Quote of the week #4

qotw_cropped

Image from WUWT reader “Boudu”

This QOTW is from Pen Hadow, leader of the now farcical Catlin Arctic Ice Survey:

“It’s never wise to imagine that either man or technology has the upper hand in the natural world.”

That’s probably the only true statement  published from the expedition.

BTW I was planning on using Steve Keohane’s art this time, but his “tinypic” links expired. Steve if you want to submit again (or if anyone wishes to) I’ll be happy to use the artwork submissions posted here.

Advertisements

62 thoughts on “Quote of the week #4

  1. “It’s never wise to imagine that either man or technology has the upper hand in the natural world.” Pen Hadow
    Precisely Mr. Hadow. Which is why the hubris required by AGW theory causes the natural world to smile.

  2. He should have stood at home and watched the satellite images. The Arctic, on a seasonally adjusted basis, is freezing back up and will for another two decades, at least.
    Foolish Prince, take note. You’ve got to make yourself minimally useful once your mother dies.
    =================================================

  3. Unfortunately, the irony of that statement will be lost on the very people who need to understand it the most.

  4. Great phrase! Such a wise statement is like a prayer of the human kind. Fools use to imagine themselves greater than nature, even more powerful than God.
    The lack of principles and a mounstrous self deceit and self indulging is what makes them to succeed, but just for a while, in the longer trend nature imposes its rule, its laws.

  5. For a fantastic story of polar exploration with REAL explorers with a REAL purpose, I can’t recommend “South With Endurance” enough–the Shackleton Antarctic Expedition from 1914-1917.
    The incredible photographs of Frank Hurley alone are more than worth the time to read it.

  6. Only this time Pen has the deck stacked. Lounging about in some swanky resort, with only a few moments spent per week on a photo-op at the lake down from the lodge.
    Next time, Pen, hitch a ride on a US Nuclear Sub, have them pop up at the Pole, and get out with your camera and Stanley Tape Measure and have at it.
    Short & sweet.

  7. Oh, but kim, weep not for Pen. You didn’t catch the sun angle post in another thread. Mighty Pen is yukking it up at the Elk Lodge somewhere.

  8. Robert Bateman. I don’t doubt Pen Hadow is on the ice. It has been his life for the past 10 years.
    However the merits of the expedition are dubious at best.

  9. Robert Bateman 09:37:42
    Yes, I must have missed that. Does a photo with an impossible sun angle reveal a hoax? Oh, boy, the irony of that one would be rich.
    ======================================

  10. The first thing that came to mind for me was a paraphrase of Pink Floyd’s ‘A Momentary Lapse of Reason’, replace the last word with ‘Delusion’.
    REPLY: see the note to you above about your art submissions – Anthony

  11. wattsupwiththat 09:41:12
    Yes, I’m not particularly skeptical that the expedition is real. But let’s see the photo that Robert is talking about.
    Frankly, with the money behind the CO2=AGW scam, and the intentions behind it, I’m not sure I’d put it past someone to try such a hoax.
    ========================================

  12. Kim,
    Too bad that the satellites don’t have sufficient resolution to prove one way or the other whether they are where they say they are.
    Hmmm… does anyone here have contacts at the CIA? This could be a national security issue, since the outcome of the expedition could affect America’s GDP, which, in turn, would affect our combat readiness.
    Point all those satellite North. We might even be able to see the bumper sticker on that sled… “My other car is a Prius”.

  13. Oh, of course, what’s up with that, I don’t doubt that the Mighty Pen in on the Ice. It’s just where in the heck that ice is. Impossible Sun Angle. I mean really way out there somewhere in Colorado Ski resort mid-latitude high sun elevation stuff.
    When that pic was displayed, that was enough for me.

  14. First there is a Scientific Hypothesis. For example, the Hypothesis that increased humanmade atmospheric CO2 causes catastrophic global warming.
    With some substantial evidence, that Hypothesis becomes a Theory, as in the “Theory of Evolution”.
    Then with absolute proof and lack of counter-evidence, that Theory becomes a Law, as in the Law of Gravity.
    Global Warmists have repeatedly stated that “The Science is Settled”. Warmists claim not only that increased atmospheric CO2 causes warming, but that current and future humanmade increases in CO2 will cause catastrophic global warming that threatens the very existence of life on our planet.
    Warmists have thus promoted their alarmist statement past Hypothesis and Theory to the status of Law.
    In fact, Catastrophic Humanmade Global Warming is still a Hypothesis, and a failed one at that.
    There has been no significant net warming since 1940, in spite of an 800% increase in humanmade CO2 emissions. Earth is now entering a natural cooling cycle, after a ~25-year natural warming cycle. It is this recent 25-year natural warming cycle that has been used as evidence for alleged catastrophic global warming. As Earth continues to cool, this falsehood will become increasingly apparent to all, and Al Gore, young Barack and their ilk will become increasingly humiliated after being caught in a BIG LIE.
    The only Theory that seems to have survived this foolish, wasteful debate is the Theory of Warmist BS – that almost everything the Warmists have stated will turn out to be false, alarmist and self-serving.
    Witness that IPCC centerpiece, the Mann Hockey Stick. Eliminating from the historic record both the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age was not problem for these so-called scientists – just sweep it away with the shoddiest of cherry-picked evidence, and hope nobody will notice.
    When someone does point out Warmist falsehoods, just say they are “in the pay of big oil” or try to intimidate them by more direct means, including threats of violence.
    I want everyone to remember who the Warmists are. I will stand by my statements, but you can expect the Warmists to be running for the exits in the coming years.
    Watch as various strident individuals and organizations try to back away from their Warmist statements – it’s already starting, and is rather amusing.

  15. It could easily be 2000 ppm CO2 at your workplace, and you wouldn’t know it from 385 ppm CO2. You sweat a little easier, that’s it. Might be a tad stuffier, but with the boss breathing down your neck, his stern voice will quickly win out in your mind as you toil away.
    If it were 4000 ppm C02, you’d be griping away and the boss would agree with you. The both of you would gut it out, and be back the next day for more.
    EPA 385ppm CO2 Toxic my -self snip-.

  16. “It’s never wise to imagine that either man or technology has the upper hand in the natural world.” ”
    In other words: “Mother Nature bats last”.

  17. @ 385 ppm CO2 EPA Toxic Hazard Gas levels, my normally worked body is not globally warmed. I still need a coat & sweater until 10 am.

  18. Robert Bateman (09:37:42) :
    “You didn’t catch the sun angle post in another thread.”
    Pardon me for missing the boat here, but does someone have a link to that?

  19. And hope that when the TV Meterologist announces a record for the day, that nobody notices that 10 years ago it wasn’t a record because it was beat out by the record in 1933.
    Mr. GreenPlans: “Oops”.

  20. 385ppm is a worldwide average. Cities experience 600ppm, 800ppm with heavy traffic. It could even be 1000ppm in your kitchen at times. It’s definitely over 1000ppm in busy professional kitchens.
    Bad for health? Nobody has ever had a health problem because of CO2. The problems come from other chemicals released by cars and chimneys that could be captured or rendered harmless much easier and without penalising industry or imposing taxes.

  21. Just to remind that Ohio submarine class (carrying two dozens of Polaris ICMB equal to 30xWWII explosive power) has long-term crew exposure limit 5000ppm of CO2, planned to be increased to 8000ppm.

  22. Pearland Aggie (10:26:37) :
    also, today is the 42nd straight spotless day, tying the #8 longest spotless streak since 1849. tomorrow will tie the 7th longest streak, assuming no spots appear.
    http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/Spotless/Spotless.html#Period

    Except that most likely SIDC will reset the counter to zero for March 26 and perhaps even April 6., as noted and .
    http://www.sidc.be/products/ri_hemispheric/
    As mentioned elsewhere, the total count og 600+ days is the most interesting.

  23. David Segesta 11:02:13
    Yes, I’d like to see that picture, too. And its provenance.
    ========================

  24. Just updated:
    Today was a landmark day for the team as they reached their 50th day on the Arctic Ocean. Any cause for celebration was naturally short-lived, however, since it looks as if the trend of open water may now become a regular feature of the team’s daily travel.
    Today Ann, Martin and Pen encountered two such stretches of exposed ocean, the first being approximately 40 metres across and the second a slightly more manageable 10 metres across. Fortunately, both leads contained recently refrozen sections, allowing the team to cross to the next ice floe, albeit with a high degree of caution.
    To make life even more interesting, the winds picked up towards the very end of the day and it started to snow quite heavily, reducing visibility to zero for the second time since the expedition began. Despite these adverse weather conditions and challenging terrain, navigation, physical fitness, teamwork and determination all paid off, resulting in the team conducting 10 kilometres worth of surveying today.
    As well as the 7-9 hours worth of non-stop topographical observations being recorded each day (which include the height, consistency, size and frequency of pressure ridges, rubble fields, flat ice pans and open water), the team also conduct an additional 3-5 hours worth of measurements at static locations. These include measuring the thickness, density and temperature of the snow layer, and the thickness of the underlying ice, both above and below the waterline. The team currently take anything up to 76 such measurements each day.

  25. As you say, the only truthful thing to come out of the expedition so far.
    Anyone notice that the temperature has stayed constant at -25C for several days now on the blog (whether sunny, raining(?), or snowing as now). Another equipment failure?

  26. Carsten:
    I have also done some histogram & image processing analysis on the April 6
    2009 spot :
    http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/DeepSolarMin2.htm
    see bottom of page.
    It probably did not last long enough to pass SIDC muster, which is 30 minutes of visibility. The visibility at 1.07 contrast is the troubling part.
    I have serious doubts that it was visible to the eye, showing itself only upon image processing.
    Who takes the image, and how long to process it?
    Are not sunspots supposed to be physically visibile, and not just CCD detectable?
    Is this a case of the observer being unsure but CCD aided?
    It would be fair for both parties to tell the story, what really happened, and go from there.

  27. “Watch as various strident individuals and organizations try to back away from their Warmist statements – it’s already starting, and is rather amusing.”
    The warm is turning!

  28. Juraj V. (11:09:54) :
    Just to remind that Ohio submarine class (carrying two dozens of Polaris ICMB equal to 30xWWII explosive power) has long-term crew exposure limit 5000ppm of CO2, planned to be increased to 8000ppm.

    It’s good to have your fighting force at peak performance and not at all drowsy when dealing with those nukes!
    http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/co2-comfort-level-d_1024.html
    Indoor air quality includes
    •temperature
    •odor
    •high or low levels of gases
    Since CO2 is exhaled by people at predictable levels the content of Carbon Dioxide – CO2 – in air may be a significant indication of air quality.
    A measure of CO2 indicates the amount of fresh air supply:
    •15 cfm ventilation rate per occupant corresponds to 1000 ppm CO2
    •20 cfm ventilation rate per occupant corresponds to 800 ppm CO2
    Normal CO2 Levels
    The effects of increased CO2 levels on adults at good health can be summarized:
    • normal outdoor level: 350 – 450 ppm
    •acceptable levels: < 600 ppm
    •complaints of stiffness and odors: 600 – 1000 ppm
    •ASHRAE and OSHA standards: 1000 ppm
    •general drowsiness: 1000 – 2500 ppm
    •adverse health effects expected: 2500 – 5000 ppm
    •maximum allowed concentration within a 8 hour working period: 5000 ppm
    The levels above are quite normal and maximum levels may occasionally happen from time to time.
    Extreme and Dangerous CO2 Levels
    •slightly intoxicating, breathing and pulse rate increase, nausea: 30,000 ppm
    •above plus headaches and sight impairment: 50,000 ppm
    •unconscious, further exposure death: 100.000 ppm
    Carbon Dioxide Standard Levels
    The recommendation in ASHRAE standard 62-1989 are
    •classrooms and conference rooms 15 cfm per occupant
    •office space and restaurants 20 cfm per occupant
    •hospitals 25 cfm per occupant
    or
    Carbon Dioxide Level in PPM Resulting Conditions on Humans
    300 (0.03% vol.) Nothing happens, normal concentration in air
    3,000 – 5,000 Low concentrations cause increased respiration and headache
    5000 (0.5% vol.) Lung ventilation increases by 5%. PEL
    10,000 (1.0% vol.) Symptoms may begin to occur, such as feeling hot and clammy, lack of attention to detail, fatigue, anxiety, loss of energy, weakness in the knees commonly know as (jelly legs).
    20,000 (2.0% vol.) Lung ventilation increases by 50%, headache after several hours of exposure
    (5 to 10% vol.) Violent panting and fatigue to the point of exhaustion merely from respiration & severe headache. Prolonged exposure at 5% could result in irreversible health effects.

  29. I am sooooo stupid.
    When I was younger I actually thought that most people were interested in knowing as much about an issue as possible and researching what they didn’t know. How wrong I was. P.T. Barnum was right. Whether in entertainment, politics, (some might say the first two are the same), religion, education, or climatology – it is far more about what people WANT to believe than any dispassionate study of the information available.
    It’s all a Three-Card Monte game.

  30. Here’s another weird thing;
    today their position is shown as 84°46’16.4″N, 127° 36’ 55” W. So they have 313.7 nautical miles to go to the North Pole (if they go in a straight line N; so the longitude doesn’t matter, just the lat). Which is nearly 581kms. And yet their “Estimated distance to North Pole” is shown as 548.93 km. What gives?

  31. Reference CO2, what was the level when it was getting dangerous in the Apollo 13 capsule? Or was that a little bit of Hollywood? I seem to recall something in the region of 15%?

  32. I see the Catlin crew mainly as victims of the overwhelming AGW madness which has been forced upon society.

    Expedition Leader Pen Hadow who remembers feeling angry a few days into the expedition because he felt that, between expeditions, his memory had tricked him over the cold.
    “Although I’ve been here before, I wasn’t able to hold the memory of just how uncomfortable, in an almost surreal sense, it really is”, he says. “When you’re warm, at home, you can tell yourself how awful it’s going to be, but when you get here, the shock of it hits you all over again and you really can’t believe you’ve allowed yourself to go through it again”.
    http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/headline.aspx?postId=164

  33. Can someone enlighten me as to these wetsuits that they swim in when there’s no way round a lead? It all sounds very impractible.
    I’m sure I read today that they had to swim but how? I’m finding that a tad implausible due to all that equipment and clothing at risk of getting wet?

  34. Hmmm. I suppose they tow all this equipment in a raft? Does anyone else get the feeling that they are acting increasingly foolish. Wet suit or not, I don’t think it’s smart to jump in such a freezing ocean.
    =====================================

  35. Aron (11:09:42)
    “385ppm is a worldwide average.”
    385 ppm is the CO2 concentration at an elevation of approximately 11,000 feet above the local sea level, when the wind is not blowing up the slope of Mauna Loa from the direction of the Kilauea CO2 emitter.
    Only 77 ppm of the total 385 ppm is due to man-made CO2 emissions and only 0.4 ppm of the yearly increase of 2.18 ppm is due to man-made emissions.
    Natural emissions of CO2 are not in balance with the natural CO2 sinks and never have been, with or without man-made CO2 emissions.

  36. A wetsuit in that water sounds like an invitation to disaster. How’s about a dry suit? There is a big difference between a wet suit and a dry suit.

  37. It’s here:
    http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/catlin_ice_measurement_technique.png?
    the high sun angle.
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/16/busted-catlin-arctic-ice-survey-didnt-expect-to-find-first-year-ice/
    And the above is the WUWT article.
    Judge for yourself.
    That pic did NOT come from the Arctic in April.
    High Alpine Lake in the USA or similar latitude in April, ok, but NOT in Arctic, not even on June 21st.
    Reply: I keep posting this but it gets unnoticed. I am the one who found the video. The video was not posted for public consumption. I believe it was shot during training, probably in Resolute Bay, and this sequence WAS SHOT AT NIGHT under artificial illumination. Please limit conspiracy theories to known facts. ~ charles the moderator.

  38. I’d be tempted to jump into a High Alpine lake under those conditions with a wet suit if I knew a warm fire was awaiting me in the Lodge a few minutes away. It takes nerve to do that much, because you know it’s going to be shockingly cold.
    You are out of your mind to do that in the Arctic @ 85 N with a wet suit.
    Well, ok, if that is what they are doing, they are loony tunes.

  39. Molon Labe (13:07:49) :
    How about an answer on where this high sun angle pic was discussed.
    Molon I get the feeling Mr Bateman is on the ‘wind up’ Maybe there’s a clue in his name ?

  40. Steven Goddard (12:33:39) :
    “I see the Catlin crew mainly as victims of the overwhelming AGW madness which has been forced upon society. ”
    Mr. Hadow seems to be lacking in self-awareness.
    “Knowing others is wisdom, knowing yourself is Enlightenment.”- Tao Tzu

  41. Robert Bateman (11:55:47) :
    Carsten:
    I have also done some histogram & image processing analysis on the April 6
    2009 spot :
    http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/DeepSolarMin2.htm
    see bottom of page.
    It probably did not last long enough to pass SIDC muster, which is 30 minutes of visibility. The visibility at 1.07 contrast is the troubling part.
    I have serious doubts that it was visible to the eye, showing itself only upon image processing.
    Who takes the image, and how long to process it?
    Are not sunspots supposed to be physically visibile, and not just CCD detectable?
    Is this a case of the observer being unsure but CCD aided?
    It would be fair for both parties to tell the story, what really happened, and go from there.

    I agree with you 100% But according to SIDC, are we ate 42 days or 24 days (as spaceweather.com claims)? It does not matter for the reality of things, but breaking records like we are doing now (if you disregard the Catania tiny tim) may be of some importance wrt. media.
    I have observed sunspots myself, and I cannot see how that thing could have been visible to the naked eye or on projection. CCDs should not be used for this purpose if long term consistency of data has any meaning.
    Thanks for the link.

  42. Robert Bateman (13:11:56) :
    A wetsuit in that water sounds like an invitation to disaster. How’s about a dry suit? There is a big difference between a wet suit and a dry suit.

    I took my open water test for my PADI certification in 42F water wearing a wet suite. After approximately 30-40min., I was mild hypothermic with purple lips and almost no feeling in my arms and legs. It took at least an hour to properly warm up again. Some years later, I was on a dive in Lake Superior in 34F water in a dry suite, dive time was about 1.5hrs, result was just about the same. Of course, I don’t have a whole lot of natural insulation. But, I cannot imagine immersing in water at the Arctic. I would never make it (meat Popsicle).
    Reply: I’ve been skinny dipping along the Antarctic Peninsula, but not for very long. Get your head under water. Then run screaming to shore. ~ charles the unfortunately well-insulated (it was not a pretty sight) moderator.

  43. Charles, (in reply to Squidly (14:01:24) 🙂 that was WAY TOO MUCH information. In a desperate attempt to get that image out of my head, I clicked on “View Map” here:
    http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/live_from_the_ice.aspx
    What a strange map that is. The sea ice extent shown is quite small — I’m guessing it’s the 2007 minimum.
    Once again, they present a misleading image. It looks like they started near the edge of the ice, when, in fact, the ice extends (at 100% coverage) out into the Bering Sea. Then they write about all this open water — giving the impression that the ice is vanishing, day-by-day.
    They are the perfect representatives of the whole AGW fiasco. I can’t find a single deception-free thing from them.

  44. Rereading their latest update, I don’t think they swam across the 40 and 10 metre stretches. They found refrozen areas that allowed them to cross the gaps.
    ==========================================

  45. Robert Bateman (13:11:56) :
    A wetsuit in that water sounds like an invitation to disaster. How’s about a dry suit? There is a big difference between a wet suit and a dry suit.
    ***
    This maybe what they are using
    An immersion suit, or survival suit (or more specifically an immersion survival suit), is a special type of waterproof dry suit that protects the wearer from hypothermia from immersion in cold water, after abandoning a sinking or capsized vessel, especially in the open ocean. They usually have built-on feet (boots), and a hood, and either built-on gloves or watertight wrist seals.
    ***

  46. I can’t find the thread to post this, so OT here. It is reported that the most deadly fire during the recent Victorian bush fires in Australia was *deliberatley* started by someone from the CFA (Fire autority). Crazy…but as I said to mates, it was either someone like a “fireie” (CFA) or an environmentalist.
    What I can tell you about local weather in Victoria and New South Wales in recent days is that, unusually, I had to buy a fleese jacket as it was *VERY COLD* in both states. Do you hear that Hansen?

  47. May I inquire why you have pulled this post?
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/19/the-role-of-carbon-dioxide-in-the-origin-of-hydrocarbons/
    The Role of Carbon Dioxide in the Origin of Hydrocarbons
    Posted: April 19th, 2009, 9:49pm CEST by wattsupwiththat
    This essay was sent to me a couple of weeks ago, and I thought it was interesting. But it also goes against the grain of consensus on hydrocarbon formation. Not being a geologist, I can’t comment much on the validity of the idea, but since we have some geologists in our group, I’ll leave it […]
    REPLY: The author’s email address bounced when I sent him a question, since i have no way to contact him to ask a question raised about the article, I cannot keep it published. – Anthony

  48. kim (16:44:47) :
    Rereading their latest update, I don’t think they swam across the 40 and 10 metre stretches. They found refrozen areas that allowed them to cross the gaps.
    Kim, I swear that I’d read over the weekend that they’d actually donned their dry/wet suits and swama gap in the lead. Anyhow I’ve emailed the caitlin website last night to see if this was so, and how do they accomplish this feat with all that equipment needing to stay dry. Have’nt had a response yet, but we’ll see.

  49. If you leave Nature do its thing and learn to adapt, then Humanity will be wiser. It’s trying to change the climate that is stupid.

  50. Didn’t have time to read the other posts, so apologies to whomever might have already said this. It seems to me that belief in man-made GW is doing precisely what the quoted author is warning against. I wonder whether he sees the irony.

Comments are closed.