In meantime, here is UK/Independent article from yesterday:

http://environment.independent.co.uk/climate_change/article3087271.ece

'Carbon sinks' lose ability to soak up emissions
By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Published: 23 October 2007

begins:
"A dramatic decline in the ability of the Earth to soak up man-made emissions of carbon dioxide, and a corresponding acceleration in the rate of increase of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, have been detected for the first time by scientists.
The discovery that more carbon dioxide from human activities is lingering in the air rather being absorbed by the world's forests and oceans has alarmed scientists who believe that it signals a potentially dangerous turn of events for the global climate.
They fear that a much-anticipated "feedback" in the global climate – when increases in carbon dioxide in the air trigger further increases in atmospheric concentrations of the gas – has already begun to occur decades before many predicted.
"We always said that these feedbacks would happen in the future, but what this study shows is that these feedbacks are happening right now," said Josep Canadell, executive director of the Global Climate Project in Canberra, and the lead author of the study."

Here's UK Guardian piece saying Greenland earthquakes increasing:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/08/climatechange

Notice no pursuit of implications.

Here's UK/Independent reporting melt holes, moulins, big enough for helicopter navigation:

http://environment.independent.co.uk/climate_change/article3021310.ece

From same paper, report of rain at North Pole:

http://environment.independent.co.uk/climate_change/article3021309.ece

Here's NY Times on usefulness of emissions curtailment:

"In a conference call with reporters, the scientists also said the momentum to a warmer world with less Arctic sea ice — and fewer bears — would be largely unavoidable at least for decades, no matter what happened with emissions of heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide.

“Despite any mitigation of greenhouse gases, we’re going to see the same amount of energy in the system for 20, 30 or 40 years,” said Mark Myers, the survey director. “We would not expect to see any significant change in polar conditions regardless of mitigation.”

In other words, even in the unlikely event that all the major economies were to agree to rapid and drastic reductions in emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases, the floating Arctic ice cap will continue to shrink at a rapid pace for the next 50 years, wiping out much of the bears’ habitat."

from: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/08/science/earth/08polar.html

Note no discussion of human habitat currently depending on land ice not sliding.

"In a conference call with reporters, the scientists also said the momentum to a warmer world with less Arctic sea ice — and fewer bears — would be largely unavoidable at least for decades, no matter what happened with emissions of heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide.

“Despite any mitigation of greenhouse gases, we’re going to see the same amount of energy in the system for 20, 30 or 40 years,” said Mark Myers, the survey director. “We would not expect to see any significant change in polar conditions regardless of mitigation.” "

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/08/science/earth/08polar.html?fta=y

As sea ice goes, so does land ice. Except land ice gets earthquakes under it, will consequently slide. All projections about melting that I've seen, including "Why We Need To" above, ignore this, and have for the past 3 decades.

Former permafrost increasingly releases methane, nothing humans can do about that at this point. Warming earth in England now releases more greenhouse gases than English industry.

Here's a UK/Independent piece, mentions rain at the North Pole:

http://environment.independent.co.uk/climate_change/article3021309.ece

Same paper reports melt holes big enough to fly a helicopter into:

http://environment.independent.co.uk/climate_change/article3021310.ece

Here's UK Guardian saying Greenland earthquakes are increasing, no pursuit of implications:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/08/climatechange