I just can't help wondering what it was that the team of global warming researchers were looking to prove when they ventured into the Antarctic with a ship and got stuck in the ice. As of this writing they are still stuck. I thought global warming was "settled science". If that's the case why venture into the Antarctic? Exactly what is it that they were expected to find? Think about it, if they went any farther they would have come across more ice, snow and miserably cold temperatures. Were they thinking they would find less of it?
Was it a challenge to their hypothesis in that they were so very sure that the globe was warming that they could just take a ship into the a frozen hell hole and not get stuck "due to global warming", come back and say "we just sailed deep into the antarctic and didn't get stuck, see, that's global warming for ya"?
And the daily reports of this unimaginable folly is reported un-ironically to a point of media negligence. The New York Daily News just calls them "researchers" (read here) and makes no mention of climate research. CNN just quotes one of the passengers as a "climate change researcher" with no mention of the ships mission. London's Mail Online reports it thus:
They went in search evidence of the world’s melting ice caps, but instead a team of climate scientists have been forced to abandon their mission … because the Antarctic ice is thicker than usual at this time of year.
Thicker than usual? In other words there should have been less ice like in the past, right? In the past when it was colder and the ice caps weren't melting like they are now supposedly.
...The scientists have been stuck aboard the stricken MV Akademik Schokalskiy since Christmas Day, with repeated sea rescue attempts being abandoned as icebreaking ships failed to reach them.
Now that effort has been ditched, with experts admitting the ice is just too thick. Instead the crew have built an icy helipad, with plans afoot to rescue the 74-strong team by helicopter.
I want to know who the "expert" are that "admitted" (under pressure?) that the ice is "too thick". Are they experts in ice? What's that called, iceologists? Are these the same experts who were going to find the melting "ice caps"? Did they actually think they would find anything that resembles anything that they can label "melting" in the antarctic?
What they also failed to do was to retrace the steps of Antarctic explorer Douglas Mawson who a hundred years ago explored the region but was able to go much farther in with a godforsaken miserably cold wooded boat that probably used a sail with a crew eating salt pork. The Mail Online says of this:
The expedition is being lead by Chris Turney, a climate scientist, who was hoping to reach the base camp of Douglas Mawson, one of the most famous Antarctic explorers, and repeat observations done by him in 1912 to see what impact climate change had made...
...The Academic Shokalskiy set off from New Zealand on November 28 to recreate a 100-year-old Australasia expedition first sailed by Sir Douglas Mawson to see how the journey changes using new technology and equipment.
Oh it changed alright. Put that in your data under "failed".
But it's "Climate change", you see, not global warming. In the old terminology it would be reported that a ship of researchers studying global warming got stuck in the ice and could not get out thus preventing the team from observing ice caps melting which would confirm that global warming is real, not that this is needed because when we already know it's settle science.
It just doesn't get any more absurd than this....alright, maybe the Obama presidency comes close.