Risking lives to promote climate change hype
Yet
another global warming expedition gets trapped in icebound ideology
Paul
Driessen
*********************************
Will global warming
alarmists ever set aside their hypotheses, hyperbole, models and ideologies
long enough to acknowledge what is actually happening in the real world outside
their windows? Will they at least do so before setting off on another misguided
adventure? Before persuading like-minded or naive people to join them? Before
forcing others to risk life and limb to transport – and rescue – them? If
history is any guide, the answer is: Not likely.
The absurd
misadventures of University
of New South Wales
climate professor Chris Turney is but the latest example. He and 51 co-believers
set out on the (diesel-powered) Russian charter ship Akademik Shokalskiy to prove manmade global warming is destroying the
East Antarctic ice sheet. Perhaps they’d been reading Dr. Turney’s website, which
claims “an increasing body of evidence” shows “melting and collapse” across the
area. (It is, after all, summer in Antarctica,
albeit a rather cold, icy one thus far.)
Instead of finding open water, they wound
up trapped in record volumes of unforgiving ice, from Christmas Eve until
January 2 – ensnared by Mother Nature’s sense of humor and their own hubris.
The 52 climate tourists were finally rescued by a helicopter sent from Chinese
icebreaker Xue Long, which itself became
locked in the ice. The misadventurers were transferred to Australian icebreaker
Aurora Australis, but the Shokalskiy remains entombed, awaiting
the arrival of US Coast Guard icebreaker Polar
Star. (Meanwhile, Tourney hopes to get more grants to study manmade global
warming, to help him make more money from his Carbonscape company, which makes
“green” products from CO2 recovered from the atmosphere.)
As to his expertise, Dr. Tourney couldn’t even gauge the ice
conditions the 74 crewmen and passengers were about to sail into. And yet we
are supposed to believe his alarmist forecasts about Earth’s climate.
NASA reports that Antarctic sea ice
is now the largest
expanse since scientists began measuring its extent in 1979: 19.5 million square kilometers (4,806,000,000 acres) –
2.1 times the size of the entire United States. Another report says ocean melting of western Antarctica’s huge Pine Island Glacier ice shelf is at the lowest
level ever recorded, and less than half of what it was in 2010. Reminding
us of Monty Python’s pet
store clerk, Turney nonetheless insists that the sea ice is actually
melting, and his communications
director says the record sea ice is due to … global warming! (As they say, fiction has to make sense.)
Equally
amazing, the Shokalskiy was
apparently not equipped with adequate wind and weather monitoring and forecasting
capabilities. The expedition had to contact
climate realists John Coleman, Anthony Watts and Joe Daleo for information
that would allow them to plan their helicopter rescue.
All
of this raises serious questions that most media have ignored. How
could Tourney put so many lives
and vessels at risk – people he persuaded to join this expedition, the ship
and crew they hired, the ships and helicopter and crews that came to their
rescue? How did he talk the Russian captain into sailing into these dangerous
waters? Who
will pay for the rescue ships and their fuel and crews? What if one of the
ships sinks – or someone dies? What is Tourney’s personal liability?
This
may be the most glaring example of climate foolishness. But it is hardly the first.
In
2007, Ann Bancroft and Liv Arnesen set off across the Arctic
in the dead of winter, “to raise awareness about global warming,” by showcasing
the wide expanses of open water they were certain they would encounter.
Instead, temperatures inside their tent plummeted to -58 F (-50 C), while
outside the nighttime air plunged to -103 F (-75 C). Facing frostbite,
amputated fingers and toes or even death, the two were airlifted out a bare 18
miles into their 530-mile expedition.
The
next winter it was British swimmer and ecologist Lewis Gordon Pugh, who planned
to breast-stroke across open Arctic seas. Same story. Then fellow Brit Pen
Hadow tried, and failed. In 2010 Aussie Tom Smitheringale set off to
demonstrate “the effect that global warming is having on the polar ice caps.”
He was rescued and flown out, after coming “very close to the grave,” he
confessed.
Hopefully,
all these rescue helicopters were solar-powered. Hardcore climate disaster
adventurers should not be relegated to choppers fueled by evil fossil fuels.
They may be guilty of believing their own alarmist press releases – but losing
digits or ideological purity is a high price to pay.
All these intrepid explorers tried to put the best
spin on their failures. “One of the things we see with global warming is
unpredictability,” Bancroft-Arnesen expedition coordinator Anne Atwood insisted.
“But global warming is real, and with it can come extreme unpredictable changes
in temperature,” added Arnesen. “Global warming can mean colder. It can mean
wetter. It can mean drier. That’s what we’re talking about,” Greenpeace
activist Stephen Guilbeault chimed in.
It’s
been said insanity is hitting your thumb repeatedly with a hammer, expecting it
won’t hurt the next time. It’s also believing hype, models and delusions,
instead of real world observations. Or thinking taxpayers are happy to pay for all
the junk science behind claims that the world faces dangerous manmade global
warming. Or that they are delighted that the EPA and IPCC are increasingly
regulating our lives, livelihoods, liberties, living standards and life
spans, in the name of preventing climate change.
The
fact is, Antarctic ice shelves have broken up many times over the millennia.
Arctic ice has rebounded since its latest low ebb around September 2007. Despite
steadily rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, average global temperatures
have been stable or declining since 1997. Seas are rising at barely seven
inches per century. And periods of warmer or colder global and polar climates
are nothing new.
Vikings
built homes, grew crops and raised cattle in Greenland between 950 and 1300, before they were frozen out by the Little Ice
Age and encroaching pack ice and glaciers. Many warm periods followed, marked
by open seas and minimal southward extent of Arctic sea ice, as noted in ships’
logs and discussed in scientific papers by Torgny Vinje and other experts. But warm
periods of 1690-1710, 1750-1780 and 1918-1940, for instance, were often
preceded and followed by colder temperatures, severe ice conditions and maximum
southward ice packs, as during 1630-1660 and 1790-1830.
“Not only in the summer, but in the winter the ocean
[in the Bering Sea region] was free of ice, sometimes with a wide strip of
water up to at least 200 miles away from the shore,” Swedish explorer Oscar
Nordkvist reported in 1822, in a document rediscovered by astrophysicist Willie
Soon.
“We were astonished by the total absence of ice in the
Barrow Strait,” Francis McClintock, captain of the
Fox, wrote in 1860. “I was here at
this time in 1854 – still frozen up – and doubts were entertained as to the
possibility of escape.”
In 1903, during the first year of his three-year
crossing of the Northwest Passage, Roald Amundsen noted that his party “had made
headway with ease,” because ice conditions had been “unusually favorable.”
The 1918-1940
warming also resulted in Atlantic cod increasing in population and expanding
their range some 800 miles, to the Upernavik area of Greenland, fisheries biologist Ken Drinkwater has reported.
Climate
change is certainly real. It’s been real throughout Earth and human history –
including the Roman and Medieval Warm Periods, Little Ice Age and Dust Bowl,
and through countless other cycles of warming and cooling, flood and drought,
storm and calm, open polar seas and impassable ice.
Humans
clearly influence weather and climate on a local scale – through heat and
emissions from cities and cars, our clearing of forests and grasslands, our
diversion of rivers. But that is not the issue. Nor is it enough to say – as President
Obama has – that the climate is
changing and mankind is contributing to it.
The
fundamental issue is this: Are humans
causing imminent, unprecedented, global climate change disasters? And can we prevent those alleged disasters, by
drastically curtailing hydrocarbon use, slashing living standards, and imposing
government control over industries and people’s lives? If you look at actual
evidence – instead of computer model forecasts and “scenarios” – the answer is
clearly: No.
______________
Paul Driessen is senior policy
analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death.
_______________________________
VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!: (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
_______________________________
VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!: (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
No comments:
Post a Comment