I read an article on CNN.com today titled, 'Arctic is screaming'. Now conservatives will tell you that we can't be alarmed, often using two points of argument that seem to be popular. One, we've only been imaging and focusing on the arctic ring since 1979, how can we find cause for alarm on 'only' 35 years worth of data. Noel Sheppard goes as far as to use small boats as "proof" that the Northwest passage was navigable over 90 years ago. (As a side note: I find it humorous that his readers more or less claim that the arctic ice came from Noah's flood! That's awesome!) . The second argument being, 'the antarctic is at an all time high in terms of the amount of ice it has'. And of course they are merely combating 'liberal media bias' because conservatives themselves are never biased.

In one sense the second statement contradicts the first. How can we be at ease with the decline of the northern ice caps based on an increase of the southern if 35 years worth of data was supposedly insufficient to generate alarm in the first place? I'm just curious. The argument about the antarctic is akin to going to the doctor and saying "My left leg is bleeding profusely... but my right leg has never felt better... obviously there's no problem!"... Somehow it all just 'magically' seems to balance out.

Unfortunately, many right wing conservatives seem to take the stance of 'there's nothing wrong unless something goes wrong' and there is less of an inclination to be proactive... even once it appears we've passed the stage of pro-activity. Like when we believed the world was flat, or the sun revolved around the earth... only once it was indisputable did the conservatives of that age come over to the side of acceptance. They would have you do nothing... And the cause, in my opinion, is that they fear being hit where it hurts... In the wallet. It is better to wait as long as possible... then maybe it is someone else's problem! They will have you believe that open markets will cure all the worlds ills... because someone is going to spend billions of dollars on research instead of doing nothing and making money with the resources they already have! Tell me... why would the oil industry want to dump the amount of money into alternative fuel research to make it viable in the near future when they are making record profits off of what they already have?? Same type of mentality. Free markets won't save our asses... only common sense will!

According to the article on CNN:

• 2007 shattered records for Arctic melt in the following ways.
• 552 billion tons of ice melted this summer from the Greenland ice sheet, according to preliminary satellite data to be released by NASA Wednesday. That's 15 percent more than the annual average summer melt, beating 2005's record.
• A record amount of surface ice was lost over Greenland this year, 12 percent more than the previous worst year, 2005, according to data the University of Colorado released Monday. That's nearly quadruple the amount that melted just 15 years ago. It's an amount of water that could cover Washington, D.C., a half-mile deep, researchers calculated.
• The surface area of summer sea ice floating in the Arctic Ocean this summer was nearly 23 percent below the previous record. The dwindling sea ice already has affected wildlife, with 6,000 walruses coming ashore in northwest Alaska in October for the first time in recorded history. Another first: the Northwest Passage was open to navigation.
• Still to be released is NASA data showing the remaining Arctic sea ice to be unusually thin, another record. That makes it more likely to melt in future summers. Combining the shrinking area covered by sea ice with the new thinness of the remaining ice, scientists calculate that the overall volume of ice is half of 2004's total.
• Alaska's frozen permafrost is warming, not quite thawing yet. But temperature measurements 66 feet deep in the frozen soil rose nearly four-tenths of a degree from 2006 to 2007, according to measurements from the University of Alaska. While that may not sound like much, "it's very significant," said University of Alaska professor Vladimir Romanovsky.

The article goes on to state that some scientists believe we could be out of Arctic ice by the summer of 2012.

A similar story from ABC News claims a more conservative figure of 2030 before we are 'Royally Screwed' (scientific term) and points out that that ice levels are down approximately 50% from where they were in 2004, smashing the previous levels of decline set in 2005.
"Currently, there are about 1.63 million square miles of Arctic ice, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo. That is well below the record of 2.05 million square miles set two summers ago and could drop even lower before the final numbers are in."

Let's say, hypothetically speaking, that the conservative are correct. The ice caps have been melting and reforming for hundreds... no... thousands of years... How did the polar bears not face extinction before (According to the US Geological Survey, 2/3rds of species will disappear by 2050)? Or mankind? How is we've never noticed the impact on the climate before?

Sure... ok fine.. we've only got 35 years worth of ice data... but we have hundreds of years of climate data to correlate to... and the sea levels... obviously we've tracked sea levels... and we're finding all time highs in sea levels, sea temperature and air temperature. The winter of 2006-2007 was the warmest winter in over 100 years, with 2004 in second and 1998 in third. According to Reuters, the 10 warmest winters on record have occurred since 1995. That is basically 10 of the last 12 winters, with this winters results still not in. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said the combined global land and ocean surface temperature from December through February was at its highest since records began in 1880. Last winter, Austria's Central Institute for Meteorology and Geo-Dynamics in Vienna, claimed the alps were warmest they've been in 1,300 years (how's that for historical data?)! As it is, 2007 has been labeled the 6th warmest year on record, with 2005 and 1998 being first and second. How do we explain this? We're ignoring this... It's easier to rationalize and ignore than to react. Reacting might affect our 'bottom lines' and after all... world and society affairs should be ran like a business right? Profit margins dictate we take a wait and see approach.

I wonder what the impact will be on human kind. The Northern hemisphere, for one, relies on the artic to regulate temperatures, infuse cold air and keep the sea at temperatures that are desirable for creatures that inhabit it... a major source of food for mankind. In the next dozen years or so, we will really start to see what kind of impact this change in the globe will have on mankind. I am not the most environmentally friendly guy... I drive my SUV, I love electricity, I probably waste more than my fair share of reusable goods and I am not the most motivated to act. I actually hope the conservatives are right and we don't have anything to worry about... but then again... I've never had much faith in waiting for the gun to be fired before moving out of harm's way...

Additional data can be found at the National Snow and Ice Data Center.