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
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Slacko says: @ur momisugly January 4, 2014 at 1:43 pm
Does Donna’s book come in hardback…
Unfortunately not: http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/my-book/
The Wall St Journal:
“Fossil-Fueled Ingenuity to the Rescue in Antarctica”
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303370904579294842962248258
“…But where Mawson barely escaped with his life, the icebound researchers, questing after evidence of global warming, seemed most threatened by a storm of global ridicule.
Beyond the obvious jokes stirred by the story’s basic outline, it’s worth noting how much better off today’s adventurers were than Mawson’s team, thanks to the wonders of modern technology—much of it decidedly fossil-fueled.”
connolly wondered @ur momisugly January 5, 2014 at 2:30 am;
Connolly,
I’m seriously suggesting that not only will mere aspersion and innuendo prove ineffectual, but the indulgence itself will reflect poorly on the very horse you rode in on … shading & obscuring potential merits it could otherwise theoretically possess.
Ted
Some good may come of this Christmas Turkey fiasco. The USA may now get one or more of it’s new ice breakers and perhaps something larger than the existing Polar class vessels. Australia may also now get her new ice breaker. However, Russian Antarctic tours may see reduced business as the vessels that are really capable of such tourism work are nuclear and all are found in the Arctic.
The Chinese vessel may have become stuck due to inexperience. The Russian vessel with people out on the ice and an inadequate means to get them back quickly had limited options, though one of those might have been to have abandoned them to shelter in the Mawson facility and there await rescue. But with a child out on the ice that option was not really available and so the captain of the Shikalski simply had to wait even if that meant the ultimate loss of the ship. Though perhaps if the kid was back on board and the party on the ice were all adults then perhaps the master of the Shikalski should have told them to get to the Mawson station and left to await helicopter rescue.
It could be argued that no expeditions to the Antarctic should occur without suitable equipment, appropriate ships and helicopters. Clearly the Turkey expedition was not adequately equipped, nor was the Xue Long, inexperienced and helicopter with wheels, no floats or skis. This would likely mean that none of the existing vessels in the Antarctic region are in fact suitable and that the Russians should use vessels such as the Yamal or some of the new much larger vessels about to come on stream.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamal_%28icebreaker%29
But it would need to berthed in Cape Town since the Aussies are a bit wimpy when it comes to having nuclear powered ships around. As for the international agreement on no-nuclear in the Antarctic- tear it up.
Gail Combs says @ur momisugly January 5, 2014 at 3:18 am;
Some minor clarification is in order.
Originally, we know that the rescue or evacuation was to involve all 52 members of the Mawson group, plus 4 members of the Russian crew.
The Russian crew includes 5 females. A cook, 2 “stewardesses”, and 2 “waitresses”. The later 4 females would most likely be for the comfort of the passengers – the Mawson group. So, when plans were made to fetch the passengers back to civilization, personnel nominally in the ship’s crew for their benefit (not for the rest of the crew) were automatically slated to be shipped off with them.
Apparently, these 4 girls lodged a protest with their Captain Igor Kiselyov. Their probable complaint might be liberally translated along the lines of; “Bollocks, bozo! We are assigned to this ship, and we are not going with them. Now, you get back on the horn and straighten it out”!
And, evidently, that’s exactly what Capt. Igor did.
The esteemed Prof. Turney said: “If you put more carbon in the atmosphere, you’d expect the planet to warm, and basically that’s what you see…”
Turney expects to see it, so does, although notice the qualifier “basically”. Even the tried-and-true CAGW Believers are hedging their bets now, looking for an out.
Ted Clayton says: @ur momisugly January 5, 2014 at 6:46 am
Some minor clarification is in order….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I noticed that and figured given a choice of being stuck in ice or stuck with Turney’s Turkeys the few crew members who were to be airlifted decide they rather risk the ice after a few more days of the whinging and whining. Says a lot about the Turkeys manners doesn’t it?
Take a look at this quote :
“In sum, a strategy must recognise what is possible. In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”
This is a quote from the IPCC report of 2001, back when that body still recognized that predictions of the sort made by Turney’s colleagues are fantasy. As the world fails to warm, an even greater faith is invested in the faulty climate models which have so far proved worthless.
Turney’s current employer, the University of New South Wales, published a report that appeared in Nature on 1 January, claiming that current climate models under-estimate the level of warming, which could reach 4ºC by 2100.
A question that needs to be asked about Turney’s expedition is how come the only journalists aboard are from the Guardian, which has sent two reporters, the BBC and Radio New Zealand – all eager mouthpieces of the global warming lobby.
Who is going to be paying for this fiasco? Efforts by Turney and his co-leader Chris Fogwill to crowd-fund money have been an embarrassing failure. They wanted to raise $49,000 in this way – a small fraction of the $1.5 million overall costs – but they managed to raise only $1,000 from 22 people. Not even the promise of a signed copy of Turney’s book, “1912: the year the World Discovered Antarctica” was enough to tempt donors into action: not a single one chose to receive the book.
British taxpayers, needless to say, have been forced to pay up. One of the sponsors is the University of Exeter, Professor Turney’s previous employer. The university is fast on its way to taking over from the University of East Anglia as the “global warming” worshiper’s chief mouthpiece. Universities claim to have fallen on hard times – unless it comes to broadcasting the “global warming” hysteric’s case : Exeter has just launched a “massive open online course” on climate change which the public are all invited to sign up – all for free. I don’t think I would be pleased about that if I was paying tuition fees for one of Exeter’s other courses.
Dr. Turkey is in more hot water. He is being poached and now roasted.
After thousands of comments on several threads on Mawson-Turkey, still I think no-one has voiced an opinion similar to mine on the attribution of costs, which is as follows.
The insurance industry is pretty solidly behind CAGW because it allows them to ramp up profits from those willing to pay increased premiums against supposedly expected extreme weather. Therefore, since some insurance policies will almost certainly be in place to cover calamities to those involved in the Turney expedition, either as members or rescuers, the insurance adjusters will bend over backwards in the interpretation of the clauses in those policies, and ensure that adequate insurance is paid out. This will avoid unseemly (to their mind) litigation of Turney et al to recover costs.
So, all of us insurance premium payers, especially those insuring against the weather, will pay for this. Actually, much as I’d like to see Turney sued, I don’t mind that much – it’s been good entertainment so worth the money!
Rich.
I think I understand now the purpose of this leg of Turney’s expedition and why they brought along four photojournalists. Get photos of the struggling penguin colonies at Commonwealth Bay. Heart wrenching photos of starving penguin chicks that can be used for CAGW propaganda. That is probably the most important “data” they wanted to get away with, and getting that “data” is probably what left them stuck in the ice.
This would replace the use of the Polar Bear for CAGW propaganda, which hasn’t gone too well since the Polar Bears are doing quite nicely.
The penguin colonies at Commonwealth Bay have declined because of thick year-round fast ice, held fast partly because of the presence of iceberg B09B. B09B calved off the Ross Ice Shelf in 1987 (not 2010 as Turney claims) beginning a multi-decade chain of events that leaves it near Commonwealth Bay today.
I don’t see that any of these events have anything to do with “global warming” especially since this area of the Antarctic has not been warming. In fact, the penguins would probably be doing better if it had been warming.
I believe it was a “call for assistance” not a mayday call. First intent was to get the other ships to help them get clear of the ice buildup, after that proved a failure, aside from those who commented it was a “rescue of the Russian crew”, I think a legitimate case could be made that by taking the “tourists” off the ship you reduce the risk of loss of life if the hull was compromised by the ice build up. Much easier to manage a holed hull if you only have the ship’s company to worry about rather than also dealing with 52 untrained passengers and getting them out of harms way while you deal with damage control and try to save the ship.
I see it as a logical effort to reduce risks rather than a “rescue”.
connolly says:
January 5, 2014 at 2:45 am
” … Time for truth. …”
—-
Truth should not include speculation reported as fact. You appear to have developed an irrational hatred for a dead man (the nice thing about libelling dead people is that they can’t really defend themselves.)
Negrum
I am as skeptical in regard to the myths of history as I am in regard to CAGW. By the way if you want some real speculation your hero while he was fighting a tough war in London for the Australia munitions producers is alleged to have bedded the widow of Scott – two years aftr he married Delprat’s daughter. I don’t have a irrational hatred of Mawson just a healthy scepticism when it comes to mythical heroes. The reason you cant libel a dead person is that reputation dies with the indivdual. They enter into history. And history is not a respecter of reputation – only the truth. Turney sought to exploit the myth of Mawson. As history shows myths die in the face of harsh reality.
connolly says:
January 5, 2014 at 12:54 pm
Negrum
I am as skeptical in regard to the myths of history as I am in regard to CAGW. By the way if you want some real speculationwhile he was fighting a tough war in London for the Australia munitions producers is alleged to have bedded the widow of Scott – two years aftr he married Delprat’s daughter. I don’t have a irrational hatred of Mawson just a healthy scepticism when it comes to mythical heroes. The reason you cant libel a dead person is that reputation dies with the indivdual. They enter into history. And history is not a respecter of reputation – only the truth. Turney sought to exploit the myth of Mawson. As history shows myths die in the face of harsh reality.
——
” … your hero … ”
——
Don’t try that trick. I never indicated that I considered him a hero. It does not help your case.
I find your search for “truth” to be based on highly questionable methods. Be careful to clearly distinguish between verifiable facts and hearsay/speculation. You appear to be prejudiced and subjective in the analysis of Mawson’s character (whatever his real faults) That is not the mark of a sceptic.
Stating outright that Mawson succumbed to cannibalism (not that I particularly care – survival is played by different rules than when sitting comfortably and well-fed in front of a computer) when the only evidence I can see is deduction and speculation by the author of Flaws in the Ice, I consider misrepresentation. Acceptable at the National Enquirer, but it doesn’t fly here. If you have any more evidence, I would appreciate you sharing it.
I am not particularly interested in speculation about public figures’ private lives (dead or living). I leave that to breathless teenagers who are fascinated by the activities of celebrities.
And to set your mind at ease concerning my regard for Mawson, I do not suffer from hero-worship, but I have a healthy respect for people who perform remarkable deeds under difficult conditions. Mawson seems to fall into this category. This is to be contrasted with those who spend their time attacking the reputations of the living or the dead for whatever obscure personal reasons. It seems to me to show a lack of good character, not scepticism – as you want to characterise it.
——
” And history is not a respecter of reputation – only the truth.”
——
If you subscribe to that idea, you are more naive than I thought. The “truth” in history (especially human history) can be very subjective, and depends a lot on the view of the one writing it it. That is why it is difficult to classify history as a formal science. Though they do keep on trying to 🙂
In case I have not made my point clear: Mawson is dead, but CAGW is alive and doing far too well up to now.
Turney’s estimate of the current cost of Mawson’s expedition being $20-25m instead of $4.2m is not just related to a general lack of perspective on magnitudes from climatologists. It is a failure to see the net benefits. Mawson’s expedition was doing something original – establishing (possibly) the first buildings on a continent and seeing if it was possible to live there. It was akin to to Skylab 40 years ago in this respect. Also there were no satellites, so any information on ice changes, or temperature data was completely new and original. Further, new species of animal, bird or fish might be found. Any discoveries by Turney would be extremely marginal compared to this. Getting stuck in the ice also appears to have jeopardised on-going research, so the opportunity costs, in terms of the research forgone, appears to be much greater than Mawson would have achieved.
The Expeditions must also be looked at in the context of the time. Early in 1912 Robert Falcon Scott died with his team on the return leg of their journey to the South Pole. They aimed to be the first to reach the South Pole, but were beaten. In Britain, Scott was revered as decades as a great hero, despite his failure and amateurishness. So an expedition a few months later would have attracted support. “Heroic” failure would have hit the headlines around the world as much as if they had discovered a white Antarctic mammoth. Now, with the satellite photos, and rescue, there is no heroism in amateurish failure.
The leader of the “expedition” , Professor of “Climate Change” CHRIS TURNEY said :
“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 ” !
Show me the calculation . That’s about 54 degrees below the gray body temperature in our orbit ( ~ 279k ) and implies a solar versus IR reflectivity ratio about 0.4 . Given our observed absorptivity/emissivity with respect to the solar spectrum of about 0.7, assuming the planet radiates as a perfect black body in the longer waves , gives the endlessly parroted 255c ( – 25 c ) minimal possible temperature . ( 279 * ( 0.7 % 1.0 ) ^ % 4 ) ..
To have an equilibrium of 223k in our orbit , you would have to have an albedo wrt the Sun of
( 223 % 279 ) ^ 0.25 |>| 0.41
This is the bold first line from Turney’s bio page: By a series of accidental turns and a healthy dose of serendipity I have ended up exploring the world. http://www.christurney.com/
Rife with irony, that one is.
Setting up eco-tourist trips for paying clients and recruiting investors for his green company = “healthy dose of serendipity.” Turney has been enjoying others-funded jaunts for years. His tweets and public comments show the depth of his scientific knowledge.
This morning ~07:30 am UTC on Dutch radio station Q-music: interview with oceanographic scientist Erik, speaking Dutch fluently, about his stay on icebound Akademik Shokalskiy. They finished their ‘science’ before the ship got stuck, then had a 9-day vacation until evacuation by the Chinese helicopter. Major worry: the party was threatened to be spoiled by running out of beer and gin-tonic. Views of ice and penguins were beautiful.
HOW TO FREE SHIPS TRAPPED IN ICE
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0eBv5RdpJPeOUphdU5IQU1WRmc/edit?usp=sharing
PROFILE LINK
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/steven-belsky/42/835/625
PLEASE pass links __ it is __ NOT __ search engine findable.
please make comments (upper right (FOR ME) click next to SHARE)
ON the drive.google.com page.
Steven Belsky says @ur momisugly January 7, 2014 at 9:52 am ;
If you have a “comment” to contribute on the topic of this Post, the way to go about participating is to insert the text of your remarks in the Reply Box.
At the very least, summarize or outline the gist of the content you want us to go look at.
As it is, your ‘comment’ is DIFFICULT__to__DISCERN from ordinary SPAM.