Living Inside Their Own Heads

This is what our friends imagine the Arctic looks like. Full of poor, starving, depressed  creatures with bearly enough energy to move – trapped inside an eternal summer of hellish temperatures brought on by evil humans and their SUVs.

The picture below is what it actually looks like in Barrow today.

This past Arctic melt season had the latest start and was the shortest melt season on record. Summer was the coldest on record in the high Arctic. This autumn, ice has been forming at the fastest rate on record and temperatures in the high Arctic have been their coldest in six years.

But facts and details have nothing to do with the global climate disruption story, and of course it is the hottest year ever.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Living Inside Their Own Heads

  1. Gneiss says:

    Many of the Arctic scientists I know spend time in the field every year, so they have a pretty accurate first-hand understanding, even apart from their data, of what the Arctic is like and how things are changing. I was in a room last week with people who have done icebreaker transects, ice cores, plankton measurements, oceanographic cruises, snow sampling, or biological experiments on the tundra within the past year. Not “Living inside their own heads,” that’s a fantasy of someone far from science.

    But I’m curious, tell us about stevengoddard’s “Real Science” experience in the Arctic?

    • Do you know any Arctic scientists who endorse this Daily Mail drivel?

    • Amino says:

      Everything is normal. What is happening now has happened before. There still is no evidence that what is happening in the Arctic has not happened before.

    • Amino says:

      Many of the Arctic scientists I know spend time in the field every year, so they have a pretty accurate first-hand understanding

      Do they talk about comparing what is happening now to what happened during the Medieval Warm Period?

    • Amino says:

      Many of the Arctic scientists I know spend time in the field every year, so they have a pretty accurate first-hand understanding

      Were they in the Arctic doing studies during the 1950’s to 1970’s when Arctic Ice mass was much larger than now? Do they have studies from that time period?

    • Amino says:

      ….and how things are changing.

      Gneiss,

      What are the changes? Have the changes happened before?

    • Amino says:

      Gneiss says:
      October 3, 2010 at 9:44 pm

      ….icebreaker transects, ice cores, plankton measurements….

      Have you seen this peer reviewed study?

      Peer reviewed study says current Arctic sea ice is more extensive than most of the past 9000 years….Arctic sea ice extent at the end of the 20th century was more extensive than most of the past 9000 years. The paper also finds that Arctic sea ice extent was on a declining trend over the past 9000 years, but recovered beginning sometime over the past 1000 years and has been relatively stable and extensive since.

      http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/23/surprise-peer-reviewed-study-says-current-arctic-sea-ice-is-more-extensive-than-most-of-the-past-9000-years/

    • Amino says:

      ……a fantasy of someone far from science…..

      You are talking about Al Gore’s movie?

    • Amino says:

      Gneiss says:
      October 3, 2010 at 9:44 pm

      people who have done icebreaker transects

      It is good that they were in icebreakers. There are people who have fantasies about the Arctic being freely navigable so they go out in boats, sometimes even Kayaks, and some have had to be rescued by icebreakers.

  2. Gneiss says:

    Actually, I forgot to mention that several of the scientists I talked with last week have been involved with polar bear (or walrus) related studies. And they do all take the problems seriously, unlike you.

    So again, I’m still curious. You don’t seem to be a scientist, but what is your Arctic experience, behind all these posts?

  3. Amino says:

    several of the scientists I talked with last week

    Where was this meeting? Why was it held?

  4. Amino says:

    And they do all take the problems seriously, unlike you.

    Many, many scientists don’t take the “problems” of global warming seriously. Have you heard of any of them?

  5. Suzanne says:

    Hey Gneiss, Have you talked with Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu, IARC Founding Director and Professor of Physics, Emeritus, who was the the director of the International Arctic Research Institute at the University of Alaska? He has spent his career studying the periodicity of changes in the Artcic. Have you talked with Dr. Mitchell Taylor, a Canadian biologist and director of wildlife research for the Arctic Government of Nunavit or Dr. Susan Crockford,evolutionary biologist and paleozoologist at the University of Victoria in Canada, Nigel Marven, naturalist, zoologist and botanist and Dr. Olafur Ingolfsson, University of Iceland. All have done extensive work in the Arctic and on the basis of their research find the polor bear in no danger. The studies that show alarm about the polar bear are based on computer models and completely forget that the polar bear survived the last interglacial which was much warmer that the present.

    “There is no evidence to suggest that the polar bear or its food supply is in danger of disappearing entirely with increased Arctic warming, regardless of the dire fairy-tale scenarios predicted by computer models,”‘

  6. Gneiss says:

    Amino writes,
    “Do they receive grant money to study ‘global warming’?”

    Not everybody receives grants at all. Among those who do and don’t, most often they are studying how things are — whether the reality is related to warming, cooling or neither. For example, what are the characteristics and origins of water masses at different depths within the Arctic basin, where and how are they moving, what will it affect as they do. Or how can we forecast ice better, or what’s happening in the subarctic seas. No research grant I ever heard of says you have to find warming.

    “Do they talk about comparing what is happening now to what happened during the Medieval Warm Period?”

    Yes, of course they do.

    “Is the polar bear population decreasing Gneiss?”

    If that’s a real question, ask an expert. This looks up to date:
    http://pbsg.npolar.no/en/status/status-table.html

    “Many, many scientists don’t take the “problems” of global warming seriously. Have you heard of any of them?”

    I’ve read articles by the usual suspects, who are loud and yet quite a small group. Where do you find these many, many scientists who “don’t take the “problems” of global warming seriously”?

    • intrepid_wanders says:

      You have got to be kidding!

      10 out of 19 population groups have DATA INSUFFICIENT for the “Status”. Then, you go to the fantastic “Population Map” (http://pbsg.npolar.no/en/status/population-map.html) and find that half of the Arctic has no information, but the Chukchi Sea with no population counts, because of “Illegal Harvest” and “Sea-Ice Conditions”, the population is declining.

      Then, this year, since they have not done anything universally stupid since Copenhagen 2009, decide to contradict the ACTUAL EXPERTS of the Nunavut Nation (http://pbsg.npolar.no/en/news/archive/2010/Nunavut-norisk.html).

      No wonder it is hard to take you serious…

    • SBVOR says:

      Gneiss,

      It seems your PBSG — just like your IPCC — has a nasty habit of stacking the deck in favor of their predetermined, purely political conclusions.

      Click here for the dirty little secret about your beloved PBSG.

      Click here to further debunk the polar bear and Arctic sea ice hysteria.

    • Amino says:

      How many signed the Oregon Petition???

      Should we pretend it’s a small number?

      • ChrisD says:

        How many signed the Oregon Petition??? Should we pretend it’s a small number?

        No, but you can pretend that many of them are actually qualified to express an informed scientific opinion.

        Personally, I don’t think that a veterinary surgeon specializing in large equines is any better equipped to express an expert opinion on climate science than my mother-in-law is.

  7. R. de Haan says:

    Arctic Sea Ice is ok, polar bears are ok, seals and robs are ok…. tell us your real problems.

  8. SBVOR says:

    I wonder if the alarmists will ever admit that the polar bears have already survived one or more (probably many) episodes during which there was zero Arctic sea ice during the summers.

    If polar bears can adapt to life at the San Diego zoo, I’m pretty darn sure they can survive Arctic summers without any sea ice.

    Click here for the facts which refute the polar bear and Arctic sea ice hysteria.

  9. chris y says:

    Gneiss-
    “No research grant I ever heard of says you have to find warming.”

    Almost all grant topics having to do with climate (whether studying nature, predicting impacts or inventing technologies to mitigate emissions) at Federal agencies (NSF, EPA, DOE, DOT, etc.) assume global warming is dire and caused by human activities. No recent research grant I ever heard of is openly questioning the tenets of CAGW.

    • SBVOR says:

      Every scientist publishing anything related to climate change knows that the fastest way to ensure your next research project will not be funded is to even come close to suggesting that AGW might not be a problem.

    • ChrisD says:

      The fundamental problem with this is that most research doesn’t even address global warming per se. A study on how salinity affects ocean currents is neither “pro” nor “anti” AGW. It’s just research.

      And they can get funding to do it.

      And what this means is that the whole “The vast majority of the world’s scientists are endorsing AGW so that they can get more grants to do more phony research and write more fraudulent papers for peanuts” denier meme just collapses completely.

  10. Amino says:

    Gneiss,

    Are you an environmentalist? Are you the member or head of an environmental organization?

    • ChrisD says:

      Are you an oil industry executive? Are you a member of, or the head of, an association of fossil fuels producers?

      See how easy that is?

      See how it adds nothing to the conversation?

  11. Amino says:

    Gneiss says:

    You don’t seem to be a scientist

    You say Steven Goddard is not a scientist. Do you know what you are talking about? It looks like you don’t know what you are doing. Is that what it is? Or is it something else?

  12. Scarlet Pumpernickel says:

    GLOBAL WARMING, I have a picture of an arctic wolf with no ice, please pay me $100,000 Daily Mail and write a story about it as there are arctic wolves with no ice in the middle of summer!

  13. Gneiss says:

    Amino writes,
    “Is Steven Goddard a scientist Gneiss?”

    No, he is not.

  14. Gneiss says:

    chris y writes,
    “No recent research grant I ever heard of is openly questioning the tenets of CAGW.”

    This might be true regarding what you’ve ever heard of, but it’s not true about research. The “CAGW” acronym seems to exist mainly as a third stage of denial on the blogosphere. I haven’t seen it in a scientific paper or grant.

    Most climate research sets out to learn more about if, how or why things are changing, and researchers report back what they find. Some things aren’t changing, some are changing faster or slower than expected. Fields like ice sheet dynamics are very dynamic themselves. The most common finding is, “It’s more complicated than we thought,” but with each step we learn more.

    Sometimes things are better than expected. Often, they turn out to be worse.

  15. Gneiss says:

    Returning to my unanswered question inspired by stevengoddard’s “living inside their own heads” theme above:

    “But I’m curious, tell us about stevengoddard’s “Real Science” experience in the Arctic?”

  16. Gneiss says:

    SBVOR writes,
    “If polar bears can adapt to life at the San Diego zoo, I’m pretty darn sure they can survive Arctic summers without any sea ice.”

    No wonder stevengoddard’s fan base believes he’s a scientist.

    • SBVOR says:

      Gneiss,

      1) As to whether Steven Goddard is a scientist — I don’t know and I don’t care. The evidence he presents stands on its own merit.

      2) Since you are obviously so enamored of the logical fallacy of an appeal to authority, I presume you will be more inclined to accept my evidence once you know that I am an Environmental Scientist.

      3) I am also educated enough to know that polar bears have already survived Arctic summers without any sea ice. In fact, even the alarmists at NSIDC admit that the polar bears probably survived such conditions as recently as 5,000 years ago.

      Again, click here for the inconvenient truths.

  17. Nick says:

    Doctor Strangelove was a scientist!

    The story shows the absurdities of the nuclear arms race and officials of both The United States and The Soviet Union are presented almost as comic caricatures of highly placed government bureaucrats.

    AGW?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s