South Pole May Hold Secrets Of Life

Scientists Explore Antarctic's Mysteries, From Ancient Air Samples To Buried Neutrinos

(CBS)  This is the second part of a series on the effects of global warming in Antarctica.

---

Welcome to the Earth's air conditioner.

At the South Pole it's 48 degrees below zero on a typical summer day. Antarctica holds 90 percent of the Earth's ice - that's seven million cubic miles of it.

At the South Pole, the enormity of the Antarctic Ice Sheet is striking. Beneath the spot on Antarctica where CBS News correspondent John Blackstone reported, the ice is two miles thick, and it stretches over an area larger than the United States and Mexico combined. The ice is so thick, it buries entire Antarctic mountain ranges.

It's so cold at the South Pole, the snow never melts; it just turns to ice and gets thicker. Now the secrets of the ice are coming into focus.

"For me, the really cool thing about Antarctic ice is the bubbles," said Kendrick Taylor, a Glaciologist from the Wais Divide Ice Core Project.

Those bubbles are samples of the earth's ancient atmosphere, trapped in the ice. For Taylor, the ice is like a library, stacked with climate records going back thousands of years. He expects his ice core samples will confirm a key argument in global warming.

"The current levels of greenhouse gases are much higher than they've been at any time during the last 650,000 years, and it's all due to human activity," he said.

When CBS News last visited Antarctica in 1999, the geodesic dome of the American scientific station was already disappearing under the snow. Now there's a new state-of-the-art station for dozens of scientists and support workers.

It's on stilts so it can be raised as the snow builds around it.

No one owns the South Pole, but the American presence makes a subtle point about who's in charge; discouraging the kind of competing land-grabs currently happening at the North Pole, where Russia even sent a submarine to plant its flag in the ocean floor beneath it.

"This station represents the United States presence in playing a key role in scientific research in understanding our planet better," said Jerry Marty, South Pole Station Manager.

So the National Science Foundation is funding ambitious experiments like the $272 million telescope drilled into the ice. It detects neutrinos - powerful particles from space that travel right through the Earth - and may reveal how the universe was formed.

"There is a chance that this telescope will have great discoveries that no one is able to predict," said physicist Mark Krasberg.

Looking down may yield even more immediate breakthroughs … under the ice in the ocean around Antarctica. From fish with anti freeze in their blood, this is one of the last largely undisturbed ecosystems on earth.

And it's filled with unusual creatures that somehow survive when they should be freezing.

"Here's a sea spider, if you'd like to hold him," said Cara Sucher, picking up another creature, this one round and jelly-like. "What's interesting about this guy, his shell is on the inside."

"There's a lot these organisms can do which would be really great for humans to understand and apply to human biology," said USF biologist Deneb Karentz.

Like how doctors can use cold fluids to keep critically ill patients alive. Cool science from a frozen continent.

[octavianfdlr]

Hominatrix53, scientists do indeed rely on evidence, and not on blind faith. Priests, on the other hand, rely on the blind faith of others to carry out their agendas.

Did you notice the scare quotes that mediapreachr put around the word "scientists," proclaiming to all the world that he was not talking about scientists, but those who dishonestly represent themselves as scientists to get us to give them the blind faith that priests once commanded? Just because a person claims to be a priest does not mean he has been ordained. Just because a person claims to be a scientist does not mean he is scientific.

For may years, climatologists trying to detect any evidence for global warming caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gases lamented the lack of any temperature measurements over most of the globe in even recent centuries. Then the UN chartered the IPCC to provide "authoritative" data demonstrating that human activities are causing significant global warming. (Priests are authorities, not scientists.)

Early this decade, the IPCC proclaimed that it had proof of global warming: these authorities now had the log sheets, filled out in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries by those observers who never existed, on which they recorded daily temperatures all over the globe.

This is not science. The IPCC is relying on our blind faith.

Do you believe?

mediapreachr: Scientists rely on evidence - religions rely on blind faith. The newest ploy of referring to scientists as "priests" is an absurdly transparent attempt to discredit science, and demonstrates a embarassing lack of understanding of the natural universe.

[octavianfdlr]

talkingham dismisses the observation (by Search4Truth) that global warming is happening on other planets as "A typical red herring." Having thus (neatly) dismissed the proof that the Global Warming conspirators have been telling lies, talkingham continues by trying to equate Global Warming with all other environmental effects caused by humans.

What everyone should recognize is that, about a year ago, the UN''s IPCC proclaimed that the detection of global warming was proof of an anthropogenic cause because anthropogenic greenhouse gases are the only possible explanation for global warming.

If, as the IPCC claims, only anthropogenic greenhouse gases can cause global warming, then anthropogenic greenhouse gases are the cause of global warming on Mars and Jupiter.

There are no anthropogenic greenhouse gases in the atmospheres of Mars and Jupiter. Therefore, the IPCC lied. Rather than discuss physical reality, talkingham dismisses this simple fact as "A typical red herring," and blames the realization of this simple fact by Search4Truth on brainwashing by some propagandist.

So, talkingham, which propagandist brainwashed you?

[search4truth-2009]

I reply to "talkingham" (Very apt, btw),

Actually, Mr. Ham, astrophysicists are to blame for my understanding of current warming trends. Apparently, you see Rush Limbaugh and the "church" involved where ever you read something you disagree with. I do agree that cutting down the rain forest is criminal for many reasons, in fact. AND I do agree that man has influence in global warming, just not that much.
The sun is to blame for most of earth''s changes in climate this past 100 years as it has been for the past several million. DUH!
Of course I am sure you will continue to believe that man is to blame and could actually change the solar cycle to get a stable climate.
Btw, I DO know about the core samples showing more CO2 than in previous years but as you yourself pointed out in your more recent post NATURAL EVENTS like volcanos etc. cause more CO2. Those astrophysicists predicted more of these events for the next 50 years due to an alignment of the planets in year 2000 (which could be the reason religions have warned about impending doom around 2000. Cosmic events would be a whole lot easier to predict than a new Hitler or Satan returning, eh?).
You are right...I don''t have a lot of respect for Al Gore, but I did read his evidence.
Apparently, you don''t read opposing point of view without BIAS.

[taddles-2009]

"if "man" has raised the temp of the Earth, Mars, Mercury, Saturn etc.(all of the planets of this solar system, esentially) AND the SUN,
Just how the **** did "man" do this?

Posted by Search4Truth at 12:34 PM : Feb 13, 2008"

Um...we didn''t. Look, do you have any info that doesn''t smell like your a$$?

[taddles-2009]

"All of this is well documented on CO2 science.org

Posted by rphull at 09:07 PM : Feb 12, 2008"

A small organization run by a father and 2 sons who have been on the payroll of the Western Fuels Association and receive annual checks from ExxonMobil. Their primary purpose is to expound that increasing CO2 levels don''t increase the earth''s temperature and the even if it does the CO2 is good for plant development. Basically they are shills for the oil giants.

[djconklin]

"Search4 obviously has his or her tiny brain stuck deep within the sands of the Good Book and Rush Limbaugh''''s dark place."

The Good Book had nothing to do with his misguided thinking. There was no reason to attack the Bible.

[rf35]

mediapreachr said: "I bet they have lists with who is to live or not to live, where, and how much should they consume."

I think it''s time to go back on your meds, Preacher.

[mediapreachr]

Sticking your hand in other people''s pockets is in vogue today.What 200 or so was OK to pander to the Church,now we have the "scientist" priests telling us what''s moral(or good for the Planet).
I bet they have lists with who is to live or not to live ,where,and how much should they consume.Don''t believe me?
That''s where this leads to.

[talkingham]

RPhull we might not know what caused the warm-up then but we have a pretty good idea of what''s causing it now. There are plenty of natural events such as huge volcanic eruptions, huge emissions of gas by undersea volcanoes, even asteroid strikes that can cause a spike in the warming process. Even atmosphereic conditions that we don''t understand. However none of that changes the fact that we are seeing a rapid warm-up in all major indicators that point to an onslaught that is technology driven against the environment. It''s like parents who blame the curve in a highway when their kid gets drunk and dies in a car wreck on prom night. No one wants to accept the consequences of our overblown use of fossil fuels. Obviously they have no affect on the environment. Please stick head deeper in sand.

[talkingham]

Search4 obviously has his or her tiny brain stuck deep within the sands of the Good Book and Rush Limbaugh''s dark place. And certainly has criticized Al Gore''s film without ever seeing it I''m sure. The film really is for people like Search4 who really don''t search 4 any answers or search 4 would know the answer to the question posed.

Huge amounts of carbon emissions at rates of change greater than any ever recorded are holding the heat in our atmosphere. And search4 this has nothing to do with any of the other planets. A typical red herring. And while it''s true there may be additional increases in Earth''s temp due to other natural causes why is it so hard for people like search4 to understand that cutting down all the world''s rainforests which produce oxygen and then saturating the atmosphere with various hydrocarbons in addition to those from carbon fuels might just have some little affect on this planet. Not to mention the asphalting of America at every white-flight driven suburban ginormous strip mall. And it only takes a small change to produce a big result over tiem int he environment. Ask the Bald Eagles who were nearly made extinct by a little DDT in the environment.

There any many reasons for the heat up, not just one. And man-made pollution is a big part of the current picture.

[search4truth-2009]

Glad to see all the toughtful people here.
No one would admit to being brainwashed, but let me ask you all something about "Man-made Global Warming":
If "man" has raised the temp of the Earth, Mars, Mercury, Saturn etc.(all of the planets of this solar system, esentially) AND the SUN,
Just how the **** did "man" do this?
Don''t answer that unless you want to prove your mental condition OR you have a vested financial interest in propagating the "Man-made Global Warming Myth".

[octavianfdlr]

Good story, except for the obligatory Global Warming propaganda. After all, the question has never been whether carbon dioxide levels are much higher now than at any time in the last several million years -- they are. The question is whether such high levels have any significant effect on climate. That question will never be answered by demonstrating that carbon dioxide levels are high.

Nevertheless, analysis of the ice in the ice core can give us more information about global temperatures. The discovery of higher temperatures in the past, in Antarctica as well as Greenland, would weaken the "high carbon dioxide = high temperature" argument that is central to the Global Warming conspiracy.

As a person who has been concerned about the environment for many decades, I welcome the promise of additional, reliable data.

[displeased]

co2 increases are needed to accelrate plant growth so that we will be able to feed the 8 billion people by 2050.
Posted by rphull

It won''t do any good to accelerate plant growth if there is not enough water to drink.

[godseyesore-2009]

God squad Repugnicans will deny it...they don''t want no stinkin'' science to show is real. Well, go on to paradise of the mind. Dolts.

[mediapreachr]

I got the bottom line for you-it is,you guessed right-Money.
The funny thing is,people who got money just want more.
You can''t just walk to people and ask money today.You need an "inspiring" story to go with that.

[rphull]

Ask Taylor what caused the Medieval Warm Period? The co2 content then was not high! This period was also warmer that it is now. If co2 content is the cause of global warming then how do you explain the global warming around 1000ad? There is plenty of data showing that the earth goes thru a 1500 year cycle of warming and cooling. The little ice age which ended around 1850 signaled the start of the current warm period about 50 years before the co2 started going up. co2 increases are needed to accelrate plant growth so that we will be able to feed the 8 billion people by 2050. All of this is well documented on CO2 science.org