Slashdot Mirror


Global Warming Shifts the Earth's Poles

ananyo writes "Global warming is changing the location of Earth's geographic poles, according to a study published this week. Researchers at the University of Texas, Austin, report that increased melting of the Greenland ice sheet — and to a lesser degree, ice loss in other parts of the globe — helped to shift the North Pole several centimeters east each year since 2005. From 1982 to 2005, the pole drifted southeast towards northern Labrador, Canada, at a rate of about 2 milliarcseconds — or roughly 6 centimetres — per year. But in 2005, the pole changed course and began galloping east towards Greenland at a rate of more than 7 milliarcseconds per year (abstract). The results suggest that tracking polar shifts can serve as a check on current estimates of ice loss. Scientists can locate the north and south poles to within 0.03 milliarcseconds by using Global Positioning System measurements to determine the angle of Earth's spin. When mass is lost in one part of a spinning sphere, its spin axis will tilt directly towards the position of the loss — exactly as the team observed for Greenland."

18 of 482 comments (clear)

  1. Three Gorges Dam by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Part of this shift could be caused by filling the reservoir behind the Three Gorges Dam, since that is on the opposite side of the world from Greenland. But that would only explain part of it, since the reservoir holds about 40km^3 and Greenland is losing about 240km^3 per year.

    1. Re:Three Gorges Dam by Aardpig · · Score: 5, Funny

      I welcome our new Asian Overlords and their Moment of Inertia.

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    2. Re:Three Gorges Dam by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      With that said, why did they change from "centimeters" to "milliarc"? What the hell is the ratio?

      A Nautical Mile is one minute of arc. Since a NM is 1852 meters, an arc second would be 1852/60 = 30.87m, so a milliarcsecond would be 3.087. So the ratio is about 3.

    3. Re:Three Gorges Dam by JMJimmy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Something about this article just feels wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_polar_wander feels more right - just sits better in my gut. ;)

    4. Re:Three Gorges Dam by bmo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A nautical mile isn't an "imperial unit"

      It's a nautical unit. It's actually Babylonian. It's useful for measuring the Earth because it's "close enough" to a minute of arc.

      If Gunther had changed his surveyor's chain to 1/100 of a nautical mile in 1620, (instead of 1/80'th statute mile)^1 we wouldn't be talking about the Meter at all, as it would have been useless.

      --
      BMO

      1. A nautical mile is 92.06 chains. An adjustment of the chain to 100 per NM wouldn't have been a big difference, and made things even easier for surveyors and engineers.

    5. Re:Three Gorges Dam by vikingpower · · Score: 4, Informative

      . Meters and kilometers are strait-line measures, and can only approximate distance on Earth (unless you want to bore through the earth).

      Which is bollocks. The one is not more "curved" than the other. Both can be used to measure distance on either flat ( Euclidean ) or curved surfaces.

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
  2. Re:The opposite might also be true by ZaMoose · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was actually going to post something incredibly close to this. The causal link just isn't there, as far as I can tell. It could very well be that the glaciers melt/freeze due to slight shifts in the poles' positions and variations in the Sun's output.

    --
    I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
  3. Spinny-Chair by Mystakaphoros · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is this a conservation of angular momentum thing? Because I feel like my high school physics teacher would try to explain this by spinning someone around in a chair with a melting ice cube on their head.

  4. it all goes south from here... by burdickjp · · Score: 4, Funny

    When you're at the North Pole, which way is East?

    1. Re:it all goes south from here... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Funny

      A quick bit of projection math tells me the value of east is the set of all angles when you're at the north pole.

  5. Shifting Poles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    There was this guy called Adolph that shifted the Poles too

  6. Re:The opposite might also be true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree. Global warming may or may not be caused by humans. Perhaps in part. Regardless, we should focus on cutting pollution even if global warming is not man-made.

  7. Re:The opposite might also be true by SirGarlon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's face it people, there is nothing we can do, accept it and deal with it.

    There are plenty of things we can do. There's very little we *want* to do.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  8. Re:Surface Drift Question by EmagGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The crust does drift, and because the crust does not have uniform thickness, crustal drift changes the center of gravity and angular momentum of the Earth, and also shifts the poles.

    Also, if there is a major earthquake that sinks a large portion of crust any appreciable amount, the rate of rotation AND center of gravity change, and poles shift some more.

    There are many many vectors of change for the position of the poles. To assume that all of the observed drift is due to the change in mass of a single ice sheet is ludicrous. But, we're talking about the chicken little global warming narrative here, so anything goes.

  9. Re:The opposite might also be true by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 4, Informative

    I was going to call stupidity on this, but then I realized they meant the axial poles. The magnetic poles have been shifting (they travel a lot, and sometimes reverse; there's been dramatic movement in the recent decade), and this can alter magma flows and screw with global weather patterns. Axial poles shift due to mass movement, which may occur from magnetic poles moving hot metal around, but also other reasons as cited.

  10. Re:The opposite might also be true by SirGarlon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fact that bad ideas dominate the set of proposed solutions does not make the problem invalid.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  11. Re:The opposite might also be true by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Changes like this have happened time and time again ... and the world will continue and life will continue

    The problem is it might not be habitable by 7billion humans ... this *will* affect you

    --
    Puteulanus fenestra mortis
  12. Re:Global Warming my Arse... by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Congratulations, you just demonstrated how little you know about climate science and global climate change. Colder winters and longer winters are both explainable and predictable depending on where you are. For instance, changes in the currents in the ocean may direct colder water towards the UK and northern Europe, thereby actually making for colder winters and more snow. In North America this year, the melting Arctic icecap (which melted much more than usual last summer) added extra heat to the northern oceans, which affected the jetstream, pushing it south. That dragged cold air from the Arctic down much further south.

    Climate is wild and woolly, and it's hard to know exactly what's going to happen, but we know enough of what's going to happen and what's happening that most of the complaints you're going to come up with can be explained by Science. And not just some random scientist, but peer-reviewed and published science.

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/25/scientists-long-winter-in-u-s-the-result-of-melting-arctic-ice-cap/

    We know the poles shift. In fact, that's IN THE SUMMARY. You didn't even have to read the article to see that shifting geographic poles are well known. But they're shifting faster, and NASA's GRACE experiment is also helping measure the subtle shifts in gravity associated with shifting mass. It all seems to be correlating well. Someone else here has even already pointed out this comment in the article:

    "The results suggest that tracking polar shifts can serve as a check on current estimates of ice loss."

    Are you interested in science or not? Then sit and read and understand the science. Don't go off on a rant before you know a single damn thing of what you're talking about.