
The rotational North Pole is moving east at 14 cm per year - empressplay
http://gizmodo.com/we-finally-know-why-the-north-pole-is-moving-east-1769588584?utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_source=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
======
ChuckMcM
So here is a crazy whacko theory about how an ice age gets kicked off. The
theory goes that the further "south" (or out of position) the pole moves, the
more it changes the solar insolation ratio of land/water to more land and less
water. Since land has a higher albedo that water, its reduces the amount of
energy from the sun that makes it into the atmosphere and that causes the
temperature to drop, putting down more snow, higher albedo, more snow, until
full on glaciation. Then the shifted mass of the water pulls the pole back to
where we consider "normal", things start melting, we exit the ice age the
water moves around pulling the pole southward again, and like one of those
giant "drinking bird" toys you could get in the science museum the planet goes
in and out of ice ages.

------
glitcher
Can anybody explain how moving any direction from the North Pole is anything
but south? Or am I confusing magnetic north with rotational north?

~~~
jacobolus
Unfortunately our language doesn’t have great words for concisely and
precisely describing three-dimensional rotations, precession, etc. in plain
words. (We can be precise by using diagrams or mathematical notation, or
writing an extended paragraph of explanation.)

Of course if we define the rotational axis to be the “north pole”, then it
doesn’t make sense for it to be moving east, or even south: by definition
whatever direction it points is always north.

What they seem to mean is, if we predict the pole’s future path over the
surface of the planet, previously it was moving toward Canada, and now it’s
moving toward England. Relative to the N–S–E–W coordinate frame we use today,
if we keep that coordinate frame static, the modified path of the pole is to
the “east” of its original path.

~~~
ahazred8ta
TL;DR - For a long while, the pole was slowly moving toward Canada. Then for
about a decade, it slowly moved toward Europe. Now since about 2012, it is
slowly moving toward Greenland. Based on gravity measurements, it looks like
changes in global groundwater levels and icecaps are responsible for the
changes in direction.

------
LukeB_UK
Link to the actual paper:
[http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/4/e1501693](http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/4/e1501693)

------
ythl
I thought any direction relative to the north pole is south? What does "east"
even mean in relation to the north pole?

~~~
thrownaway2424
Even worse, what could "east along the Greenwich meridian" possibly mean?

~~~
mynewtb
'gizmodo'

------
eternauta3k
I'm surprised the Earth is rigid enough that you can define the rotational
axis to that level of precision.

~~~
adevine
I still think it's pretty amazing that scientists are able to detect something
like a 14cm annual change on something as big as the Earth, and even more, to
come up with a plausible explanation for this tiny change.

~~~
intrasight
Indeed. And we can assume that the precision will only increase. So we'll be
watching the global warming catastrophe unfold in high-res.

------
blue1
Meanwhile, the magnetic pole is moving 4000 times faster.

------
basicplus2
yes but they need to include all the effects of all the nutations of the earth
from the shortest a 19 year cycle caused by the moon to the 22,000 year cycle

------
jrapdx3
The laws of unintended consequences were never more evident than implicit in
global climate change, a result of human activity. We always intended to make
the world better, at least that's what we constantly said we were trying to
do.

We should be warned based on history. All actions and decisions have numerous
and unpredictable outcomes, more than we ever realize at the time. It's a
curious thing that we seem not to remember this lesson, endlessly repeating
the process on each iteration. Rush headlong into an idea, and then spend
decades or centuries repairing the damage.

Despite having evolution's best brain, and the ability to do otherwise, we
humans have been on the whole poor long-term planners, we have failed to see
the big picture. Or more to the point we don't heed those among us who urge us
to consider the implications of our behavior, preferring the expedient until
we hit a wall.

The article's conclusion is not a surprise, all the clues are converging
toward the revelation that human cleverness will be our undoing, unless we
learn to push our problem-solving abilities to their full capability, setting
aside our usual short view for the possibility of continued existence.

So what do we surmise are the odds world-wide leadership of that caliber will
arise? One guess is as good as any other.

~~~
mikeash
The activities that resulted in climate change also resulted in a vast
improvement in the lives of a huge number of people. If I were somehow thrown
back in time and given control over the process, I'd do it all over again,
albeit with a greater emphasis on efficiency, and on alternatives once they
became practical.

~~~
noiv
> greater emphasis on efficiency, and on alternatives once they became
> practical.

Sorry, that's weasel language and I hear it everyday. Electric cars existed
before gas tech, the first Porsche was electric, Einstein described the
photoelectric effect in 1905, got Nobel Prize in 1921. The greenhouse gas
effect by carbon dioxide has been realized the century before and wind energy
is in use for millennia. If we had not chosen that route, we'd be _all_ better
off for sure, had probably a few wars less and wouldn't look at sea level
rising for thousands of years to come.

Of course you'd do it again, the party was fun and the cleanup team pays
someone else.

~~~
mikeash
> Of course you'd do it again, the party was fun and the cleanup team pays
> someone else.

Wow. I don't know how you expect that to contribute to the conversation. Maybe
your goal is just to shut it down? Don't be a dick.

~~~
serpix
instead of assaulting the poster directly we should pick up where he left and
think of ways to improve the situation. Bickering just breeds more negative
thinking

~~~
mikeash
I had half of such a reply written, but when I got to than massive insult I
couldn't proceed.

I think it's worthwhile to inform people when they've gone way too far.

