Global Warming Study Ship Stuck in Ice

Funny? It's freaking hilarious. LMAO every time it comes to mind, including now. BWAHAHAHA!

 

LOL...I spotted Neil Young on board.

 

It was my impression that one must affirm anthropogenic global climate change to be a real scientist.

 

I wonder just how many politicians, environmentalists or scientists who use the phrase ’97% of scientists’ (or those who more carefully use ‘active climate scientists’) to give weight to their arguments regarding climate change to the public, have any idea of the actual source of this soundbite.

Perhaps a few may say the ’Doran Survey’, which is the one of the most common references for this ’97% of active climate scientists’ phrase. In fact, the Doran EoS paper merely cites a MSc thesis for the actual source of this 97% figure and the actual survey.


“This was a very simplistic and biased questionnaire.”


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/what-else-did-the-97-of-scientists-say/

 

No, we're insulting the proposition that what they are involved in is science.

Science is the process wherein one has a hypothesis and then seeks to disprove it by testing. These climate "scientists" are involved in nothing of the sort; they are seeking to prove a hypothesis. Around here, we call that a circle jerk.

 

Most, if not all, of the scientists that are promoting global warming do not go into the field. Most of the money has been funneled into the climate models. Those going into the field, the ones that are actually putting their feet on the ground, are less supportive of the CAGW theory.

 

Perhaps if we threw a virgin into a volcano somewhere we could stem this global warming.

 

What the hell do you think they are doing in Antarctica? A circle jerk? They are actually out there, in the field, doing research.

The on the other side of the propaganda coin you just have arm chair 'scientists', not out in the field, not doing research, being funded by some very shady sources to proclaim "all is well".

 

In science, one likes to have more examples than theories. – Dusan Djuric

The theory of the sensitivity of climate to the radiative forcing imposed by a doubling of carbon dioxide suffers from a lack of observed, repeatable examples.

 

Global warming climate "scientists" are not involved in science. Their "conclusions" are forgone. They are not involved in a scientific process at all; they are involved in a propoganda process.

Science is the process wherein one seeks to disprove a hypthesis by testing.

 

I dunno, it might be awhile before those rescue ships get there, and it's a bit cold.

 

Cold hands and a 'jerk' don't usually go well together.

 

A ship got stuck in the ice...that proves everything...no global warming!!!

get real.

 

No, but it does disprove a great deal, and science is built upon disproof not proof.

 

Environmental science, has become little more than a mechanics of marketing competing political agendas, and scientists have become leading members of the advertising campaigns.

 

scientist looking for answers as to what effect man is having on the climate, never hear of anti-climate change folks doing any real research

fact is, man is contributing to climate change, the question is.. how so? for all we know we could be causing it to warm up as we are supposed to go into another ice age, thus pushing the ice age back a few more years, we do not have enough data yet, and much much more research is needed before wither side can predict the future


.

 

I found Al Gore!

 

Yes, thin seasonal sea ice which ignores the very different land ice relevant to the issue. It's the land ice which is being measurably eroded. Here's some information from your own source:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/sea_ice_south.php
And more:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm

This was evidently an error of omission on your part, so I'll let it go this time...

 

I know it is as good as the claim that since it is summer in the Antarctic there should not be any Blizzards!!

Still chortling over that one.

Now for those who have not worked it out yet

WEATHER and CLIMATE are two different things

- - - Updated - - -

Oooooh! Gooody!! You brought up Gore so I get to bring up Lord Monckton!!

Let's play - guess who is the bigger twit?

 

You know when I first heard about the Chinese ice breaker that was stuck in ice all I could think was "Well that is about typical of anything made in China!!"

 

What happens when it is warmer? Well for one, more evaporation. That water goes somewhere, usually as rain and snow in other parts of the world. More snow, more less absorption of solar energy and more snow cover, like we are experiencing now which leads to no warming or cooling, like we have experienced the last decade and a half. There is even evidence that the sea level in the Maldives, the poster child for rising waters, has dropped in the last 30 years. This would be one of the natural control loops for temperature.

 

Winter weather as opposed to climate doesn't help your case at all. How about a link to your claim that sea levels are dropping around the Maldives? All I see is evidence to the contrary.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/sea-level-rise.htm

 

it's ok libs the media is covering for you. The news agencies covering the fact it is stuck are not mentioning it was a global warming expedition and the ones covering the fact it was a propaganda trip for the climate pseudo scientists are not mentioning it is stuck in ice

 

On phone right now but easy. Shoreline buildup 30 years ago was higher.

 

And , as always , whenever the situation is COLDER TEMPS, "it's just weather";

Whenever its WARMER TEMPS, it's "absolute proof of man-caused global warming..er, I mean 'climate change' ".

Yeah, we got it....