Ages-Old Icecap at North Pole Is Now Liquid, Scientists Find
By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
Published: August 19, 2000The thick ice that has for ages covered the Arctic Ocean at the pole has turned to water, recent visitors there reported yesterday. At least for the time being, an ice-free patch of ocean about a mile wide has opened at the very top of the world, something that has presumably never before been seen by humans and is more evidence that global warming may be real and already affecting climate.
The last time scientists can be certain the pole was awash in water was more than 50 million years ago.
Ages-Old Icecap at North Pole Is Now Liquid, Scientists Find – New York Times
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 70C At Lisbon
- Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- “Earlier Than Usual”
- Perfect Correlation
- Elon’s Hockey Stick
- Latest Climate News
- “Climate dread is everywhere”
- “The Atmosphere Is ‘Thirstier.’”
- Skynet Becomes Self Aware
- “We Have To Vote For It So That You Can See What’s In It”
- Diversity Is Our Strength
- “even within the lifetime of our children”
- 60 Years Of Progress in London
- The Anti-Greta
- “a persistent concern”
- Deadliest US Tornado Days
- The Other Side Of The Pond
- “HEMI V8 Roars Back”
- Big Pharma Sales Tool
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- 622 billion tons of new ice
- Fossil Fuels To Turn The UK Tropical
- 100% Tariffs On Chinese EV’s
- Fossil Fuels Cause Fungus
- Prophets Of Doom
Recent Comments
- Gordon Vigurs on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- Bob G on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- Bob G on 70C At Lisbon
- Bob G on 70C At Lisbon
- Disillusioned on “HEMI V8 Roars Back”
- Crispin Pemberton-Pigott on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- Disillusioned on “HEMI V8 Roars Back”
- Disillusioned on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- arn on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- conrad ziefle on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
The article also quotes a Russian Ice Breaker Captain who claims he has never seen open water at the North Pole before….
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Well, at least NYT published a correction, though I doubt on the front page. Anyone know?