Icy consensus: least ice "at least the last few thousand years"

From Ohio State, alarming news about ice, sediments, proxy algae, and other worrisome stuff. It has a familiar ring to it, plus some luck.

ARCTIC ICE AT LOW POINT COMPARED TO RECENT GEOLOGIC HISTORY

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Less ice covers the Arctic today than at any time in recent geologic history.

That’s the conclusion of an international group of researchers, who have compiled the first comprehensive history of Arctic ice.

For decades, scientists have strived to collect sediment cores from the difficult-to-access Arctic Ocean floor, to discover what the Arctic was like in the past. Their most recent goal: to bring a long-term perspective to the ice loss we see today.

Now, in an upcoming issue of Quarternary Science Reviews, a team led by Ohio State University has re-examined the data from past and ongoing studies — nearly 300 in all — and combined them to form a big-picture view of the pole’s climate history stretching back millions of years.

Leonid Polyak

“The ice loss that we see today — the ice loss that started in the early 20th Century and sped up during the last 30 years — appears to be unmatched over at least the last few thousand years,” said Leonid Polyak, a research scientist at Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University. Polyak is lead author of the paper and a preceding report that he and his coauthors prepared for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program.

Satellites can provide detailed measures of how much ice is covering the pole right now, but sediment cores are like fossils of the ocean’s history, he explained.

“Sediment cores are essentially a record of sediments that settled at the sea floor, layer by layer, and they record the conditions of the ocean system during the time they settled. When we look carefully at various chemical and biological components of the sediment, and how the sediment is distributed — then, with certain skills and luck, we can reconstruct the conditions at the time the sediment was deposited.”

For example, scientists can search for a biochemical marker that is tied to certain species of algae that live only in ice. If that marker is present in the sediment, then that location was likely covered in ice at the time. Scientists call such markers “proxies” for the thing they actually want to measure — in this case, the geographic extent of the ice in the past.

While knowing the loss of surface area of the ice is important, Polyak says that this work can’t yet reveal an even more important fact: how the total volume of ice — thickness as well as surface area — has changed over time.

“When we look carefully at various chemical and biological components of the seafloor sediment, and how the sediment is distributed — then, with certain skills and luck, we can reconstruct the conditions at the time the sediment was deposited.”

“Underneath the surface, the ice can be thick or thin. The newest satellite techniques and field observations allow us to see that the volume of ice is shrinking much faster than its area today. The picture is very troubling. We are losing ice very fast,” he said.

“Maybe sometime down the road we’ll develop proxies for the ice thickness. Right now, just looking at ice extent is very difficult.”

To review and combine the data from hundreds of studies, he and his cohorts had to combine information on many different proxies as well as modern observations. They searched for patterns in the proxy data that fit together like pieces of a puzzle.

Their conclusion: the current extent of Arctic ice is at its lowest point for at least the last few thousand years.

As scientists pull more sediment cores from the Arctic, Polyak and his collaborators want to understand more details of the past ice extent and to push this knowledge further back in time.

During the summer of 2011, they hope to draw cores from beneath the Chukchi Sea, just north of the Bering Strait between Alaska and Siberia. The currents emanating from the northern Pacific Ocean bring heat that may play an important role in melting the ice across the Arctic, so Polyak expects that the history of this location will prove very important. He hopes to drill cores that date back thousands of years at the Chukchi Sea margin, providing a detailed history of interaction between oceanic currents and ice.

“Later on in this cruise, when we venture into the more central Arctic Ocean, we will aim at harvesting cores that go back even farther,” he said. “If we could go as far back as a million years, that would be perfect.”

Polyak’s coauthors on the report hailed from Penn State University, University of Colorado, University of Massachusetts, the U.S. Geological Survey, Old Dominion University, the Geological Survey of Canada, University of Copenhagen, the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, Stockholm University, McGill University, James Madison University, and the British Antarctic Survey.

This research was funded by the US Geological Survey and the National Science Foundation.

#

Contact: Leonid Polyak, (614) 292-2602; Polyak.1@osu.edu

Written by Pam Frost Gorder, (614) 292-9475; Gorder.1@osu.edu

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

173 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
James Klein
June 2, 2010 9:53 pm

How will they distinguish between ice extent and southward dispersion of icebergs?

June 2, 2010 9:57 pm

Ok. Let’s say, just for arguments sake, that the doomsayers are all correct and that we’re heading for an ice-free Arctic at a fast pace.
Has anyone actually explained exactly WHY and HOW an ice-free Arctic is such a disaster? And for whom would it be a disaster? And in what way it would be a disaster?
My enquiring mind would like to know, because when I read all these ARCTIC IS MELTING! stories all I see is an implication that This Is A Bad Thing. I have never seen “An ice-free Arctic is bad because….”.

Mike McEwen
June 2, 2010 9:59 pm

“with certain skill and luck…”
What absolute rubbish!!
Get a real job.

June 2, 2010 10:01 pm

It is ridiculous, sheer, utter nonsense to claim that they can detect the September minimum from ancient sediments. Junk science reigns supreme in the Arctic.

Al Gored
June 2, 2010 10:04 pm

Oh goodie. More proxies.
“with certain skills and luck, we can reconstruct the conditions at the time the sediment was deposited.”
Yes. Certain undefined skills, and luck. The basis of all rigorous science.

Espen
June 2, 2010 10:04 pm

Hmm, I tried to find an abstract by clicking on the Quarternary Science Reviews link, but that seems to link to the current issue. Which has some interesting stuff: “Thousand years of climate change reconstructed from chironomid subfossils preserved in varved lake Silvaplana, Engadine, Switzerland”, which confirms the Medieval Warm Period (or “Climate Anomaly”, as they like to say now): “The inferred July temperatures were in the same range as the inferred temperatures during the last part of the MCA suggesting that during the 20th century, at Lake Silvaplana, the chironomid-inferred temperatures do not exceed the natural climate variability of the past millennium.”

June 2, 2010 10:06 pm

“…then, with certain skills and luck, we can reconstruct the conditions at the time the sediment was deposited”
This is like the “science of evolution” they teach my kids in public school? The one where life began from nothing and in one organized step of chaos, created all the machinery necessary for minimal life to exist?
Excuse me for being apprehensive at more of anything which appears to be a search for proof of AGW (AGWC). We haven’t flushed the liars from the system yet, nor their corruptive influence (“scientific” or political.)

Joe Public
June 2, 2010 10:07 pm

What he should have said was, “..then, with certain skills tricks and luck…”
lol… what an ass-hat…

AlanG
June 2, 2010 10:11 pm

OT: Al and Tipper Gore are separating after 40 years of marriage, after four children and three grandchildren, after just buying a $9 million house in Montecito, California, two weeks after celebrating their anniversary. I shouldn’t be delighted but I am. I wonder what the rows were about? Climategate perhaps?

MikeN
June 2, 2010 10:11 pm

>Polyak’s coauthors on the report hailed from Penn State University, University of Colorado, University of Massachusetts
Hmmm…..
REPLY: yeah, I’m, thinking the same thing, Penn State, proxy, press release prior to publication, worst in thousands of years…who do we know that talks like that? – Anthony

JEM
June 2, 2010 10:16 pm

They “had to combine information on many different proxies as well as modern observations. They searched for patterns in the proxy data that fit together like pieces of a puzzle.”
I’m not at this point going to claim that they took the scissors and sandpaper to the pieces to make them fit together the way they wanted, but it all begs for very close review.
Especially since they’ve seen fit to put out this scary funding-troll press release.

Dave F
June 2, 2010 10:16 pm

How do you compensate for the ocean currents when you are pulling sediments from the sea floor? Aren’t they studying the sediment that settled after being kicked up elsewhere, perhaps the Pacific or some other ocean?

savethesharks
June 2, 2010 10:17 pm

So???
A few thousand years. Big ****ing deal!
Recovery during the interglacial from the last Ice Age.
Its not the findings…but the “tone” of the findings that gets my hackles up with press releases like that.
It’s not what is said, but what is left unsaid by what is said: “The world is melting and we are all gonna die.”
To quote a brilliant British Comedy from the 1990s:
“Cheer up. It may never happen.” LOL
[from Jennifer Saunders…the most brilliant comedienne the world has ever known].
A few thousand years. Big bl**dy deal!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA

Dave F
June 2, 2010 10:18 pm

Also on that note, what evidence is there that ocean currents have remained constant over these time periods?

Al Gored
June 2, 2010 10:19 pm

Hmmm. Funny how this article first states that they already have “combined them to form a big-picture view of the pole’s climate history stretching back millions of years,” but then at the end quotes this researcher who states that “If we could go as far back as a million years, that would be perfect.”
Even funnier is that their actual conclusion so far appears to be “the current extent of Arctic ice is at its lowest point for at least the last few thousand years.”
What’s a “few”? In any case, no big deal even if it actually was true given where were are in ice age history.
But I can already see the scary headlines about “lowest in millions of years” promoted round the world.

Dave Wendt
June 2, 2010 10:20 pm

“For example, scientists can search for a biochemical marker that is tied to certain species of algae that live only in ice. If that marker is present in the sediment, then that location was likely covered in ice at the time. Scientists call such markers “proxies” for the thing they actually want to measure — in this case, the geographic extent of the ice in the past.”
“When we look carefully at various chemical and biological components of the seafloor sediment, and how the sediment is distributed — then, with certain skills and luck, we can reconstruct the conditions at the time the sediment was deposited.”
Who could possibly dispute such rock solid logic?

Ben
June 2, 2010 10:21 pm

“When we look carefully at various chemical and biological components of the seafloor sediment, and how the sediment is distributed — then, with certain skills and luck, we can reconstruct the conditions at the time the sediment was deposited.”
They are lucky, what can I say?

janama
June 2, 2010 10:23 pm

“then, with certain skills and luck,” doesn’t sound very scientific to me.
I wonder if they’d bet their lives on their findings?

Pete Hayes
June 2, 2010 10:29 pm

“Polyak’s coauthors on the report hailed from Penn State University”…….
I wish that line had been at the beginning of the post, I could have saved myself 5 minutes to take the dog out!

Editor
June 2, 2010 10:35 pm

Pete Hayes says:
June 2, 2010 at 10:29 pm
“Polyak’s coauthors on the report hailed from Penn State University”…….

Yep…. my thoughts as well. Home of Mann and the sham review of his antics.
Having Penn State on there is like having “reviewed and approved by Al Gore” on it !!

June 2, 2010 10:39 pm

Did they already find the irrefutable means to blot out the MWP – this time around?

Doug in Seattle
June 2, 2010 10:45 pm

And who exactly did the team pick from Penn State? Any guesses?
There was not a paper listed at QR that I could find. I suppose it has just been submitted. The claims in the press release cannot be refuted until it is published, but the AGW elite will cite this as proof just the same.
Also you will note that this submission was sponsored by US tax payers through the Climate Change Program.

Ray Boorman
June 2, 2010 10:48 pm

These guys must have built another expert model to tell them how far & in what direction the algae drifted as it settled to the sea bottom. Or maybe they just assumed it dropped like a lead balloon straight to the bottom. End result – their paper ain’t worth the cost of the ink used to print it!

Rdcii
June 2, 2010 10:52 pm

So…when folks were ice-skating on the Thames, the Arctic ice extent was smaller than it is today? (Eyes roll)
Do these guys ever d0 a sanity check?

Evan Jones
Editor
June 2, 2010 10:54 pm

They are very ambiguous (i.e., weasely) about the 20s-30s warming. They also do not address causes (CO2, soot or what?).

1 2 3 7