The Guardian Relocates The North Pole By 500km

So – I went to the Guardian website and read their article – and they do not say the Catlin team was picked up at the North Pole. Indeed, the article clearly says they are being picked up 490 Km short of the Pole.
So – do you regularly make up quotes on the assumption that your readers will not check?
NwCitizen writers have been following your stuff – and have been impressed to a point. Perhaps we need to keep track of you as you supposedly – read pretend – to keep track of the envoro’s press. Hello.

There’s also a rather good summary of Catlin at American Thinker titled, The Catlin Ice Follies.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/the_catlin_ice_follies.htm
Yet, in what passes for journalism today, the brain numb communication majors, having mastered the challenging task of reading, proudly display their accomplishment by dutifully reading press releases handed them by advocacy groups. Theirs is not to think, to check facts, to look behind the curtain and see all the shenanigans happening there. So now, across the land these light headed talking heads solemnly pontificate on the great heroic adventure that was Catlin. From them you will never hear of the flight over the Arctic that covered more area in 30 days than Catlin did in 73 days and found ice much thicker than expected.
Remember everyone – let’s all stay on message and let’s not get distracted by any such foolishness as facts.
** ** **
This was all just a PR stunt leading up to Copenhagen. As I’ve mentioned before, there’s still that inconenient moment in September when the ice melt turns out to be less than the last two years. Bet the media manages to be silent about that off message fact.

“So – I went to the Guardian website and read their article – and they do not say the Catlin team was picked up at the North Pole. Indeed, the article clearly says they are being picked up 490 Km short of the Pole. ”
John Servais, I can confirm that you are wrong.
They state, as Anthony says, “After 73 days, the Catlin Arctic Survey has come to an end. Pen Hadow’s team of British Arctic explorers have battled to the North Pole through freezing conditions collecting data about the ice en route.”
Direct quote. I have screenshots as well.

John
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/gallery/2009/mar/24/catlin-arctic-survey-arctic?picture=347364812
“Pen Hadow’s team of British Arctic explorers have battled to the North Pole ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthpicturegalleries/5323888/The-Catlin-Arctic-Survey-led-by-Pen-Hadow-finds-the-polar-ice-cap-is-thinner.html
“250 miles to the North Pole ”
Hello
It is sloppy, imprecise writing, but then again, everything about this “expedition” has been sloppy and imprecise.

Steven, we need to add another point to your summary:
8. The Catlin Arctic Survey did not result in any useful information.
Is there a “GPS report” of this PR stunt across the Arctic ice? I think an examination of their distance traveled while idle in their tents (due to ice drift), as a fraction of total distance would be interesting.
Is there a report yet of the results of the German team that “scooped” the Catlin survey available? http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/28/inconvenient-eisdicken/#more-7406

John Servais – sorry, you have it wrong. I followed the link provided in Steven’s story and there it was, a block of text over a photo of the 3 climate pilgrims, stating:
After 73 days, the Catlin Arctic Survey has come to an end. Pen Hadow’s team of British Arctic explorers have battled to the North Pole through freezing conditions collecting data about the ice en route. The Guardian has been following the expedition’s progress with images, audio, video and blogs sent back by the team. You can find full coverage here.
Steven, I would suggest you screen capture that (if you haven’t already done so) and include in an update to this terrific (and utterly hilarious) post. Once the folks at the Guardian realize their goof, it may get air-brushed without comment. This sort of idiocy simply must be captured for posterity.

@John Servis
Ya know, John? I just have to assume you’re a first-timer on Anthony’s Blog.
If you’d spent any time here, you’d know that Anthony is concerned with scientific fact presented for his readers’ perusal and is open to polite discussion of the facts.
Your snide comment is rather jarring and I must assume you haven’t taken the time to study the volumes of material presented in this award-winning blog.
I went to the link that Anthony provided and easily found the quote that Anthony referenced. It’s the caption on the picture and it states that ‘ . . . . British Arctic explorers have battled to the North Pole . . ..”
Now THAT is misleading reportage.
Since you’re such a crusader for truth-in-reporting, why don’t you skip on over to the Catlin/Guardian love fest and pee on their parade.

John Servais (16:58:28) :
So – I went to the Guardian website and read their article – and they do not say the Catlin team was picked up at the North Pole.
So – do you regularly make up quotes on the assumption that your readers will not check?

Do you regularly twist what others say? Steve didn’t say the Guardian reported they were picked up at the North Pole.
Here is the quote from the Guardian online that pops up in an inset with the picture of the three intrepid fools (1 of 27).
“After 73 days, the Catlin Arctic Survey has come to an end. Pen Hadow’s team of British Arctic explorers have battled to the North Pole through freezing conditions collecting data about the ice en route. The Guardian has been following the expedition’s progress with images, audio, video and blogs sent back by the team. You can find full coverage here.”
Steve did not make up a quote. It’s right there. So you jump in with your warmist defense to try to mislead readers following behind you with your own falsehood. Nice try. Did you think we also would not check?
Given the entire publicity stunt farcical nature of this “scientific expedition” in the first place, I suppose your own misreprepresentation of what Steve is saying is to be expected. Afterall, it’s hard defend any alleged science in this “Green Trek” when the Russians drove to the North Pole in a fraction of the time in what amounted to super Hummers (and relative comfort) and consumed far less fuel than the Catlin Team’s Otter. We’re all still wondering how many fuel drums these Catlin numbskulls left out on the ice.

Oh! Everything I said above applies to John Servis’ impugning Steven Goddard’s honesty :0)

John Servais (16:58:28):
So – I went to the Guardian website and read their article – and they do not say the Catlin team was picked up at the North Pole. Indeed, the article clearly says they are being picked up 490 Km short of the Pole.
So – do you regularly make up quotes on the assumption that your readers will not check?
I went too and found this:
After 73 days, the Catlin Arctic Survey has come to an end. Pen Hadow’s team of British Arctic explorers have battled to the North Pole through freezing conditions collecting data about the ice en route.
Which is exactly what Steven Goddard wrote:
Immediately upon their return, The Guardian reported :
After 73 days, the Catlin Arctic Survey has come to an end. Pen Hadow’s team of British Arctic explorers have battled to the North Pole through freezing conditions collecting data about the ice en route.
What’s the problem?
Catlin should get an insurance on “catched moving the North Pole”… Just in case Catlin wanted to change the North Pole to Mexico. Heh… 🙂

From the looks of the picture of the trio with the caption it sure looks like they’re dressed for all that warm arctic air that’s melting the polar ice cap.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/gallery/2009/mar/24/catlin-arctic-survey-arctic?picture=347364812
I would have guessed that during such warm conditions they would have been pictured enjoying a balmy say 50F-60F day. The gift that keeps on giving “Catlin Survey”

Anthony:
Without detracting in any way from the courage and tenaciousness of the three polar explorers, one would have to conclude that their efforts have come up considerably short of their goals. They did not reach the North Pole (Guardian’s article to the contrary), their equipment was woefully inadequate for the conditions encountered (poor planning and poor execution), they did not succeed in measuring ice thickness to the extent they wanted and they have underscored the fact the Arctic remains a domain dominated by frigid temperatures and ice. If anything, they have educated the public (largely British school children apparently) that the Arctic will not be bikini haven anytime soon.
But something bothers me – why has no one queried the Catlin organization about the garbage left behind on the ice? When the group was put out on the ice, they went out with 2 Twin Otters. They were picked up by 2 Twin Otters, but one was full of fuel and the other was full of BBC TV crews and breathless reporters. Who picked up the empty drums? Where are the sledges and detritus of the expedition – did they come back in the 2 Twin Otters? Are the Floating Supply Bases still out on the ice? Are there caches of full fuel drums still out on the ice to pollute the pristine Arctic seas? Obviously, the BBC is not going to ask those tough questions.

Anthony
You may have already considered this idea. Each time you post a blog such as this why not send a communication to the author of the outrageous statement (particularly when they are “expert” scientists) advising that person that they are the subject of a blog here on WUWT. Also point out the monthly traffic that visits this site each month and also invite the author to justify on the blog their original statement. Me thinks that this action will quickly qwell some of the more stupid media statements.

Wow, another sign the AGW-savvy media is making stuff up, can you trust anyone outside of WUWT, IceCap and IceAgeNow on climate anymore?
I love how that little red line started flattening out before it dipped below any of the other lines, still at the top, and apparently ignoring the orders to melt from the BBC

Mike Bryant, even with my ultra-sensitive setup, there is no problem with John A’s link. It is directly to a jpg, end of story.
I do, however, have a problem with Symantec/Norton, having just made myself a bunch of $$$ removing it from someone’s computer today. That thing IS a trojan/virus.

Well, over on Denial Depot we were considering awarding Mr Goddard a Blog Science Doctorate. However he has kind of blotted his copy book, so to speak. Here he considers a mere photo caption as worthy of a whole ‘rapid rebuttal’ post, even when the same publication is quite clear …
The Catlin Arctic Survey’s original mission to take measurements right up to the North Pole has not worked out though. They will be picked up 490km from the pole, less than half way there.
Look, we’re all on the same side here, fighting the good fight agianst the phoney psuedoscientific alarmism alarmism of the IPCC and the Gore-ist UN socialist bedwetters and their tax-imposing agenda, but nitpicking over photo captions is not going to help the cause one jot. Surely the bandwidth taken up by this post would have been better expended on a photo of a weather station next to a barbecue?

I don’t think the Guardian Goofed – considering the state of science knowledge these days it might actually be a sincere belief held by many of the AGW camp.
Sad really.

The Australian MSN picked up the UK report of Hadow and crew leaving the ice due to the early Summer melt, intimating that there is a (AGW) problem.
Another spin on ‘data’ that has not yet been analysed and nothing about the relative amount of ice ast the moment compared to previous years.
Sounds like an agenda looking for a complacent MSM ‘reporter’.

2 steps forward, 1 step back.
Whatever their excuse is, the whole thing was a comedy, even if taken at face value.
Hadlow was supposed to be a seasoned Arctic trekker.
Falling 500km short is gross failure.

“This year, the summer melt came a little early,” Hadow said during a Webcast conference from Resolute Bay in northern Canada. “We would have rather reached the Pole if we could have, but we’ve always regarded (getting there) as the cherry on the cake.”
The summer melt came a little early?
http://www.heraldonline.com/wire/world/story/1342700.html

Catlin Insurance has put out a press release:
http://www.catlin.com/cgl/media/press_releases/pr_2009/2009-05-14/
I find this interesting:
“The expedition ended several weeks ahead of schedule because of concerns that the Spring melting of the Arctic sea ice would make it too dangerous for aircraft to land at a later date.”
The original plan, as I know it, was to travel 1000 kilometers in 100 days and arrive at the geographic north pole. Therefore, according to their plan they would arrive at the north pole sometime in early June. We know from past posts that the pilots consider April 30 as the cutoff point for normal, safe operations in the arctic. There seems to be a disconnect here, to say the least. The press release implies, and could easily fool anyone who hasn’t paid attention, that the “expedition” has come to an end because the ice is melting “ahead of schedule”.
the same press release also quotes Pen Hadow:
“It was a gruelling but successful expedition.”
Warning! LAYMAN speculating.
Wasn’t the original idea of this expedition to take precise radar readings of the ice thickness. The drilled and measured readings were probably to be used as a sort of control to back up the radar readings or provide data to adjust, as necessary, the radar readings? If the radar didn’t work, wasn’t this whole endeavor a colossal boondoggle from day 1 (or 2.)

I just wanted to pile on John Servais also : Your quick reaction (you were number one) and your inaccuracy are emblematic of the global warming alarmists: they can’t even report straight forward information correctly and yet do it with a snobbery that only they can call up so well. What a loser.

The early melt part is the fraudulent statement that is the most egregious as far as I am concerned. The rest is just spin about hardship and ice thickness. There is no part of the ice melt statement that can be said to be true as all data sources indicate that the initiation of the melt season was average. In addition, anyone can check Arctic temperature, weather, wind patterns, and jet stream to see if you need to get off the ice early or not.

If the Guardian can convince the public every year from now on that the North Pole moved by 500 km south in 5 years it will be in an ice free area of the pacific ocean and Al is proven right after all.
A few years further and the pole will be found close to the Hawaiian islands.
Climate science at its best if the ice wouldn’t melt move the pole instead.

Without a doubt, the Catlin Survey ranks as one of the most environmentally destructive stunts perpetrated in the name of science. How much aviation fuel was burned getting them there, resupplying them, and getting them out? How much refuse did they generate and was it left behind? And all this for what? A few imprecise ice thickness measurements taken with a tape measure!
There was no science here…just one giant publicity stunt for an insurance company…
By the way, did you know that the Catlin Group is headquartered in Bermuda?
http://www.catlin.com/cgl/media/press_releases/pr_2009/2008-05-08c/
Catlin Group Limited, headquartered in Bermuda , is an international specialist property/casualty insurer and reinsurer writing more than 30 classes of business worldwide through four underwriting platforms and an international network of offices. Catlin shares are traded on the London Stock Exchange (ticker symbol: CGL). Gross premiums written in 2008 exceeded US$3.4 billion. More information can be found at http://www.catlin.com.

Also speaking of ice look at this comment by a climatologist
http://www.cdapress.com/articles/2009/05/11/columns/columns06.prt
That’s the Hubbard glacier advancing 7 feet a day and if it closes off the Fjord could have a huge negative economic impact on the various regions, and he blames it on the quiet sun.
He’s predicting the Idaho Summer to be rather short because of the ‘silent sun’, but it’ll be a very hot one as if all the summer heat is trying to squeeze into the shorter season.
As for the big economic threat from the glacier maybe they could blow up the glacier, it’s a newer option now they didn’t really have during the Little Ice Age.

I would cut the Grauniad some slack. I expect that the writer was simply unconsciously filling the need to maintain its reputation for speeling mistooks and mispronts.

More coverage of the “successful” expedition at insurancejournal.com:
“The bulletin noted that the three explorers “were forced to cope with extreme physical conditions during the first weeks of the expedition, even for Arctic standards.”
Peter Wadhams, Professor of Ocean Physics and Head of the Polar Ocean Physics Group in the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics at the University of Cambridge commented: “The data already sent back show the team have been travelling on first-year ice and provide an insight into its rate of growth this year. The rest of the data the team will provide on their return will help us to process and interpret it further and make a valuable contribution to data available to sea ice scientists.”
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2009/05/15/100541.htm
We should start keeping a tally of how many ways these reports manage to dance around the fact that they had to deal with unexpectedly cold conditions.

John
try clicking on the link for the Gauardian reported above.. The caption for the picture clearly stated they battled to the North Pole.

The AGW crowd has dragged this out rather well.
As the Earth cools and the economy dies the money is going to dry up. Gonna be interesting since even the deniers will be affected.
If you look at the actual history of the Arctic the ’30’s were quite warm and that continued into the ’40’s. There were many boats running all over the NW Passage. Then all of a sudden in the later ’40’s the Arctic froze up. History will repeat, it always does and all the predictions and statistics of the dissapearing Arctic ice will be laid to waste.
So why does the science consider the past history anectodal?
Winston Churchill, “The farther backward you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.”

From this article.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jan/25/melting-arctic-north-pole-explorers

Hadow puts it more chivalrously: “I see the Arctic as a maiden newly discovered on the social scene, and we’re melting away her petticoats, and there are some avaricious types peering underneath, and someone needs to defend her honour.”

I think Hadow’s been on the ice waaay too long.

peter_ga (18:44:31) :

Strictly speaking, “battling to” a destination does not imply with 100 surety that the destination was achieved, merely that the direction of any progress was towards that destination. Its the perfect weasel word for this situation.

Pen Hadow’s team of British Arctic explorers have battled to the North Pole
There is no ubiquity in the above quote. It’s misleading and sloppy journalism.

The American Thinker article link is missing an l. It should be
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/the_catlin_ice_follies.html

Breaking news: the Catlin Crew have been ranked amongst the top five British polar explorers of all time: http://margosmaid.blogspot.com/2009/05/catlin-expedition-ranked-second-on-all.html

Anthony,
Could you please add a commentary reply to the ” John Servais (16:58:28) : ” post (first post)?
I found it disconcerting to the discussion here to have such a blatantly false accusation presented as first comment. It really detracts from the remainder of the thread.
Thank you for your consideration…

As a Brit I just know that the yearly HM Queen’s Birthday Honours list will contain awards for the 3 Stooges. For what?
About as valid as Al Gore’s Nobel prize or the Oscar for the Convenient Untruth.
If the GPS data is evident for the entire trip how come Anne Daniels ‘navigated’ the team in fog by ignoring the [apparently faulty] GPS and using the wind that ‘She knew was coming from the West.’
And the band played “Believe it if you must!” tra la…….

For months Guardian environment articles were accompanied by a plug for the Catlin expedition claiming that it would reveal the state of ice at the poles, in the plural. Ending up 490 km from the North one at least means that they were that much closer to the South one.

The initial BBC article made no mention of the expedition’s failure and portrayed it as a successful trek. That article was a better choice to make an example of but it might have recieved edits by now.

John Servais (16:58:28) :
You and your friends keep watching John. You’ll learn something. There is life outside of politics.

They release the article to the press. They get busted on it. A retraction is placed in some far away corner, unseen. The damage has been done. We see this over and over , and yet it just seems to keep on keepin’ on. Perhaps society is turning a blind eye willfully. Sometimes you get tired fighting the good fight all the time and you just want to lie down for awhile. Then along comes Mr. Servais actin’ all big and bad, makes a ginormous gaff, and WHAM, your vigar is renewed !!!! I thank you, sir, ………

John Servais (16:58:28) :
If you are truly concerned about things that are made up then put Al Gore, James Hansen, Michael Mann, and Naomi Oreskes under your watchful eye.

John Servais (16:58:28) :
“So – I went to the Guardian website and read their article – and they do not say the Catlin team was picked up at the North Pole. Indeed, the article clearly says they are being picked up 490 Km short of the Pole.”
Steven Goddard didn’t post a quote that said they were “picked up” at the Pole. The Guardian created the impression that they made it to the North Pole. And that statement was hyperlinked to an article that did not reference where they were picked up, nor did the hyperlink below that.
One had to dig through the whole site to find that information – there are or were *several* articles, not just one, or as you say “their article”.
“So – do you regularly make up quotes on the assumption that your readers will not check?”
Oh, the irony. No quote was made up, unless it was by you claiming a quote was posted saying they were picked up at the Pole.
“NwCitizen writers have been following your stuff – and have been impressed to a point. Perhaps we need to keep track of you as you supposedly – read pretend – to keep track of the envoro’s press. Hello.”
Now that’s just downright scary! Any reason why anyone should give a hootnholler? Got even one reference to a post on your dead site where a writer references Wattsupwiththat?

i see, nevermind

list should say bottom 5, hey?

The BBC news site shows them being picked up. And it has the best map I have seen about the track of the expedition.
In the BBC videos Pen declares his team did what they said they would although it was too bad some electronics let them down. But anyway the real goal was drilling the holes and making the measurements.
He notes the ice was thinner that expected and that is important data.
The BBC reporter is obviously trying to be agreeable and stay neutral about what Pen says. And I think that is the right way to handle the story when you consider the setting; on the ice 300 miles from the pole, talking with three tired people.
Personally I don’t see how they even managed to take all those ice measurements. Boring hundreds of holes through ice doesn’t seem possible when you consider they kept moving, spent time on the useless radar, and had to stay in tents during several bad storms.
No doubt we will hear Pen’s version and little else. Twas a famous victory!

I hopeyou will excuse my poor English.
I love this site but I always double check what is said when I want to use it.
The memo from John Servais is a non information for the following reason:
Some people when they make a conference have a “complice” in the room who will ask the first question. The question can even be on a chosen topic, asked in a way that the speaker can answer and say latter I already answered to that question. I hate that.
Here we do not know but this first memo is so cute that it could be an Antony manipulation.
I would be a chief alarmist, I would say:
John Servais [snip], you made the game of Antony Wattt and Steven Goddar. It is clear that you are a hidden sceptic and we will claim that all that stuff is a new proof of how these guys are manipulating the truth. Do not apologize; [snip]
Some times it is not an organised manipulation, the first to ask question could be some one who just want you help the speaker like here.[snip] May be John Servais is just Steven brother in law who wanted to help him.
I personally think it is not a manipulation because I am quite sure, one made by Antony would be more subtle.
But anyway and seriously as we cannot know we cannot use that, it is just for fun.

What I’d like to know is how many of Catlin’s “readings” were done with the drill and the stick after their equipment failed. They were frostbitten and starving yet they managed 16,000 readings. How many holes did they drill?

Oh, and one last thing, Steven. When you write an article with the title ‘The Guardian Relocates The North Pole By 500km’, you should be fair and mention the fact that the main article states that thing about ‘490km from the pole, less than half way there.’

Hey my first snip. Gee Evan you must be in a snipping mood!!
I actually think that was a reasonable deduction based on 1. How incredibly easy it was to find the quote on the Guardians site to prove him wrong and/or 2. how absent he has been since his first factually incorrect comment.
Why snip a comment that brings his intelligence and/or character into question when he was the one that wanted to place it in the public arena for all to critique? I’m not one for ad-hominem attacks, but a comment about someones motivations when the situation is so black and white surely couldn’t be characterised as that. Let’s not be afraid to call a spade a spade when it is warranted.
Regards
Michael

ALL TIME DUMBEST POLAR EXPLORERS
These guys have got to be number 1
http://www.ecoenquirer.com/south-pole-tragedy.htm
“One friend of Prof. Schneider told ecoEnquirer that he had been planning a trip to an ice sheet to film the devastation brought on by global warming.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2245301/posts
“Apparently, while all of Prof. Schneider’s friends were assuming that the July trek would be to Greenland, during Northern Hemisphere summer, his plans were actually to snowmobile to the South Pole – which, in July, is in the dead of winter.”

“Arctic explorer Pen Hadow has warned that the polar ice cap he has been examining to gauge the extent of climate change appears far thinner than expected after trekking more than 250 miles to the North Pole.”
“Appears” is another of those words that needs DATA to back it up.
How far did the North Pole trek to them again? I know the magnetic north pole moves but who’d have thought that the geographic one would move about… wouldn’t we be in really serious trouble if that actually happened?
Science over propaganda.

What a site!!! well worth a look:
Dr. Slander recounted a recent incident in which a polar bear attacked a local homeless man, and had devoured only a small part of the man’s body before collapsing from exhaustion. “Because of global warming, the bears’ normal way of life is changing rapidly..it’s tragic.”
and
http://www.ecoenquirer.com/antarctic-ice.htm
Dr. Frost also described ongoing research into the application of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle to climate studies. Her concern is that the large number of climate researchers that are now observing the climate system are actually changing the Earth’s climate because of their observations, and believes this effect needs to be taken into account in computerized climate models.
and a classic
http://www.ecoenquirer.com/Bali-global-warming-2027.htm
As in previous years, the U.N. conference was the target of some criticism for neglecting mounting scientific evidence that climate change is a largely natural phenomenon. A minority of non-UN-certified climate scientists once again pointed to global temperatures that have continued their slow decline for the past thirty years. All of these comments were made anonymously due to their illegality under anti-green hate speech laws.
“Yes, global temperatures have fallen”, admitted Mr. Gore in private, “but as we all know, this spurious cooling trend will suddenly change to rapid warming…possibly as early as next month. I am told by our UN scientists that we now have less than ten years to avert a global inferno of cataclysmic proportions.”
Once again, the Canadian delegation expressed some concern that the world’s cooling trend might not end soon enough. Pointing to the ice sheet in northern Canada that has now survived through thirteen summers without melting, the Canadians warned that some towns in the far north might have to be abandoned as the ice sheet continues its expansion southward

Damn…where’s that sign I posted?…seems to keep getting knocked down or turned around…
Oh…there it is!
PLEASE…do NOT FEED THE TROLLS!
JimB

SIR Pen Hadow anyone?

Whoops! Typo acknowledged, that should read many not mant!
AtB:-0

Some here are arguing that it is OK for a newspaper to print incorrect information, as long as somewhere else they print more accurate information. Now that is an interesting point of view.
The “battled to the North Pole” and found ice “thinner than expected.” You want to let that slide?

Reading is fundamental, John….

One comment of team member published on the Catlin web site was about the fact that the drift moved them closer to the North Pole. It was made after the last re-suply and was something like this (but not exactly these words!) : “The drift is good since we then can complete as much as possible of the very important scientific study which after all is why we are here.”
What is the point to stay on the same flake of ice and do the scientifically important job when it isn’t scientifically tolerable then?
Ann said a few weeks before that education is important, and that she used her math skill to calculate how long distance they have to achieve each day to reach the North Pole. Then, late in April, they had to make 16 km a day or something… I made that scientifically important calculation in a second! It felt like I saved the Earth.

The Catlin expedition will deserve several of the Armageddon´s False Prophet next slides presentation.
HE is collecting material for HIS next roll over you in NH summer time.
I do predict you will have forcefully to give tithes to HIS most devilish cause.
Get all the “male garlic” you can!

For those of you who would like to see the results the Catlin team achieved there is a spreadsheet of values on this link:
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/science
The whole spreadsheet seems to be a bit disorganised (does that surprise anyone?) and it doesn’t seem to show individual measurements, rather averages.
There appear to be many days when measurements weren’t made.
I found it when I was looking for evidence of the (BBC’s) claim of 1500 ice thickness measurements, which, considering the effort expended in drilling each hole (according to information supplied in earlier posts on WUWT) seemed rather high. 1500 measurements over 73 days is roughly 20 holes a day and that’s without accounting for the days when no measurements were taken?
The Methodology document, also at the same location, states that 10 holes a day were drilled, when conditions permitted, over a 3 to 5 hour period. Perhaps they made multiple measurement down each hole.
I would be interested in an opinion on these two dosuments from someone who understands the subject.
I also see the start of an explanation of why the first year ice thickness would appear to be so high. Weather conditions at the start of the “survey” didn’t allow measuremnets to be taken, so of course all those low ice thickness figures that they should have obtained then weren’t included, thus biassing the results towards the thicker, more recently mesured, ice.

We don’t know that “John Servais” on this site is the same person running the site which he mentions.
On the other hand, someone posting as Watts on that site still seems to think that human population is growing explosively; perhaps he once was told that and because it’s not his field he hasn’t bothered looking at the population patterns. There also are questions about what wiped out the Mastodons and the Clovis culture; there is evidence supporting an impact or airburst event.

—————
Chris Schoneveld (04:57:49) :
I am a bit puzzled why everybody is at John Servais’ throat. He correctly referred to the text in the main body of the article rather then the caption of a photograph to which Steve referred. I think Steve owes John an apology.
——————
Let me explain it more s-l-o-w-l-y… in a photo essay on the Guardian website dedicated to the Caitlin expedition they claim that the expedition reached the North Pole, a clear objective of the survey.
Your argument is that the Guardian is right because they have the correct information in another location. So if I make a blog entry under science that says that a scientist invented cold fusion, then later on write a new post on that site in a different part say under world events that says he gave up after getting only half way to inventing cold fusion, and do not update my previous post with a correction then that is OK beans by you?

John A (03:09:08) :

I am baffled by the comment that the link I gave triggered Norton security, since its a link to a file on Picasa.

I’m baffled why anyone would install any Norton product.

Ian
I do not think think any ammunition has been supplied to the AGW movement because this is a non-science issue it is about MSM bias and bad journalism and really poor content editing. Just like if there is an error in a post on any “DENIER SOURCE” it is immediately pointed out and commented on across the blogosphere with vile mockery. If anything these posts create little tempests in teapots to allow myself and others to vent at what frustrates us without bringing the science into it.
If you look at my post about the the New Thermohaline Model you will see I tend to take a more pragmatic view on things scientific and warn about irrational exurberence when new papers are published as to not provide an opening for ridicule.

“May, 2009 shows the greatest ice extent in the AMSR-E record, which seems to contradict Hadow’s highly publicised remarks about Arctic ice health.”
I bet you that the NSIDC graph would never hit the 1979-2000 line with the winnings going to charity Steve and you didn’t take me up on my offer.
How about the same for the JAXA graph, I bet it will not be above 2008 come June 1st, this time do you feel confident enough to put your money where you mouth is? Money goes to London Air Ambulance.
Regards
Andy

AnonyMoose,
This might help you with your math.
9,000.000.000 people X 631 years / (30 years/generation) = 189,300,000,000 people.
You seem to have forgotten that people die and are replaced by other people. You don’t need any growth past mid-century, much less “explosive growth.”
It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who will take aggressive potshots – without thinking through what they are saying.
And no, it is not OK to accuse other people of “making up quotes.” Particularly when they are properly cited and referenced.

AndyW,
No doubt the fact that NSIDC Arctic ice extent is about 1/2 std dev below the 1979-2000 mean is a sign of imminent global meltdown. I suggest you move to higher ground – immediately.

This is from the so-called “accurate” Guardian article.

I’m told he will also say that they did not encounter any multi-year ice (only new ice that froze that year).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2009/may/13/catlin-arctic-survey-ends?commentpage=1
This is what Hadow reported on April 2

We’ve noticed that the ice is older and thicker than before

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7897392.stm

Peter Plail, at least you received a reply from the BBC. I’m still awaiting mine. Judging by the one you’ve recieved it’s hardly worth the wait for mine. The content is puerile.
“…while we’re fully committed to balanced and impartial coverage of the issue, the overwhelming scientific opinion is that the ice is retreating.”
Balanced and impartial? Overwhelming scientific evidence? What utter garbage!
It’s criminal that I, along with millions of other TV Licence payers, am legally compelled to fund this disgraceful BBC twaddle.

Steven, this is also from the so-called “accurate” Guardian article: “‘They will be picked up 490km from the pole, less than half way there.”
But you named this article: “The Guardian Relocates The North Pole By 500km”
See what I mean? We can agree on many things regarding hypes and media reporting, but this blog post of yours isn’t much better IMO. And it’s not the first time either. Sometimes you do great work, but sometimes you write articles like this one.

Oh my!!
I live in Washington State, USA. I am almost directly in line with the diraction of change for the North Pole.
Climatologically, is this going to cause climate change for me, now living 500km closer to the pole?
Politically, is Canada going to lay claim to the state of Washington?
I had better buy some warmer winter wear and learn to speak Canadian, EY!

I too was so incensed by the BBc coverage of the return of the three stooges that I was moved to complain. The BBC reply was:-
Thanks for your e-mail regarding BBC News at Six’ broadcast on 13 May.
I understand you feel a report on the programme about the melting polar ice caps misrepresented the facts as arctic ice is at its thickest for 50 years. – (I actually wrote that “global ice is above the average of the past 50 years”) – I note you also feel the footage of the crew of Catlin was disingenuous and staged.
Climate change and the retreat of artic ice is one of the most high profile news stories of recent years and while we’re fully committed to balanced and impartial coverage of the issue, the overwhelming scientific opinion is that the ice is retreating. We’ve an obligation to reflect this broad scientific agreement on climate change and we reflect this accordingly; however, we do aim to ensure that we also offer time to the dissenting voices.
While it mightn’t always be possible to reflect all opinions in one programme we charge our editors with ensuring that all relevant voices are heard over a reasonable period of time across our programming output, and this has included our main news broadcasts and flagship programmes such as ‘Newsnight’.
Nevertheless I appreciate your strongly held views on this matter and with them in mind I’d like to take this opportunity to assure you that I’ve recorded your comments onto our audience log. This is an internal daily report of audience feedback which is circulated to many BBC staff including senior management, producers and channel controllers.
The audience logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions about future programming and content.
Thanks once again for contacting us with your thoughts.
Anyone out there heard the dissenting voices that the BBC gives time to?

Neven,
The fact that The Guardian occasionally prints some accurate information about the Arctic does not preclude me from poking fun at them the rest of the time.

Steven Goddard:
There will undoubtedly be a Catlin press conference to highlight the “science” showing that the Arctic is melting “faster than expected”. I would hope you could attend to ask some probing questions.
Here’s a working list of questions which real science journalists might ask:
1) On April 2 Hadow reported “We’ve noticed that the ice is older and thicker than before”. When you were interviewed at the pick up site, he indicated that the ice was expected to be “much thicker” than the 1.77m average recorder during the trek. How do you square that discrepancy?
2) The Catlin website reports “First year ice is typically thinner than 2 m, while Multi-year ice is generally thicker than 3 m.” Since the route was primarily planned over first year ice, how is an average measurement of 1.77m surprising?
3) Also on the website it is claimed: “The Catlin Arctic Survey’s route was specifically designed so that the team would begin the expedition on multi-year ice, transit briefly through a region primarily covered with first-year ice, then enter a region in which second-year ice now prevails.” The track of the route clearly shows most of the transit over primarily first year ice. Why was the plan changed?
4) The expedition was terminated after 73 days of the 100 days planned, largely explained by the onset of ice melt. This is in spite of the 3rd slowest April ice melt recorded in the recent past. That would suggest that under recent ice melts history the plan was too ambitious?
Please feel free to add other discrepancies. Maybe some journalist with cajones will be at the press conferences.

“Strictly speaking, ‘battling to’ a destination does not imply with 100 surety that the destination was achieved, merely that the direction of any progress was towards that destination. Its the perfect weasel word for this situation.”
In that case, I “battled to the North Pole” yesterday in my car. I drove from Holly Springs, NC to northern Raleigh, ending up at least a dozen miles farther north than I started. That’s progress toward the North Pole!
Since I also traveled a considerable distance east, I “battled to” Morocco, Iran, and China at the same time.
On my way home, I “battled to” Japan, Peru, and Chile.

Weren’t they dragging a radar unit behind them? That MIGHT (one of those words again) account for the “precision” of the ice thickness?

Without comment:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/liberal_fantasyland.html

A thought:
Is anybody else having Catlin withdrawal?
Dang.
Schadenfreude was giving me a little upper in these crazy times.

Gee, John Servais shoots his mouth off on this blog and never replies to those who challenge his comment. Worse, he never apologizes.
The Caitlin expedition deserves to be exposed everywhere possible as the farce and lie it was. This exposure will never be at the BBC or Guardian, who committed early to the scientific validity of this ridiculous exercise. They don’t even have the decency to bury the story, rather they lie about the results and claim great success.

Neven, please don’t cry. Just because your heroes are being subjected to the ridicule they deserve accuse others of making fun of them rather than being reasonable about small errors. This whole expedition is a scientific farce. The data gathering, the quotes claiming thin ice. Everything.
The photo caption was not a mistake. It was there to gain the attention of readers, many of whom will quickly move on to another picture, satisfied they now know about the Caitlin expedition to the North Pole. Classic tabloid journalism.

Rob H (14:47:24) :
This whole expedition is a scientific farce.
This whole expedition is an unscientific farce. 🙂

One comment on the misstatement in the photo caption:
Captions are known to be read more frequently than any other print element.
This does not mean the Guardian exploited their knowledge of reading patterns. Neither does it mean that they did not exploit their knowledge of reading patterns.

So the BBC claim the overwhelming consesus is that the ice is thinning.
From what I have seen on this site that may have been the view two years ago but not now.
With the change in the sun sycle well established and less heat around there is only one way the ice is going…thicker.

“will undertake a 120 day, 2000km crossing of the ice cap ”
The Vanco Arctic Survey was planned for a year earlier and is the same survey.
(original URL redirects to guess where)
“History The Vanco Arctic Survey will follow in the footsteps of Sir Wally Herbert, whose team became the first in the world to walk to the North Geographic Pole, and on to cross the entire Arctic Ocean, a feat accomplished after eighteen months on the ice, as recently as 1969.
Sir Wally’s team-mate Fritz Koerniker, made daily ice core readings as they progressed, and Hadow believes these are the only accurate readings currently in existence. He plans to build on Sir Wally’s findings, nearly forty years on.”
http://www.vanco.com/ContentManager/Document.asp?GroupId=2&TypeId=309&Id=3141

Good clear picture close to the North Pole, showing some resistance to melting so far:
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/npole/2009/images/noaa1-2009-0517-194522.jpg
six hours earlier:
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/npole/2009/images/noaa1-2009-0517-134844.jpg
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/gallery_np.html

Martin G Atkins:-))
Now that is the real British fighting spirit! I’d forgotting that sketch the tears of laughter a still rolling even after a third view!
AtB

Mike Lorrey (14:06:42) :
The radar sets allegedly broke, perhaps due to excessive human frustration over the radar providing data that contradicted the expedition members beliefs.
Were any of the radar data transmitted back? It would be interesting to see how they compare with the subsequent ‘manual’ stuff!
Interesting also that even Associated Press gets “recent but undated photo[s] provided by Catlin Arctic Survey”. Either their PR team doesn’t know how to retain EXIF (camera) data, or they do and are intent on removing it. If so, why?

This may have been canvassed previously, if so, my apologies. But why is there a small bump in the ice record, shown on this site from IARC-JAXA exactly at the start of June every year. Some sort of adjustment ?

ak (12:27:26) : said
“remember when WUWT couldn’t locate Tonga properly on a map?”
Extract from notreallywikipedia
“It is well known that Tonga is a floating island. At times its speed has been scientifcally measured at over 120 miles in a day. This makes it impossible to locate accurately on a map.”
See, I knew there would be a rational explanation 🙂
TonyB

ak (12:27:26) :
“remember when WUWT couldn’t locate Tonga properly on a map?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/19/undersea-volcanic-eruption-in-tonga/
good times. lol”
Yes, in that thread you said:
“lol. the yellow pin of tonga and the pink arrow are not pointing at the same place!”
Apparently you didn’t or couldn’t understand the caption concerning the pink arrow:
“I found it interesting because the SST maps show a warm anomaly in that region, and extending off to the east.”
The pink arrow was not intended to point “at the same place” as Tonga. Tonga *was* properly located.
Are you perhaps related to Monbiot?

20 minutes later i wrote… (i’ll admit the first comment was posted hastily)
“okay, the distance between even the small yellow area one grid-block west of the arrow (est. 26S, 163W) and not the large anomaly that the arrow points towards, is nearly 900 miles from the island of tonga!”
And the two are related how?
“I found it interesting because the SST maps show a warm anomaly in that region, and extending off to the east.”
that’s a broad definition of region! It’s nice to know that i live in the region of both New York City and Los Angeles, CA!

Steven Goddard (17:09:38) :
“ak,
The arrow was pointing to the warm region – not to Tonga. The problem is with your reading comprehension and trigger finger.”
After seeing his last attempt to save face, I’d say he has more problems than those.
But on the subject, I don’t think the earthquake near Tonga at the same time of the eruption was mentioned in the thread
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Quakes/us2009ejbr.php
and that earthquakes are sometimes known to be preceded by increased surface temperatures.
http://www.gisdevelopment.net/application/natural_hazards/earthquakes/mi08_299.htm
“Rise in land surface temperature (LST) before an impending earthquake has been detected for 23 earthquakes”
Just a thought. This may prove to be interesting if you are still interested
http://www.mantleplumes.org/Cook-Austral.html