After being called out by WUWT on the fake biotelemtery readings presented as “live” but were actually from March 8th looping repeatedly, Team Catlin had changed the website to say:
“Biometrics – Data for March 8th 2009
Status: Operational”
This is what it originally showed:
I think it is the most honest description yet.
Of course they could just end the farce and remove it. Because, well, who needs demonstrational biotelemetry anyway?
UPDATE: they also posted this at the bottom of the main page:
An apology
We’d like to apologise to anybody who felt misled by our recent biometric data. The data was initially displayed in error in a way that gave the impression that it was live. The intended qualification and explanation that it was, in fact, delayed information, was at first missing. We have subsequently corrected this with specific information concerning the above data. We apologise for the errors and to anyone who may have found the data misleading.
The real question is: how long would they have let that “live” impression go on had WUWT not called them on it? Originally the URL for the “biotelemetry” was
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/live_from_the_ice.aspx
Now that URL if typed in your browser is automatically redirected to:
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/latestfromtheice
So with the words “telemetry” and “live_from_the_ice.aspx” it is clear what the original intent was. The apology is about saving face, nothing else.
Color me unimpressed. They should take down their farcical “biometrics” and call the team home, there’s no science being done here, only public relations, and even that is poorly done.
Long time lurker, first time poster here.
I’ll give them credit for creating nice marketing fluff. The website is really nice. A better description might be nice propaganda.
They are either very naive programmers with this bio data or they knew all along it was fake.
B U S T E D
I am so embarrassed that I actually watched this (cough) telemetry.
I felt ‘connected’ to these zealots.
Actually, I was enjoying the fact that Pen Hadow’s core temp was lower than the others and watched entranced as I waited for end stage hypothermia to set in.
Gee. I kinda miss my hope for that change.
Isn’t that what Steig, Mann, Hansen, et al should have stamped in large letters at the top of all of their “studies”? Just askin’… 😉
Is there not a legal principle that states,” Lie once, everything is a lie ” ?.
Too bad that the people who set this up are sipping latte’s in airconditioned offices and their dupes are in -40 deg C conditions on the Arctic Icecap.
Catlin Artic Ice Survey bio telemetry status: “fabricational”
Do ya suppose their ice thickness data should also be categorized as “demonstrational”?
OT: News Alert just out from the science journal Nature:
Disease in a warming climate—Fears of a global rise in infectious conditions may be unfounded.
by Lila Guterman
Climate change takes the blame for many dim future prospects: rising sea levels, more frequent droughts and disappearing glaciers, to name just a few. But perhaps the warming trend should be absolved of responsibility for a predicted bump in the global burden of infectious disease.
Demonstrational: “What we would have if we actually had live data from the ice like we claimed”
Does this mean their ice hole data is “demonstrational” too…
Fake but “accurate” !
That’s it. The science is settled.
Speaking of ridiculae: UW researchers find weather forecasts confuse the public
Cathy (19:50:15) :
. . . Actually, I was enjoying the fact that Pen Hadow’s core temp was lower than the others and watched entranced as I waited for end stage hypothermia to set in.
That’s cold, Cathy.
This is starting to turn into a PR disaster. The “live_from_the_ice” link now forwards you to “latestfromtheice” because the word “live” has been exposed as BS (and deliberate, intentional, preplanned BS at that). The ice thickness measuring device won’t work so the measurements won’t be worth a tinkers dam. The hike to the north pole won’t actually be to the north pole.
Absolutely every aspect of this “expedition” has been a complete bust. They aren’t going to do what they planned and much of it has been exposed as a deliberate fraud. The whole thing is starting to remind me of “The Producers.”
“Springtime for Hikers” indeed.
The whole thing should be classified as science fiction and reported on accordingly. Of course Mother Nature’s reality is a much harsher critic than any a fictional writer might encounter. But the propaganda points from this venture is what they’re aiming for in any case.
This metaphor for the AGW scam gets better all the time. What a joke.
Steve Huntwork (19:40:32) :
B U S T E D
———————–
The ice is definitely thinner though. That’s definitely not demonstrational, because it will soon be “PEER”-reviewed, by Larry, Moe and Curly.
HELLO, earth to general public …… are you getting AGW yet ?????
It’s a crock of robust.
Well I at least have to give them credit for making a limited if late effort to clean that up some. They could have trotted out a “Baghdad Bob” PR guy to try to blow smoke up the communities —- Uhhhh — well you know.
I also find it interesting that the hard core AGW folks have stayed at arms length from this one too.
Better late than never but you only get one shot to establish credibility, and the best way to do that in a web blog world is to be as open and responsive as possible. No one expects error free “science” but it does not wash well when people keep seeing shoes behind the curtain and wonder what is really going on.
In all honesty I feel sorry for the three intrepid explorers I still think they are a bit in over their head and are suffering to serve a PR agenda and a highly questionable research project.
In a web wired world this sort of thing lives for ever in web archives, and could taint everything these folks touch from now on.
Larry
“Demonstrational” : also applicable to Hansen’s models!
Congratulations Anthony.
It was to be expected, given the evidence demonstrated here in WUWT. Nevertheless, you’re now clearly exposing how they were originally deceiving the public.
Engineers who write here should analyze the rest of this history. Those who know on radars, ice drills, survival equipment, etc.
I had liked to contribute a bit more on this subject here; nevertheless, I was busy with a teeth problem which, thanks to the auspices of a dentist friend, has been partially settled. I hope she (the dentist) won’t be in demonstrational mode.
Frank K — Does this mean their ice hole data is “demonstrational” too…
Everything those ice holes do is demonstrational.
Why is it these global warming knuckleheads always have to resort to lying??
I guess my question is why are they still there?
I wonder if they are suffering from snow dementia. We had an engineer get lost in a white out a couple of years ago, by the time search and rescue found him 2 days later he was sure that they were there to kill him and had all sorts of weird stories. They literally had to tackle him and sedate him to get him to safety.. I wonder if this same thing is happening to our entrepid explorers. It seems to me if your instruments are broken and your proposed course consists of two steps forward one step back movement ending in a zig zag pattern, any of the supposed info would be bust anyhow. So again.. why are they still there?
Shades of “Johnny Dangerously” ? :^)=)
@ Frederick Michael
The Producers…..LOL
I was thinking ‘The Truman Show’ or ‘Capricorn One’
Just curious but has the expedition actually confirmed that there is in fact ice up there?
Mike Bryant (20:04:20) :
Catlin Artic Ice Survey bio telemetry status: “fabricational”
Wonderful but a couple of superfluous words crept in!
Catlin Arctic Ice Survey status: “fabricational”
DaveE
Very nice work Anthony.
Let’s see how this develops.
If these people return safe from their escapades and reality sinks in there is always a chance that they switch their point of view to become extremely motivated skeptics.
Who knows.
I think it’s very hard to support Global Warming with a frozen brain.
Richard DeSousa,
‘The ends justify the means’ lying and gross deception is thought to acceptable for those who believe their cause is just.
They started off adjusting the data here and there to fit the models and they are now telling outright lies to cover up not only the fake data and adjusted models but to hide new data that directly contradicts the whole basis for AGW.
Like all flawed belief systems the temptation to hide from reality becomes unavoidable, the more actual reality comes knocking on their door the greater desire to deny that reality with ever more fantastic excuses.
They have the media access and they dominate it with a fanatical determination, once they lose their media dominance they know they will lose the whole debate, the science rapidly becomes secondary to the prime political motive, the science is only useful as a belief verification tool.
Next they will accidentally drop their auger bit and extensions down one of the ice holes into the ocean below and that will be it for the “Scientific” aspect of this expedition. Then there would be no excuse to not lift these bozo’s from the ice.
It would be interesting in PR terms of what would be broadcast if sites such as WUWT had not kept a very watchful eye on this soiree. Any future AGW PR stunt will need to be very careful – they are being watched
John H (21:52:53) :
Just curious but has the expedition actually confirmed that there is in fact ice up there?
____________________________
What on earth were you thinking John?? It’s been scientifically proven and presented by a Nobel Laureate recently, that the ice is not going to disappear until December, 2013.
I’m thinking that if we can get some of that ice real quick before it melts, and wrap it around that hidden pipeline of heat, we can SMOOTH out the curve a bit and anthropogenically slow down the anthropogenic climate change. Any takers ?
I guess we need to find the pipeline first though !!
RO BUSTED!!
So, this is Science, eh?
I’m from a generation where science wasn’t a form of social advocacy. Scientists did science out of curiosity, and mostly it was pretty cheap. Scientists, and science students, went out into what passed for reality in those times, and looked at stuff. Then, they fiddled with stuff. And changed some stuff. Then when they figured something out, they wrote some stuff up. Some peers, who were remarkably like the aforementioned scientist, looked at it and said, this is some good stuff. But why is this stuff important? And the scientist says, Because this means we can do this stuff betterfastercheapersmallerlarger, or maybe in New Mexico, where the smell won’t be so noticeable. And life was good.
I must be seeing things, but everytime I read “Bad Science” as BS, I keep thinking someting completely different, a sort of “bovine faecal” moment! Sorry must be just little old me. It almost reminds me of those wonderful LEDs on my car’s on board computer, as if I really need one more electronic thing to tell me what I’ve already worked out for myself – the damned sensor has failed – again, the ABS & Electronic Stability Programme is still working just fine! I have computer feedback because “we can”, not because I need it!
Now, Capricorn One, that was a great movie, went for every conspiracy theory in the book apart from Global Warming simply because it hadn’t been invented then! Now I await the revealing autobiography from Neil Armstrong about how hot it was in that studio under the lights! As if the moon’s surface is all grey, what kind of cheese is all grey I ask you???????
About low temperature: I had an uncle whose temperature was 35.6 instead of 36.7 as the rest of us when in health. He died age 92 and was very mild mannered and universally esteemed ( these last comments because somebody posted something about psychopaths and low body temperatures).
.
This has been a social trend over the last two decades. Having had a society founded on probity for many decades, someone has decided that spin and halls of mirrors are a much better option. Everything is now ‘sold’ to the public with as little in facts as possible.
We will soon end up in a Soviet situation, where the official description of the nation and its people bore no relation whatsoever to real society and real people. One of many jokes about this went, “the government pretends to pay us, and we pretend to work”.
Needless to say, the Soviet hall of mirrors finally collapsed.
.
Demonstrat ion Al.
“The whole thing is starting to remind me of “The Producers.”
“Springtime for Hikers” indeed.”
Recall their hair-brained scheme was so hilarious – it became a big hit. Piltdown, Nessi, Yetti, Caitlin… The hits just keep on comin’
.
The most important thing is to get this in mainstream media – that the expedition is a farce. Can everyone write to the media – newspapers and TV – and explain the situation, especially the BBC who have morally underwritten this saga. Christopher Booker is a good supporter who may assist.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5028380/The-Global-Warming-Three-are-on-thin-ice.html
.
Demonstrational?
The Mirriam Webster dictionary has this:
4: a public display of group feelings toward a person or cause
— dem·on·stra·tion·al
Which seems apt somehow.
Time for a hug everyone. 🙂
I will buy someone a cheeseburger of they crack that site and change “demonstrational” to “delusional”
In any case there isn’t even any such word as “demostrational”. I believe it should be “demonstrative”.
They should have gone with light sabers and ewoks if they needed more gimmicks to make an awe-inspiring impression on their financiers and the public. A Flash animation of heart beats is just not going to cut it.
We can now add a new entry into the dictionary.
Main Entry: catlin
Part of Speech: verb
Definition: mislead; be dishonest
Synonyms: bamboozle*, beat, beat out of, beguile, betray, bilk, buffalo, burn, cheat, circumvent, clip, con, cozen, cross up, defraud, delude, disappoint, double-cross, dupe, ensnare, entrap, fake, falsify, fleece, fool, gouge, gull, hoax, hoodwink, hook*, humbug, impose upon, lead on, outwit, play joke on, pull fast one, put on, rob, scam, screw, sell, skin, suck in, swindle, take advantage of, take for, take for ride, take in, take to cleaners, trick, victimize
Antonyms: be honest
I think there is already a word with a similar definition:
http://thesaurus.reference.com/cite.html?qh=deceive&ia=lexrog
I would make a longer post but my catlin is peeping. (alternative usage)
When these “Idiots” finally get back to the UK, they’ll be on the BBC as “Heroes”, and the Data will be displayed for us ALL to cut our Carbon Footprint.
Who is ultimately footing the bill for this pointless jaunt? If it’s the British taxpayers I’m demanding a refund…
I see they have at least issued an apology for the error.
In climate science it seems people are jubilant to accept results and data as accurate, even pasting them on the front pages of Nature – until they are shown to be rubbish. Then all one hears are denials, accusations, fretting, name-calling etc. until it gets completely indefensible – then you get (if you’re lucky) apologies.
Ed Snack (20:21:12) :
Fake but “accurate” !
rather; Fake but “robust”!
If Catlin are going to change their web site you would think that they would at least make the attempt to do it right.
Today’s education page says
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/education_resources.aspx
“Arctic Survey Education enables students to access live data, recorded data and useful tools to help analyse that data in a ‘real world’ context.”
Today 15th April 2009 students can access live data.
It’s not even “demonstational”. When you demonstrate something you are still showing something real. What they are showing isn’t even simulated; it’s a mock-up (I won’t say fake).
And to risk repeating something I wrote a few days ago: this expedition won’t be a failure for the team on the ice. They are extreme sportsmen; all they ever wanted was a jolly time trekking on the ice. That is expensive so they needed sponsors. They found them long ago. Mission accomplished. If the team members have been required to utter silly things about climate along the way and drill a few holes, small price. It’s the sponsors who want to spin this jaunt as proof of something.
One has to wonder about the ‘busted’ Spite radar. Maybe is wasn’t busted at all. Perhaps the readings they were getting were of sea ice that was too thick for the AGW community to accept. It could be that the dramatic pick up and fly back to England for repairs was nothing more than a farce to hide the fact that sea ice was far more thick than they expected to come across. After all, the whole purpose of this mission was to find out ‘how much longer until it all melts away’. I’m sure data contrary to their expectations may have brought on frustration.
“Four point five meters again?! Stupid radar! Why ain’t you working ri…OOPS! Cable snapped…(whistles)…I guess we won’t be needing this anymore. Now, where’s that drill…”
45 minutes later…
“Damn, I still haven’t drilled through this ice yet…”
From the other side of a pressure ridge
“Hey Pen, come take a measurement from over here…”
“Wow, Ann! You found a several week old fracture we can skate down. First let me take this depth measurement.”
Drilling commences…
“Hmmm…One point six meters. That’s more like it. Ann, put that in the log and let’s get going. We drifted backwards half a kilometer in the last 12 hours.”
Perhaps they can label AGW and all Carbon taxes, as simply “demonstration” also!……. Now that would be a damn good idea.
Perhaps we can get a big red rectangular stamp made up that says.
“Demonstrational purposes only – Not for Political use.”
Then whenever a “peer reviewed” AGW Paper comes out. We can prestamp it.
The small print:
“An apology
We’d like to apologise to anybody who felt misled by our recent biometric data. The data was initially displayed in error in a way that gave the impression that it was live. The intended qualification and explanation that it was, in fact, delayed information, was at first missing. We have subsequently corrected this with specific information concerning the above data. We apologise for the errors and to anyone who may have found the data misleading.”
Call me paranoid, but is it possible that the 3 stooges are “useful idiots” ??
As such they are expendable?
Would they have a chance for “independent communication” other than the sponsors?
It would be difficult to establish a communication without the
sponsors “wetting” the line…but IT would be interesting if someone drop a
sat-phone for them.
It’s like a modern-day Jack London story. To Build a Fire is more like operational biotelemetry.
The inconclusiveness of the Poznan talks last weekend signals once again that our leaders are prepared to drink in the last chance saloon – with last orders being called (Global climate change decisions on hold for Obama, 15 December). There is just a year left for our political leaders to put a post-2012 deal in place at Copenhagen next year, if there is to be any hope of preventing global warming from reaching really dangerous levels. But slow progress seems to signal a deal that will fall short of expectations.
Scientists have presented a barrage of evidence for global warming and I have seen with my own eyes the irrevocable changes taking place in the Arctic Ocean. Each year more and more of the fragile multi-year sea ice melts and it could be less than a generation before the ice cap disappears completely. The loss of this astonishingly beautiful place will be a tragedy in itself, but a still greater calamity for us all is its unbalancing of the Earths whole eco-system.
Next year, during the critical few months before Copenhagen, I will be leading a scientific expedition to the north pole to assess the status of the ice. Using a specially designed ice-penetrating radar, the Catlin Arctic Survey team will take millions of readings of the thickness of the floating ice over a 1,200-kilometre route. The data will be analysed by the worlds leading scientists from organisations including Nasa.
I believe I owe it to my children and future generations to carry out this important, if hazardous, survey. Putting our abilities as explorers at the disposal of climate scientists is our teams small contribution to securing a solution. It is to be hoped world leaders recognise early enough they have a still greater role to play in Copenhagen next year.
Pen Hadow
Catlin Arctic Survey
If this doesn’t open people’s eyes to what this expedition is all about then nothing will!
The purpose was, reading between the lines, to try and present data that would be used to drive home the Copenhagen Accord. A propagandist stunt to achieve political goals, more or less.
Google search news articles on Pen Hadow. How can one possibly expect to get credible data from an advocate? Same with Hansen being in change of measuring temperature.
This is almost like the Marlboro Man becoming the surgeon general then proceeding to tell us “Smoke ’em if you got ’em”.
Apologie?
“The data was initially displayed in error in a way that gave the impression that it was live”
Displayed in ERROR, come off it.
I had no impression that it was live, it was live, no two ways about it.
We could record the live data onto their highly professional template.
As I said earlier today 15th April their educational page states live data.
This whole thing is a demonstration, just like the telemetry data. They might as well have turned up outside a coal fired power plant in sunny England in all their Arctic regalia and stuck pictures of fluffy Polar Bears on the chain wire fence.
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/assets/downloads/Ice_Report_14_4_09.pdf
The results collected in the first month of the Catlin survey point to an unexpected lack of multi-year ice…
I thought the machine was bust? And what was ‘unexpected’? They went there to measure the ‘decline’ in the ice.
OT
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13437705
OT you seem to have upset new scientist. Keep up the good work
“For the last two years, the “Best Science Blog” in the Weblogs Awards, which are based on readers’ votes, has gone to blogs by climate change deniers. Such blogs may be having an influence: polls show more and more Americans now think the threat posed by climate change is exaggerated even though denialism has become rarer in the mainstream media, with even Fox News finally embracing the truth.”
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227035.800-review-the-open-laboratory-edited-by-jennifer-rohn.html
Where’s Chad on this one?
Only one “deliberate attempt to deceive” is needed to destroy credibility.
This particular AGW-Team has no credibility with me. I presume that even though their survey instruments have failed (other than a hand tape measure), they will conclude that AGW is destroying the Arctic.
Right or wrong, I will not believe their results.
tallbloke (23:45:06) :
Oh wow, I had assumed that wasn’t in the dictionary.
3: a show of armed force
Just in case a PB attacks the sensors?
More apt?:
There is no difference at all between what the Catlin AGW promoters are doing and any other part of the AGW promotion industry.
Well, you fooled me with the fake bio data. Send real ice data now, and if it appears credible I will forgive you, Catlin.
Love and Kisses,
Mike
PS I’m still pulling for you to do the right thing.
Pen Hadow may well have seen changes in the Arctic, but, as he is only 47, I presume that he is referring to the changes that have taken place over the last 25 years or so, not those that took place in the early part of the last century thro’ to the 1940’s, nor the cooling & presumabley increased sea-ice from the 1940’s to the 1970’s? So he has only witnessed changes occurring over this relatively short period, which we are told by experts that it is far too short a timescale to draw any conlcusions in long-term trends!
PS Me thinks the Met Office have been getting it wrong again IMHO! we’ll see what crops up this afternoon.
Having just written a comment to the BBC re: its reporting on the Caitlin Arctic Survey (http://tinyurl.com/dy95u )- I noted curious search engine results. If one searches Google for BBC Caitlin Arctic Survey – you get only the 21 Feb 2009 … article titled:
“Arctic team targets key ice data”
By Jonathan Amos
Science reporter, BBC News
This is their pre-expedition launch story about the glories of the mission. But there is no result for the later stories about the problems on the ice, equipment failure, etc., e.g. Tuesday, 14 April 2009 14:39 UK:
“Arctic team gives up on ice radar”
By David Shukman
Science and environment correspondent, BBC News
One can only find these stories by going directly to the BBC site and then searching for Caitlin Arctic Survey. Thus, it would appear that BBC is positioning stories in search engines to effectively censor reporting the Survey failures.
No only does the Caitlin Survey site manipulate (falsify) data, BBC, and I’m sure other MSM, sites are burying the bad news bear about global warming – that is not. This should be pointed out in letters to Editors.
http://tinyurl.com/dy95u
Catlin captain on his return from the Arctic, “Ice cores equivocally and demonstrationally show that it is thinner. Drilling in only flat areas to assure variation control of ice compression, we discovered that the ice was the same thickness every time and everywhere we drilled.”
News flash! “WUWT blogg discovers ice core samples were taken from the same flow of ice that the Catlin team walked on, thinking they were actually moving across the ice, when in fact the ice was moving with them. This discovery follows the previous exposure of repeating biometrics. The Catlin team and sponsors stand by their data explaining that equivocal and demonstrational ice cores are more reliable than in-situ measures and should replace the outdated buoy, submarine, and satellite measures, thus confirming the consensus that the Arctic is thinning.”
Wow, that is some “apology” they give. Basically, they lied, and now they are lying further to try to cover up their initial lies. It’s classic CAGW/CC behavior, and a big reason why more and more people are becoming Skeptics or Climate Realists (along with blogs like this one, of course!).
Indiana Bones: If one searches Google for BBC Caitlin Arctic Survey – you get only the 21 Feb 2009 … article
That’s probably because you spelled the name of the expedition incorrectly. Try Catlin with only one i
Is this whole thing just a glorified episode of hazing, with a side order of “reality show” sensationalism?
I keep wondering what the team members were promised if they did indeed meet the desired goal…which apparently is not reaching the north pole…not obtaining scientifically valid data…but rather simply continuing to parrot the party line in the face of extreme adversity. Do they end up sitting at the right hand of the new king of the new world order? Or are they simply disposable stooges?
I’m guessing that they couldn’t pay a camera crew enough to endure what these people have endured.
Indiana Bones (07:03:30) :
“Arctic team targets key ice data”
By Jonathan Amos
Science reporter, BBC News
This is their pre-expedition launch story about the glories of the mission. But there is no result for the later stories about the problems on the ice, equipment failure, etc., e.g. Tuesday, 14 April 2009 14:39 UK:
“Arctic team gives up on ice radar”
By David Shukman
Science and environment correspondent, BBC News
One can only find these stories by going directly to the BBC site and then searching for Caitlin Arctic Survey. Thus, it would appear that BBC is positioning stories in search engines to effectively censor reporting the Survey failures.
No only does the Caitlin Survey site manipulate (falsify) data, BBC, and I’m sure other MSM, sites are burying the bad news bear about global warming – that is not. This should be pointed out in letters to Editors.
——————————-
By fraudulently modifying Obama’s acceptance speech, the BBC have made it pretty clear that fraud is fine with them, as long as you are earning planet-saver dinner party credentials in the process
I keep thinking of that oldie but goodie description of higher education:
BS means what you think it does.
MS means ‘more of the same’.
PhD means ‘piled higher and deeper’.
“I have seen with my own eyes the irrevocable changes taking place in the Arctic Ocean.”
Pen Hadow
Perhaps when Pen gets back someone could ask him how you can visually confirm that a change is “irrevocable”
OK, sure if you’re using explosives …
The good news is that it’s possible some people interested in the Catlin arctic “survey” are now reading WUWT. The bad news is that if you Google “Catlin Arctic” you still get 37 rubbish links before WUWT.
I think a lot of the story of first year ice and everything is connected to the start site the Ice Team chose. If you check their Route page, http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/routemap , you can see that they chose 80 N, 140 W as their start site. This puts them in the middle of the cycle of the Beaufort Gyre ( http://nsidc.org/seaice/processes/circulation.html ). This is an area with heavy and regular ice breakup, as you can see in the animation Anthony provided here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/13/watching-the-2007-historic-low-sea-ice-flow-out-of-the-arctic-sea/#more-7019 .
“Steve (03:38:48) :
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/assets/downloads/Ice_Report_14_4_09.pdf
The results collected in the first month of the Catlin survey point to an unexpected lack of multi-year ice…
I thought the machine was bust? And what was ‘unexpected’? They went there to measure the ‘decline’ in the ice.”
Does anyone else think the picture of Pen drilling in the ice with a 20′ auger looks possibly suspicious?
I’ve used an ice auger before and I am both doubtful you could put that many extensions together, and also be able to control or even turn it at that great a depth…..
The picture also looks photoshopped?
Oh dear… thanks for the correction!
Spelling incompetence has tripped this old coot! When the spelling correction is made however, the results STILL show only the happy news from the BBC Catlin search including this uplifting trifle: “Catlin Arctic Survey song project,” from BBC Schools. http://www.nacollege.devon.sch.uk/bbc_schools_report.html
Whilst not trying to be a frozen blanket here, can we expect the team’s iPod to be working any better than the ice measuring electronics? And to our budding artist friends – ask the world’s greatest artists what is more important to art – ideology or truth.
Clearly the issue remains. BBC and other MSM weight their stories (or don’t submit them at all) so only their favored spin arrives on Google searches. In a real world this is still called censorship.
Gentry (02:24:49) :
“One has to wonder about the ‘busted’ Spite radar. Maybe is wasn’t busted at all. Perhaps the readings they were getting were of sea ice that was too thick for the AGW community to accept.”
ScottinMN:
“Does anyone else think the picture of Pen drilling in the ice with a 20′ auger looks possibly suspicious? I’ve used an ice auger before and I am both doubtful you could put that many extensions together, and also be able to control or even turn it at that great a depth….. The picture also looks photoshopped?”
If one of those shoes drops (gets confirmed), Wow!
The picture also looks photoshopped?
No, it doesn’t. It looks like it was taken in low-light and blowing snow, which would not be surprising for the Arctic.
I think I know why they think their readings are wrong. They are not in the location they are showing in the report. If you compare the image they provide here ( http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/assets/downloads/Ice_Report_14_4_09.pdf ) with the image from the route page ( http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/assets/downloads/RouteMap.pdf ), you can see the error.
The grid lines on the findings page are for every five degrees of longitude and latitude. On the Route page, the longitude line are for every ten degrees. Now, the initial start point of the Ice team was supposed to be 80 N 140W, per the webpage. If you use the grid line for 90W longitude (it runs through the Western headlands of Ellesmere Island), that start point would be ten gridlines (140-90=50/5=10) west. The listed line they are using on the Findings page is at 130W, not on the 140W line. They are in the middle of the first year ice in the their satellite image, not in the mixed ice.
Can anyone point me to a site where it is explained how to determine whether some ice is ‘first year’ and how reliable that is?
And this drilling that they are doing now, manually if I understand correctly. That must be an awful job. Do they have a protocol or can they select the pices of ice that do not look too thick?
“AKD (11:10:07) :
The picture also looks photoshopped?
No, it doesn’t. It looks like it was taken in low-light and blowing snow, which would not be surprising for the Arctic.”
I was more refering to the auger blade below his hand doesn’t quite seem to be quite on the same line as above his hand. Hard to tell.
I’m more curious in what he is actually doing. If you need that many extensions, you would drill down the length of one drill bit, take off the handle, add another length put the handle back on , continue drilling and so on. The reverse process would need to be used when extracting the auger out of the ice.
Ignoring the above procedure. In this picture, if he is just starting to drill a hole, he needs to get his 20′ extension ladder off his sledge before he can start drilling. In other words it would not be possible for him to drill a hole with this auger with out assembling it piece by piece while drilling. If he is just finishing a hole why wouldn’t he pull it all the way out and lay it on the ice to de-assemble
Also with the length of pictured auger, it would quite heavy and unwieldy to hold with one hand while bending over to pick something up.
Besides they are only drilling through 1-2 meters of ice, so why the extra length?
I have an explantion of why they are seeing first year ice. They are going around in circles over the same area. They need to mark the holes they have already drillied because of these guys.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Polar_bears_near_north_pole.jpg
and scroll down to see the sub with polar bears…..
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=73330
Lucy Skywalker (08:28:17) :
… if you Google “Catlin Arctic” you still get 37 rubbish links before WUWT.
But if you Google “Catlin Arctic Survey” WUWT is #3.
They’re in trouble.
Several posters have asked who is paying for the expedition. As I understand it, the principal sponsor is Catlin Insurance, whose home page is:
http://www.catlin.com/
The link for contacting their various worldwide offices is:
http://www.catlin.com/cgl/contact_us/
Presumably, they are aware that they are paying good money to turn their corporate name into a synonym for “farce”. . . . I suspect there are an increasing number of red faces that are not caused by -35 degree temperatures. . . .
PMM (13:16:21):
Presumably, they are aware that they are paying good money to turn their corporate name into a synonym for “farce”. . . . I suspect there are an increasing number of red faces that are not caused by -35 degree temperatures. . . .
And “Money is Stronger than Truth”… Who said that? I don’t recall who said that.
Here is another group that supposed to be out on the ice as well. I wonder if the Catlin group will run into them?
http://expeditions.iceaxe.tv/
The results of the first month of the Catlins survey point to an unexpected lack of multi-year ice ……
Truth is strong and evidencing itself by its particulars , but a lie is always weak and will not hide the true perception taking place ! Given the AGW theory the lack of first year ice was to be expected and what should be unexpected ?The thickness of the ice measured by their radar-machine ? The quantity of older ice found ? One thing is for sure they must have found something very unexpected otherwise the guys would not have used this type of expression ! Where is the proof for their handmade ice-depth surveys . Would it not be very easy to make a video to impress the whole world ? Is not that exactly what the guys are trying to accomplish ? Making a show and not showing what you are trying to do exactly ? Who is doing things like that in our society ? A magician or a medicine-man ? Anyway not a scientist !
“I have seen with my own eyes the irrevocable changes taking place in the Arctic Ocean.”
Pen Hadow
Last time he went was in 2003, It’s a whole lot colder now but notice he didn’t say which way the irrevocable changes were going. After the catlin failure we can only assume he means that it’s a lot colder and more stable.
They also complained about wet sleeping bags. At -40 nothing gets wet! You can’t even make a snowball.
G Alston (21:36:52) :
Everything those ice holes do is demonstrational.
How do we submit something for QOTW?
wow, that proves global warming isnt happening after all, thanks
Delusional is more like it. I’m laughing at the worshipers of Al Gore now and so will the world before too long.
Anthony,
Thanks for publicizing the Catlin Battle on Global Warming. As you and others in the media cast the light of truth on the Catlin action and other skirmishes in the overall War on Global Warming, the people are seeing the tremendous cost in human resources and treasure. Soon there will be protests and demonstrations in which the horrified environmentalists will be burning their World Wildlife Fund Cards. there will be antiwar chants… Hey hey, ho ho, we don,t want your snippin war. Celebrities will will disavow this war, and soon even the government will have to surrender to the will and drag us out of this quagmire. Let’s surrender and stop the killing of our dignity and common sense.
I liked this picture, although I don’t suppose this was a bit they measured..
http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/gallery/Latest_Images_from_the_Ice/1311
Would you buy insurance off a company that is sponsoring an expedition that has deliberatly set out to deceive?
Catlin – A name to remember!!!!
It’s not even “demonstational”. When you demonstrate something you are still showing something real. What they are showing isn’t even simulated; it’s a mock-up (I won’t say fake).
Mock data. Hansen has been getting a lot of that lately.