In the attached article, Climate change 'irreversible' as Arctic sea ice fails to re-form
Steve Connor writes that the:
"Sea ice in the Arctic has failed to re-form for the second consecutive winter, raising fears that global warming may have tipped the polar regions in to irreversible climate change far sooner than predicted."
OK, glaciers are melting, sea ice is melting, average temperatures appear to be on the rise. The final paragraph in the Connor piece has something interesting in it, see if you can catch it:
"Professor Peter Wadhams, of Cambridge University, who was the first Briton to monitor Arctic sea ice from nuclear submarines, said: "One of the big changes this winter is that a large area of the Barents Sea has remained ice-free for the first time. This is part of Europe's 'back yard'. Climate models did predict a retreat of sea ice in the Barents Sea but not for a few decades yet, so it is a sign that the changes that were predicted are indeed happening, but much faster than predicted.""
Did you catch it? "Climate models did predict a retreat of sea ice, ....but not for a few decades..." Computer models, the model didn't predict accurately, which can mean one of several things.
- The computer program is flawed
- The computer program is not accounting for all variables or not weighting existing variables properly
- Data collection is flawed
- Data interpretation is flawed
Again the ice sheets on land and water are diminishing, many would have us believe that it is our, (the human race's) fault, to the exclusion of all else, our cars, our factories. What about the thing that heats the earth in the first place? The Sun? I very rarely hear any reference to the one thing that supplies the energy that heats the earth. Without the sun you could suffocate in greenhouse gases and it wouldn't matter one bit, you would more resemble an ice cube than a human.
Go to the nearest lamp with a 3 way bulb in it: (aside - stupid alert, don't touch the flipping light bulb it will be hot, you will get burned, you have been warned. end stupid alert), with the bulb on the dimmest setting put your hand about two feet away from the lightbulb with the lamp lit. Feel any warmth? Now increase the light to the middle brightness, put your hand in the same position about two feet away, any difference? Repeat again with the lamp set to the brightest setting.
What's the point of all of this? You are dealing with a very small source of energy, and a sensor that can not measure fractions of a degree with accuracy. I would venture to guess though that you should feel a difference. Ok, everybody now......SO? What if the lightbulb for the earth, the Sun, was at a point that it increased the amount of energy it is putting out into the cosmos? A fractional increase, coupled with the surface area of the earth could potentially influence earth's climate:
"Another period of enhanced solar activity, but with substantially fewer sunspots than now, occurred in the Middle Ages from 1100 to 1250. At that time, a warm period reigned over the Earth, as the Vikings established flourishing settlements in Greenland."
From the Max Planck Society:
http://www.mpg.de/english/illustrationsDocumentation/documentation/pressReleases/2004/pressRelease20040802/
And if you really want here is another article on the Max Planck site of interest:
http://www.mpg.de/english/illustrationsDocumentation/documentation/pressReleases/2004/pressRelease20041028/
Are there answers here, maybe, but my personal opinion is that we have great questions, but we are lacking many pieces of the puzzle's answers and maybe even more important than that, we are lacking some of the necessary questions.
