Researchers, politicians converge at permafrost conference
Published Monday, June 30, 2008
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!
FAIRBANKS — Hundreds of researchers are in Fairbanks this week to get the real dirt on permafrost.
The Ninth International Conference on Permafrost officially began Sunday at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. Held every five years, the conference attracts about 600 participants from more than two dozen countries. The participants will spend the next few days sharing research about permafrost, defined as ground which remains frozen for more than two years.
The theme of this year’s conference is “permafrost and a warming climate,” an issue especially pertinent to Alaska. About 80 percent of the state is covered in some form of permafrost.
“We need to know more about this as time goes by, and that needs to be accelerated,” Fairbanks North Star Borough Mayor Jim Whitaker said in his welcoming remarks to the researchers. “I hope you can accelerate that by being here.”
This is the first time the conference has been at UAF, though the university was the birthplace of the International Permafrost Association in 1983.
Melting permafrost from global climate change can pump even more carbon dioxide into the air, increasing warming trends even more.
Larry Harting, commissioner of the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation and keynote speaker at Sunday’s conference, is looking into what impact climate change will have on the state’s infrastructure. He said that by 2030, the state will have to spend between $3.6 billion and $6 billion to replace damaged infrastructure, including moving coastal villages that will no longer be sustainable.
Even more pressing, he was recently asked on “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer” whose fault it would be if someone in a coastal village were killed as a result of strong storms caused by climate change.
“That was a very sobering question,” he said. “These communities are losing land and infrastructure in desperate ways.”
UAF President Mark Hamilton reminded the crowd of researchers that the work they’re doing on permafrost today could affect public policy for years to come.
“Without you, populist laymen will drive public policy with bumper stickers rather than with science,” he said.
A public lecture, “Remote Sensing of Permafrost-related Hazards and Disasters,” will be held at 4:45 p.m. today at Davis Hall in the Fine Arts Complex. Parts of the conference are being streamed online at www.iarc.uaf.edu/video/NICOP.
Contact staff writer Chris Freiberg at 459-7545.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
------------->
Melting permafrost from global climate change can pump even more METHANE into the air, increasing warming trends even more.
Methane is 23times more powerful than CO2 as atmospheric gaseous solar infrared trap.
Warming Climate May Cause Arctic Tundra To Burn
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...
Lakes Boiling With Methane Discovered In Alaska
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...
Fire In The Ice: Gas Hydrate Project Could Unlock Vast Energy Resource In Alaska
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...
-------
http://www.google.com/search?gbv=2&n...
==============
$500million is cheap fire insurance
USE IT BEFORE YOU LOSE IT
First Gasline Over The Brooks Wins !!!
www.fairbanksgas.com
......flash/rumble
We wouldn't want those nasty "populist laymen" driving the agenda, with their "bumper stickers" and all. We all know that today's research scientists, a.k.a. the high priests, never have an agenda, with which they set the course for us "populist laymen". The working class is too dumb to understand science, and agendas.
Thank you, President Hamilton, for your condescension from the hill. Just call us "populist laymen" when you need more money.
Glacierles-
I'm sure all of the "populist laymen" are glad to have a spokesperson in you. From what I've seen, the working class is not too dumb to understand science, they just don't care. They would rather leave the work up to researchers and sit back and gripe because they don't like what they hear. Good science has no agenda. It seeks to understand.
"Good science has no agenda. It seeks to understand."
I couldn't agree with you more. The key word in your sentence is "Good".
Otherwise, your tone is a bit elitist. Dont you think? Looking down your nose at the working class?
See, now, I saw your tone at 9:01 as patronizing and sarcastic... not that I have a problem with it.
I do have a problem with crying "foul" when you've set the tone, dear glacierles.
Mark Hamilton shows his liberal elite racism against the common people. This is the person that they pay to be the UAF President.
Mark Hamilton should apologize to the people of Fairbanks.
The elite using science is the root cause for the problems in the world. Common people are being bled for the elite.
Common people did not cause the problems.
The irony of someone using the World Wide Web to criticize "the elite using science" for being the root cause of the world's problems, is not lost on all of us.
Hint: If it wasn't for "the elite using science," you wouldn't have a newsminer.com to type on.
Zero --
Once again, you REALLY REALLY need to figure out the definition of "racism"... Heck, I'll even look it up for you:
racism |ˈrāˌsizəm|
noun
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, esp. so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
• prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on such a belief : a program to combat racism.
Most of the miraculous medical technology we all benefit from today came directly from the "elitist" scientific researchers who pioneered lifesaving research. Many scientific, academic researchers work much overtime (without extra overtime pay) at the expense of their families, outside interests, etc because they are extremely devoted to their work. Without some of the selfless devotion to science by the "elitists", we would not have things like vaccinations and lifesaving medicine for our children, we would not enjoy a life expectancy that exceeds 70 years or age, and the list goes on....
The vast majority of "elitist" scientists I've met would enthusiastically share their field of study with folks and in no way believe that others are too dumb to understand. It's the chosen ignorance and self-imposed martyrdom that goes hand in hand that are really annoying.
cool name, neanderdog!
"go hand in hand"
I can think of many things to grateful to science for. Really. Medical advances, crop growing and distribution, computers, (some) television, space travel, and on and on and on.
I can also think of a few things that we'd be better off without. Nuclear bombs, abortion, (some) television, and Al Gore come to mind.
Scientists are not holy. They are human. They do make mistakes, both in research and in judgement. And sometimes, they can be arrogant. Like the rest of us schlubs.
It's possibly true we would be better off without nuclear bombs. Though the invasion of Japan would have been one bloody mess for both sides.
But it's questionable as to whether we'd have the same extent of knowledge about nuclear physics and nuclear power if Uncle Sam hadn't funded a whole bunch of research into figuring out how to build a nuclear bomb.
I agree that it's a sad truth that a lot of science has been paid for with the aim of figuring out how to kill people more efficiently.
A nice Heinlein quote for ya'll --
"For explanations of a universe that confuses him, he seizes onto numerology, astrology, hysterical religions, and other fancy ways to go crazy. Having accepted such glorified nonsense, facts make no impression on him, even if at the cost of his own life. Joe, one of the hardest things to believe is the abysmal depth of human stupidity."
"[T]he abysmal depth of human stupidity". That's not arrogance, is it? But hey, thank you, and Robert Heinlein, for allowing us to breathe the same air as ya'll.
Actually, if one were a scientist that disagreed with manmade global warming (and I know that there are many), you could take this same quote and apply it to the Al Gore types that want to save a planet, that will save itself, by turning our own nation into a 3rd world economy, and all that goes with that. "[E]ven if at the cost of his own life."
Hey newsreader,
Cool Heinlein quote!
I wonder if the mayor has read Carl Sagan's "The Demon Haunted World"... an exercise in getting comfortable with gray areas and human nature and the scientific method...
-jen (who also enjoyed DistantThunder's link about gas hydrates, even though I'm a hopeless illiterate schlub. :-P )
Mark Hamilton shows his liberal elite racism against the common people.
The newsminer trolls have come out.
Newsreader has time from his busy work day that he can post from his work computer.
The elite newsreader hates anyone who would dare post anything religious. (In my eyes that makes you a racist). If you believe in God you don’t have freedom of speech here. The elite newminer trolls will but a stop to you.
Let us all get on our knees for the great novel writer Heinlein and beg him to save us.
Maybe newsreader can save us? All hail newsreader.
Science is the one thing that can destroy this world.
Yes, science can destroy the world. That's an argument in favor of responsible science, not in favor of no science at all.
Science is a tool, no more, no less - like a pistol, its results can be good or evil depending on how it's used.
Especially living in Fairbanks, I can't help but laugh uncontrollably at the demonization of science. Modern science is the only thing that makes the Alaskan lifestyle possible.
Where does one think all this electricity, telephone and Internet service comes from? Synthetic insulation, oil-fired furnaces, the internal combustion engine and all that it powers, the fact that we can go to Fred Meyer and cart home televisions made in China, lettuce picked in California and fresh beef slaughtered in Iowa... the fact that we can climb aboard a 737 jet this afternoon and arrive in Seattle by evening.
Alaska is the last place for a neo-Luddite.
Zer0-
Can you really see a difference between your "Newsminer Trolls'" opinions and the way you and g'les slam scientists or people who have dared to get and use an education?
IUR---
If I am critical of some science, I am not critical of all science. I agreed with you completely that "Good science has no agenda. It seeks to understand." You must have forgot that part, either that or you just decided to twist my words to your purpose.
I dont agree with 0cents. But again, you saw an opportunity to twist my words to your purpose.
Now why would you do this, I have to ask myself, rather than to refute my arguments? I guess that it could be that you are not as smart as your education says that you are. Or maybe you just like to make things up. Sadly for you, my previous comments are not as you indicate.
Things that I am critical of:
Arrogance
Dishonesty
Laziness
Zero says -
"Mark Hamilton shows his liberal elite racism against the common people."
"The elite newsreader hates anyone who would dare post anything religious. (In my eyes that makes you a racist). "
Well then, maybe you need to get your eyes checked?
"Common people" are not a race. People who "post anything religious" are not a race. Thus, the term "racism" does not apply.
glacierles --
Sounds like you are critical of politicians then! *chuckle*
Seriously though, science isn't the problem. It when science is used by politicians for their own gain that it becomes a problem. I will happily agree with you on that point.
Unfortunately, much science is funded by gov't - which means that politics are involved (by definition). That's the part that sucks. Just look at the pseudo-science that went on in the Soviet Union (especially in the early days) and in Nazi Germany.
As polarflack stated, science is a tool. How that tool is used is where the foibles and fallibilities of man come into play...
Hopefully, at a conference with some 600 international participants, true (good) science will prevail over any individual's political agenda.
G'les-
I guess I am going off this statement: "We all know that today's research scientists, a.k.a. the high priests, never have an agenda, with which they set the course for us "populist laymen". " Help me out, here, g'les-- that sure seemed like a polarizing slam to me. To your credit, you did make an attempt to temper that statement with a bit of open-mindedness later.
Keep in mind that criticism can only strengthen a researcher's methods and conclusions. Science would be not be science without it and if a study cannot stand up to sound criticism, it's no good. If a scientist regards him or herself as infallible, then they are not really a scientist in the true sense of the word. You have to accept the possibility that you are wrong and you have to keep questioning yourself, your methods, your data, your interpretations, everything---or you get nowhere. So, bring on your criticism... just remember to do it out of concern for the process, not simply for the sake of criticizing something you don't want to hear or understand.
Considering the temperature latter this week is suppose to be in the 80F, I guess they picked a good topic, permafrost in a warming climate. I for one am looking forward to the free lecture. Just drive down some of the roads in Fairbanks and we know one of the dangers. Make the drive on Framers Loop and you can see the effect on some houses.
Things that I am critical of:
Arrogance
Dishonesty
Laziness
Hopefully Glace you'll be as critical of yourself then as you seem to be of everyone else who disagrees with you.
Are you feeling okay? I know you had a bad golf game, but you know, we've both been on these boards a long time. There were many instances when I found myself agreeing with you or found your comments, if if not agreeable at least thought provoking.
At any rate, may God and Science both shed their blessings on you. I'm glad someone is looking at the permafrost and how the changing weather will affect it. The way the world is going now we need all the advance warnings we can get.
Even more pressing, he was recently asked on “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer” whose fault it would be if someone in a coastal village were killed as a result of strong storms caused by climate change.
“That was a very sobering question,” he said. “These communities are losing land and infrastructure in desperate ways.”
WHAT!!! Ok seriously... Those who live there, live there by utter choice. Why should the state and by the state i mean MY TAXES pay to move them. I have an IDEA... Im going to have the state move me to Missouri because they have the lowest gas prices around, but i wont be able to find a job that pays as much as i have up here so they will have to supplement my income too. OH OH OH and i still want my PFD too... Cause its to expensive and cold to live and who knows i could slip and fall on the ice and die and then whos fault would that be. Sounds like a sobering question to me... Good god... People need to understand that they live where they live by mere choice and dont need a hand out when where they live gets nailed by the natural disaster that is going to happen... Just like salcha at break up time... Its going to flood and if i lived there then state has to pay to move me cause i deserve it.
What good is a country, JWC, if it can't help its citizens when a natural disaster threatens?
Would you have left the people trapped by Katrina die?
Hmm, so when Shishmaref gets washed into the Chukchi Sea, it's all their fault for establishing a village there centuries ago?
Interesting moral universe you live in.
I suppose you're totally against the government helping Alaskan families afford to pay their heating bills this winter, too? They chose to come live here, let 'em freeze?
Im usually wrong:
I stated a fact “Science is the one thing that can destroy this world.”
I never said I was against science. I believe in science. I’m not slamming science just Mark Hamilton.
You have 595 posts you are a newsminer troll. Do you have a life? Do you just want to slam all the people you disagree with? Is free speech only for the newsminer trolls? Some of us don’t get paid to post all day like newsreader.
Maybe you could pull out in front of newsreader so he can put you in a ditch. Nice guy, up standing jerk.
Mark Hamilton took a cheap shot at the common people. I wonder if Mark can unplug his own toilet from his BS.
I took a cheap shot at Mark!
Science is behind drilling oil but you are against it.
Osense,
yep, says it all. Do you have a life beyond name calling? Well, jerks are way below trolls on the evolutionary scale. But you're right on one thing, obviously you really are usually wrong.
Free speech is something for those who know what a civil discussion is. Go unplug your own toilet.
newreader---
Yes. We are in agreement here. Politicians generally suck (a few notable exceptions). Scientists work better without politics influencing their work. Hopefully, the conference will be successful, but I am skeptical because of the makeup of the audience and participants. There will be many politicians attending and, I'm guessing here, participating.
Murphy---
Believe me. I am self critical. To a Woody Allen stage, at times.
While I am just a schlub, an ignorant layman, it has been my observation in living here for 36 short years, that it is human activity, not weather, that effects permafrost most. I could be wrong. All of my conclusions are observational. Thus, a village, over time, might cause permafrost to thaw. Just as a village built close to a river, in order to fish more efficiently, might be susceptible to flooding.
IUR---
Weak man. Really weak. I expect better from you.
FreeDarfur---
It is summertime. On nice days, it gets warm up here in the Interior. Always has. Dont be overly worried. Enjoy it.
What do you want from me g'les... a fight?
P.S.-- I'm not a man, dude.
IUR---
Well, if you poke me in the eye, I guess that you know to expect that I would respond. Call it a fight. Call it a disagreement. I dont much give a hoot. So far, it's been mostly a civilized debate, and I would hope it to continue that way.
You definitely surprised me with your postscript. I am a disagreeable chastised schlub, and shall remain so.
Strange-
I thought everybody knew that I was a disagreeable, opinionated girl...woman...whatever.
madjoseph
You can not take my free speech away. My toilet is not plugged and if it is, I know how to fix it.
Mark Hamilton should apologize to the people of Fairbanks.
IUR---
Disagreeable and opinionated?
Yes.
As co-chair of the Ninth International Conference on Permafrost, I feel somewhat compelled to respond to some of these comments. The scientists who work at the University of Alaska are not elitists. They are typical Alaskans who are at home on our streets, rivers and forests. The one characteristic that sets them apart is, they have a mandate of service. President Hamilton often reminds us that we exist to serve the people of Alaska. That is one reason why we hosted this conference in Fairbanks. The Russians, Chinese, Canadians and Norwegians have all recently completed major projects over permafrost terrain. They learned valuable lessons and are willing to share their knowledge with us. Researchers at the University of Alaska have also developed new techniques for building houses and roads that will work better than methods used for years. We hosted a workshop and field trips to share that information with the public and such information is continually updated and available through our Cooperative Extension Service. We are attempting to resolve problems of global proportions that no single nation can address (such as the release of tremendous amounts of methane stored in permafrost) but we are also working to help Alaskans learn to adapt and prepare for a changing climate. The challenges are substantial, but we will strive to improve the lives of northern residents.
Larry Hinzman
Co-Chair, Ninth International Conference on Permafrost
Director, International Arctic Research Center, UAF
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.