Flying in a helicopter over the crevasses of a receding glacier in the Arctic is a dramatic way of seeing what scientists say are the risks of climate change…but getting there may be badly stoking the problem.

Last week I went to the Arctic island of Spitsbergen to report on a meeting arranged by Norwegian Environment Minister Helen Bjoernoy: she invited 40 politicians and leading researchers two hours flying time north of the Arctic Circle (and a few reporters).

Melting glaciers are one of the main signs that the planet is heating up, according to climate scientists, and glaciers coating much of Spitsbergen and other islands nearby have more ice than in the Alps. Loss of glaciers could nudge up world sea levels and a melting of the Himalayas, for instance, could disrupt river flows in Asia.

Crammed into a helicopter, we flew over glaciers near Ny Alesund, where the meeting was held, for views of bizarre patterns in the ice and crevasses. Many on Spitsbergen are receding, with huge chunks of ice splitting into the sea. But experts say that planes and helicopters are big contributors to global warming by burning fossil fuels — roughly 2 percent of the total from human activities.

So it is a good idea for politicians or reporters to travel to remote parts of the world to get a better grasp of the issues? 

Or should they stay at home and do their work on the phone and leave the ends of the earth to scientists who might find something new rather than just gawp?

Tell us what you think!