December 30, 2013

"Third Icebreaker Fails To Reach Stranded Ship In Antarctic."

"That was the word early Monday from aboard the MV Akademik Shokalskiy — the Russian ship with 74 passengers and crew that's been stuck in Antarctic ice for a week now."

The passengers are not all scientists. Some are "paying members of the public." Oh, those people who just need to go everywhere, eh? People with "bucket lists." I suppose they want to pay to go up in space too. Will they have to chip in for the helicopter rescue or whatever else is going to be needed and/or will they sue the shipping company?

Here's how the cruise was presented to the public:
Our vessel, MV Akademik Shokalskiy, is well-experienced in these waters. She will carry a mixture of scientists and a limited number of fare-paying passengers. As a passenger you will be invited to act as a field assistant to help the scientists complete their ambitious programs. Your involvement will of course be voluntary and it may vary throughout the journey; dictated in part by the prevailing weather, conditions and some permit restrictions. It is an exciting concept that has not been tested in the Southern Ocean before. 
Well-experienced and untested! I'd like to see what these passengers paid, but somehow the prices aren't currently showing. And — here — now, the news is that there will indeed be a helicopter rescue. As for the climate-change scientists, whom you might think would be embarrassed by the difficulties experienced in what is the Antarctic summertime, they're working on their story:
Chris Turney, one of the leaders of the scientific expedition [and a] professor of climate change at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, said satellite images indicated that their vessel had become stuck in ice which had broken away from a glacier.

The fierce winds had pushed it into an area of normally open sea, blocking the ship's progress, and this ice was now three to four metres thick in some places, although in others there were gaps with no ice.

"It's an unusual event that's happened," he said. "We were in the wrong place at the wrong time."
If only that ice had remained attached to that glacier, it wouldn't have been out there where they encountered it. It's all very unusual. Very change-y. See, whatever happens can be said to have happened for the reason you've already reasoned is the reason for whatever happens to have happened. You can't lose. Now, winch me outta here.

ADDED: I love the way the cruise ship's website lures customers with "Rare wildlife encounters on land and at sea, possibly including Emperor penguins." You might see some penguins! Wasn't this mostly a commercial enterprise, a cruise for bucket-listers? There's the lure of rubbing elbows with climatologists, who'll be providing lectures to acolytes of their "ambitious programs." I'd like to see who paid and who was paid what. Could some journalist do an investigation into these science-tastic cruise junkets?

AND: A reader sends a to an article from last January in The New Zealand Herald titled "Tourists drawn to wonders of Antarctic." That puts the price of a 28-day tour leaving from New Zealand — which is what the currently icebound cruise was — at $20,000 per person. 50,000 people a year cough up that kind of money for the strenuous trip (which I wouldn't do if you paid me $20,000). For some reason, this is called "responsible" tourism.
Filmmaker and marine reserve advocate Peter Young said responsible tourism was "the answer for the Ross Sea." "Tourists take photos, become ambassadors, and share the reasons the Ross Sea is special... The marginal fishery is full of conflict and danger."

Aaron Russ [who works with Heritage Expeditions] said tourism could compete with the profits of the toothfish industry: "You could easily realise $20 million from tourism while having a lot less impact on the environment."...

Organising trips to the Ross Sea is a logistical nightmare. Ships have to sail through pack ice for 36 hours, and contend with gut-wrenching swells and changeable weather. Aaron Russ said his company had to prove it would have an invisible footprint, and had annual evaluations to prove it would cause only "a minor or transitory impact."
I had to look up "toothfish." And then I looked up "responsible tourism," which I'm guessing is tourism that is subject to the criticism that it's irresponsible and consequent efforts to mitigate the environmental degradation. Wikipedia has "responsible tourism" squirreled away inside an article on "sustainable tourism," with a paragraph saying that the 2 things share the ideas of "environmental integrity, social justice and economic development," but they are different in that "in responsible tourism, individuals, organizations and businesses are asked to take responsibility for their actions and the impacts of their actions." I don't quite get the difference, unless "asked to" means "required to."

I find it very hard to understand the people who imagine they are big environmentalists who go on trips like that. Why doesn't the couple with $40,000 to drop on an arduous vacation stay home, read about environmentalism, and donate that money to some worthy environmental group? The notion that you are earning authority as an "ambassador" or that your photographs of the ice and potential penguins are going add in any significant way to the world's millions of ice-and-penguin pics is delusional.

109 comments:

Paul said...

Can't make it even in the SUMMER?

Dang.. Global Warming is a bitch, isn't it?

Michael said...

Ah yes, the risky travel theme. Safer on that boat than in a car. Safer on the plane that took you to the boat than in a car. By a very long shot.

I dont have any interest in going to Antarctica but know those who have and who loved it.

Sorun said...

"Chris Turney, one of the leaders of the scientific expedition [and a] professor of climate change..."

I wonder if he used to be a Professor of Global Warming but changed it.

richard mcenroe said...

Unusual ice in Antarctica.

*tongue click*

Yyyyyyeahhhhhhhhhhh....

EDH said...

Chris Turney, one of the leaders of the scientific expedition [and a] professor of climate change at the University of New South Wales

A rare moment of candor? With a moniker like that, how can one profess objectivity?

EDH said...

The best icebreaker I ever had was walking my friend's three-legged dog.

MadisonMan said...

The best icebreaker I ever had was walking my friend's three-legged dog.

Was the dog named Cigarette? Was he taken out for a drag?

David said...

My favorite pic in the brochure is "Enjoying the Ice."

More than likely they will get out unscathed. The passengers will have a great adventure tale, having been rescued at great expense and with widespread publicity. The space tourists will be taking considerably more risk.

jacksonjay said...


This story reminds me of the idiots who took the kids "jeeping" in Nevada! Wow, what an adventure! Wow, how courageous! Will to live! Wow!

Idiots!

mesquito said...

I see in my mind a small advertisement in the back section of an greenie magazine or perhaps The Nation.

Join REAL scientists on REAL research expedition to Antartica to investigate the effect of GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE on that DELICATE and ENDANGERED ecosystem....

David said...

You think maybe the professors of climate change are getting some cold cash for this gig? Perish the thought.

Perish? Did I say perish?

madAsHell said...

Did you see the caveat at the bottom of the promotional web page??

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Oh, Ann, enough with the "bucket lists."

My parents, in retirement, have become damned good wildlife photographers. They've been to Antarctica once, and are going back in a few weeks (different side of the continent, South American access). They aren't going to be able to say "been there, done that," and you have no right to assume anything different of the non-scientist passengers on the Shokalskiy.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Enh. Badly phrased. I meant "They aren't going in order to be able to say "Been there, done that."

Bob Boyd said...

Science Question:
How much does a rescue chopper increase the carbon footprint of an Eco-Haji?

Joe said...

And don't forget that this is a diesel powered ship.

Steve said...

All three legged dogs are named Lucky or Lieutenant Dan.

CWJ said...

"their vessel had become stuck in ice which had broken away from a glacier."

Now that's funny. Are they really trying to say that they couldn't steer around it? Iceberg ahead Captain! Sorry, our itinerary doesn't allow any course deviations.

gerry said...

and you have no right to assume anything different of the non-scientist passengers on the Shokalskiy.

Someone is protesting too much, methinks.

Ann Althouse said...

"They've been to Antarctica once, and are going back in a few weeks (different side of the continent, South American access). They aren't going to be able to say "been there, done that,"…"

They why mention that they are going to a different side of the continent?

And why so defensive about your parents travels?

People who push traveling seem weird to me. People can do what they like. Why evangelize? I think there's too much travel propaganda, and given the crazy amount of money spent on travel (and the hypocrisy about carbon footprints), I've made it my thing to weigh in on the other side.

If retirees have extra money, who cares if they travel? Maybe some might say they should go somewhere cheaper and give more money to charity or to their grandchildren. People get suckered into all sorts of commercial ventures, and I am concerned that these people who are currently stuck in the ice got ripped off.

Ann Althouse said...

"and you have no right to assume anything different…"

In America, I have the right to think anything I want.

Another reason not to travel… I like to be where I have a decent set of rights, reasonably well enforced and believed in.

MathMom said...

I've been around plenty of glaciers which calved - there a lots of small chunks floating in the water, but you don't get stuck in them. (When I say "small", they can still rip a hole in a ship, and the captain tiptoes through them, but they don't leave you icebound.)

Oh! The wind blew all of them into a dense pack and that is what caused the problem? Well, then, why didn't we acknowledge a few years back when "the North Pole was free of ice" that all the ice was found close to Greenland because strong winds pushed it there? Nope. THAT was global warming, melting all the Arctic ice.

I understand.

cubanbob said...

Another reason not to travel… I like to be where I have a decent set of rights, reasonably well enforced and believed in.

12/30/13, 11:41 AM

If you follow Drudge and Instapundit you may get a different impression.

John Constantius said...

My impression is that these kinds of half-science/half-tourism trips to the Arctic & Antarctic are fairly common. I recall attending a lecture & slide show in Chicago over ten years ago by a guy who had been on one (his was a Russian ship as well).

My sense is that the intent of the trip is genuinely scientific research, but they bring wealthy tourists along to help fund the expedition. I'll note that archaeologists have been doing this kind of thing for decades, so no surprise the climate scientists (sorry, climate change scientists) have gotten into the game as well.

As for travel, I just got back from a two-week trip to Southeast Asia. I thought it was great, but you wouldn't have enjoyed it, Ann. I think driving to see family in Austin is more your speed.

FWIW, I was in Austin in October rock climbing in the Barton Creek greenbelt, stayed at the Hotel San Jose. Love it -- good crags right next to downtown, great beer, food & music, plus hippies!

Carter Wood said...

May I offer a neologism? Locabore?

Kidding, just kidding! A chacun son goût.

Rusty said...

Another reason not to travel… I like to be where I have a decent set of rights, reasonably well enforced and believed in.


You're Canadian?

MadisonMan said...

Earthwatch.org is a bigger company for eco-tourism with a potential science tie-in, I think.

John said...

What I would like to see these folks do is recreate the Scott expedition to the South Pole.

Starts in New Zealand, ends in a tent about 20 miles from home basis.

For added realism, scurvy is provided for all participants at no additional charge.

But, hey, global warming, right? Should be much better now.

This story makes me think of the two Minnesota women who tried to hike to the North Pole 6-7 years ago.

They had a lot of experience with this sort of thing but didn't choose their clothing wisely, got severe frostbite and had to abort the trek. They said that, with global warming, they had not expected it would be as cold as it was.

John Henry

John said...

One of the articles I read this morning said there was no danger to the people but said nothing about danger to the ship itself.

Ice is 3-5 meters thick for 11 miles. The biggest icebreaker available only handles 1/3 to 1/2 of that.

If the ship sinks, with its load of diesel and other stuff, seems like it will cause a lot of pollution in an area that is vary environmentally sensitive.

No problem. All these folks care(tm) deeply about the environment. That shields them from any need to actually do anything to protect it.

John Henry

jr565 said...

"Science Question:
How much does a rescue chopper increase the carbon footprint of an Eco-Haji?"


Ha ha, so true.
What about the population bomb idea, also posited by many greenies. Shoudn't we not send any rescue boats or helicopters at all? Cut down on both the carbon footprint AND the population at the same time.

Fernandinande said...

http://motls.blogspot.com/2013/12/alarmists-stuck-in-antarctica-will.html
"Exactly 83 years ago, there was almost no ice on their trajectory which brought some smooth sailing to the polar explorer Douglas Mawson."

Tyrone Slothrop said...

Are there any real-time satellite photos available of the MV Akademik Shokalskiy stuck in the ice? So we can point and laugh?

Michael said...

Althouse. " People who push traveling seem weird to me. People can do what they like. Why evangelize? "

Do you think your understanding of novels set in New York is enhanced by your time in NY, diminished or neutral? Do you believe that you grasp poverty in the same way as someone who has traveled in the third world? You can hear the ice crack on the lake in Madison. A description of ice cracking is more meaningful to you than to someone who has never seen or heard ice.

cubanbob said...

People who push traveling seem weird to me. People can do what they like. Why evangelize? I think there's too much travel propaganda, and given the crazy amount of money spent on travel (and the hypocrisy about carbon footprints), I've made it my thing to weigh in on the other side."

The drive from London to Prague is shorter by 500 miles than the drive from Madison to Austin. Probably more interesting as well. Just an observation.

FullMoon said...

See, whatever happens can be said to have happened for the reason you've already reasoned is the reason for whatever happens to have happened.
I am going to use that sentence in all my future arguments. It's beautiful.

mrs. e said...

What John C. said.

"I am concerned that these people who are currently stuck in the ice got ripped off."

Why? They're adults and made a choice to fulfill some need of theirs. Why not leave them be and not make it about you?

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Althouse really gets around for someone who doesn't like to travel.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

"In America, I have the right to think anything I want."

Except that marriage is between one man and one women, eh Ann?

tim in vermont said...

I call BS on his claim that it is "calved ice off of a glacier." If a huge sheet of ice did calve due to 'global warming,' it would be solid and they wouldn't be able to sail into it.

I would sure love to hear a detailed explanation from this guy, including references to satellite data. Ice has been increasing in Antarctica since the '80s.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png

That Lubos link is pretty funny, here is one where a few years ago, some guys tried to kayak to the North Pole to bring attention to global warming:

http://motls.blogspot.com/2008/09/agw-activists-stuck-in-arctic-ice.html?m=1

Anniella said...

What about the population bomb idea, also posited by many greenies. Shoudn't we not send any rescue boats or helicopters at all? Cut down on both the carbon footprint AND the population at the same time.

Ha. And redistribute some wealth as well. There's no downside!

n.n said...

thermodynamic closure

Original Mike said...

Ya buys your ticket, and you takes your chances.

Scott M said...

Surely this is the only downside of Obama stopping global warming back in 2008.

tim in vermont said...

I often wonder why the same people who profess such concern regarding the carbon footprint of mankind work so hard to move millions of climate friendly Mexican peasants to the US where they will lead carbon intense first world lifestyles.

If you ask them about it to their face, they just give you a dumb look and change the subject, and maybe imply you are racist.

Xmas said...

I'd like to get to Antarctica myself. I've only got 3 continents left to step foot on...

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Ann, I'm not "pushing" travel. My butt hasn't been more than a hundred miles from Salem since I moved here.

I was reacting to your "bucket list" sneer. There are people who want to go to Antarctica for reasons other than ticking something off a list.

I mentioned that my parents were going to a different part of the continent because it means that they're unlikely to get caught in the mess that you linked. I hope.


If retirees have extra money, who cares if they travel?


Well, evidently you do.

Maybe some might say they should go somewhere cheaper and give more money to charity or to their grandchildren.

They have no grandchildren, and so far as I (their sole living child) am concerned, their money is theirs to spend as they like. I would likely not spend it the same way, but it's not my money.

People get suckered into all sorts of commercial ventures, and I am concerned that these people who are currently stuck in the ice got ripped off.

How so? They wanted to go to Antarctica, and they are now experiencing perhaps a bit more Antarctica than they would've liked, but I don't see how they have been "ripped off."

Original Mike said...

I want to go to Antarctica in the winter; for the stars.

Michael said...

Original Mike: I would imagine that what you could see in the night sky there would be simply amazing. Is there any place further from ambient light than there?

MadisonMan said...

I want to go to Antarctica in the winter; for the stars.

But they would look so different.

DanTheMan said...

Can't Obama just raise the ocean levels a bit in just that one spot, and float them out of there?

campy said...

Can't Obama just raise the ocean levels a bit in just that one spot, and float them out of there?

Why should he? If those people had donated that money to his campaign instead of selfishly spending it on this trip, they wouldn't be in this fix now.

traditionalguy said...

What do we need to do to warm the globe, and to warm it fast?

It's to save the holy scientists of Gaia.

Hurry. Hurry. They are all going to die!

Ann Althouse said...

""In America, I have the right to think anything I want." Except that marriage is between one man and one women, eh Ann?"

You really don't understand what rights are. You have the right to think it and the right to say it too, but you certainly don't have the right to stop other people from thinking you are ugly/wrong/dumb or whatever and from shunning you socially. Freedom works all the way around. In a free market, sometimes your product doesn't sell well. You have the right to cry and whine about it, and I have the right to decide I don't like that about you.

Original Mike said...

Althouse, I'm not seeing how these people were duped.

Original Mike said...

"But [the stars] would look so different."

From here in the U.S. we can not see the galaxy from roughly galactic longitude 0-degrees to -90-degrees. IOW, we can't see half of the central region of our galaxy. We can't see the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds (satellite galaxies to our own.). We can't see the best globular cluster. In fact, if you were to compile a list of the top 20 astronomical objects, over half would be in the southern skies.

But you knew that, didn't you. ;)

tim in vermont said...

"Given the recent reorganisation of the ice around the Mertz glacier, glaciologists aboard the Shokalskiy think the ship might have become inadvertently caught in the formation of a new area of fast ice, which could stay in place for several years."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/30/antarctic-rescue-mission-fails

Not sure if this means the ice breaker will be stuck there for years, but the potential for a huge irony exists.

Larry J said...

You'd need a heart of stone not to laugh at those people.

Original Mike said...

"I would imagine that what you could see in the night sky there would be simply amazing. Is there any place further from ambient light than there?"

I think you're right. I have a meter for measuring sky brightness that I use to evaluate dark sky sites. I wonder what I would get in Antarctica?

Original Mike said...

OTOH, there would be a lot of nights you'd have to contend with the light pollution from the aurora. At a star party, when an aurora starts up the crowd groans.

Michael said...

Original Mike: There a couple of sites that show the lights on earth at night. The middle of Africa is pretty free of lights, ditto central Asia and Siberia. Still, I think Antarctica would be the darkest.

Bob said...

This one deserves the "Obnoxious Althouse" tag.

tim in vermont said...

"This one deserves the "Obnoxious Althouse" tag."

Why?

West Texas Intermediate Crude said...

Good bang for your financial, political, and carbon footprint buck to evade light pollution is the McDonald Observatory out here in west Texas.
Otherwise, North Korea would work- we have all seen the satellite views of the sea of darkness that is the workers' paradise at night.

Between the Obamacare rollout and the thought of "climate change scientists" getting caught in the summertime ice and needing diesel powered rescue, I might need a schadenfreude break.

garage mahal said...

If Antarctica has ice that pretty much settles it for me that global warming is a huge joke.

Broomhandle said...


"In America, I have the right to think anything I want. "

Whoooo, doggies! You're going to have this quoted back at you a few times, Althouse.

tim in vermont said...

"If Antarctica has ice that pretty much settles it for me that global warming is a huge joke."

The thing is that the ice extent has been growing there for 30 years.

Peter said...

John Constantius wrote, "My sense is that the intent of the trip is genuinely scientific research, but they bring wealthy tourists along to help fund the expedition."

And before the age of Big (government-funded) Science, just about all costly science that was not self-funded was funded by patrons.

I suppose scientists won't like having to bang tin cups at possible patrons, but for the rest of us- perhaps there's something to be said for self-funded expeditions?


garage mahal said...

And don't even get me started about "global" "warming" when it's like freezing cold here in Wisconsin.

jr565 said...

I'm not a big traveller either. But may i suggest that Althouse is a bit curmudgeonly in her dislike of travel.
Some people want to see all the places in the world that are different than home. Others just want to stay home and be in their little part of the world.
Both have relevance. When I travel I pretty soon want to find my way home asap, since home is where the heart is. But when I'm home for an extended period of time I want to get out and go on adventures because sitting at home all day is or can be boring.

Not sure if there is a right answer ecept personally. But I certianly get the idea of wanting to travel.

jr565 said...

Garge Mahal wrote:
And don't even get me started about "global" "warming" when it's like freezing cold here in Wisconsin.

Only, Al Gore used an example of the ice caps melting to show global warming was happening.
If it can be used to show one thing, why can't the opposite be used to show another thing?
Or that the thing that Al Gore showed was in fact not true.
Remember, it's the pro global warming advocates who used all the hurricanes that were devestating to show that global warming is bringing on these horrendous changes. And then the following year we get a record diminishing hurricanes.
So, if the global warming advocates are going to predict so emphatically they should be man enough to accept when their predictions are wrong.

tim in vermont said...

I don't know if about you, but I am not sure that people aught to be preaching about climate change due to CO2 when traveling to the bottom of the world, most likely by jet aircraft, then by ship. It is plain hypocritical.

It is almost as if they don't really believe themselves that which they preach.

Michael said...

Tim in Vermont: I read the linked articles and did not see that the emphasis of the trip was on global warming. Climate was one of four or five things they intended to observe. They were re-tracing the path of an earlier expedition.

Anglelyne said...

And why so defensive about your parents travels?

People who push traveling seem weird to me.


She's not pushing, she's pushing back at your sanctimony. You're a peregrinaphobe, Althouse. How does somebody getting pleasure from wandering abroad threaten your pleasure at staying home?

Carter Wood: ...locabore...

Brilliant.

Eric Jablow said...

Michael, I believe the best place on Earth to see the stars is North Korea. Perhaps some of these Antarctica travelers should go there instead.

Larry Nelson said...

This isn't original, but I have to say that this story is giving me a schaudenboner.

Michael said...

jr565: I believe the professor's objection to travel springs from her fear of flying. I certainly understand it. I was a white knuckle flyer for many years but was in a profession that required me to fly almost every week. Believe me when I say I hated every moment of it: I knew the sound and feel of everything having to do with flight. The wheels retracting, the flaps going in and out, the feel of the void the millisecond before violent air, clear air turbulence, lightening, snow storms, aborted landings, fly arounds. All of it happened to me. And then I tried something new. I sat by the window and watched the ground in the day and the lights below at night and the blinking of the strobes in cloud. And in not very long I was cured, a miracle, of my fear.

So I understand the professor's fear. But fears retract if faced, especially if you have to do what the fear is all about whether you like it or not.

Michael said...

Eric: The maps indicate that it is pretty dark indeed in N. Korea. China was like that back in the 70s, even the big cities were dark. No cars, frequent blackouts.

Mary Martha said...

I am presently packing for my trip to Antarctica in January.

I am going on a big cruise ship and I don't really care about the environment. A vacation where I would have to help scientists sounds like no fun.

My hobby is photography thusly I like going to places that are different and interesting to photograph.... like Chile, Antarctica and Argentina (destinations on this cruise).

Everyone can do as they wish with their money. I seem to recall Althouse saying that she has chosen to live a life of beauty and freedom (or something like that). I have chosen to live a life of travel and photography and faith.

No bucket list ... rather I have a practice of taking advantage of opportunities as they arise. I like to think of the things I have done as being a sort of 'life list' of cool experiences. Listing accomplishments rather than listing things that may never happen.

This cruise opportunity came up and I figured it would be a great experience. Hopefully my big cruise ship won't get stuck in the ice (though I am certain that the captain will not chance it - far too much money invested int he big cruise ships).

Michael said...

Mary Martha: I believe a friend of mine took the same trip out of Punta Arenas. He loved it. Love Chile and Argentina but have not made it that far south. Yet.

Wonderful trip

Rusty said...

garage mahal said...
If Antarctica has ice that pretty much settles it for me that global warming is a huge joke.

You do understand that it's summer in the southern hemisphere,right?

traditionalguy said...

The explanation for warming cycles and cooling cycles like today's serious cooling has been known for 8 years. the actual science is settled.

When solar eruptions (sunspots) go quiet there are more cloud formations and solar radiation warms the sea and earth. Every golfer knows sunny days are hot and a cloud passing overhead cool you off. It' that simple.

when heavy solar flares erupt they block the cosmic rays that seed cloud formation, and the solar
radiation heats up more of the Globe.

CO2 has near zero effect on warming. It does cause crop abundance, but that is all it does as a miniscule trace gas.

CO2 warming is All Hoax. It is a world government BIG LIE.

Mike and Sue said...

"In America, I have the right to think anything I want.

Another reason not to travel… I like to be where I have a decent set of rights, reasonably well enforced and believed in."

-A.A.

Amen to that.

Fred Drinkwater said...

Steve: So sorry, not true. The 3-leg dog that hung out on Sproul Plaza (Berkeley) in the mid-70's was named Ludwig. I actually think the ratty red bandanna around the dog's neck is the mandatory bit.

Michael K said...

"In a free market, sometimes your product doesn't sell well. You have the right to cry and whine about it, and I have the right to decide I don't like that about you."

Sometimes someone comes along that you don't want to sell to. That's OK as long as they aren't gay. Then you are indentured to provide your product.

John Constantius said...

Althouse is afraid of flying? From previous posts I'd gathered that she merely hates traveling in coach class (I don't blame her), is unwilling to pay for business/first class, and doesn't have the frequent flier miles to get free upgrades.

If I had to fly coach and stay in a La Quinta or Best Western, I suspect I'd hate travel also.

Michael said...

john C: I may have it wrong but I believe she is afraid to fly. Rationalizing from there it is the crowds, the incessant announcements, the small seats, etc. But she has averred that she is afraid to fly.



RecChief said...

no wonder they changed it to "Climate Change". As I shovel snow again, and this is just a normal midwestern winter, I'm laughing.

RecChief said...

John said...
One of the articles I read this morning said there was no danger to the people but said nothing about danger to the ship itself.

Ice is 3-5 meters thick for 11 miles. The biggest icebreaker available only handles 1/3 to 1/2 of that.

If the ship sinks, with its load of diesel and other stuff, seems like it will cause a lot of pollution in an area that is vary environmentally sensitive.

No problem. All these folks care(tm) deeply about the environment. That shields them from any need to actually do anything to protect it.

You beat me to it. I was thinking the same thing.

Illuninati said...

Althouse said:
" You have the right to think it and the right to say it too, but you certainly don't have the right to stop other people from thinking you are ugly/wrong/dumb or whatever and from shunning you socially."

I'm not sure about this. Do straight people really have the right to organize to shun gay people or would they be convicted for hate speech? If the rules don't apply both ways, then our liberties are in danger.

RecChief said...

Althouse said...
""In America, I have the right to think anything I want." Except that marriage is between one man and one women, eh Ann?"

You really don't understand what rights are. You have the right to think it and the right to say it too, but you certainly don't have the right to stop other people from thinking you are ugly/wrong/dumb or whatever and from shunning you socially. Freedom works all the way around. In a free market, sometimes your product doesn't sell well. You have the right to cry and whine about it, and I have the right to decide I don't like that about you.

Unless of course you actually say it out loud. Then you are vilified as a hate speech spewer. Ask Phil Robertson. Not debated with, but simply screamed at.

RecChief said...

tim in vermont said...
I don't know if about you, but I am not sure that people aught to be preaching about climate change due to CO2 when traveling to the bottom of the world, most likely by jet aircraft, then by ship. It is plain hypocritical.

It is almost as if they don't really believe themselves that which they preach.

I'll believe in CAGW/ Climate Change when rich, liberal, climate change true believers (?, hahaha) stop buying oceanfront property at exorbitant prices.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/greenhouse/post/2010/05/how-green-is-al-gores-9-million-montecito-ocean-front-villa/1

Illuninati said...

If there were no air transportation the people on the ship could be stranded there for the winter and could potentially lose their lives if they were to run out of supplies. Summers are short down there and as more water freezes and the ice expands, they could end up many miles from open water.

John Lynch said...

Experiences are not accomplishments.

Fen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fen said...

"The explanation for warming cycles and cooling cycles like today's serious cooling has been known for 8 years. the actual science is settled."

Bullshit. Climate scientists are scrambling to explain why their models are running hotter than the (now) observable temp data.

If they had "known for 8 years", they would have revised their computer models instead of becoming the laughingstocks they are now.

BTW, after all the bogus data and broken models we've seen, anyone claiming "the science is settled" is an idiot.

Cedarford said...

Michael said...
Original Mike: There a couple of sites that show the lights on earth at night. The middle of Africa is pretty free of lights, ditto central Asia and Siberia. Still, I think Antarctica would be the darkest.
==================
Add places in the Pacific well clear of shipping lanes and islands, mainlands. And portions of upper Canada and Greenland....

But absence of light is just one factor in optimum stargazing, astronmical research. Most light spectrum observatories are high on Chilean, Hawaiian, Euro alps, or out in space. The higher you go, the less moisture and dust obscures things. Higher you go, less disorting layers of atmosphere you have to deal with until you reach "Hubble opimum" conditions.

Original Mike said...

Atmospheric water vapor sucks.

Cedarford said...

John Lynch said...
Experiences are not accomplishments.

=====================
Yes and no.
It is a good saying.
But people tend to admire those that amass a lot of life experiences - things that really do not involve "accomplishing" anything specific - but in toto - well travelled, having met interesting people, pursued interests that required no great skill, with tales to tell - that in sum - that in itself is seen as an accomplishment in an individual.

Madison Mike said...

My dad, a non environmentalist, went on an Elder Hostel trip to the Falkland Islands and Antarctica in the '90's when he was about 85-90. Current cost ranges from $8000-$13000. His main comment was that the penguins in Antarctica had had no exposure to humans so they would have no problem walking between one's feet while at the Falklands, they kept their distance.

Mountain Maven said...

I think it's hilarious as did Steyn on Rush today. Global warming fraudster 1%ers stuck in ice in the summer.

If they thought it was a real crisis they would act like it.

Still waiting for them to denounce air travel and dope the way they do SUVs and cigarettes

tmitsss said...

* This is the largest and most expensive Antarctic expedition ever mounted by Australia.
* It is being funded almost entirely by the Australian Taxpayer, as is the rescue operation.
* It’s not about “tourists”. There is the ship’s crew, the BBC documentary crew, the Guardian Reporters, a bunch of mad climate scientists, and a whole heap teachers and PhD students who actually paid for passage so they could be unpaid “research assistants” to the mad scientists.
* By the time this little “Climate Change PR fiasco” is over, the cost to the Australian Taxpayers will run into several millions of dollars.

http://joannenova.com.au/2013/12/antarctic-ice-swallows-boat-media-spin/


John Lynch said...

The irony is that the technological progress decried by climate change activists is going to save their lives.

John Lynch said...

This is a good place to mention the Endurance and Ernest Shackleton.

The men on that ship all survived the sinking and had to rescue themselves. Anyone think this bunch could, even with 21st century technology and a century of experience?

Pookie Number 2 said...

(Y)ou certainly don't have the right to stop other people from thinking you are ugly/wrong/dumb or whatever and from shunning you socially.

That's the rub, though. People like Althouse are trying so hard to convince themselves that people not buying into the 'homosexuality is normal' pretense are "ugly" and "dumb" because they (the Althouses) know that they (the non-self-deluders) actually are not "wrong".

gerry said...

This just in, from the same area into which these clowns are frozen:

MAWSON’S EXPEDITION.
Sir Douglas Mawson's second expedition
on Scott’s Discovery to Antarctic
waters south of the Indian Ocean and
Australia Is by this time already near
the coast which he skirted and explored
In the Summer of 1929-30. He identifled
Enderby and Kemp Lands, first seen
by British explorers a hundred years be-
fore. He found new territory and named
it MacRobertson Land after a Melbourne
patron. He put an area of 150,000 square
miles on the map. The coast line was
charted. Land and islands were claimed
for the Crown. Tons of rock and mineral
ore were brought home. Seven hundred
and fifty deep-sea soundings were made.
The sea floor about the Crozet Islands,
Kerguelen and Heard Island was exam
ined. Ocean currents were noted, and the
chemical nature of the sea water was de-
termined. Observations of whales, seals
and bird life were recorded.
The New York Times
Published: December 28, 1930
Copyright The New York Times

via WUWT

It seems it was a lot warmer and there was a lot less ice, eighty-three years ago.

Will said...

Thank you DanTheMan and campy for your comments on ocean levels!

I laughed so hard I almost choked on my coffee, which would have been a disaster since my Obamacare doesn't kick in until tomorrow ( I hope)

Paul said...

I can't gripe about them paying 20K bucks to travel on the ship.

How much do people pay to climb Mount Everest?

We went to Alaska this summer and it cost 10 grand (but we paid for the kids and their spouses to come with us.) Yes we went by ship.

The funny part is the global warming scientist. Every time they do something it turns into a blizzard.

Roweliza Lulu said...

Hi – It’s good to read such interesting stuff on the Internet as I have been able to discover here. I agree with much of what is written here and I’ll be coming back to this website again. Thanks again for posting such great reading material!!
Test and Tag Brisbane
rcd testing services brisbane

Ummey Rezwana said...

I am very enjoyed for this blog. I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me. I know something information, to know you can click here
Test and Tag brisbane
rcd testing services brisbane