Oh thank the Lord somebody thought of doing this. The arctic needs our prayers SO MUCH and yall are praying for some football game? God has better things to worry about and he (or she) needs to hear about this. (Everyone has this person on their Facebook, I swear)
And deep sea water is dark, so absorbs heat, snow and ice don't, they reflect it. so with the ice melting, exposing darker sea water, it's just compounding the situation. That's how you get a runaway greenhouse effect. One thing impacts another which impacts another and so on. The ice lakes in Siberia also hold loads of methane, once they melt things are gonna get much worse. They recon they hold millions of tons of methane under those lakes!
@@trunzlerclement3227 The change in temperature precedes the change in carbon level by up to a year. 97% of all carbon emissions are natural. Every. Single. Prediction. that has been made regarding the climate from these scientists has been wrong. Remember the hole in the O-zone thing?. Yes, the planet is changing. It has for millennia. Don't be so arrogant to think that humanity has any control over Earth's temperature. Carbon levels rise as the planet gets hotter, as more organic matter decomposes. I don't deny the planet's climate changes. I just have working long-term memory. Incidentally, the year this was made was also the year Al Gore said we'd already be flooded. Let's not give these people any more power. They're wrong.
I knew this was happening due to James Hansen's work almost 30 years ago and we did absolutely nothing for decades. We would be so much farther ahead by now but climate change became a partisan issue in the 90s and then action stalled.
Or what about the ongoing surface mining (40-400m deep) all over the world that leaves only deserts and canyons and destroys farming grounds (food production)?
There is no such thing as deforestation. That's an alarmist myth to scare people. For every tree cut down it gives a signal to the market to plant a new tree. We should use more wood instead of less. CO2 is plant food, you know.
This is about the decline in sea ice not land glaciers. And these images are created from the microwave satellite data and thus not photographic images.
We all are ok and will continue to be. Did you know that the CO2 levels over the past 500 million years averaged about 2-5x what it is now? It's extremely low currently. Life thrived back then. There isn't even enough CO2 in the air for plants to grow anywhere near optimally. Which is why CO2 is pumped into greenhouses. A warmer earth is definitely a good idea.
He said the data they are showing is false and misleading. No one denies global warming, it has been going on since the coldest day of the ice ages. And it is accelerating every day after.
Steve J, Sorry, but that is old information, and thus somewhat inaccurate. In 2015 Antarctica had, at it's winter maximum, the greatest sea ice area that has been seen since accurate satellite recording started. Note that this was a thin seasonal sheet of large area but but comparatively little volume. In the couple of years since, Antarctic ice (both winter max and summer min) have undergone a drastic decline in both area and volume. This years summer ice minimum was the lowest sea-ice area that has been seen in Antarctica since satellite records begun. nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/
Gaining snow ice in the middle of the continent, but losing it along the edges, where it buttresses land ice glaciers, which are moving, faster in the last decade.
@loblocks222: the problem: mass of water displaced by floating ice is equal to the mass of the ice; melting the floating ice doesn't change the ocean level, or at least does so minimally. OTOH ice resting over land melts, water flows into the ocean and raises the sea level. So the harm coming from melting Antarctica is much worse than melting northern Arctic.
I love how many scientists there are in this comments section. I see so many experts educating other experts. Amazing how many smart people are in the TH-cam comment section, astounding really.
The graphic actually starts over at about 1:15 going back to the beginning when the ice decline in the Arctic was observed based on satellite data. Watch it several times to see the sharp declines in summer 2007 and 2012 and then toward the end sea ice muli-year ice drops even lower. Another TH-cam video shows the sea ice decline right up to July 2019.
The reason why there are such crazy denialists in this debate is that they know that without industry heavily regulated our civilisation can't survive. The other crazy thing is that retooling the human race with new energy sources is exactly what the world economy needs. Just the the rebuild after WW2 created the great economy of the mid 20th century a "green new deal" could do the same for the 21st century. Just bloody hard to get things done in a plutocracy and some little people hanging onto weird ideas.
Well that, and scientists have been wrong about every prediction they've made about this. Gore said we'd see mass flooding by 2016. Maybe these guys aren't very reliable.
In minute 1:05 its still labled as sea ice age. The old ice is almost gone in that moment just like in the sep 2016 snapshot. Wouldnt this be considered a natural?
Take plastic from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and create artificial ice bergs to reflect light from the arctic circle and it will cool down and form more ice. Could make floating plastic dens built into the plastic ice bergs for the polar bears to use as well.
Dear Dr. Walt Meier of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. Please allow an answer for my following question. The years of this timelapse film are from 1986 to 2016? Is that right? More importantly, at some point the mature ice takes a sudden decline and never recovers, can you provide a specific time for when that stark drop off appears to have occurred and what events may have been going on globally leading up to and during the time of this dramatic sea ice loss? P.S. I can look provide the time stamp as referance if you cannot deduce what point in film im referring to but I very well believe you capable! Forgive me if I remembered the beginning and end years incorrectly. Thank you for your dedication and passion.
@SaRa. This particular graphic starts in 1991 and runs to 2016 and starts again at the same time at 1:16 showing the year in the left hand corner instead of the color code reflecting the muti year sea ice.
Thank goodness for that. In school everyone was worried about the sea levels rising to the point of mega natural disaster... But what this is trying to show is that (1) this is all cyclical, and has been happening forever (2) Ice melting, that was already sat in the water, doesn't raise the level of the water as it melts... That's a relief!!!
It's like watching the planet trying to breath. But every breath becomes thinner and thinner, and brings less oxygen to the lunges than the previous. Literally watching the death of a planet.
I thought Ireland was under ice during the ice age? Or does this model ignore northern Europe? Also, the amount of thick ice at 1:03 looks a lot less than in 1993. What is this model based on?
Mourning Ireland NASA's Polar orbiting satellites took images of the ice extent and thickness over the last couple of decades, these satellite images were used to make the animation you saw.
Taking pride in willful ignorance with the belief whatever you think is right while facts are fake news is the reason we haven't stopped corporate greed from stripping all natural resources and laying waste to the environment. Hope you live on the Florida cost.
They are just showing the start of their data gathering vs the last record. Clearly it's melting, but what the cause of it is still up for debate. Many argue that this melting is caused by humans. Some argue it's simply normal for the EArth's atmosphere to fluctuate. We really don't know. We do a lot of speculation on both sides of the argument. I'm on the fence, it could be a combination of things outside our knowledge. I think we should do our best to reduce creating greenhouse gases but let's not kill each other over it. I personally believe these things sort themselves out. Whether it be war or famine but something's gotta give sooner or later.
You're probably more likely to accidentally kill something from temperature shock or hard impact from waves crashing the ice onto organisms. Which is hilariously ironic.
The climate scientists, though they may find it disturbing, have more in common with those who stop in dread and fear to pray (out of respect and forced humility for what they don't understand) than those who are unwilling to stop treading the current path (aka the majority of society). Divide and conquer.
This is a great animation, thank you guys. I think it's important to mention the "during the era of satellite measurements" - I mean, how can we make sure this relates to human activity ? Also, from what I've read on the Nsidc, isn't the Antarctic ice at the south pole increasing ? Not questioning the climate "change", just questioning our responsability in all this, thanks.
The problem with geo-engineering is that you cannot predict all possible side effects. What if your barrier disrupts water flow and makes something else accelerate?
Es un fenómeno cíclico, cada cierto tiempo ocurre eso como en el polo antártico, pero esta vez los ciclos son mas pequeños debido al cambio climático global It is a cyclical phenomenon, from time to time occurs as in the Antarctic pole, but this time the cycles are smaller because of global climate change
Not beyond that year, but as Arctic ice cover continues there is increased possibility of strong winds pushing sea ice around causing to melt quicker leading to less and less sea ice. Soon there will be none in summer in maybe ten years which is hard to predict. There is still a lot variability in the Arctic!
Yueh Tewb Yueh knoe according to climate science that started all this was about 25 years before that. We should be all done frozen over by now, but noooo! Wayyy too many keyboard climatologists in the "Tewb" anymore...good luck all see ya all on the bright side.
@@jasonmartin4775 you do know its a computer simulation right sport. All data man made and input into the computer to output what they want you to see.
Yeah, Europe will get colder, but more equatorial regions will become inhabitable sending waves and waves of "climate refugees" to colder regions. Coastal areas will also flood causing people to move inwards. All this movement will cause demographic catastrophe. There will be wars for resources like water or food. All in all this is terrible news for everyone.
we don’t know exactly. To my knowledge the best current estimate of what will happen is Hansen 2016: www.atmos-chem-phys.net/16/3761/2016/ It also lists the uncertainties which still need to be addressed to get a stronger estimate.
It is not as dramatic as this video because most sea ice melts back around Antarctica every year. The bigger concern with Antarctica is the accelerating melt rate of land glaciers in western Antarctica.
Amazing video, theres no thick ice left. Same probably has happened to forests and animals living in forest. Beside these we get new land made of plastic in the oceans. We might be doing something wrong?
I, for one, welcome the day when we have an ice-free Arctic. Will be a major boon for economic progress and will shorten trade routes. We still have a LONG way to go until we reach the conditions of the last interglacial. The ice age of Greenland being the dead giveaway in that regard.
The current warming of climate and related Arctic ice retreat is occuring much faster then occured in the past interglacial periods. When the Arctic becomes ice free in summer then the albedo of the Arctic will be near zero and almost all sunlight will be absorbed by the Ocean warming and in turn warming the rest of the planet still further. And with GHG's contiinuing to rise in the warming the climate will continue to warm from that cause. As the Arctic sea ice withdraws from the Arctic this allows the waters to warm and allowing for the potential and rapid increase in methane release from the permafrost. Peter Wadhams who has studied the Arctic for almost 50 years reports that the release of this methane could come as a dramatic spike in methane levels, a methane bomb as it were which could raise global temperatures by 0.6 °C in a short time. This is what years of research on the changes going on in the Arctic has indicated is a real concern. What science and research have you done that is a credible alternative to current science??
@@smoothtwh This graphic is based on satellite data going back to 1984. Stop criticizing what you don't understand. That just makes you look more irrelevant to this conversation!!!
barrettdesigns thats actually not true, the antarctic is growing slightly (due to the ice melting and making the water less salty, therefore making it easier to turn into ice) ,but it is not growing fast enough to outgrow the arctic melting, and soon that thin ice around antarctica will melt too...
Thecl Artic is perfectly healthy and record this winter too. It's all natural cycles. We're likely entering a cosmic ray indused little ice age, brought on by incoming weak the sun cycles.
That's not accurate. f you wish to compare, Antarctic ice (land and sea) has been growing by about 82 gigatonnes per year for the last few years. Greenland alone has lost an average of 238 gigatonnes in that time range. www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/nasa-study-shows-global-sea-ice-diminishing-despite-antarctic-gains Antarctica gained 82 gigatonnes of sea ice per year from 2003 to 2008. Greenland alone has lost an average of 238 gigatonnes per year from 2002- 2015, and that's land-based ice cap, which contributes to sea level rise. www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/nasa-study-shows-global-sea-ice-diminishing-despite-antarctic-gains www.arctic.noaa.gov/repor.../greenland_ice_sheet.html More recently, however: www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/sea-ice-extent-sinks-to-record-lows-at-both-poles
Based on your own numbers the 82 gigatonnes of sea and land ice per year. Your comparison dataset is 2002-2015 which is 13 years. 82 gigatonnes times 13 years equates to 1,066 gigatonnes which is vastly more than the 238 you mention. Your second comment references 238 per year so youre either misrepresenting your data or intentionally being confusing to swindle the public. Personally, I'm pleased to see the NASA mission reset back to its core. I'm tired of tax money being wasted to swindle the public on fake environmental concerns.
This is no joking matter. The consequences of inaction will likely be shortages, then hunger, and finally starvation in the industrial countries at some point. Planning now might reduce that likelihood. Contact your representative and let them know you are a single issue voter.
David Bolger Taking millions of pictures of the North Pole from literally the same exact place for 32 years for no reason because clouds will cover everything anyway doesn't seem like a great plan to me.
We don't advocate geoengineering, there are too many possible unintended consequences of putting those metals in the atmosphere at quantities large enough to change the atmosphere.
all things considered this is the most accurate evidence the world and all of mans work are destined to be burned. 2Pe 3:11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
That Part ,where the ICe FLows Out!!.... NEEDS to BE BLOCKED. . The Many items created? .. Need to create a BLockage or something to control this from happening
That is a very different dynamic because most of the sea ice in Antarctic melts every year anyway and that does not threaten to warm the planet like the warming of the Arctic does. The bigger concern in the Antarctic is the accelerated warming and thus melting of glaciers in western Antarctic.
what did the 10 instances of 30yr periods prior to this show? Are there other, longer, cycles outside of seasonal cycles? Are there generational cycles, say, every 300 years???? would be awesome if someone could answer
Lachy Becke Yes, there are 14 year water current cycles, 10-14 year solar cycles and 200/400 Grand solar cycles, then there is the malcanvich cycles of the tilt of the earth and the great year which anout 24000 years? (I forget). What NASA won't tell you is that we're entering a mini iceage as we speak. Grand Solar Minimum is here and the weakened helisphere allows more super charged cosmic ray particles to hit earth ...which heat up since I'm magma, waking up the big volcanos. We're in big trouble when the crops don't grow.
Well, yeah, that is clear as day if you just look at the video and see that no ice is really melting, there was a single bad year that took the old ice but new ice took its place. This graph is deceiving as all hell.
What the Arctic is doing is cycling DOWN to the point when there is no Arctic sea ice in the summer which will lead to greater warming for the rest of the planet. That will come sooner then you think. And as the Arctic warms still further we will see the release of methane in massive quantities which will accelerate warming!! COMPRENDE???
So the greenhouse effect we are making we are just speeding up the process? Am I correct? I heard we were supposed to have one of two situations. Another ice age or another greenhouse all life on the earth dies or changes to survive the climate change?
Yes we are speeding it up due to our carbon emissions. If enough meltwater enters the Atlantic it will slow down the Gulf Stream. Gulf Stream moves huge amounts of heat towards Europe from equatorial regions. You cut that off and Europe will indeed get much colder. But the rest of the world, especially equatorial regions or even south of US will become hotter and hotter with more droughts and heatwaves and extreme weather.. There is also a possibility of runaway greenhouse effect; that could end up in massive extinction throught the world. If we change and act quickly enough we can still stop this. But we need to act now.
So I imagine it's true that we only have imagery since about 1975 of this actually happening as a process, from a distance such as orbital photography where we can get an idea of what's really going on? So, is it possible that this cycle is independent of massive climate change around the whole world? My "belief", and my family are all MDs or meteorologists, except myself, weirdly, is that the climate is changing - such is the nature of climate, but that even our emissions all put together - all carbon-based life on earth's own emissions, pollution, (and yes I'm including methane from cow farts), deforestation, can't possibly trigger or much accelerate a global calamity. Nature is just so ridiculously powerful that it's silly, again in my opinion, to think that all living beings together can really affect the climate, at least up to the point where it's 'by accident. I'm not including intentional destruction by ionosphere radio arrays and such, or cloud seeding with chemicals which may destroy atmosphere elements and layers. It's actually scarier to have to accept that this is all far beyond our control - and I feel like we are getting closer to having to live in awe of our planet, rather than keeping this mentality that it's ours to 'conquer'. A single tidal wave can take out hundreds standing on a pier in India, lethally in a matter of seconds.. it's that severe, what nature can do. Go watch videos of underwater volcano erupting. I've seen this stuff, and it's so severe that it just seems ridiculous to think we are responsible. It's like we're taking credit for nature, and making nature part of the ego. That is ego boundary dissolution, and leads to insanity :) BE well.
I think that the magnitude for which certain environmental changes are occurring may be influenced by these events; but not necessarily 100% reliant on human contributions. I do believe however, that regardless of this being our fault or not; if the habitability of the world is going to decrease in the next 100 years; then clearly nations need to redefine their priorities and focus on survival and the preservation of anything they can. Otherwise, a potential Holocene extinction could be imminent.
No nothing like that is going on. Besides the US would know if they did. The Russian coastline is where the most warming of Arctic waters has occured for various reasons. Alaska is ice free early in melt season as well.
![เป็นไปได้ไหม - WanMai [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_6lZ6b3_7Vo/mqdefault.jpg)
What a cool animation. Almost like a heartbeat. That final image is a little terrifying.
A few Facebook prayers should be able to fix this.
hold on, you dropped this: 🙏🙏
How do I change my profile pic to a melting ice cap?
Oh thank the Lord somebody thought of doing this. The arctic needs our prayers SO MUCH and yall are praying for some football game? God has better things to worry about and he (or she) needs to hear about this.
(Everyone has this person on their Facebook, I swear)
Norwegian Chill Lmao I laughed so hard.
Iskrem, vær så snill.
NSIDC; Arctic sea ice Nov. 4, 2016
2012 sea ice area = 8.051 million sq km
2016 sea ice area = 7.259
Difference is 812,000 sq km
Texas = 696,000 sq km
Americans are always measuring things in texases
yeehaw?
Adam Fidelio Not real Americans (I identify as Alaskan)
696k nice
And deep sea water is dark, so absorbs heat, snow and ice don't, they reflect it. so with the ice melting, exposing darker sea water, it's just compounding the situation. That's how you get a runaway greenhouse effect. One thing impacts another which impacts another and so on. The ice lakes in Siberia also hold loads of methane, once they melt things are gonna get much worse. They recon they hold millions of tons of methane under those lakes!
Agreed!!!(yes I am very late)
What u gonna say now?! Climate change deniers!?
@@trunzlerclement3227 The change in temperature precedes the change in carbon level by up to a year. 97% of all carbon emissions are natural. Every. Single. Prediction. that has been made regarding the climate from these scientists has been wrong. Remember the hole in the O-zone thing?.
Yes, the planet is changing. It has for millennia. Don't be so arrogant to think that humanity has any control over Earth's temperature. Carbon levels rise as the planet gets hotter, as more organic matter decomposes.
I don't deny the planet's climate changes. I just have working long-term memory. Incidentally, the year this was made was also the year Al Gore said we'd already be flooded. Let's not give these people any more power. They're wrong.
I knew this was happening due to James Hansen's work almost 30 years ago and we did absolutely nothing for decades. We would be so much farther ahead by now but climate change became a partisan issue in the 90s and then action stalled.
30 years, wow that long ago. He studied it for how many years? On a planet that is how many centuries old? Its a bit cooler today isn't it?
@@stevearcus2963 No - it is significantly warmer.
@@godfreypigott No , it is not ! And arctic sea ice has been increasing for several years .
@@reishiggins4116 *HAHAHA* - you're a comedian!!
@@godfreypigottno its not.
my question to you NASA is when you gonna make a time-lapse with deforestation in all the world ?
or when they gonna give us some new pic of earth from space
Check out the Landsat project. There are many comparisons that show this effect, with 40+ years of imaging the Earth. www.nasa.gov/landsat
Or what about the ongoing surface mining (40-400m deep) all over the world that leaves only deserts and canyons and destroys farming grounds (food production)?
There is no such thing as deforestation. That's an alarmist myth to scare people. For every tree cut down it gives a signal to the market to plant a new tree. We should use more wood instead of less. CO2 is plant food, you know.
If you cut 100 fifty year old trees, and plant even 1000 2 years old trees you will restore like 5% of what was before. You know.
Why does the first 1/3 of the video not show the months/years? It seems like it all but disappears (1:06) before they start in 1992?
Why is the land grey? A lot of deniers are saying that is a reason not to believe the animation as it isn't real satellite images.
This is about the decline in sea ice not land glaciers. And these images are created from the microwave satellite data and thus not photographic images.
Don't worry, humans! Trump has said there's no such thing as global warming so we're all ok.
We all are ok and will continue to be. Did you know that the CO2 levels over the past 500 million years averaged about 2-5x what it is now? It's extremely low currently. Life thrived back then. There isn't even enough CO2 in the air for plants to grow anywhere near optimally. Which is why CO2 is pumped into greenhouses. A warmer earth is definitely a good idea.
He said the data they are showing is false and misleading.
No one denies global warming, it has been going on since the coldest day of the ice ages.
And it is accelerating every day after.
There were no humans 500 million years ago, smooth brain.
@@brageok 👍
God I hope this is satire
Can we have a similar animation for the antarctica please?
(a video showing both arctica and antarctica at the same time....)
because the South is gaining ice
Steve J,
Sorry, but that is old information, and thus somewhat inaccurate.
In 2015 Antarctica had, at it's winter maximum, the greatest sea ice area that has been seen since accurate satellite recording started.
Note that this was a thin seasonal sheet of large area but but comparatively little volume.
In the couple of years since, Antarctic ice (both winter max and summer min) have undergone a drastic decline in both area and volume.
This years summer ice minimum was the lowest sea-ice area that has been seen in Antarctica since satellite records begun.
nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/
Gaining snow ice in the middle of the continent, but losing it along the edges, where it buttresses land ice glaciers, which are moving, faster in the last decade.
Wouldn't be the same. Antarctica is an actual landmass, the Northern Arctic is not considered a landmass.
@loblocks222: the problem: mass of water displaced by floating ice is equal to the mass of the ice; melting the floating ice doesn't change the ocean level, or at least does so minimally. OTOH ice resting over land melts, water flows into the ocean and raises the sea level. So the harm coming from melting Antarctica is much worse than melting northern Arctic.
The comments from scientific illiterates are astoundingly numerous.
Well now that we have an internet everyone is a scientist. It's where the social misfits and nitwits come to play.
You guys like to call people dumb, that's not nice man.
He said they are illiterate, not dumb (although many of them undoubtedly are).
Like yourself.
Bro I didn't misread that.
I love how many scientists there are in this comments section. I see so many experts educating other experts. Amazing how many smart people are in the TH-cam comment section, astounding really.
It looks the same now as it did just before the video started recording the years. It was almost gone around 1989 or so and then came back.
If you really think that then you need to watch it several more times and slow it down. The change over 30 years is obvious and disturbing!!
What time period does this cover?
EDIT: Time period indication starts 01:16
dude you're amazing i love this!
doesnt the same thing happen at about 1:06? seems like there might be cycles of old ice dying and then coming back.
The graphic actually starts over at about 1:15 going back to the beginning when the ice decline in the Arctic was observed based on satellite data. Watch it several times to see the sharp declines in summer 2007 and 2012 and then toward the end sea ice muli-year ice drops even lower. Another TH-cam video shows the sea ice decline right up to July 2019.
The reason why there are such crazy denialists in this debate is that they know that without industry heavily regulated our civilisation can't survive. The other crazy thing is that retooling the human race with new energy sources is exactly what the world economy needs. Just the the rebuild after WW2 created the great economy of the mid 20th century a "green new deal" could do the same for the 21st century.
Just bloody hard to get things done in a plutocracy and some little people hanging onto weird ideas.
Well then break the law buddy.
Well that, and scientists have been wrong about every prediction they've made about this. Gore said we'd see mass flooding by 2016. Maybe these guys aren't very reliable.
In minute 1:05 its still labled as sea ice age. The old ice is almost gone in that moment just like in the sep 2016 snapshot. Wouldnt this be considered a natural?
The beat of an ice heart core!
Animation stats are almost 3yrs old, so there's probably no old-ice there now, maybe even almost no ice-cap at all!
i was born in 84 so old ice was the real hip hop then
Have you done an update to 2020?
Thoughts and prayers for the ice. 🙏🙏🙏
😄
Do an animation of a specific month over the years.
Take plastic from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and create artificial ice bergs to reflect light from the arctic circle and it will cool down and form more ice. Could make floating plastic dens built into the plastic ice bergs for the polar bears to use as well.
Would it be possible to update this time lapse to the end of 2019 sometime soon? Thank You.
Would be cool if it showed 2020 too, so we can see whether or not quarantine changed much.
I need to refill my glass.... brb.
Dear Dr. Walt Meier of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. Please allow an answer for my following question. The years of this timelapse film are from 1986 to 2016? Is that right? More importantly, at some point the mature ice takes a sudden decline and never recovers, can you provide a specific time for when that stark drop off appears to have occurred and what events may have been going on globally leading up to and during the time of this dramatic sea ice loss? P.S. I can look provide the time stamp as referance if you cannot deduce what point in film im referring to but I very well believe you capable! Forgive me if I remembered the beginning and end years incorrectly. Thank you for your dedication and passion.
@SaRa. This particular graphic starts in 1991 and runs to 2016 and starts again at the same time at 1:16 showing the year in the left hand corner instead of the color code reflecting the muti year sea ice.
Would they prefer another Ice Age?
RIP thicc ice
Interesting video! It would help to highlight the important parts you are talking about.
Thank goodness for that. In school everyone was worried about the sea levels rising to the point of mega natural disaster... But what this is trying to show is that (1) this is all cyclical, and has been happening forever (2) Ice melting, that was already sat in the water, doesn't raise the level of the water as it melts... That's a relief!!!
Sea ice is different from land ice, Einstein
Please, Einstein is my father. Just call me Elvis.
It's like watching the planet trying to breath. But every breath becomes thinner and thinner, and brings less oxygen to the lunges than the previous. Literally watching the death of a planet.
This is terrifying.
I thought Ireland was under ice during the ice age? Or does this model ignore northern Europe?
Also, the amount of thick ice at 1:03 looks a lot less than in 1993. What is this model based on?
Mourning Ireland NASA's Polar orbiting satellites took images of the ice extent and thickness over the last couple of decades, these satellite images were used to make the animation you saw.
I wanna cry. I love my planet Earth. What have we done since then , except watching and recording? Nothing. O
BiHlover80's I think the problem is that that's all we can do right now. The politicians are stupid, and small minded
We cannot do anything about this, we are coming out of an Ice Age. Even with decent politicians, the ice still would be melting.
Taking pride in willful ignorance with the belief whatever you think is right while facts are fake news is the reason we haven't stopped corporate greed from stripping all natural resources and laying waste to the environment. Hope you live on the Florida cost.
TheGesox; Why don't we just get rid of you instead? You seem like the kind of person that wouldn't be missed anyway.
Stinkasaurus nnnnnope, going by cycles it would actually stop warming and start getting colder
I'm interested in why at the end of the video, you chose only 2 comparison points? Why and how was September 1984 chosen vs September 2016?
They are just showing the start of their data gathering vs the last record. Clearly it's melting, but what the cause of it is still up for debate. Many argue that this melting is caused by humans. Some argue it's simply normal for the EArth's atmosphere to fluctuate. We really don't know. We do a lot of speculation on both sides of the argument. I'm on the fence, it could be a combination of things outside our knowledge. I think we should do our best to reduce creating greenhouse gases but let's not kill each other over it. I personally believe these things sort themselves out. Whether it be war or famine but something's gotta give sooner or later.
There's no debate over this. It's global warming.
@@timothyandrewnielsen the last record was 2017. That's disingenuous.
@@noahwilliams8996 There is a debate as to what the cause is, my brainwashed friend.
@@timothyandrewnielsen
No, there's just one side having science, and the other being ignorant fools who are going to doom humanity.
Solution is very simple. We build a wall between Greenland and Svalbard and make Mexico pay for it.
How can politicians look at this and not believe in climate change?
The same way a lot of average citizens are in denial.
Kevin Costner was right!! He was trying to warn us but we didn't listen!!!
Is there any possibility to access the source data behind this video? E.g. as a GeoTIFF, NetCDF, gridded binary, ...? Thanks!
You can download datasets and images from the NASA GISS website: data.giss.nasa.gov/
dang. thanks for the video
Just filled up a cooler full of ice, gonna drive down to the beach and set it free
#ImDoingMyPart
You're probably more likely to accidentally kill something from temperature shock or hard impact from waves crashing the ice onto organisms. Which is hilariously ironic.
More prayer meetings will fix this.
Antifoul Awl, What? Like climate change summits in Cancun?
God wants us all to burn, apparently.
The climate scientists, though they may find it disturbing, have more in common with those who stop in dread and fear to pray (out of respect and forced humility for what they don't understand) than those who are unwilling to stop treading the current path (aka the majority of society). Divide and conquer.
prayers fix everything, weve been praying for 28 years for gun control and its finally working.
*tips fedora*
This is a great animation, thank you guys. I think it's important to mention the "during the era of satellite measurements" - I mean, how can we make sure this relates to human activity ? Also, from what I've read on the Nsidc, isn't the Antarctic ice at the south pole increasing ? Not questioning the climate "change", just questioning our responsability in all this, thanks.
is it possible to create barriers to avoid ice to escape? so that more ice can get older
The problem with geo-engineering is that you cannot predict all possible side effects. What if your barrier disrupts water flow and makes something else accelerate?
Christ, this is really sad!
Just like when you watch you snowman on Sun 😥
That's what happens to you when you mess up with Titanic!
bahahahah this is gold
Was Gibbs Helmholtz equation used to measure the melting in this research?
Thank you 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Es un fenómeno cíclico, cada cierto tiempo ocurre eso como en el polo antártico, pero esta vez los ciclos son mas pequeños debido al cambio climático global
It is a cyclical phenomenon, from time to time occurs as in the Antarctic pole, but this time the cycles are smaller because of global climate change
We got to take the Futurama approach and drop a really big ice cube in the sea yearly. that will solve all our problems
great job!
Well that's terrifying.
This is 2016, we have peer reviewed papers that show we will have no polar ice by now.
We're clearly getting there.
Clark Magnuson "We will have no polar ice by now". This sentence has a parallelism mistake. Thus, it must have not been peer reviewed.
Clark Magnuson It has not happened yet, thus it won't. You need to study your fallacies, and earn that grey hair.
I was being facetious.
Ray Hilborn has done a great job of documenting how many peer reviewed papers on fisheries are anything but science.
i'm sorry but you were being a moron. i'm sorry for myself for not having the self-control I need to not replay this kind of comments
Would the stong artic cyclone back in Aug 2012 have lasting effects?
Not beyond that year, but as Arctic ice cover continues there is increased possibility of strong winds pushing sea ice around causing to melt quicker leading to less and less sea ice. Soon there will be none in summer in maybe ten years which is hard to predict. There is still a lot variability in the Arctic!
we are all dead.
unfortunately we're not robots
Ugraptap well....yeah
Yueh Tewb
Yueh knoe according to climate science that started all this was about 25 years before that. We should be all done frozen over by now, but noooo! Wayyy too many keyboard climatologists in the "Tewb" anymore...good luck all see ya all on the bright side.
stop it. Stop this. get off your butts and change things, and quit your WHINING.
@@jasonmartin4775 you do know its a computer simulation right sport. All data man made and input into the computer to output what they want you to see.
holy grail at the center of the dish? and why is that horizon cut all weird
Just drop a huge cube of ice in. It'll be alright.
...which means that at some point the meltwater entering the north Atlantic will trip the NAD, which means an Ice Age for the northern hemisphere.
Yeah, Europe will get colder, but more equatorial regions will become inhabitable sending waves and waves of "climate refugees" to colder regions. Coastal areas will also flood causing people to move inwards. All this movement will cause demographic catastrophe. There will be wars for resources like water or food. All in all this is terrible news for everyone.
we don’t know exactly. To my knowledge the best current estimate of what will happen is Hansen 2016: www.atmos-chem-phys.net/16/3761/2016/
It also lists the uncertainties which still need to be addressed to get a stronger estimate.
what about Antarctica? any time laps like this available?
It is not as dramatic as this video because most sea ice melts back around Antarctica every year. The bigger concern with Antarctica is the accelerating melt rate of land glaciers in western Antarctica.
1:02 1:08 happened before and seems like this is normal on a longterm
Source?
yeah, i thought so, but statistically, it seems not,
SPOLIER ALERT: We are all already dead.
NANI?
Amazing video, theres no thick ice left. Same probably has happened to forests and animals living in forest. Beside these we get new land made of plastic in the oceans. We might be doing something wrong?
I, for one, welcome the day when we have an ice-free Arctic. Will be a major boon for economic progress and will shorten trade routes.
We still have a LONG way to go until we reach the conditions of the last interglacial. The ice age of Greenland being the dead giveaway in that regard.
The current warming of climate and related Arctic ice retreat is occuring much faster then occured in the past interglacial periods. When the Arctic becomes ice free in summer then the albedo of the Arctic will be near zero and almost all sunlight will be absorbed by the Ocean warming and in turn warming the rest of the planet still further. And with GHG's contiinuing to rise in the warming the climate will continue to warm from that cause. As the Arctic sea ice withdraws from the Arctic this allows the waters to warm and allowing for the potential and rapid increase in methane release from the permafrost. Peter Wadhams who has studied the Arctic for almost 50 years reports that the release of this methane could come as a dramatic spike in methane levels, a methane bomb as it were which could raise global temperatures by 0.6 °C in a short time.
This is what years of research on the changes going on in the Arctic has indicated is a real concern.
What science and research have you done that is a credible alternative to current science??
Is there an updated version with 2017 and 2018 imagery?
This is fake! All animated!!
smoothtwh
I'm sure there's satellite images of it somewhere on the internet.
Just word search Beaufort Gyre which shows this graphic going right up until July 2019.
@@smoothtwh This graphic is based on satellite data going back to 1984. Stop criticizing what you don't understand. That just makes you look more irrelevant to this conversation!!!
@@michaeldeierhoi4096
Bite me!!! I DO understand! ! You're the one who doesn't!!
Why is Greenland not shown with the big sheet ?
This video is depicting the decline in SEA ICE area and volume not the glaciers on land.
A good visual illustration of our impact on our home.
RIP Earth
in the same time-frame the south pole has grown by an amount larger than that of the north poles shrinking
barrettdesigns thats actually not true, the antarctic is growing slightly (due to the ice melting and making the water less salty, therefore making it easier to turn into ice) ,but it is not growing fast enough to outgrow the arctic melting, and soon that thin ice around antarctica will melt too...
You're making things up. Antarctic growth has outpaced north pole's shrinking.
Thecl Artic is perfectly healthy and record this winter too. It's all natural cycles. We're likely entering a cosmic ray indused little ice age, brought on by incoming weak the sun cycles.
That's not accurate. f you wish to compare, Antarctic ice (land and sea) has been growing by about 82 gigatonnes per year for the last few years. Greenland alone has lost an average of 238 gigatonnes in that time range. www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/nasa-study-shows-global-sea-ice-diminishing-despite-antarctic-gains Antarctica gained 82 gigatonnes of sea ice per year from 2003 to 2008. Greenland alone has lost an average of 238 gigatonnes per year from 2002- 2015, and that's land-based ice cap, which contributes to sea level rise. www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/nasa-study-shows-global-sea-ice-diminishing-despite-antarctic-gains www.arctic.noaa.gov/repor.../greenland_ice_sheet.html More recently, however: www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/sea-ice-extent-sinks-to-record-lows-at-both-poles
Based on your own numbers the 82 gigatonnes of sea and land ice per year. Your comparison dataset is 2002-2015 which is 13 years. 82 gigatonnes times 13 years equates to 1,066 gigatonnes which is vastly more than the 238 you mention. Your second comment references 238 per year so youre either misrepresenting your data or intentionally being confusing to swindle the public. Personally, I'm pleased to see the NASA mission reset back to its core. I'm tired of tax money being wasted to swindle the public on fake environmental concerns.
So what? we need more and cheaper Chinese products. The Northwest Passage can be pretty handy.
glad i'm an old hippie and grew up when i did.
Good job destroying the planet humans 🤦🏾♂️
It's a good thing you're not a human!
@@jamesbckmstro3 animals destroying to
glad im a dog
Who did it?
This is no joking matter. The consequences of inaction will likely be shortages, then hunger, and finally starvation in the industrial countries at some point. Planning now might reduce that likelihood. Contact your representative and let them know you are a single issue voter.
I notice that this NASA video is an animation. If only there were a government agency capable of taking actual photographs from space...
David Bolger
Taking millions of pictures of the North Pole from literally the same exact place for 32 years for no reason because clouds will cover everything anyway doesn't seem like a great plan to me.
we're so dead.
Only a very small number of people realize that right now.
And yet the oceans have not risen.
John Nursall
You're aware that Greenland exists... right?
very relevant.
yes, climate change will bring drought, hence war and human displacement
Cant you just spray a blanket of Barium and Aluminium in to the atmosphere to reflect the UV rays?? It would surely slow down the melting?
Its surely safer than millions of people losing their homes to rising ocean levels!
We don't advocate geoengineering, there are too many possible unintended consequences of putting those metals in the atmosphere at quantities large enough to change the atmosphere.
Wow it looks so real how did they get these photos
The graphic is based on satellite images.
all things considered this is the most accurate evidence the world and all of mans work are destined to be burned. 2Pe 3:11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
What?
Imagine earth without humans
That Part ,where the ICe FLows Out!!.... NEEDS to BE BLOCKED. . The Many items created? .. Need to create a BLockage or something to control this from happening
7 350 000 000 people today 1 000 000 000 every decade that's it! !
oops.
this was cool---now show the timelapse for antarctic
That is a very different dynamic because most of the sea ice in Antarctic melts every year anyway and that does not threaten to warm the planet like the warming of the Arctic does. The bigger concern in the Antarctic is the accelerated warming and thus melting of glaciers in western Antarctic.
Generally, older ice is thicker ice...
Im sure this has happened b4 not like we have had the ability to watch this in the past.
what did the 10 instances of 30yr periods prior to this show? Are there other, longer, cycles outside of seasonal cycles? Are there generational cycles, say, every 300 years???? would be awesome if someone could answer
Lachy Becke Yes, there are 14 year water current cycles, 10-14 year solar cycles and 200/400 Grand solar cycles, then there is the malcanvich cycles of the tilt of the earth and the great year which anout 24000 years? (I forget).
What NASA won't tell you is that we're entering a mini iceage as we speak. Grand Solar Minimum is here and the weakened helisphere allows more super charged cosmic ray particles to hit earth ...which heat up since I'm magma, waking up the big volcanos. We're in big trouble when the crops don't grow.
@@orangeedo Just stock up on food my dude.
IT'S FINE
EVERYTHING IS FINE
NOTHING TO SEE HERE
Well, yeah, that is clear as day if you just look at the video and see that no ice is really melting, there was a single bad year that took the old ice but new ice took its place. This graph is deceiving as all hell.
But, is it possible to use the temperature change to somehow encourage ice growth?
Everybody leave your freezer open make the earth cold
So when did it disappear? It's still there at the end of the video....
it does not say it dissapeared, but dissapearing
Diego So it shows that things change and nothing is static. Got it.
Looks like it just goes through long cycles.
What the Arctic is doing is cycling DOWN to the point when there is no Arctic sea ice in the summer which will lead to greater warming for the rest of the planet. That will come sooner then you think.
And as the Arctic warms still further we will see the release of methane in massive quantities which will accelerate warming!! COMPRENDE???
can you show me 25 years time laps ?
So the greenhouse effect we are making we are just speeding up the process? Am I correct? I heard we were supposed to have one of two situations. Another ice age or another greenhouse all life on the earth dies or changes to survive the climate change?
Yes we are speeding it up due to our carbon emissions. If enough meltwater enters the Atlantic it will slow down the Gulf Stream. Gulf Stream moves huge amounts of heat towards Europe from equatorial regions. You cut that off and Europe will indeed get much colder. But the rest of the world, especially equatorial regions or even south of US will become hotter and hotter with more droughts and heatwaves and extreme weather.. There is also a possibility of runaway greenhouse effect; that could end up in massive extinction throught the world. If we change and act quickly enough we can still stop this. But we need to act now.
life on earth won’t die. It survived worse. Human civilization might.
So I imagine it's true that we only have imagery since about 1975 of this actually happening as a process, from a distance such as orbital photography where we can get an idea of what's really going on? So, is it possible that this cycle is independent of massive climate change around the whole world? My "belief", and my family are all MDs or meteorologists, except myself, weirdly, is that the climate is changing - such is the nature of climate, but that even our emissions all put together - all carbon-based life on earth's own emissions, pollution, (and yes I'm including methane from cow farts), deforestation, can't possibly trigger or much accelerate a global calamity. Nature is just so ridiculously powerful that it's silly, again in my opinion, to think that all living beings together can really affect the climate, at least up to the point where it's 'by accident. I'm not including intentional destruction by ionosphere radio arrays and such, or cloud seeding with chemicals which may destroy atmosphere elements and layers. It's actually scarier to have to accept that this is all far beyond our control - and I feel like we are getting closer to having to live in awe of our planet, rather than keeping this mentality that it's ours to 'conquer'. A single tidal wave can take out hundreds standing on a pier in India, lethally in a matter of seconds.. it's that severe, what nature can do. Go watch videos of underwater volcano erupting. I've seen this stuff, and it's so severe that it just seems ridiculous to think we are responsible. It's like we're taking credit for nature, and making nature part of the ego. That is ego boundary dissolution, and leads to insanity :) BE well.
I think that the magnitude for which certain environmental changes are occurring may be influenced by these events; but not necessarily 100% reliant on human contributions. I do believe however, that regardless of this being our fault or not; if the habitability of the world is going to decrease in the next 100 years; then clearly nations need to redefine their priorities and focus on survival and the preservation of anything they can. Otherwise, a potential Holocene extinction could be imminent.
Many ancient species lost in the sea..
The ice also tends towards Canada. Has Russia been blowing nukes off their coast? Melting the ice near their side?
No nothing like that is going on. Besides the US would know if they did. The Russian coastline is where the most warming of Arctic waters has occured for various reasons. Alaska is ice free early in melt season as well.