Ice cap disappearing 30 years ahead of schedule

[goldenecitrone]

The report from the lie machine states that the passage is "fully navigable" for the first time in 30 years. However, no one appears to have made the journey to confirm that it really is. Weird that, don't you think?

If we provide you with a rowing boat and a puffa jacket, would you go and check it out for us. Please.

 

[dash_two]

The report from the lie machine states that the passage is "fully navigable" for the first time in 30 years. However, no one appears to have made the journey to confirm that it really is. Weird that, don't you think?

Considering none of your examples supported your argument, and on closer examination overturned it, talk of 'lie machines' is perhaps a little rich.

A degree of humility from you in the face of a series of easily-checked and basic errors would be more appropriate.

 

[dash_two]

The 'fully navigable' claim comes from the Danish National Space Center - the BBC have merely reported their press release:

http://www.spacecenter.dk/research/remote-sensing/northwest-passage-opens-up

Would you say that the Danish National Space Center is a 'lie machine'? You do recall the DNSC is also home to the researchers who conducted the experiment on cosmic rays and cloud formation which you were enthusiastic about.

 

[bigfish]

Considering none of your examples supported your argument, and on closer examination overturned it, talk of 'lie machines' is perhaps a little rich.

Can you show the forum a single example supporting the lie machine (and presumably your own) argument that the passage is "fully navigable" for the first time "since records began"?

Any idea why Greenwarfare hasn't dispatched a couple of its vessels to the region to maximize its "manmade global warming" propaganda?

 

[dash_two]

Are you really claiming that the Danish National Space Center is a 'lie machine'?

 

[bigfish]

Sailing the so-called Northwest Passage is not so unusual a feat as it once was, but it is still a rarity. Cruise ships have accomplished it only three times -- in 1984, 1985 and 1988.

--New York Times

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=travel&res=9E0CE7D8113BF933A25756C0A964958260

 

[free spirit]

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=travel&res=9E0CE7D8113BF933A25756C0A964958260

erm would those cruise ships have possibly been early versions of this one?

The HANSEATIC, a cruise liner / ice breaker all in one designed to be able to steam through pack ice?

The vessel’s special construction to the highest ice class rating (E4) means that the 5-star expedition ship can
plough through the Arctic ice independently.

Just because a few specially constructed Ice Breaker style boats have got through in the past doesn't mean the passage was 'fully navigable' IMO

 

[bigfish]

Guardian's climate hype called "misleading and alarmist"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2164776,00.html

Greenland is starting to accelerate in its melting. This is wide open to interperatation as to how quickly it can melt. But however quick or slow, it has begun.

Here's another interpretation from a climatologist/seismologist working precisely in the area mentioned in the report.

Your article (Melting icecap triggering earthquakes, September 8) is misleading and alarmist. As a climatologist/seismologist working on glacial seismic activity in the Jakobshavn glacier basin - precisely the area your reporter mentions - I know that local earthquakes (or glacial quakes) are actually fairly common in the area and have been for a long time.

I also know that there is no evidence to suggest that these quakes "are happening far faster than ever anticipated" in the region, as Dr Corell of the global change programme at Washington's Heinz Centre is quoted as saying.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/sep/13/climatechange.comment

Note: "Melting icecap triggering earthquakes", September 8, is a rehash of the report, published in the Guardian the day before, cited by david above.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

dash_two: The most comprehensive destruction of anyone's arguement i've seen in quite a while.

 

[free spirit]

If we provide you with a rowing boat and a puffa jacket, would you go and check it out for us. Please.

I'd be happy to chip in a few quid for the boat, and have a spare puffa jacket I could donate... tis a worthy cause

 

[bigfish]

I'd be happy to chip in a few quid for the boat, and have a spare puffa jacket I could donate... tis a worthy cause

I love the way you cabal types set about turning things inside out in order to support your fallacious arguments. I know, instead of chipping in a few quid for a boat, why don't you chip in a few examples of vessels having successfully navigated the NW passage with sea-ice apparantly at its lowest extent this year "since records began"?

 

[david dissadent]

Here's another interpretation from a climatologist/seismologist working precisely in the area mentioned in the report.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/sep/13/climatechange.comment

Note: "Melting icecap triggering earthquakes", September 8, is a rehash of the report, published in the Guardian the day before, cited by david above.

Glacial earthquakes in Greenland have been monitored for decades using the global seismic network, and although their number has increased over the last five to six years - likely due to Arctic warming -

.

 

[david dissadent]

Everything that does not agree with you is a "lie machine" not a valid difference of opinion.

Speaks volumes for your mind. You already know the answers and only ever see evidence that confrims what you know. Such lack of doubt must make you a very contented person, unlike me, who has to fudge through a world in which every week contradicotry evidence to many of my basic assumptions comes through requiring lots of thought research and analysis.

 

[bigfish]

Everything that does not agree with you is a "lie machine" not a valid difference of opinion.

it was the BBC I was referring to as a lie machine, david, and not "everything" as you rather disingenuously put it. With an annual budget of more than £3.5 billion, one could be forgiven for thinking that the BBC might have checked its very own website at least before repeating the claim of a NW passage "fully navigable" for the first time "since records began" - especially as we have not received any reports of vessels successfully making the journey this year, no?

 

[free spirit]

I love the way you cabal types set about turning things inside out in order to support your fallacious arguments. I know, instead of chipping in a few quid for a boat, why don't you chip in a few examples of vessels having successfully navigated the NW passage with sea-ice apparantly at its lowest extent this year "since records began"?

cabal types?

interesting choice of phrase there Bigfish, yet another demonstration of the weird upside down version of the world you have in your head.

Cabals are sometimes secret organizations composed of a few designing persons, and at other times are manifestations of emergent behavior in society or governance on the part of a community of persons who have well established public affiliation or kinship. The term can also be used to refer to the designs of such persons or to the practical consequences of their emergent behavior, and also holds a general meaning of intrigue and conspiracy. Its usage carries strong connotations of shadowy corners, back rooms and insidious influence; a cabal is more evil and selective than, say, a faction, which is simply selfish.

I'd say cabal would be better used to describe you and your exxon funded cronies wouldn't you?

as for you question, well if you'd bothered to read the link in my earlier post, you'd have noticed that the link I'd posted fairly clearly stated that the HANSEATIC had made precisely that trip between 15 August - 9th September this year.

not that it proves anything about whether of not the passage was fully navigable or not being as that cruise liner's designed to break through pack ice, same as the one would have been in the early 80's that you were on about.

what point was it you were trying to make again?

 

[Crispy]

His point is that unless you can paddle a rubber dinghy through the northwest passage, then the ice has not been melting at all.

 

[kyser_soze]

Ah, the problems of assigning a micrometeorological phenomena a macrometeorological significance...

 

[free spirit]

His point is that unless you can paddle a rubber dinghy through the northwest passage, then the ice has not been melting at all.

aha - well that's an easy one, I've got a rubber dinghy & puffa jacket knocking around which I'll be happy to loan to bigfish any time he fancies an attempt on the north west passage.

 

[free spirit]

 

[dash_two]

I love the way you cabal types set about turning things inside out in order to support your fallacious arguments. I know, instead of chipping in a few quid for a boat, why don't you chip in a few examples of vessels having successfully navigated the NW passage with sea-ice apparantly at its lowest extent this year "since records began"?

But why should anyone pander to your paranoia? The world doesn't revolve around you.

You are asking us to choose between your word, and that of the Danish National Space Center.

That's not a hard choice to make.

 

[bigfish]

cabal types?

interesting choice of phrase there Bigfish, yet another demonstration of the weird upside down version of the world you have in your head.


I'd say cabal would be better used to describe you and your exxon funded cronies wouldn't you?

(CNSNews.com) - The scientist touted by CBS News' "60 Minutes" as arguably the "world's leading researcher on global warming" ... publicly endorsed Democrat John Kerry for president and received a $250,000 grant from the charitable foundation [the Heinz center. bf] headed by Kerry's wife. ... Hansen has also admitted that he contributed to two recent Democratic presidential campaigns. Furthermore, he acted as a consultant in February to former Vice President Al Gore's slide show presentations on "global warming," which Gore presented around the country.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200603\POL20060323a.html

It's clear that NASA's James Hansen trousered a cool $250,000 "grant" from the Heinz foundation for his services to leading political figures in the Democrat party. It's also worth noting that Robert Correll, chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, who features so prominently in david's link in his post No 15, ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/internatio...164776,00.html ) is also on the Heinz payroll.

ROBERT W. CORELL JOINS THE HEINZ CENTER AS GLOBAL CHANGE DIRECTOR
http://www.heinzctr.org/news_archive/corell_joins_center.shtml

 

[bigfish]

.

Glacial earthquakes in Greenland have been monitored for decades using the global seismic network, and although their number has increased over the last five to six years - likely due to Arctic warming -

Greenland’s ice is not in danger of disappearing. In fact its thickness has been growing by 2 inches per year for a decade.

Recent Ice-Sheet Growth in the Interior of Greenland
(Johannesen et al., 2005).

A continuous data set of Greenland Ice Sheet altimeter height from European Remote Sensing satellites (ERS-1 and ERS-2), 1992 to 2003, has been analyzed. An increase of 6.4 ± 0.2 centimeters per year (cm/year) is found in the vast interior areas above 1500 meters, in contrast to previous reports of high-elevation balance. Below 1500 meters, the elevation-change rate is –2.0 ± 0.9 cm/year, in qualitative agreement with reported thinning in the ice-sheet margins. Averaged over the study area, the increase is 5.4 ± 0.2 cm/year, or 60 cm over 11 years, or 54 cm when corrected for isostatic uplift. Winter elevation changes are shown to be linked to the North Atlantic Oscillation.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1115356

 

[david dissadent]

Greenland’s ice is not in danger of disappearing. In fact its thickness has been growing by 2 inches per year for a decade.

Recent Ice-Sheet Growth in the Interior of Greenland
(Johannesen et al., 2005).



http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1115356

and yet others disagree.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conte...ot&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

How much meltwater the Greenland Ice Sheet may be contributing to global sea-level rise depends on the mass balance between the interior of the ice sheet and its margins. The present understanding is that the interior is gaining mass but the margins are eroding even more rapidly. Rignot and Kanagaratnam (p. 986; see the Perspective by Dowdeswell) present an ice velocity map of the entire Greenland Ice Sheet and estimate the rate of ice discharge around its entire margin. A comparison of their results to past data shows that there has been a widespread acceleration of ice flow since 1996, that mass loss has doubled in that time, and that ice dynamics, which are particularly dependent on warming, dominate the rapid retreat of Greenland's glaciers.

Everything you see proves what you already know.

 

[david dissadent]

it was the BBC I was referring to as a lie machine,

True. You dont call everything that disagrees with you a lie machine. You have a long list of disparaging prejorative terms to heap upon anything that does not agree with you.

 

[bigfish]

True. You dont call everything that disagrees with you a lie machine. You have a long list of disparaging prejorative terms to heap upon anything that does not agree with you.

I must say that's a bit rich coming a member of a cabal promoting manmade climate catastrophe for whom ad hominem is usually the first resort taken against anyone who doesn't immediately snap into line and join the church.

 

[david dissadent]

I must say that's a bit rich coming a member of a cabal promoting manmade climate catastrophe for whom ad hominem is usually the first resort taken against anyone who doesn't immediately snap into line and join the church.

Complaining about ad hominem with ad hominem....

I am open to persuation. I am actualy very keen to be persuaded, I just find your arguments unpersuasive.

 

[bigfish]

and yet others disagree.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conte...ot&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

So no consensus then?

 

[david dissadent]

So no consensus then?

There is no total consensus on evolution or relativity.

However there is enouggh of a general consensus on them and anthromorphic global warming to make them the dominant paradigm.

 

[bigfish]

... there is enouggh of a general consensus on ... anthromorphic global warming to make [it] the dominant paradigm.

Nonsense!

120 specialists from 11 countries who attended the International Climate Seminar meeting at The Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden September 11-12th 2006 appeared to be in wide agreement that "there is no strong evidence to prove significant human influence on climate on a global basis," and that "there is no reliable evidence to support that the 20th century was the warmest in the last 1000 years. Previous claims based on the “Mann hockey-stick curve” are by now totally discredited."


http://gamma.physchem.kth.se/~climate/

See also "Consensus? What Consensus"

It is often said that there is a scientific “consensus” to the effect that climate change will be “catastrophic” and that, on this question, “the debate is over”. The present paper will demonstrate that the claim of unanimous scientific “consensus” was false, and known to be false, when it was first made; that the trend of opinion in the peer-reviewed journals and even in the UN’s reports on climate is moving rapidly away from alarmism; that, among climate scientists, the debate on the causes and extent of climate change is by no means over; and that the evidence in the peer-reviewed literature conclusively demonstrates that, to the extent that there is a “consensus”, that “consensus” does not endorse the notion of “catastrophic” climate change.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/m...limate_scientists_the_debate_is_not_over.html

 

[david dissadent]

Nonsense!

120 specialists from 11 countries who attended the International Climate Seminar meeting at The Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden September 11-12th 2006 appeared to be in wide agreement that "there is no strong evidence to prove significant human influence on climate on a global basis," and that "there is no reliable evidence to support that the 20th century was the warmest in the last 1000 years. Previous claims based on the “Mann hockey-stick curve” are by now totally discredited."


http://gamma.physchem.kth.se/~climate/

See also "Consensus? What Consensus"

It is often said that there is a scientific “consensus” to the effect that climate change will be “catastrophic” and that, on this question, “the debate is over”. The present paper will demonstrate that the claim of unanimous scientific “consensus” was false, and known to be false, when it was first made; that the trend of opinion in the peer-reviewed journals and even in the UN’s reports on climate is moving rapidly away from alarmism; that, among climate scientists, the debate on the causes and extent of climate change is by no means over; and that the evidence in the peer-reviewed literature conclusively demonstrates that, to the extent that there is a “consensus”, that “consensus” does not endorse the notion of “catastrophic” climate change.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/m...limate_scientists_the_debate_is_not_over.html

If I post links to well atended intellegent design confrences will you give up on evolution?