A combination of modern research and various historical lists created a historical picture that reveals the secrets of the ice layers in the sea between Greenland and Svalbard
A new study by the University of Copenhagen reproduced the extent of the ice that was in the sea between Greenland and Svalbard from the 13th century to the present day, the results show that there has never been as little ice water as there is today.
Of course there are no satellite images and climatic records from the 13th century, but nature has its own "archives" about the climate both in ice cores and in the growth of the seasonal rings of trees, also humanity has left a lot of documentation over the years - observations, documentation of natural phenomena, documentation of the movement of ships in ports and more. A combination of the various data creates a picture of the amount of sea ice over the years.
"We combined information about the climate found in ice cores found in the ice caps in Svalbard and from the natural growth of tree rings in Finland, this created a historical climate curve," explains geophysicist Aslak Grinster from the Center for Ice and Climate Research at the University of Copenhagen.
There has never been so little ice in the sea between Svalbard and Greenland in the last 800 years. To reconstruct the amount of ice that existed in the past, the researchers turned to historical information that was recorded by fishing ships and whalers where the sailors described the boundaries of the sea ice layer. The voyage diaries of the sailors are very accurate and they go back to the 16th century. Another source of information about the ice sheet is in Iceland, where the intensity of winters has been recorded since the 18th century.
By combining the climate curve with real historical information about the distribution of the ice, the researchers were able to reconstruct the extent of the ice sheets back to the 13th century. Although the 13th century was a warm period, calculations show that there has never been as little ice as in the 20th century. It is true that in the middle of the 17th century there was a sharp decrease in the amount of ice, but it lasted for a short period of time. The biggest jump in the ice amount curve occurred in the period 1700-1800, also known as the "Little Ice Age".
"There was a sharp change in the amount of ice at the beginning of the 20th century," says Aslak Greenster. He explains that the ice shrunk by 300,000 square kilometers in a span of 10 years in 1910-1920. It can be seen that there have been sudden changes over the years, but in the last five years the documentation shows that there is a low extent of the amount of ice in the sea.
"We see that the ice sheets are shrinking to levels not seen for more than 800 years," the researcher concludes from his research published in the scientific journal Climate Dynamics.
9 תגובות
Lee, if you really want to be convinced by the evidence about global warming, I suggest you turn to the professional literature. The website web of knowledge will be able to direct you to the real scientific studies on the subject.
Well, there is no shortage of articles that show the connection between FDF and global warming, there are hundreds of them, also in Hebrew, in addition to a number of UN reports (biased to the good, but still) that emphasize the global scientific consensus around the matter. You expect me to prove the theory in a talkback?
The steps are critical because there is a dramatic difference between those who claim there is no warming and those who claim there is warming that is not man-made, these are two opinions that although they are wrong they are opposite, the film in question is full of lies. You don't need to understand anything about science to know that if two of the main interviewees denied the things that were attributed to them, and many of the interviewees were given misleading titles, there is no point in watching the rest of the film
I am qouting. "There has never been so little ice in the sea between Svalbard and Greenland in the last 800 years."
If I knew how I would emphasize "ever" and "in the last 800 years".
Am I the only one who doesn't really understand the Hebrew here??
In any case, Yoav, the fact that you invent 3 stages for disparaging "deniers", and then when someone argues about the issue, you run to "which stage are you in my three disparaging stages", is not really a way to argue about things, it is mainly a way To "I said my thing, I close my ears, I don't hear you, ha ha ha ha", or in other words, a 5-year-old boy.
Also "everything you say is a lie, and only I'm telling the truth", is a pretty _____ form of "thinking" (assuming you at least think that's what you're doing).
Until you find a study (or carry it out, if you are gifted with knowledge that goes beyond believing in cheap populism) that proves that the FAD is the cause, it is still a hypothesis, an evaluation, an idea. If you don't think so, maybe you should find out how science is created, and how conclusions are drawn.
Also at what stage are you from the stages I mentioned above? There are no warm-ups like in the movie or there is a warm-up but not by a person like Shabib?
I've heard of this rant, based on nothing less than outright lies, two of the scientists interviewed said their position was misrepresented, and many of the speakers there were presented as having false credentials.
For an explanation on Wikipedia
First of all, the Little Ice Age was for 500 years in general and not 100 as it is written.
Secondly, blame the carbon dioxide as much as you want...just try to find a correlation between its levels and the warming of the earth and keep trying because you won't find it...after all, carbon dioxide is something that follows and with a delay of hundreds of years after the level of warming or cooling of the earth.
The earth doesn't warm up because of it..and like the carbon dioxide before modern man compared to today it changed by no more than 0.00X the composition of the atmosphere..about 4 units if my memory is correct.
I too once supported this warming until I saw some serious studies that compare data altogether. There is also a pretty good movie that is broadcast from time to time on the Doku channel and it's called Global Warming? .. it's worth watching because it's an eye opener
When the Sahara comes to Turkey, think again how comfortable it will be to live here.
I have a better claim: Yoav, no one really cares and it would be very comfortable to live in Israel if someone already destroyed the thermo-helical circulation or whatever they call it...
The title actually supports the side of the deniers of warming, because if after the last warming we reached the temperatures of the 13th century, this justifies the claim of the deniers that warming is a cyclical matter.
This is of course not true, first of all, because the change today is extremely dramatic, natural changes have of course occurred in the past, but the speed of change is enormous in relation to them.
The global warming deniers have 3 clear steps: 1. It's not happening, there is no global warming. This stage was passed in the nineties when the evidence was not yet clear enough. 2. It happens but not because of us. Most of the deniers are at this stage when the belief is in delusional theories such as Shaviv's cosmological theory which of course cannot explain the speed of changes. 3. It happens, and there is nothing to be done. This is the next step, soon we will be told that it is too late and there is no meaning to the emission of carbon dioxide because the damage has been done.