Slashdot Mirror
Antarctic Climate Research Expedition Trapped In Sea Ice
First time accepted submitter Stinky Cheese Man writes "An Antarctic climate research expedition, led by climate researcher Chris Turney of the University of New South Wales, has become trapped in heavy ice near the coast of Antarctica. The captain has issued a distress call and three nearby icebreaker ships are on their way to the rescue. According to Turney's web site, the purpose of the expedition is 'to discover and communicate the environmental changes taking place in the south.'"
Al Gore said the Arctic Ocean could be ice-free by now... What the Heck!? I didn't even bring a parka.
You cherry pick the data, and only choose what seems to allow you to take the Ancient Aliens approach of "Oooh, an anomaly - Ancient Aliens."
There is plenty of cherry picking of data by all sides of this argument, and far more money to be had for those who support the anthropological global warming hypothesis (especially for "reputable research groups").
Science should not be as completely contaminated by politics as this particular issue has become, as it really is now a political issue and not a scientific issue as well. That scientists are being active in politics (to keep that money flowing if for no other reason) is one of many reasons why this whole debate is becoming very tiresome for me. Arguments at science conferences about the value of the Hubble Constant or the status of Pluto are one thing, but deciding the fate of entire industries, literally trillions of dollars and how the world's economy is going to reshaped to fit the consequences of this discussion is why so many people have such a huge stake in such a thing. If Pluto is demoted (or has been demoted), nobody really cares other than a bunch of science museums where curators need to rework their orrery and planetarium systems (tens or hundreds of dollars at most at stake). Well, I guess a bunch of school kids have spent a bit more money chewing out Neil DeGrasse Tyson, but it doesn't get even into the million dollar rages at the worst possible estimate of economic impact. More than a million dollars gets spent each time a climate scientist talks at a congressional hearing on AGW.
Right – go the source. Artic air temp is the highest it has ever been, ice loss is at its highest in the past 50 years, etc.
The GP then picks a single point of data that covers only 2 years and says “Ha!” At the very least he is cheery picking his data. He is probably misinterpreting the conclusions of the scientist. (Which is not to say that their pronouncements are perfect. Different people can look at the same data and come up with the different results. The problem is taking a single fact out of context.) The deeper problem is that the data actually may indicate a warming trend, not cooling. As it gets warmer the glaciers calf icebergs at a faster rate so you get more surface area covered with ice, not more ice - as this will last as long as the glaciers last.
One interesting fact about Antarctica is that the sea ice essentially melts out completely every year so there is no carry over from one year to the next like there is in the Arctic.
Another interesting fact is that what you're saying is essentially bullshit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_ice_sheet
Do you see the water levels rising by 70 meters each year? 'cause I sure as hell don't.
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)