USCGC Polar Star icebreaker

Only two ships stuck, Davey. One Russian and one Chinese.
The Australian ship avoided that fate. I expect the US one will also stay unstuck
but whether it will succeed in freeing both icebound ships will be interesting to watch.
 
Prediction: the Polar Star will succeed in breaking the ice, but a little too enthusiastically, ramming both vessels and sinking all three. A twelve-man dug-out canoe from Tonga will be dispatched and save all crewmembers.
 
Nah, the Chinese one is paddling furiously and moving a bit. Desperate to get out before the Yanks arrive.

Reports say something about them 'clearing a path' for the ship to break through. Maybe they took my advice and fired a few skyrockets into it?
 
And I thought that as the One aim of the expedition was to track how quickly the Antarctic's sea ice was disappearing because of global warming, but a blizzard and thick ice caused the expedition to be abandoned on Christmas eve, despite the fact that it's the height of Summer in the Antarctic, wonder if they found out if it was because of global warming? I am confused about all this.. hehe !!
 
You're going to have to start behaving yourself Phil, have you been hanging out with Catfish by chance.

I couldn't help myself - that terrible twosome of Tongan teases titillated me terrifically!

Catfish? Who or what is this Catfish you speak of? I know of no "Catfish" ...
 
Only two ships stuck, Davey. One Russian and one Chinese.
The Australian ship avoided that fate. I expect the US one will also stay unstuck
but whether it will succeed in freeing both icebound ships will be interesting to watch.



YUP ,you're right,I read that wrong.PLease dont mention this mistake to Vice Admiral Ray Griggs of the Royal Australian Navy.
:)
 
PLease dont mention this mistake to Vice Admiral Ray Griggs of the Royal Australian Navy.
:)

Heck, no! He'd probably send you to a penal colony like ... like ...

... Australia.
Whistle.gif
 
Further to SB's video, found a 12 minute one with a good run down on these climate alarm fleas, and what they're earning for their 'support.' It's done with a very wry commentary. Will appeal to the 'schadenfreude' in climate change skeptics and is a good wake up call to those who still believe every word from these shamans.

... and Warri, just for you especially and for any still convinced that this whole thing isn't a con.
It is an excerpt from an Andrew Bolt show which I know you never watched as you view him as the representative on Earth of the forces of evil that produce successful people, and the Climate Change anti-Christ incarnate.

(If it's any consolation I never watched him either because I didn't want my opinions to be 'led' by hearing only people who shared them.)

But just this once, for the sake of the fairness I know you always display and espouse, have a look at what real, unbribed, climate scientists had to say about the what the Government funding dependent ones were predicting.

It's old footage of your iconic Gillard making moronic statements, in reverential tones, of the infallibility of ... "the science" being discussed in lucid terms by 'real' climate scientists.
It remains relevant because those same bullsh*t misinformed 'facts' are still being delivered.

To save trauma and time start it around the 5 minute mark, the first bit is just about the fallacy of CO2 being termed a pollutant etc, and you've heard plenty of that one from DB and I already... the rest of it is illuminating though. Very.

Especially pertaining to the Gt Barrier Reef which is used as some kind of icon that we must 'save' from the deprivations of Global Warming. That a tropical coral reef would suffer from warmer temps was always beyond my imagination, but Greenies still believe it so............... have a look and listen.


[video=youtube_share;C35pasCr6KI]http://youtu.be/C35pasCr6KI[/video]

For those who can't be bothered...it also mentions that the carbon tax imposed on us by the illustrious one J.Gillard, PM to reduce 'carbon' emissions from OZ, would, at best, in real figures reduce GLOBAL 'carbon emissions' by one 20,000th of 1%. Wow, we were all just busting to empty our pockets into hers, and the UN's coffers for that fantastic result! Hell, that would stop it in it's tracks right?!
Still wonder why we voted those fraudulent fleas out???
 
You should know better than to wave Andrew Bolt in front of my nose.

Not bothered about answering your post point by point, but to present the other version of the current Antarctic situation, I offer this:

Chilly warning from scientists on impact of Antarctica changes

DateJanuary 7, 2014
Peter Hannam

Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald

Evidence of climate change in parts of Antarctica is as dramatic as anywhere in the world and has a potentially big impact for Australia, scientists say. While recent public attention has focused on the stranded ships requiring rescue from sea ice, the wider picture is one of rapid change that reflects global warming and will also drive it, they say.

"Antarctica is one of the key drivers of the global climate system," said Tony Press, head of the Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems Co-operative Research Centre (ACE CRC) in Hobart. "Changes in Antarctica will affect not only the Antarctic region but Australia and the rest of the planet."

The change in sea-ice coverage is massive every year - roughly increasing from a minimum of about 3 million square kilometres at the end of summer to about 19 million square kilometres by late spring. However, regions of West Antarctic are recording a drop in sea-ice extent of about 7 per cent each decade, or more than the 4.15 per cent reduction in Arctic ice.

"It's a very marked regional response [to climate change], more so than for the Arctic," Phil Reid, an Antarctic scientist with the Bureau of Meteorology, said. Countering that reduction in the west, in part, is an increase in ice off east Antarctic, possibly because of extra snowfall. Overall, "it's not more sea ice, it's just differently distributed", said Jan Lieser, a marine glaciologist with the research centre.

Some of the additional sea ice in eastern regions may also be the result of melting of land-based sheets, resulting in cooler ocean conditions. Fresher water is more conducive to sea-ice formation. Recent work by Dutch researchers has identified such changes in the Ross Sea region south of New Zealand, Dr Reid said.

The sea-ice extent also seems to be affected by westerly winds, which have strengthened by 15 per cent to 20 per cent since observations began in the late 1970s. The low-pressure systems have also shifted about 1-2 degrees south over the period, with apparent impacts on Australian rainfall.

port-antartica.jpg


When there is heavy snowfall at Law Dome, directly south of Perth, the south-western part of Western Australia is very dry as rainfall systems slip south of the continent, Dr Press said. The use of proxy records such as ice cores indicates the same pattern may explain lower rainfall for the Murray-Darling Basin.

"There are very strong connections between those big weather patterns in Antarctica and rainfall and drought in Australia," Dr Press said.

Hobart will host a conference on sea ice from March 10-14, where this "sensitive indicator of climate change" will be discussed, the symposium's website says. Future research will focus on issues such as the stability of the eastern Antarctic ice sheet, its potential to significantly lift global sea levels if it melts, and just how thick the sea ice is around the continent as it expands and retreats each year.

"We just don't know how thick it is," Dr Press said.

Tongue lashing


Meanwhile, the US Coast Guard's heavy ice-breaker Polar Star is expected to reach the beset Russian expedition ship Akademik Shokalskiy, and its would-be rescuer, the Chinese ice-breaker Xue Long (Snow dragon), within a week.
The build-up of ice that stranded the two ships, and required Australia's Aurora Australis to divert from its planned mission to assist the rescue, is considered to be largely unrelated to shifting climate patterns in the far south.
In 2010, a massive iceberg B9B, measuring 97 kilometres broke off part of the Mertz Glacier tongue.

The splintered glacier itself had a surface area of 2,500 square kilometres, with the calving event captured in these pictures.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/c...ica-changes-20140106-30dmr.html#ixzz2pgawOp3E
 
"We just don't know how thick it is," Dr Press said.

Got that right! The ice and the bullsh*t!.

But Warri, the point is that they don't understand it themselves, or they wouldn't be freezing their butts off would they?
Didn't they read that piece by the ultimate expert on everything at the SMH or something?
They are the 'scientists'.
They are the ones presenting their theories and brainsnaps as 'the science.'
They are the ones who claim to be right and that all those of other opinion are "dinosaurs."
They are producing the computer modelling and fancy figures that we are supposed to accept as gospel.
They should have known bloody better where (and why) the ice was if they really have any more of a clue what's going on than anyone else.

Any idiot can rearrange the figures to fit the reason for the stuff up. True science doesn't need to!
True scientists don't make stupid predictions and prophesies until they've proven the theory beyond doubt.
I'd hate to be in the space shuttle any of these fleas built and pointed in the rough direction they thought it might go according to a theory and computer modelling exercise based on guesstimates and cherrypicked figures. No insurance company would cover me.

They don't KNOW! They THEORISE. When the theory doesn't fit they just change the wording.
When Global Warming was blown they altered it to 'Climate Change.' When CO2 was shown to be a natural inert gas which didn't sound scary enough to convince the public to pay a tax to 'stop' it then they changed the terminology to 'carbon pollution'. Wtf is that exactly? Then they started weighing air!!! So many tonnes of CO2 per capita... c'mon what's that about? The particulates in it may have weight but the gas???

It's farcical.

You don't indicate if you watched the video so about that crapola reported about the Gt Barrier Reef's imminent demise that the Greens and Aunty ABC flap about.

Firstly, sea levels have been slightly lower than normal in recent geological times. (perhaps because it's all frozen around a boat somewhere?) Hence the topmost coral growth is more likely to be exposed at low tide and dies off.
Rising sea levels would be the best news the Gt. B. Reef has had in a millenium. It will have more room to grow!

2ndly. The warming sea temperatures. That reef has exactly the same coral species as the parts of it near P. New Guinea. The only difference is that the corals in the WARMER waters of PNG are growing bigger and healthier than the ones off Qld. Is there a message there??? They are tropical corals. Duh.

That's just an example of the stupid things that have been thrust down the throats of the public to brainwash them into accepting anything proposed to stop a largely invented cataclysm befalling the planet.
There has just been too much wrong stuff put out there.

Personally, I don't give a toss if the planet eventually pops and produces a cosmic butterfly. I won't be around long enough to care and have no DNA investment in the future to protect. All I care about is exposing the posers as frauds. I hate people who try to rip me off!
I don't even care if they fluke it and have it right, I just hate the farce and bullsh*t they've turned 'science' into at the behest of politically and financially motivated con artists.
 
What Di said ..... and, for what it's worth, the temperature in the Antarctic has been dropping (ever so slightly) all the time the sea ice extent has been increasing:
rss_ts_channel_tlt_southern-polar_land_and_sea_v03_32.gif

Source: ftp://ftp.ssmi.com/msu/graphics/tlt/plots/rss_ts_channel_tlt_southern polar_land_and_sea_v03_3.png


and, leaving the Antarctic for a while, Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering well and getting thicker.

arcticicennowcast.gif



Source: http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticicennowcast.gif

Global Temperatures through November 2013 had not increased for between 8 years and 11 months to 17 years and 3 months. depending on data set and Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) reached 17 years in October, 2013: Interactive graph

trend
 


Back
Top