Aug. 19, 2007
The Age Of Warming
60 Minutes Goes To The Bottom Of The World And To The Top of A Glacier To See The Fastest Warming Place On Earth
-
Play CBS Video Video Watching The World Melt Away In Full: Scott Pelley looks for - and finds - evidence of global warming in Antarctica where the bottom of the world is literally melting away.
-
Video Pelley's Reporter's Notebook Only On The Web: Scott Pelley discusses global warming in the Southern Hemisphere, where glaciers are receding in an unprecedented way, and how the study of ice helps understand climate change.
-
-
60 Minutes Scott Pelley perilously stands on an iceberg in Lake O'Higgins -- a lake formed by the melting of glacier O'Higgins in Patagonia, Chile. (CBS)
-
Penguins migrate up to 5,000 miles in the coldest water on earth. But, after millions of years of endurance, researchers say many of Antarctica's Chinstrap and Adelie penguins aren’t surviving anymore. (CBS)
-
-
Photo Essay A Warming Effect A behind-the-scenes look at the 60 Minutes team's trip to Patagonia, Chile and Antarctica.
-
Interactive Global Warming The greenhouse effect, a look at the Kyoto Protocol and a history of the Earth's climate.
-
Fast Facts Antarctica Learn about the people, economy and history of Antarctica.
The other reason one comes to the Warsaw Plateau is to see some of the most dramatic evidence anywhere in the world of climate change. Over the past 50 years, this region, the Antarctica peninsula, the northwestern part and the islands around it has been going up in temperature about one degree every decade and that makes the region the fastest warming place on earth.
Mayewski is on the plateau to drill an ice core because, when ice is laid down, it captures everything in the air. Drilling down is drilling through time.
"The ice cores are really the only way we have of demonstrating what greenhouse gas levels were like prior to their first measurement by humans," he explains.
By chemically analyzing the core, he can see what was in the air thousands of years ago. Back in Maine, Mayewski has a vault of hundreds of ice cores. He once led a team that drilled a glacier core two miles deep. He and his colleagues have found some of the most powerful evidence that man is changing the climate.
What do ice cores tell him about greenhouse gases?
"Now we know from the ice core record that the levels and the speed of rise are significantly, significantly greater than anything in the last 850,000 years," Mayewski explains. "And the levels that we expect to get by the end of this century are going to be double what we have today."
Mayewski and his colleagues have timed the sudden rise in greenhouse gases to the start of the industrial revolution about 150 years ago. If, as expected, greenhouse gas pollution doubles by the end of the century, temperatures are predicted to rise four to six degrees.
"You could very well see sea level rises on the order of several feet and perhaps even several tens of feet," Mayewski predicts.
Asked what that would mean for coastal areas around the world, Mayewski tells Pelley, “If sea level were to rise like that, that would be tremendous changes. Immense migrations.”
"It would be the largest catastrophe that the modern world would have experienced," he adds.
That rise in sea level would play out over decades. Some of it may be inevitable. It turns out that many greenhouse gases last a long time in the atmosphere—there’s a lot up there already.
"If we stopped every automobile every factory, every emission of a greenhouse gas, would the world continue to warm?" Pelley asks Mayewski.
"It would certainly for a while. And I think that’s one of the important thing for people to understand," Mayewski says. "It is important that everybody really begins to make reductions in greenhouse gases all the toxic elements that go along with it in order to impact or to have a change in the future. And once we start it’s not going to be an immediate solution. We’re going to have to pay for a while for what we’ve done."
Produced by Solly Granatstein and Catherine Herrick
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Recent Segments
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Add a Comment See all 24 Comments
- Why let facts get in the way. The average temperture at the south pole is MINUS 49. Unless there has been a change in the melting point of ice - nothing will melt until the temperature is around freezing. For you at
CBS 60 minutes it is 32 degrees. The south pole is not melting! - Reply to this comment
- Thank you for re-airing the alert on global warming in the Southern Hemisphere. I have an idea I have been sending to potential investors to slow glacial melting that I would like to send to Scientist Gino Casassa for his input on how to make it more effective, and on how we might proceed. Basically, I propose we use reflective sailcloth to shield the ice and waters. I would appreciate very much information from you on how I could contact him or send him my thoughts.
Thank you for your inspiring program!
Sincerely,
Dot Montaine - Reply to this comment
- As someone who spent a year at the South Pole Scott Pelley%u2019s praise of Gino Casassa was over rated when he said: He was so respected a mountain was named after him. When Antarctica was mapped the mountains were name after anyone who was there. I worked with a cook and communication person who had a mountain named for them
- Reply to this comment
- I tell you what, let''s shut the whole thing down. All industry, power production, etc. No more warming. No more food, no more CBS, no more going to see Grandma in the family car, nothing. You eat what you grow or catch. Cuts down on stray dogs don''t it. No grocery stores.
Sounds a bit like the stone age. If that''s where the liberals want to go, well, Gore might just talk them into it. - Reply to this comment
- I agree with almost all the comments. There was no mention of the fact that the main ice in Antarctica is "thickening" significantly. It seems that even though some warming may be happening, earth is compensating by increasing snows in antarctica so the net effect of sea level rise is near zero. Why don''t you guys show all sides of a question? That''s why I normally watch Fox news.
- Reply to this comment
- Only one answer to this problem: Penguin burgers.
- Reply to this comment
- I watched with great interest your story about the Antarctic warming phenomenon and specifically the conclusion drawn that human activity since the Industrial Revolution is the main contributor to the problem.
A few weeks ago, I had a dream that I wwas receiving a voice-mail and it was from the Chief Economist of the Universe. The subject was global warming and a solution to the problem was offered.Being a musician, I composed a song which I think captures the message. I''m wondering if you are interested in hearing the song? - Reply to this comment
- Something new under the sun?
Interesting climate changes have been occurring since time immemorial.
If climate change is deemed to be such an alarming problem, than why have not the seas risen even an infinitesimal amount in our recent industrial era history?
Certainly we should all be concerned about our environment; but the waters are being murkified and methinks the largest supplier of %u2018warming%u2019 is the hollow hot air emanating from profiteering pundits from each side of the issue.
http://hotairorrealconcern.blogspot.com/ - Reply to this comment
- Thank you for the story, Global Warming/Climate Control.
The stories objectivity was wonderfully shown. That''s right, there''s only one side to global warming, now changed to "climate change".
Why the name change? It''s hard to talk about "Global Warming" when it snows in areas with global warming demonstrations (LOL).
Now that 60 Minutes has told the story from ONLY one side, let''s hear from the other side, those scientists who do not believe in the Global Warming Theory.
When the weather men start predicting the future weather patterns, correctly, then maybe we can look into "your science" into global warming.
Please let me know the airing of the other side.
Drinking the Kool-Aid
Be Good - Reply to this comment
- astro2111 - kudos to you for being able to go out and do your own research!
- Reply to this comment
- Ray_Collins: no one has said that there aren't Planet Earth factors adding to the global warming/climate change events.
YES, decidedly they do happen.
The question is: what percentage is us, and what percentage is this planet? I don't know the answer to that.
I don't live in an all-or-nothing world. Things are seldom just one cause, and never something else. They blend. For better, or for worse. - Reply to this comment
- Michalak4:
"Since our dependancy on eating meat is perhaps the single largest contributor to the climate change - even more so than driving cars, I would suggest starting there. Not even Al Gore wants to touch that one."
Not necessesarily so. Yes, the big bang meat-raising conglomerates are an issue, but sustainable meat ranching IS sometimes better on an energy-use scale than trucking in your (big bang) veggies from 2000 miles away. The artichokes I'm cooking for tonight's dinner came in from the other side of the continent. The venison I ate two nights ago foraged in the wild and didn't take any extra energy to get to my home (because the person who brought it to my doorstep was coming here anyway).
There's a lot of talk about moving to corn for our energy needs. One plus: it gets us off of immediate foreign oil dependency. The negative: we just drop that dependency back a layer or two. It's still there.
There's some talk about animals like goats, which can live in areas where human crops cannot grow, and free-range pasture. This source of meat would not be cheap perhaps, but can provide for sustainable protein production.
My point is that there are a lot of variables on food sources and environmental impact, and we should keep this in mind. - Reply to this comment
- Great job Scott Peley.
One thing though, there is no place on earth named Anartic. It is Anarctic - like the other side of the world from Arctic. I looked it up in the Reader's Digest World Atlas!
Another thing is, there are no polar bears in either the Anartic or the Anarctic. Check - it - out! - Reply to this comment
- I don't pretend to understand all of the science regarding global warming. I do question some of the validity and assumptions we are asked to believe. Take for example the ice core drillings that were mentioned in this report of Antartica. By drilling down in the ice to take core samples going back thousands of years we are told that the air samples were purer. This may be viable, but honestly if we are in a global warming trend that we have caused over the last 100 or 200 years, any samples that would have indicated the air quality at that time would have already melted. The idea of drilling down to get core samples of previous years would indicate to me, the average human being using common sense, that we are experiencing a cooling and a deposit of ice formations over the last years. I am aware that only two decades ago they were warning us of global cooling. Regarding my own experience in Minnesota, our records indicate that the land of 10,000 lakes have had no consistant indication of warming trends based on annual reports of ice out dates on area lakes since such records were kept. I have yet to see a direct significant connection to man's contribution to global warming. While there is enough data to show there are climatic changes, can anyone really test all of the variables to make the assumption that man is responsible. In the mean time I do support conservation efforts and am waiting for more verifiable proof.
- Reply to this comment
- Al Gore may be a visionary, but if THIS is true, does it not represent the real crisis?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/what_al_gore_really_wants.html
I am buying his book and movie to find out. - Reply to this comment
- In the mid 70s through the early 90s we were warned about the effects cutting down the Amazon rain forests would have. 80% - 90% of the earth's moisture came from there. It should be no surprise that the earth is now having to dig into it's reserves to keep our climate moist enough. Whether man exists on this planet or not, the earth, with it's extraordinary ability to survive, will.
- Reply to this comment
- As a carnivore, I don't plan on cutting meat out of my diet.
The sad thing is that it is too late to do anything about global warming. That's why there is little said about reversing the trend. I still advocate getting the world, especially America, off fossil fuels. It just makes sense to end our dependence on oil and be able to breathe cleaner air. But global warming is too far along to do much about in the short term. Whether human activity caused this or not, humans certainly can%u2019t do anything to reverse it. - Reply to this comment
- So much of the media has addressed global warming, but little time is ever given as to how we as a population can make viable changes our own lives to reverse the trend. 60 Minutes should do a series of segments focusing on the major contributers to global warming and how we can achieve positive impact. Since our dependancy on eating meat is perhaps the single largest contributor to the climate change - even more so than driving cars, I would suggest starting there. Not even Al Gore wants to touch that one.
- Reply to this comment
- On our Alaskan cruise we received a map of Glacier Bay as the ship entered it. In 1750, it was a glacier out to the Inland Passage. By the early 1800's it had retreated 60 miles or so. It seems that the earth is in a warming trend. We are no doubt adding to the problem, but humans probably could have little effect in reversing the trend. See about Glacier Bay: http://www2.nature.nps.gov/geology/parks/glba/.
- Reply to this comment
- Quick question - why was there no counter opinion offered in this piece? Every other topic gets a pro or con, for or against, etc - why not this 'scientific' topic?
- Reply to this comment
