Note: This story was originally printed with the title, "Polar Express".

10 Comments

1. 1. Tan Boon Tee 12:29 AM 7/2/08

   Indeed, there is a new sense of urgency. The NASA satellites watch on polar ice shelf is an unsurpassed evidence of global warming.
   
   This serves as a strong reminder to everyone (be they skeptics) that the climate change is already here and accelerating. Never mind whatever cause one may attribute to, be it the green house effect, the extraordinary sun spots activity or the phenomenal cycle of nature, the earth is obviously getting warmer. For those fence sitters, it is time to be jolted out of unnecessary complacency.
   
   Everyone ought to contribute to the effort (no matter how minute) of decelerating the climate change. Do we really want our childrens children and their children to face the catastrophic consequences?
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. Bjorn_Palmen 04:45 AM 7/2/08

   If this is

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. Bjorn_Palmen 04:50 AM 7/2/08

   If this is the "unsurpassed evidence" of global warming the evidence is poor indeed.
   
   Doomsday speculations are not science. I am waiting for the next Ice Age.
   
   --------------------- Bjorn Palmen is a nuclear engineer in Helsingfors, Finland

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. Kylenn Black 11:12 AM 7/2/08

   In the print edition I find it interesting and amusing that the ad on the facing page is from energytomorrow.org - an organization whose policies are environmentally destructive and accelerate the global warming catastrophe. (As an aside I have to wonder why SciAm accepted ad dollars from such an entity.)

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. ultimatexpert 09:24 AM 7/5/08

   Bjorn, being a nuclear engineer, explains your blindness to global warming. You are, as we say in the US, a major putz.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. Bjorn_Palmen in reply to ultimatexpert 02:59 PM 7/5/08

   Actually global warming works FOR more nuclear power, as it will reduce the amount of fossil fuel being burned. Thus it would give me no sneaky advantage as a nuclear engineer to point out that the evidence for global warming is still lacking.
   
   So the "ultimatexpert" got it wrong. But he is wrong about the warming too. Some people just cannot think.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

7. 7. robaustin 11:50 PM 7/10/08

   While the topic is how scary it is when a crumb of ice breaks off the Wilkens ice shelf, Antarctic ice also set a record (since 1979) for extent of sea ice at the end of last winter. But of course, all climate related phenomena are strong indicators of climate change (formerly known as global warming).
   I recently read the following article in the Washington Post: "The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen, Norway. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds." Incidentally, the article was published in the November 2, 1922 issue of said newspaper. "Deja vu all over again"?
   NASA satellites have only been giving this bird's eye view of the polar regions since 1979, a mere blink of the eye in the time scale required to show unnatural climate change. Sorry believers, you are pathetically unconvincing.
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

8. 8. umanpower 10:50 AM 9/7/08

   I'm not a scientist, but would the harvesting of energy produced by the ultimate release of methane gas from the burning off of the permafrost be actually beneficial? Allow commerical access to this resource. Maybe they can divert the gas into energy, saving the planet while they convert, store and distribute the energy.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

9. 9. realboyskissboys 03:14 AM 7/29/09

   i'm doing a study for science on the water levels and on how the polar icecaps are changing and melting. some books are saying there not changing the water levels and some are saying they are. one book said it doesn't and had a STUPID idea of a bowl of water and having 10 ice cubes to measure the water put in the ice, let it melt then remeasure it. thats stupid because thinking the worlds water is the bowl theres more then 10 icebergs that are going to melt. so which is it? true or false? do the melting polar icecaps really change the water levels? i think it would have to ecause it could give an imbalence of fresh water and salt. please correct if wrong.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

10. 10. realboyskissboys in reply to realboyskissboys 08:55 PM 7/30/09

    never mind i have got it now its not the melting ice its the ice breaking which everytime it does it adds a little but to the levels...

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this