Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Raunds, Northants
  • Interests
    Long distance walking, Archery, Website building
  • Weather Preferences
    Warm if possible but a little snow is nice.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,596 profile views
  1. A polite question please. Would it be possible to present alternative research/opinions on this forum in accordance with accepted scientific criteria or are we as sceptical scientists excluded because of our perception of the issue? I am not talking of belief here because belief belongs in the realm of religion or political manipulation. Please let me know so that I can contribute.
  2. I do not get the point. These shelves always do and have to go through a calving event. It has happened for who knows how many millions of years but now a (so called) numerical model is anticipating that the ice front is at risk of becoming unstable?. So what? has this not happened thousands of times before?
  3. Oops it appears that Alaska's Hubbard Glacier is expanding http://www.weather.com/science/environment/news/alaska-hubbard-glacier-growth .I will now proceed to duck, avoiding flack and such.
  4. Yup had a look "Antarctica is a unique environment, and the complex interactions between ice, ocean and atmosphere have led to a unique set of circumstances that have resulted in sea ice growth. It may be explained by many factors, or most probably by a combination of several." MY takeaway is this - It is getting cold out there Jim.
  5. " The doubling of mass loss does not mean that vast swathes of the continent has suddenly gone above freezing but that the 'buttresses' holding the ice back on land are failing allowing the ice to naturally 'drain' , under gravity, into the fluid ocean ( and ice in a fluid does what?)" Rubbish, what is supposed to be melting these so-called buttresses of yours when temperatures are stable (cold) as are sst? Sea ice in Antarctica is expanding year by year and cannot physically do so with warm seas or land temperatures.
  6. What I would like to know is how anyone including yourself Knocker can take Nasa Giss seriously after all that has been exposed. I proceed to duck.
  7. No Knocker this is not the denier thread because there is no such thing, but saying that I hope that you and your fellow clergy will forgive those having an opinion expressing it on this patch of virtual hallowed ground. The arrogance is breath-taking and it is no wonder that our fellow forum users for the most part avoid the climate section.
  8. Who knows, the climate is unpredictable and the "experts" have no clue. Did they predict the extent this year???????
  9. Well to be realistic such a huge increase in ice does not support elevated sea surface temperatures or temperature increases of any description be it on land or otherwise. The only reason creatures would be at risk now would be too much ice and freezing temperatures.
  10. I am referring to the Nunavut region of Canada that was cold last year and experienced a lot of ice thickening in the archipelago that the passage traverses. There is going to be much ice left over this year to thicken further and make next year impassable, even if the winter is not particularly severe.
  11. Seems that the Northwest passage is a bust this year. The National Geographic cruise has been unable to proceed and the route through Queen Maude is still solidly blocked with 9 to 10/10 thick ice. Time is limited and the onset of the re-freeze is only weeks away There is another ice class cruise liner somewhere in the vicinity of resolute, The Silver Explorer, but she has not updated her log in 6 days and without icebreaker assistance will also not be able to proceed. All other attempts by smaller craft with the possible exception of a steel hulled motor vessel ( Mango) whose skipper seems d
  12. It might be for you but not for thinking folk. The statement is misleading and the results of the study speculative at best . May possibly be valid from circa 2009 but that too is iffy. Nobody disputes that the arctic as opposed to antarctic ice has retreated in recent years.
  13. "From research stations drifting on ice floes to high-tech aircraft radar, scientists have been tracking the depth of snow that accumulates on Arctic sea ice for almost a century" Sorry but have to call bsh on that statement.
  14. omg Knocker, why on earth would you dare post that? You might get branded-you know.
  • Create New...