>> ^srd:

I fail to see why this is exciting. The magnetic north pole has always been off and always been moving (albeit slowly in the range of a few kilometers per year). My old school atlas from 1988 puts it in the Canadian arctic, in the Parry islands (roughly 100 degrees west, 75 degrees north).
Worse than the drift in the north pole are local disturbances in the forc^H^H^H^H magnetic fields, causing compasses to point over 30 degrees away from true north. If you're dependent on a magnetic compass for navigating, chances are you also have an up-to-date map catalogueing the local deviations.
Most aircraft have gyros for these reasons. Alternatively, you can always magnetize the aircraft and place it in a calm body of water. It will always point true north.


The reason it is slightly more exciting/crazy is because the rate of change is accelerating... drastically. From 1970, it has changed from 9 km/year to 41 km/year, to what it is now, nearly 64km a year. The acceleration might just be par for course, but it could also hint at a pole change. Really, we just don't know, and like all things, change scares us to death.

I fail to see why this is exciting. The magnetic north pole has always been off and always been moving (albeit slowly in the range of a few kilometers per year). My old school atlas from 1988 puts it in the Canadian arctic, in the Parry islands (roughly 100 degrees west, 75 degrees north).

Worse than the drift in the north pole are local disturbances in the forc^H^H^H^H magnetic fields, causing compasses to point over 30 degrees away from true north. If you're dependent on a magnetic compass for navigating, chances are you also have an up-to-date map catalogueing the local deviations.

Most aircraft have gyros for these reasons. Alternatively, you can always magnetize the aircraft and place it in a calm body of water. It will always point true north.

@robdot & @shuac

In Canada and Greenland[1][14][17][20] the term Eskimo is widely held to be pejorative[20][11] and has fallen out of favour, largely supplanted by the term Inuit. However, while Inuit describes all of the Eskimo peoples in Canada and Greenland, that is not true in Alaska and Siberia. In Alaska the term Eskimo is commonly used, because it includes both Yupik and Inupiat, while Inuit is not accepted as a collective term or even specifically used for Inupiat (who technically are Inuit). No universal replacement term for Eskimo, inclusive of all Inuit and Yupik people, is accepted across the geographical area inhabited by the Inuit and Yupik peoples.[1]

Since the 1970s in Canada and Greenland Eskimo has widely been considered offensive, as mentioned above. In 1977, the Inuit Circumpolar Conference meeting in Barrow, Alaska, officially adopted Inuit as a designation for all circumpolar native peoples, regardless of their local view on an appropriate term. As a result the Canadian government usage has replaced the (locally) defunct term Eskimo with Inuit (Inuk in singular). The preferred term in Canada's Central Arctic is Inuinnaq,[21] and in the eastern Canadian Arctic Inuit. The language is often called Inuktitut, though other local designations are also used.

While I agree that certain terms (Indian, Midget, etc) are stupid to take offense to, but when they actually have a conference and agree upon something they prefer to be called, I can respect that, and respect their wishes.

They did not just say "No, you can't say that anymore, that's our word" or "I find this term offensive" they made a name for their race as a whole.

Great find, Throbbin. Makes me excited to go back. There really is no place like the Canadian Arctic. You have to experience it to fully comprehend what a wonderful place it can be.

Didn't know that there was a Canadian Ice Service, part of the federal Ministry of Environment (Environment Canada).
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/App/WsvPageDsp.cfm?ID=11912&Lang=eng
The Northwest Passage in the Canadian Arctic was ice free and open to navigation for 4 weeks this year.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070917-northwest-passage.html

Just to add to what spoco2 said:

The "why not add a pair of extra arms?" question may seem a bit naive, but its actually a very good question, the basic 4 limbs, one head structure is something that we mammals all have from fish, the recently discovered Tiktaalik rosea fossil is a wonderful answer to this question, scientists knew already that mammals, as well as all other land animals came out of the sea, and they knew this had to be somewhere around 380 million years ago, the problem is finding fossils at that particular layer, its a needle in a haystack... but because they have mapped out different areas based on how old the exposed layer of rock is, Neil Shubin and his team was able to pin-point an area that would have fossils of that age, it turned out to be the remote canadian arctic, and it can only be searched in the summer, so Shubin and his guys spent six years up there, walking around, banging on rocks in the hopes of finding something.

Eventually, they found Tiktaalik up there, and if there ever was a "transitional" animal, it would have to be Tiktaalik, its like a fish that does push-ups, and its got the first neck in history!

You can read all about this in Niel Shubin's book "Your Inner Fish" which is a fantastic read.
http://www.amazon.com/Your-Inner-Fish-Journey-3-5-Billion-Year/dp/0375424474

Heres the little guy they found, the Tiktaalik:
http://regmedia.co.uk/2006/04/06/tiktaalik_roseae.jpg