There are a lot of news items in major media starting to appear about the folly of Professor Chris Turney’s tourism disguised as science expedition. Turney is now backpedaling on the idea that “climate change” caused them to get stuck. Perhaps the laughter has finally reached him. A roundup and video follows.
First, from the NYT:
Stranded Antarctic Ship Story, Like the Ice, Will Not Let Go
By CHRISTINE HAUSER
A team of rescuers from a Chinese icebreaker may need to be rescued themselves, soon after they plucked dozens of people from the Antarctic ice aboard a ship that had been stranded for more than a week.
Chris Turney, a leader of the expedition whose members were evacuated by the Chinese vessel Xue Long’s helicopter on Thursday, shared more photographs of the mission and then an update on Twitter about the unexpected turn of events in the rescue ordeal.
Full story here: http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/03/stranded-antarctic-ship-story-like-the-ice-will-not-let-go/
Here is a video of the rescue operation in progress:
============================================================
From the Guardian, authored by Turney himself, who links to WUWT in the article:
Antarctic expedition: ‘This wasn’t a tourist trip. It was all about science – and it was worth it’
Chris Turney, leader of the Australasian Antarctic Expedition, says his critics are wrong: the team was prepared, the risks were known, and much was achieved
The last 24 hours have been sobering. I am sitting in the comfort of a cabin on board the Australian icebreaker the Aurora Australis, one day after evacuating the Australasian Antarctic Expedition from our Russian-crewed vessel, the MV Akademik Shokalskiy. After sleepless nights thinking about keeping everyone safe, it is a relief to know everyone is on board the Aurora and well.
There is relief, but there is also frustration over what appears to be a misrepresentation of the expedition in some news outlets and on the internet. We have been accused of being a tourist trip with little scientific value; of being ill-prepared for the conditions; putting our rescuers at risk; and making light of a dangerous situation. Others have remarked on what they describe as the “irony” of climate researchers stuck in unexpected ice.
…
Let’s be clear. Us becoming locked in ice was not caused by climate change. Instead it seems to have been an aftershock of the arrival of iceberg B09B which triggered a massive reconfiguration of sea ice in the area.
[See story below on the statement -Anthony]
Full story here: http://www.theguardian.com/science/antarctica-live/2014/jan/04/antarctic-expedition-was-worth-it-chris-turney
Note: This bit of justification in the article from Turney (bold) about the cost is laughable, he’s only off by a factor of 5-6. So much for scientific precision.
The aim of the Australasian Antarctic Expedition (AAE) is to lead a multidisciplinary research programme in one of the most scientifically exciting regions of our planet, straddling the Southern Ocean and East Antarctic. Using the latest in satellite technology, we are beaming images, movies and text in an attempt to excite the public about science and exploration, inspired by one of the most scientifically successful efforts in the Antarctic: the Australasian Antarctic Expedition of 1911-1914, led by British-born Sir Douglas Mawson. Starting out at the unbelievably young age of 28, Mawson managed to raise £39,000 in a year – equivalent to some $20-25m today. With this he kitted out an entire ship to discover what lay south of Australia.
Umm, I don’t know where Turney gets those numbers, but using the calculator provided by the Reserve Bank of Australia here: http://www.rba.gov.au/calculator/annualPreDecimal.html
I get:
$4.2 million is sure a long ways from $20-25 million, but I suppose when you are always using other people’s money, being accurate doesn’t matter.
The article with Turney’s calc is saved here as a PDF Turney-spiritofmawson-and it was worth it _ Science _ The Observer -Anthony
==============================================================
Turney Backpedals! Now Says Getting Stuck In Sea Ice NOT Due To Climate Change”!
By P Gosselin on 4. Januar 2014
It appears that now even Professor Chris Turney admits blaming his expedition mishap on global warming was an astronomical stretch after all.
Yesterday I reported here, quoting flagship Swiss daily (NZZ), that his communication director Alvin Stone blamed global warming for the vessel getting trapped in ice. The whole world laughed.
I couldn’t believe it myself so I wrote an e-mail to Stone asking if they really believed this.
Stone answered circa 9 hours later:
Dear Pierre,
That is not quite the quote that I gave.
This is my understanding from talking to Chris and other glaciologists.
- The 120km long ice berg B09B that is grounded in Commonwealth Bay broke away from the continent three years ago, very likely as a result of climate change.
- B09B collided with the Mertz Glacier, smashing a large ice tongue that released the ice into that area.
- It was a mix of this ice that was blown across the path of the Shokalskiy, which led to it being trapped and explains why much of the ice surrounding the ship is old ice.
– See more at: http://notrickszone.com/2014/01/04/turney-backpedals-now-says-getting-stuck-in-sea-ice-not-due-to-climate-change/#sthash.rG7qwsHv.CeXyK3bZ.dpuf
================================================================
Australian taxpayers will pay $400,000 cost for climate scientist’s ship stuck in ice. Total cost “millions”.
The saga just keeps going. The Chinese Icebreaker is now also stuck, and has asked for help so the Aurora Australis with 52 extra passengers rescued from the Russian Charter boat have to stay nearby to help. Twenty two Russian sailors are still trapped on board the Russian boat — the Akademik Sholaskiy. Plus other scientists in Antarctica still don’t have their equipment. Costs for everyone involved are continuing to rise. Though there is a free-for-all on social media…
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/01/australian-taxpayers-will-pay-400000-cost-for-climate-scientists-ship-stuck-in-ice-total-cost-millions/
=================================================================
Antarctic Debacle Probably Biggest Setback For Campaigners Since Climategate
- Date: 03/01/14 Christopher Caldwell, Financial Times
The debacle in the Antarctic ice is probably the largest setback for global warming campaigners since Climategate scandal in 2009.
When a Chinese helicopter rescued 52 passengers from a Russian climate-science cruise ship trapped in ice off Antarctica, it was a skilfully managed end to an ordeal that had begun on Christmas Eve. It was also a debacle for climate change activists. The 233-foot Akademik Shokalskiy, a Russian meteorological ship leased by the Australian tour outfit Aurora Expeditions, had been on a mission called the “Spirit of Mawson”. It aimed to replicate part of a gruelling voyage the explorer Douglas Mawson had made in 1912. The ship carried 22 scientists looking to perform various experiments, led by Chris Turney, a professor of climate change at the University of New South Wales. They were joined by 26 tourists paying for the adventure, along with journalists for The Guardian, BBC and The Sydney Morning Herald.
http://www.thegwpf.org/ft-antarctic-debacle-biggest-setback-campaigners-climategate/
================================================================
This speaks for itself, now the USA is involved:
================================================================
Even NYT’s Andrew Revkin, who has been on such expeditions himself, is calling it a fiasco:
A helpful update on several facets of the #spiritofmawson Antarctic fiasco from @RTCCnewswire: http://t.co/bdsY1Fn92Y
— Andrew Revkin 🌎 ✍🏼 🪕 ☮️ (@Revkin) January 2, 2014
=================================================================
As are the French:
French Polar Chief slams SpiritofMawson fiasco
This really has been a PR debacle of amazing proportions. The ship stuck in ice has captured something larger than I would have expected. Methinks the timing must be apropos.
Good scientists are distancing themselves from the publicity hungry climate lightweights and commentators on both sides of the fence are agreeing in their criticism.
A third effect we are barely starting to see may ripple on for months — that’s when mass-media victims realize that the “Russian Tourist ship” was really a boat load of Australian and New Zealander scientists, paid for mostly by taxpayers and loaded and advised by supposedly “expert” climate scientists. This misinformation was despite the boat having BBC, and Guardian media on board, and Fairfax press in one of the rescue icebreakers. Today I see evidence of the first two effects.
From Skynews. The French chief of polar science calls the Spirit of Mawson trip “pseudo-scientific” and laments the effect it is having on real research.
The head of France’s polar science institute has voiced fury at the misadventures of a Russian ship trapped in Antarctic ice, deriding what he called a tourists’ trip that had diverted resources from real science.
More here: http://joannenova.com.au/2014/01/french-polar-chief-slams-spiritofmawson-fiasco/
==============================================================
This animation is hilarious:
ACM on Chris Turney and the Akademik Shokalskiy fiasco
By Simon on 4 January, 2014
ACM on Chris Turney and the Akademik Shokalskiy fiasco
Please hold Turney’s feet to the fire on the cost of the expedition and the several rescue missions. What he has said so far is nothing but a bluff.
Ric Werme says:
January 4, 2014 at 2:38 pm
CHRIS TURNEY: Well, the fundamental issue is if you didn’t have carbon in the atmosphere, the planet would be about minus 50 degrees centigrade, give or take – that’s what you’d have. So a little bit of carbon warms the planet, and that’s good, it’s where we’re at today – an average planet temperature of about 14, 15, degrees.
Carbon? The greenhouse effect depends on the tri-atomic shape of CO2 and H2O molecules, not carbon (as soot, dust, graphite, or diamonds). And it (plus H2O) I assume, shouldn’t be worth 65 kelvins:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
My assumption was that by “carbon” he meant CO2. Sloppy use of terminology seems systemic in this debate. That said, if he’s been quote correctly, and even if he meant CO2, the statement is truly bizarre. He’d be attributing 65 degrees to CO2, very nearly double the greenhouse effect in its entirety and he’d be atrributing zero degrees to water vapour which is in the range of 80% of the total effect in the first place.
What Turney is reported to have said isn’t right, it isn’t even wrong, it deserves a whole thread unto itself!
Alan Robertson says:
January 4, 2014 at 3:10 pm
“Don’t ever die. The world needs you.”
Gotta learn to keep my mouth shut in real life. I’m in the EU. Here’s a Radio Yerevan joke.
Question to Radio Yerevan: Is it true that Germany has freedom of opinion?
Radio Yerevan answers: In principle yes; as long as it is not forbidden by law.
Sydney Morning Herald report that the tab for Australia’s response to the Akademik Shokalskiy distress call comes to $400,000.
The Aurora Australis expense is set at $30,000/day.
In terms of advertising-value and entré into the living rooms & lives of half the human population … Australia is no doubt delirious at their fantastic good luck.
DirkH says January 4, 2014 at 2:58 pm… I ‘m a leftist all my life and a post-student adult for 18 years. Hear me as someone who has a viewpoint that you do not share.
Recently the Guardian has changed.
It used to be opinionated and aggressive but willing to have a fight.
I felt at home.
Now (since buying in SkS or trying for the Aussie and US markets or… near bankruptcy; I don’t know) it has changed.
When they were defending Peter Gleick’s “faux pas” I had nearly 100 comments shown instantly and uncensored. Nothing was stopped.
And I gradually won round the neutrals: According to the conversations, that were allowed to occur. And also the recommends, for what they’re worth.
The Guardian has changed. At least the Guardian Environment section has changed.
He really doesn’t explain why it was “pseudoscientific”. Just because it ran into difficulties doesn’t make it so, that only means the expedition was poorly executed.
As Turney (like Tim Flannery) is actually a paleontologist who jumped on the bandwagon, his innumeracy and lack of scientific understanding is no surprise.
They still can’t stop lying, can they?
The 120km long ice berg B09B that is grounded in Commonwealth Bay broke away from the continent three years ago, very likely as a result of climate change.
It actually broke away in 1987, and has ever since been nudging west, eventually colliding with the Mertz three years ago.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2014/01/04/turneys-iceberg-calved-in-1987/
Quote: Chris Turney says “If you put more carbon in the atmosphere, you’d expect the planet to warm, and basically that’s what you see…”
If that is so, why has there been no warming for the last 17 years or so at the very same time that CO2 in the atmosphere went up to 400 ppm? Some said that 400 was the “tipping point” and that if we reached that point we were goners.
DirkH says:
January 4, 2014 at 3:22 pm
Gotta learn to keep my mouth shut in real life.
____________________
I’ve very little idea of the politics of any European nation, but I’m standing up with anyone in the world who stands against the statist totalitarians. I grew up in the US with free speech and now see those within our own government working actively to curtail our speech and other freedoms.
Very few “official” voices are raised in opposition. I’m too old and ugly to make any sort of difference, but I stand against those who would usurp the liberty of free men and women, everywhere.
@Jeff Alberts
If you need proof, have a look at the bios of the “Scientists” involved. All but one or two will contain the words: climate change, warming planet, or similar terms. Thus, we have Ornithologists, Archeologists, Marine Biologists, Botanists, and an assortment of other disciplines who choose to limit their inquiries to a single issue. Methinks, the vast majority of “Climate Scientists” rely far too much on deductive logic, and as such, fall prey to “Idols” Bacon warns us against in Novum Organum.
From Jo Nova’s site ; h / t jorgekafkazar;
Another twist from this comical parody of a psuedo climate science research debacle.
It seems the Russians had had enough and just wanted Turney’s psuedo and so called Mawson expedition scientists and assorted tax payer funded martini and milk shake sucking and partying hanger ons to get the hell out of their way so they got them offloaded onto the Australians for them to worry about.
_________________________________
From “FleetMon” a global shipping news reporting blog
http://www.fleetmon.com/maritimenews/2014/2945/research-vessel-shokalskiy-may-become-antarctic-fl/
Research vessel Shokalskiy may become an Antarctic Flying Dutchman
[ quoted ]
On Jan 2 all 52 passengers of research vessel AKADEMIK SHOKALSKIY were evacuated to Australian research and supply icebreaker Aurora Australis by a Chinese helicopter provided research and supply icebreaker Xue Long.
World media made such a fuss over the story one could think it was a Titanik tragedy turned into success.
It was clear from actually, the very beginning, that the passengers were in no real danger, when it came out, that there are helicopters nearby.
They’ve been taken from Shokalskiy simply because they were already more of a nuisance staying on board of Shokalskiy, and eating away food supplies which are required for the crew remaining on board.
Passengers were mostly scientists, or so they say, who were trying to get yet more proofs of devastating global warming effects.
Well, if getting trapped in ice is a result of global warming, they definitely found what they’ve been after. The public didn’t miss the irony of it: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/12/30/stuck-in-our-own-experiment-leader-trapped-team-insists-polar-ice-is-melting/
Strictly speaking, it wasn’t a “rescue”, it was evacuation. There wasn’t, and still isn’t any real danger to Shokalskiy.
The future of Shokalskiy is unclear. 22 crew is waiting for ice to move so that there will be a passage to ice-free waters. It’s up to weather, currents and god or fate.
If vessel stays trapped until all the supplies run out, then, the crew will be evacuated, too. Shokalskiy may become an Antarctic Flying Dutchman. Depending on the condition of the hull, vessel may stay afloat for years, providing of course, she won’t be crushed by ice strains.
Research vessel AKADEMIK SHOKALSKIY is trapped in ice in vicinity of 66 52S 144 19E since Dec 24 13. Three vessels were engaged in attempts to free Shokalskiy.
[end]
When Turney finally gets back to Australia, it’s likely there will be an initiative among the ABC & the leftist Aussie media, to declare him a hero to the cause. How he saved all those people stranded on the ice etc. It will be on spurious grounds however. In my view, Turney has become the new Flannery. A name synonymous will self serving spin, failed prophecy & junk science.
Jeff Alberts says January 4, 2014 at 3:34 pm;
The first sentence is true, but the second is mistaken/confused. Frenot only uses the “difficulties” to assert that the expedition “drained resources” from other science, not that the expedition was pseudo-scientific.
To do science requires discipline and organization. Factors that interfere with discipline and degrade organizational structure – such as babysitting paying tourists – legitimately raise questions about the science purportedly in progress.
Prof. Turney makes general claims to having done real science, but the claims are couched in the language of the media & Press. He could quickly describe the activities of the expedition in the language of scientists, and he could also post data on the Internet, but he is electing not to speak to other scientists.
Turney’s failure to make a valid scientific case, to scientists, does not prove that no science was done, or that the expedition was never more than pseudo-scientific, but it is strongly suggestive of that, and is a reasonable inference, intellectually-speaking.
If this is all about the science, Professor Chris Turney, could you please supply some of the hard data. I haven’t seen any yet. Douglas Mawson, according to your own account had volumes of data – volumes and volumes. Maybe you could assemble some hard data so that we could look at it and compare it to Douglas Mawson’s data from 101 years ago. Just maybe a taste of your data? Some temperatures or something?
The “Clitanic” name distracts folks to the wrong nether orifice.
It’s the less prestigious one we should be thinking of, perhaps “Climtasstic”
Scott Mandia of LDF & UCS fame,
I think Turney may need some big legal funds and urgent legal counsel from your Union of Concerned Scientists and Legal Defence Fund.
Based on the last week of reports Turney is not astute enough to keep his mouth shut with the increasingly critical international media.
You better fly down there urgently on taxpayers expense . . . doing good for alarmists has no end to taxpayer expense . . . right?
NOTE: the scientists in your UCS should be concerned about science after TurneyGate.
John
Decision makers in the USA have another situation upon which to act. USCGC POLAR STAR has a sister ship USCGC POLAR SEA, which has been out of service since 2010 due to engine failure. It was slated for demolition in 2012, but the scrapping of the 35-year-old icebreaker was postponed by at least six months in June. $400 million would see the ice breaker’s service extended for another 25 years or $925 million would purchase a new vessel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USCGC_Polar_Sea_(WAGB-11)
As future winters become more intensely cold, many more heavy icebreakers will be essential to keep shipping lanes open in the northern hemisphere. However, if we are seeing the start of the next overdue glacial period, then Canada, the USA, Scandinavia, Northern Europe, Russia & Siberia will succumb to glaciation once again. Where will billions of people live & what will they live on? Soylent Green?
There are a large number of falsehoods and exaggerations being promoted by this group: Each needs to be exposed, discussed – and, where crowd-source analysis warrants – refuted, debunked, disputed, dis-reputed, discouraged, and dismembered. Where appropriate, their lies, “arguments” and science-by-inaccurate-and-exaggerated press releases need also to be smeared over, laughed at, and sneered upon.
A. “Unexpected sea ice” –
The Antarctic sea ice has been steadily gaining since December 2010 (now 3+ years ago!) and the entire Antarctic Sea Ice anomaly has been positive (more sea ice around Antarctica than that day’s seasonal normal (average) since May 2011. All of the above means, for the casual-non-CAGW-and-skeptical reader (but not the CAGW-educated elite academicians who “study” Antarctic sea for their living and their luxuries!) that;
A1… There is MORE sea ice every day around Antarctica for the past 2-1/2 years than normal
A2….. That this sea ice around Antarctica has been steadily growing every day through every season of the year around Antarctica for the past 2-1/2 years
A3….. and, That this ever-growing sea ice around Antarctica has been plotted and published every day every month for the past 2-1/2 years in the public’s view – but not apparently in the knowledge of CAGW-religious educated elite who study CAGW’s effect on Antarctica for their living and luxuries in New South Wales, Australia.
2. This “extra” sea ice has been steadily growing around Antarctica trhough every season of the year (winter’s cold through summer’s (December’s) “heat”) and is now over 1.61 Million km^2 (Mkm^2) as the Antarctic’s mid-summer “minimum approaches in late February. Certainly, when the expedition left in mid-November, the plots already showed a EXCESS Antarctic sea ice “margin” of 1.5+ million sq km’s. Sea ice obviously reduces every summer – but the “excess” 1.5 million km^2 WERE STILL PRESENT WHEN THE EXPEDITION LEFT (and when they were planning through the previous 18 months). Further, this sea ice “excess” HAD NEVER melted from the previous winter’s record-breaking high extents!
3. Total Antarctic sea ice was in September’s peak was 19.5 Mkm^2 (sea ice) + 3.5 Mkm^2 (permanent Antarctic ice shelves) + 14.0 Mkm^2 (land-based continental ice and glaciers) for a total of 37.0 Mkm^2 of reflective surface. This means a total area from the south pole up to latitude 60 [south] had been completely covered in ice at the end of September, 2013. When the expedition left NSW in November, it would appear “prudent” for its expedition scientific “leader” and head “scientist” in Antarctic’s CAGW effects to have calculated just where the actual edge of the receding sea ice would actually be when they arrived to unload equipment (and get stuck) in mid-December.
4. local conditions will obviously vary – but that 1.6 Mkm^2 of “excess” sea ice at the start of their expedition does not “go away” miraculously through press releases: If a single Antarctic Bay or headland is clear of sea ice on day “one” by day 3, it may be replaced by near-by sea ice, right? This regardless of the “iceberg” that had been in that same location suddenly “trapping” excess sea ice (since 1988) against the shore – which had not moved since 1988.
5. The AIR above the Antarctic continent has been measured as warming for many years – that IS the first, last, and primary knowledge that this “scientist” has gotten right, BUT “heat transfer” is a minute-by-minute movement of energy and physics. What happened in 1970, 1980, 1990, 1996, 2006, or even December 1, 2012 did NOT cause any ice movement or freezing in December 2013 when they were trapped. Because essentially all of the sea ice in that area melts EVERY summer around Antarctica – and in that area had melted before regularly, ONLY the actual conditions of November-December 2013 can be used to explain (or excuse) the presence or absence of sea ice around their vessel.
Thus, that the West Antarctic Peninsula has warmed 1, 3, 5 or even 7 degrees C does NOT imply that this particular area has warmed measurably.
That some glacier 800 km away has retreated does NOT mean that sea water near their ship has been diluted, cooled, or affected in any way.
6. Summer and winter conditions in 2011 were warmer than usual across the entire continent, BUT the Antarctic sea ice ended up GREATER than normal through the entire heating, melting, re-freezing, and frozen parts of the year in 2011. The expedition’s leader’s CAGW theory has no explanation for this discrepancy.
Summer and winter conditions in 2012 were warmer than usual across the entire continent, BUT the Antarctic sea ice ended up GREATER than normal through the entire heating, melting, re-freezing, and frozen parts of the year in 2012. The expedition’s leader’s CAGW theory has no explanation for this discrepancy.
Summer conditions in 2013 were warmer than usual across the entire continent, BUT the Antarctic sea ice ended up GREATER than normal through the entire heating, melting, re-freezing, and frozen parts through December, 2013. The expedition’s leader’s CAGW theory has no explanation for this discrepancy.
7. Because the actual December 2013 Antarctic air and troposphere temperatures ranged from 1.5 degrees to 2.5 degrees higher than their baseline, the expedition has tried to generate explanations for the increase in sea around their ship using this “CAGW-CAUSED-ANTARCTICA-ICE-TO-MELT” theme to explain excess sea ice around Antarctica.
Their theory of CAGW-air-warmth increases sea ice extents around Antarctica needs to be measured, analyzed, criticized, reviewed, and then mocked. In detail.
A. Scott says:
January 4, 2014 at 2:01 pm
Operating helicopters in the Antarctic is itself dangerous. Snow Dragon lost one of her Kamovs there in December 2011.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2011-12/10/content_14243321.htm
We are going to need more and better ice-breakers/polar rescue capabilities now and in the future because there are just so many people who have bought this theory.
It’s like there are millions of people who think polar ice will be no problem at all starting today and -40C temperatures can be managed with a good fall jacket. They think we don’t need electricity in the winter or natural gas furnaces to survive the cold.
We are just going to be saving their butts over and over again.
Could Pounds Sterling still be redeemed for silver around 1911? Maybe the value of silver has exceeded the rate of inflation.
Auto says:
January 4, 2014 at 1:20 pm
Bob Greene says:
January 4, 2014 at 12:40 pm
——-
[The mods point out that the newly required loopy-pig barrel roll will leave the pigs upside down at the end of the loop. This site is not responsible for the ultimate flight safety of any such inverted pigs above the viewing crowd. Mod]
——–
http://youtu.be/KBoIExQjKQ4
davidmhoffer says:
January 4, 2014 at 3:15 pm
Ric Werme says:
January 4, 2014 at 2:38 pm
CHRIS TURNEY: Well, the fundamental issue is if you didn’t have carbon in the atmosphere, the planet would be about minus 50 degrees centigrade, give or take – that’s what you’d have. So a little bit of carbon warms the planet, and that’s good, it’s where we’re at today – an average planet temperature of about 14, 15, degrees.
Carbon? The greenhouse effect depends on the tri-atomic shape of CO2 and H2O molecules, not carbon (as soot, dust, graphite, or diamonds). And it (plus H2O) I assume, shouldn’t be worth 65 kelvins:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
My assumption was that by “carbon” he meant CO2. Sloppy use of terminology seems systemic in this debate. That said, if he’s been quote correctly, and even if he meant CO2, the statement is truly bizarre. He’d be attributing 65 degrees to CO2, very nearly double the greenhouse effect in its entirety and he’d be atrributing zero degrees to water vapour which is in the range of 80% of the total effect in the first place.
What Turney is reported to have said isn’t right, it isn’t even wrong, it deserves a whole thread unto itself!
————————————————————————————–
+1
Salby in his book – Physics of the Atmosphere and Climate -puts water vapour as having 98% effect as the greenhouse gas. But I read that Turney’s background is in paleontology . If true it would explain a lot. Yes I agree Anthony should put this up as a thread for experts here to comment on. Its plainly absurd.
3 June: Courier Mail: AAP: Aust team to retrace Antarctic expedition
Professor Chris Turney from the University of NSW told AAP: “That part of the world is rapidly changing because of warming conditions and the hole in the ozone layer.
“We really want to try and incorporate current climate models and figure out the changes to things like wildlife, compared with the original data from 100 years ago,” he said.
The privately funded voyage will have its challenges, with a 150km-long iceberg currently blocking entry to the coast at Commonwealth Bay.
“We’re quietly confident with the technology we’ve got … and hopefully the weather changes as well but it will be a challenge nevertheless,” Prof Turney said.
“That’s part of the adventure and excitement.”
The team will take part in live online chats with schools across Australia during the expedition, as well as update blogs and social media…
Berths on the ship will also be made available for sale to the general public.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/breaking-news/aust-team-to-retrace-antarctic-expedition/story-e6freono-1226656467349