Slashdot Mirror
Arctic Climate Change Study Canceled Due to Climate Change (livescience.com)
A Canadian expedition to study climate change in the Arctic has been canceled due to climate change. Specifically, the icebreaker CCGS Amundsen had to be cancelled "due to complications associated with the southward motion of hazardous Arctic sea ice," reports University of Manitoba. From the report: This regrettably postpones the much-anticipated Hudson Bay System Study (BaySys) involving 40 scientists from five universities across Canada. Timing was key for this $17 million, four-year, University of Manitoba-led project. The need to deal with extreme ice conditions in the south meant the ship would arrive too late on site to meet research objectives. This year the Expedition Logistics and Science Teams accelerated the mobilization of the 2017 Arctic Expedition to permit departure of the Amundsen six days ahead of schedule. This would allow CCG to carry out critical marine safety and security operations in the unusually severe ice conditions in the Strait of Belle Isle and along the northeast coast of Newfoundland before beginning the Science Mission. Unfortunately, the conditions required much more extended support than anticipated. Fleet management issues and inadequate alternative ships forced the cancellation of the science program due to significant safety concerns. This decision to cancel the BaySys 2017 program was not made lightly. Although the cancellation was due to circumstances beyond control of the Expedition Team, every effort was made to develop a viable option to allow this valuable work to proceed.
You heard it here first, and if you disagree you're a science-denier who should be sent to the reeducation camps.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
Well I guess that's a new reason to say "nothing to see here" compared to the usual denialist crap.
They saved 4 years and $17 million.
Sounds like the best spin they could come up with, lest they generate another disastrous round of headlines like these:
https://news.slashdot.org/stor... https://news.slashdot.org/stor... https://news.slashdot.org/stor... https://news.slashdot.org/stor... https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...
If you read between all of the weasel wording, the real story is that some Warming Alarmists actually believed the hype about all of the sea ice melting - so when lots more ice came back the mission they had predicated on ice not returning, was totally screwed.
That's pretty much the exact opposite of what the story said. It said that due to increased ice melt the remaining ice was much more mobile and was reaching further south than they had expected.
"I got ice out of the pop machine at 7-11, so there can't be global warming. Boom, you alarmist libtards!"
You are welcome on my lawn.
A headline like this brings out the Climate Change deniers in full force. Too bad they'll now have to miss their Chemtrail and Moon Landing Conspiracy meetings due to their efforts to trash Slashdot.
I'll probably be modded down almost instantly for daring to point this out.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
...but it was cancelled because of snow.
Well done, not reading the article and substituting your preconceived notions which are the opposite of what the article says:
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
See for more details https://www.theguardian.com/wo...
The icebreaker was supposed to navigate from Quebec City, down the St Lawrence River, up the east coast of Canada, and into Hudson's Bay for the research mission. But shit happens...
> The icebreaker was soon diverted. Dense ice -- up to 8 metres (25ft) thick -- had filled the
> waters off the northern coast of Newfoundland, trapping fishing boats and ferries.
>
> "It was a really dramatic situation," said David Barber, the expedition's chief scientist.
> "We were getting search and rescue calls from fishing boats that were stranded in the
> ice and tankers that were stranded trying to get fuel into the communities. Nobody
> could manage this ice because it was far too heavy to get through."
[...snip...]
> The decision to cancel the first leg of the expedition was made after it became clear that
> continuing north would interrupt search and rescue operations and probably put lives at risk.
The first priority of the CCGS icebreaker is search and rescue, and there happened to be more work than anticipated, so the research mission was cancelled.
For those of you wondering, no, it is not a good idea to charter an "ice-reinforced ship", when you want to get up close to the ice and do first-hand measurements. You need a real icebreaker. The Akedemik Shokalskiy fiasco http://news.nationalgeographic... is still fresh in people's minds.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
Why not send the CCGS DES GROSEILLIERS?
It's a class 3 vessel.
It's just sitting in Quebec City doing fuck all!
Have you considered the possibility that even that class of ship is not heavy enough?
I have to wonder if they are downplaying the thickness and expanse of the ice. If this is just some local refreezing of ice chunks that stuck together then they should be able to sail around. If the ice is just generally thicker and rougher than expected then, as you suggest, they "need a bigger boat". But if the ice is too thick for even their biggest icebreaker then there is nothing to do but turn around and go back.
Not only that but the ice may be too thick for any ice breaker. It seems to be pretty common for nations to make arrangements to "rent" or "borrow" icebreakers from each other. Would it be all that hard to ask to "borrow" an icebreaker from the USA, UK, or Germany? I understand that they all have some pretty capable icebreakers. Probably the biggest are owned by Canada and Russia. If Canada is not willing to put one out in these ice conditions then Russia is likely to be reluctant too, that is assuming the two nations are on friendly enough terms to do such a thing.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
I have to wonder if they are downplaying the thickness and expanse of the ice. If this is just some local refreezing of ice chunks that stuck together then they should be able to sail around. If the ice is just generally thicker and rougher than expected then, as you suggest, they "need a bigger boat". But if the ice is too thick for even their biggest icebreaker then there is nothing to do but turn around and go back.
You misunderstand the problem. The ice isn't too touch for the icebreaker at all. The problem is that there's ice that drifted so far south that it's hindering regular shipping traffic, and so they cancelled the research mission so that their icebreaker could assist other vessels:
Considering the severe ice conditions and the increasing demand for Search And Rescue operations (SAR) and ice escort, we decided to cancel the BaySys mission
Christ the morons are out in full force today along with their little army of moron mods.
You're (a) a moron and (b) wrong. Citation: TFA.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Can we add promises by people in politics to the same law?
They could become shills for the fossil oil industry, it at least would be paid better.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Can't tell if you're a troll, idiot or a Trump follower of alternative facts.
It's all the same anyway.
that and icebreaker couldn't go out because there was too much ice. What kind of icebreaker can't sail near ice? Did they forget what the ship is designed for?
But you admit that global cooling is a risk?
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
1.) The coast guard ship the expedition was travelling on was requested to divert to the Belle Isle Strait to assist other ships that were stranded by ice. The expedition itself was only affected by not having a ship available to them to take them where they wanted to go, they decided to change plans and while still on board the coast guard ship decided to study the ice in Belle Isle Strait.
2.) Ice is normal in Belle Isle Strait and varies in intensity every year between April through June.
3.) Someone that was a part of the expedition claims the ice they saw in Belle Isle Strait had many layers which would seem to indicate it came from the high arctic and that is somehow unusual, when in fact, that's where it all comes from.
On a side note, here is an informative excerpt from a book on Amazon about the ice that flows through Belle Isle Strait: https://books.google.com/books?id=py8ukChGA_cC&pg=PA244&lpg=PA244&dq=Strait+of+Belle+Isle+arctic+ice+june+-study&source=bl&ots=4I6vwPBkCs&sig=lDAclGL_GSj0NNEw9Dec2Sr4NPA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjhh-mr1cLUAhVIxYMKHdN2AhcQ6AEIVDAL#v=onepage&q=Strait%20of%20Belle%20Isle%20arctic%20ice%20june%20-study&f=false
The term "climate change" was arguably a master stroke of marketing. The earlier version "global warming" had the inherent flaw that if the temperatures stopped rising consistently, people would stop believing it. By rebranding it as "climate change," any variation in climate that the promoters didn't like could easily be attributed to it regardless of the underlying causes. But at some point, as a researcher, you'd have to be able to prove to your donors that you've achieved your research goals. Vague goals or no goals eventually runs out of Schlitz. And when nature borks your research expedition, kiss the grant funding goodbye.
Seeing as though the people that don't think climate change is a problem get away with being false prophets I don't think their is any penalties.
My Transformation Website
Kindle Books http://www.catprog.org/rev
Interactive CYOA http://www.catprog.org/st
Largest ice by volume or by area?
Which is more ice. 1km^2 of ice 10m thick or 5km^2 of ice 10cm thick.
My Transformation Website
Kindle Books http://www.catprog.org/rev
Interactive CYOA http://www.catprog.org/st