This will be a top “sticky” post for awhile since interest is high – new stories will appear below this one – Anthony
UPDATE: Josh channels the boat people
UPDATE2: Another irony is discovered, this one doubly deep. See update 2 below.
UPDATE4: AMSA: Helicopter rescue of Akademik Shokalskiy likely to commence shortly
(It’s off again, then now its on again, with report the helicopter has landed)
UPDATE5: All the passengers (tourists and scientists) are off the ship
UPDATE6: Tough questions need to be asked
UPDATE7: Trouble on the rescue ship – reaching open water not so easy
As we reported previously on WUWT here and here, the saga of the “climate scientists/tourists trapped in ice” continues to fascinate many. Now a second ship has given up on rescue, after the Chinese ship “Snow Dragon” gave up two days ago. The Aurora Australis has abandoned rescue of the trapped Russian “research”vessel in Antarctica and a helicopter evacuation in now being ordered. This episode has taken on a heightened comedic fiasco-like quality.
Now, with such a fantastic failure in full world view, questions are going to start being asked. For example, with advanced tools at their disposal (that Mawson never had) such as near real-time satellite imaging of Antarctic sea ice, GPS navigation, on-board Internet, radar, and satellite communications, one wonders how these folks managed to get themselves stuck at all. Was it simple incompetence of ignoring the signs and data at their disposal combined with “full steam ahead” fever? Even the captain of the Aurora Australis had the good sense to turn back knowing he’d reached the limits of the ship on his rescue attempt. Or, was it some sort of publicity stunt to draw attention? If it was the latter, it has backfired mightily.
One might argue that with photos like the one below, this whole “Spirit of Mawson” research expedition, is little more than a media stunt.
Source: [ http://twitter.com/GdnAntarctica/status/412977161323036672 ]
Even after the ship was trapped, these reporters still had a party like atmosphere going on:
Source: [ http://twitter.com/GdnAntarctica/status/416881634273525761/photo/1 ]
Yesterday, Andrew Revkin tweeted something that I agreed with, especially since so many of the people trapped in the ice on the ship seem to have a nonchalant, almost partly-like atmosphere going on.
Scientist on trapped Antarctic ship: "Fantastic-I love it when the ice wins & we don't." http://t.co/UsxA2tiV2i What about rescue risk/cost?
— Andrew Revkin 🌎 ✍🏼 🪕 ☮️ (@Revkin) December 29, 2013
Yes, the cost and risk is significant. These folks trapped on-board don’t seem to be cognizant of that issue, following the #spiritofmawson Twitter feed, it’s like watching reports (with pictures and video) from a high school class party.
And here’s the kicker. Even the public saw through the charade at the beginning. Trying to get crowd funding from the public for this trip failed miserably as this Indigogo campaign shows:
Source: http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/help-us-return-to-mawson-s-antarctic-hut-the-home-of-the-blizzard
Maybe it had to do with the ridiculous image of Professor Chris Turney in full cold weather gear standing in the midst of a tropical forest.
Right after the ship got stuck and there was a realization that the world was watching, one scientist on-board, Dr. Chris Fogwill, of the University of New South Wales, decided that it would be an opportune time to hit the public for money again:
Source: http://www.spiritofmawson.com/
And again, the public has seen through this, and today, the campaign remains stuck at $1000 with just a few donors. People are realizing that there’s no real science being done on this trip, and that it seems to be little more than a chartered party boat for Antarctic enthusiasts and media.
Now, with the ship to be evacuated via helicopter, will the Akademik Shokalskiy join the list of recent ships that have been sunk in Antarctic waters?
Ships that have sunk in Antarctic waters in recent years (h/t to David Archibald)
The Brazilian yacht “Endless Sea” sank in Maxwell Bay, Ardley Cove on Saturday 7th April, 2012. It was used for “scientific and educational expeditions”.
The sunken remains of the 76-ft Mar Sem Fin, aka “Endless Sea”, which sunk on April 7, 2012, lies at a depth of about 9 meters (30 ft) in Ardley Cove, Antarctica.
In November 2007, the Linblad Explorer hit sea ice and sank.
In April 2013, the Chinese factory fishing ship Kai Xin caught fire and sank near Bransfield Strait at the Antarctic Peninsula.
And there are others, these are just a few recent ones.
With so much concern for the pristine environment of Antarctica, one wonders how much environmental damage these sinkings are doing.
And when the trip is nothing more than a party for your friends and media, disguised as a “scientific expedition”, one wonders if there shouldn’t be some moratorium on such trips.
Richard Tol summed it all up nicely with one sentence:
There has been a strong and statistically significant upward trend in climate-change-related public-relations disasters #spiritofmawson
— Richard Tol (@RichardTol) December 30, 2013
UPDATE:
The #spiritofmawson hashtag is now getting competition from the hashtag #ClitanicDisaster in honor of the trapped climate scientists that the MSM won’t mention as being climate scientists.
========================================================
UPDATE 2:
reader Aphan writes on 2013/12/31 at 7:16 pm
I don’t know if anyone was posted this yet, but the IRONY just gobsmacked me.
The British “explorers” on board the MV Explorer who were “commemorating the Spirit of Shackleton” found themselves repeating HIS adventure when their ship struck a piece of submerged ice and then SANK in the Antarctic in November of 2007! None of the passengers or crew were lost. But HOW AMAZING is it that both the “Spirit of Mawson” trip AND the “Spirit of Shackleton” cruise trips ended in disaster from sea ice?????
http://www.jamescairdsociety.com/shackleton-news-104519.htm
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/adventure/news/explorer-sinks-antarctica.html
I mean…come on. What are the odds?
============================================================
Related articles
- Saving the Antarctic scientists, er media, er, activists, er tourists trapped by sea ice (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Antarctic rescue mission fails to reach trapped ship (theguardian.com)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Glenn:
At January 1, 2014 at 10:05 pm you claim
Your claim is a blatant falsehood.
It is NOT courteous to present insulting falsehoods in polite language.
And your pretence of courtesy is a ploy which trolls often use on WUWT.
Your first post here was at January 1, 2014 at 11:50 am
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/30/the-antarctic-research-fiasco-would-you-could-you-in-a-boat/#comment-1520439
It began by saying to our host
That is about as insulting to our host as it is possible to be.
And it is untrue because he is not among those “who holds themselves up as” anything: he questions bad science notably bad science in climate. Indeed, your claim of his “ignorance” concerning such expeditions is refuted by the recent request for information from him by the trapped ship of fools
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/31/wuwt-and-weatherbell-help-kusi-tv-with-a-weather-forecasting-request-from-ice-trapped-ship-in-antarctica-akademik-shokalskiy/
Your first post got worse after that initial statement. And your subsequent posts have compounded your impolite behaviour.
Perhaps the most egregious of your offensive behaviours is your claim that local anecdotes have no value except when they are unreferenced claims of local anecdotes by Inuits which you assert are important. That is rude and insulting to everybody who questions your silly assertions.
As Johanna says of you
And you are an especially nasty troll because you are one of the group of trolls who falsely claim to be superior to serious commentators because they troll using polite forms of language.
You were amusing at first. Your trolling is now an irrelevant distraction.
Richard
pat says:
January 1, 2014 at 9:48 pm
up-to-date from new zealand:
looks like helicopter evacuation has been ruled out indefinitely! plus what does “this time because of sea ice” mean? what was it the other times?….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The other times it was bad weather conditions. Fog, wind.
what does “this time because of sea ice” mean?
I will hazard a SWAG.
The people aboard the Akademik Shokalskiy made a landing pad on the ice because the helicopter can not land on board. From what other commenters stated the helicopter does not have floatation devices and can not land in water.
If the ice where the landing pad was smoothed out has shifted because the ice is moving then the helicopter, (which is not ‘licensed to fly over open water’) can not land safely.
If this is what has happened then that ship is in an even more precarious position. The hull has already been damaged and repaired (structural integrity compromised?) and if the ice is moving it can move in such a way that it crushes the ship.
With luck the Polar Star is on the way and can get them out. The longer they stay trapped the less likely the outcome will be good.
James (Aus.) says:
January 2, 2014 at 12:19 am
Tourney need not return to Australia, and they probably don’t want him back in the UK, either. He is a blot on Antarctic research.
He uses the body language of a huckster in many of his videos.
The way they talk in this interview they seem to think they are in an icebreaker.
Paulo, you might be interested to know I have discussed homeostasis in the Avanersuaq tongue while on a research project funded by the MLA to the North-west of Greenland. It was while I was working on my second post-doc, “Toward a post colonial studies in deconstruction of eco-feminist critiques of the mammary mythos.”
We were sitting in what passed for a hot tub in “Inuit land,” actually more like a very large martini straight up. I well remember the touch of Jack Frosts brush on the mustaches of my companion, the wife of my host.She was a sort of Eskimo version of Joan Baez and if I only strained I could recall a much warmer experience at Esalen those many years ago…..
Oh God, my mind wanders when following the pug marks of “Glenn” across these comments (won’t someone tell him that “scare quotes” are as bad as CAPS LOCK as I won’t speak to it directly).
I ask you, what happened to the good old days when such puerile content was slapped down by good old “He Who Must Not Be Named” saying, “Start with ‘Bring the proxies up to date’ and read down to ‘Reports for newbies’ and get back to me in a couple months.
May I remind all my brothers and sisters whose names are not “Glenn,” of the rule of 100K…I use all asterisks in the hope of not getting snipped… ***-*****.
The rule is: even if you could convince “Glenn” to acquaint himself with the wonderful resource that is WUWT (please don’t snip me for snark), even if he learned what a Yamal is or what hide the decline really means or what the Bishops real name is, even if you could convince him of the error of his ways (MOUNT KILIMANJARO for God’s sake- pul-eeeze), there are another 99,999
***-****s right behind him so what’s the point. “Bernal”
Glenn says:
January 1, 2014 at 7:01 pm
Man Bearpig
You wrote: “So, real Antarctic Scientists do not consider this as serious research and he is entitled to have this opinion as real research is suffering those fools.”
I would defer to any serious scientists in Antarctica as far as any critiques they have of this group. My initial post was a response to the narrative that this incident somehow was egg on the face of the entire “climate change community” or climate scientists in general. (i.e. an anecdotal story about a boat getting caught in the ice in Antarctica is really not much of a serious data point about whether the climate is changing). The opinion of other climate scientists was missing previously from the discussion.
———————————–
Do you seriously expect people to believe that this is good PR for the climate industry ? Perhaps that is how it started off, big_perhaps they tried to get stuck intentionally as it is reported that they ignored the captains requests to get back on the ship but I guess that could also come down to utter stupidity.
Genuine climate scientists express their concern about the ‘tourist boat’ and how it affected real science. I think that it is time to put an end to this ‘follow in the footsteps’ mullarky and leave the Antarctic Research to those that know and understand what they are doing and the risks involved.
Now about the costs. Would you insure these guys ? would you even insure the next ‘lets go to the north pole/NW passage sailing trip in the footsteps of St Roch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Roch_%28ship%29)’? That was in 1944 – you know – when the Arctic was stuffed full of ice. LOL
Which reminds me, there were reported rescues from the Arctic ice last year too when everyone was under the impression that they could sail around there like there was no ice.
@Glenn Skankey 9:34
So you came here to argue about climate change sans CO2 and the anthropogenic component?
You sir are either stunningly ignorant or deliberately trolling.
Anyone with a modicum of education know climate changes,that history and the natural drivers of our climate are discussed on this site, at length.
The corruption of climatology/climate science is the doom and gloom belief that man changes climate catastrophically.
A belief so far berit of any empirical measurements,causation or falsifiable theorem.
Yet the reason the IPCC exists.
@10:05 the word for this ain’t troll, that is way too polite.
Colorado Wellington says: “Helicopter from ice to ice. I pray it goes well.”
Yes, with absolutely as little helicopter over open water as possible.
@ur momisugly Gail Combs says:
January 1, 2014 at 11:01 pm
————————–
Gail – you can’t say “lying” according to negrum
@ur momisugly negrum – How is that logic and discourse “thingy” doing with Glenn ?
I’ve just had the following deleted by the Guardian.
I even link to one of their OWN articles……
i’m…….bemused….
……………………………
This is also very interesting. It’s a slightly older article about Arctic ice loss and very significant ice loss in Greenland and very rapid glacier retreats of the order of 900 feet per year.
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/136317997
P.S. Why has my comment that linked to an older Guardian article been removed? It was a Guardian article for heavens sake.
Here it is again in case I was deleted in error.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jul/17/antarctica-tropical-climate-co2-research?commentpage=3
While we are waiting for the outcome of the evacuation:
I don’t think most of these fools understand how scarce the available polar rescue assets really are. Among the cold water powers, the United States has one of the smallest icebreaker fleets of only 2 vessels: The refurbished 1976-built USCGC Polar Star and the newer 1997-built USCGC Healy. The Polar Star was sitting idle in a nearly decommissioned status before it got refurbished and put back in operation last year. Its identical twin, the Polar Sea was saved in the last moment from dismantling and it’s still awaiting its fate.
I happened to read this report in The Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/02/antarctic-rescue-under-way-akademik
What caught my attention was this bit
➢ The passengers were due to be taken off in five groups, with two further flights to pick up their baggage.
Huh?!?! BAGGAGE?!?!?
Whoever has traveled by ship and had bothered to read the emergency instruction knows that in case of emergency evacuation the baggage is not included – evacuees are not even allowed to take hand luggage with them.
So what kind of luxury evacuation is this?
According to the BBC an hour ago the second helicopter flight was about to take off with another 12 passengers. The BBC correspondent on board is on the 4th flight out.
No mention by the BBC as to WHY they had a correspondent on board and they only mention it is a Russian research ship, with none of the ironic details.
tonyb
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/232290/passengers-finally-off-boat-in-antarctic
Evac under way, “tourists” off Akademie
I’ve just been “pre-moderated” at the Guardian website.
Had nowhere else to cry…Thank you for allowing my pathetic whinge….I am just a simple man trying to make his way in the world and just don’t know a naive question from an insightful one….
Sniff…..
@climatereason
Probably because BBC routinely puts correspondents on Russian research ships …
My first comment on any Akademik Shokalskiy thread.
Great news about the helicopter evacuation being partly completed and still progressing successfully.
The rescued should now provide simple humble thanks for a benevolent world’s actions.
Plans and people put the Akademik Shokalskiy in enough danger to require personnel rescue. Irony is an inadequate word for characterization of the Akademik Shokalskiy scenario as it played out.
Professional incompetence is a better word for the ship’s officers and the scientific PR seekers onboard.
John
jones
You have my sympathy. It is quite traumatic losing one’s right to an opinion in the forum that reflects your past views.
It’s thew shock that your opponent can’t be bothered to defend themselves. As though they know they are wrong and seek to lie by enforced omission.
Pre-moderation is censorship.
There may be a little insurrection afoot at the BBC:
I thought the scribes were not supposed to say that now.
M Courtney
Thanks for that. Frankly it doesn’t surprise at all.
I’ve actually been getting comments deleted literally by the dozen in recent days. Never abusive or inciting to anything. Just not following the narrative.
What I honestly find bizarre is that they will literally censor a simple link to THEIR OWN newspaper? As above. I mean, how Orwellian is that?
Thanks again.
Andy
Here is a video log of their “travels” on our dime:
http://www.youtube.com/user/christurney
It also shows a helecopter landing near the ship (4 hours ago)
richardscourtney says:
January 1, 2014 at 9:16 am
Richard … my point is, the above article suggests we should not have ships in the Antarctic … if this is the case then we should not have ships/rigs in the Arctic? I have worked in the oil industry in the Arctic …. so your fumes/rants were all for nothing.
Teddi says:
January 1, 2014 at 11:42 pm
@ur momisugly negrum says:
January 1, 2014 at 7:10 am
Sorry
——————–
Yes, you are sorry, but that’s not really the point…
—–
The sorry was to the mods for the repost – don’t flatter yourself. We are working towards the same goal, but differ about methods. This blog is only one of the approaches to counter the CAGW threat and there is usually less of the ranting and hysteria than you seem to prefer.
The CAGW movement is composed of a few groups. The ones managing the spin are far more dangerous than the ones spreading the obvious falsehoods. WUWT and Climateaudit
provides excellent references to counter the spin, to the point where other blogs are starting to copy it and even the MSM has to refer to it occasionally (though very reluctantly.)
Your style sound remarkably like the warmists call for “action now.” I am only surprised that you are not typing all caps. You would be more useful if you were to troll warmist sites (not that I am recommending it.) If you prefer the activist route, you are welcome to live out your cheerleading fantasies, but there are other blogs where can attract many more followers than you will get here.
As for your kindly concern about Glenn, try reading past the obvious in my posts. Your refuge in sarcasm merely confirms my suspicion that you cannot string together any kind of rational argument.
Glen.
You said we ought to look up the definition of the scientific method.
ok.
scientific method
noun
1.
a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
“criticism is the backbone of the scientific method”.
So you will be criticised for trolling and lacking any criticality to the ever mounting and burgeoning doubts over the theory of AGW.