Am I wrong in remembering that when people first started talking about arctic ice melting they were freaking out about rising sea levels - that whole islands and california beaches would be under water? Now the scientists are all "eh, this is symbolic of miscalculations to come."

IN 1300 London, by order of the King and Parlament, had laws with fines imposed by the judiciary against burning coal within the municipality. By 1600 ONLT 2 ship were recorded to haul coal to London, mainly for brewers. Edward III changed all those laws, increased coal use which eventually created London's famous YELLOW FOG.

Am I wrong in remembering that when people first started talking about arctic ice melting they were freaking out about rising sea levels - that whole islands and california beaches would be under water? Now the scientists are all "eh, this is symbolic of miscalculations to come."

You're not wrong, but the arctic melting won't directly cause sea levels to rise, because the ice there is floating on the water. What will cause sea levels to rise is the melting of ice that's now on land, such as glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica. And that may happen more quickly with an ice-free arctic, so what the scientists are saying is correct.

Aha!

thanks for clearing that up, Jon. Another question:

What does it mean that scientists were so wrong about the timeline of the arctic ice melting?

What does it mean that scientists were so wrong about the timeline of the arctic ice melting?

I don't know exactly, but nothing good. Certainly it appears they underestimated the speed with which the earth is warming.

Yes - nothing good - but that doesn't mean we're fucked, does it? I mean, we went from "symbolic" catastrophe in 2100 to 2050 to 2030 to this summer. WTF? Are global warming calculations so sophisticated and massive that the tipping point passed us by before we could give this issue proper attention?

Ya welcome.

One year drop in world temperatures has wipes out a century of warming.

All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that last year global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C to 0.75C a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in a year's time. For all 4 sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded

A Different Matt:

Yes - nothing good - but that doesn't mean we're fucked, does it? I mean, we went from "symbolic" catastrophe in 2100 to 2050 to 2030 to this summer. WTF? Are global warming calculations so sophisticated and massive that the tipping point passed us by before we could give this issue proper attention?

Nobody knows exactly how fucked we are. The world's climate is more complicated than anyone understands. But this certainly isn't good.

Also, you're being confused by the CNN article because it's written in a confusing way. The north pole itself being ice-free this summer wouldn't mean that all the ice in the arctic has melted -- there would still be lots of ice pushed up against the continents. The scientist interviewed in the story is talking about both things. It's all the ice melting that people originally thought might happen by 2100. That's not going to happen this year, but as the guy says, it may happen even before their most recent estimate, which was 2030.

So the north pole being ice-free is more symbolic than anything, but it's the sign of extremely non-symbolic things to come.

"Global Cooling,"

You really make me despair for humanity. At the very least, please either express things in your own words, or attribute something you've cut and pasted.

One year drop in world temperatures has wipes out a century of warming.

sure, if you can get 20-30 volcanoes to erupt simultaneously...

I think this might be a year late, last summer a bloke swam straight over geographic north:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Gordon_Pugh#Geographic_North_Pole

The RealNews had the video, at one point.

And isn't there an el nina effect off the ENSO this season? I would think it'd be hard to beat out last year's minima. Not that I'd put money on it.

Happened to catch "The Blob" (1958) last week on the Chiller Channel, and was struck by the final lines of dialogue. The gooey mess has been stopped at last through freezing and dispatched to the arctic by Army transport plane, there to remain undead, but inert.

Lieutenant Dave: At least we've got it stopped.

Steve Andrews: Yeah, as long as the Arctic stays cold.

"Also, you're being confused by the CNN article because it's written in a confusing way. The north pole itself being ice-free this summer wouldn't mean that all the ice in the arctic has melted..."

That's what I wasn't getting. You're right, the article was written in a confusing manner. The article clearly said ice was melting, but it's use of quotes supported a breaking up of ice, not outright melting.

Now the article makes sense. I couldn't figure out why the scientist was so nonchalant about this seeming catastrophe. Now the "seeming catastrophe" part makes sense. Crushed ice is easier to thaw than cubed ice, but the broken-up glaciers haven't melted yet.

Thanks for clarifying.