July 27, 2015

Ice breakers researching "global warming" called back to clear heaviest ice in 20 years

Brian LilleyArchive

Lest we forget, back in 2009, Al Gore said that "some" of the models show that there's a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice free within the next five to seven years.

It's 2015 and as we approach the next man-made global warming confab in Paris, an inconvenient number of headlines are proving that Al Gore and the AGW alarmists were wrong, and we won't be getting "the fever" they warned us about. They've been proven wrong on the science and could be proven wrong on the economics if people would actually look at what these agreements are calling for. The only warning people need to hear now is that Paris won't be about science at all but about money; who's going to get it and who's going to pay.


JOIN TheRebel.media for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

VISIT our NEW group blog The Megaphone!
It’s your one-stop shop for rebellious commentary from independent and fearless readers and writers.

READ Ezra Levant's bestselling books debunking environmentalist propaganda against the energy industry:
Groundswell: The Case for Fracking

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-07-29 10:31:00 -0400
tens of thousands of Canadians experience climate change every year: they are called snowbirds.
commented 2015-07-29 08:42:09 -0400
Egil said, “What concerns me more is our government total lack of backbone in standing up to this hoax.”

Here is where you are wrong. Harper has stood up against it, but probably not as much as he could have.

1) he correctly backed out of Kyoto
2) he refused to sign UN climate change agreement at Copenhagen in 2009
3) he refused to go to the UN climate change conference in Durban 2011

I think there was more, I just cannot remember them all.

Harper has been against the “Climate Change” scam since the beginning, but there are times making small concessions is a politically wise move. I would rather he make those small concessions and remain in that PM chair than make a politically suicidal move and then we end up with Justin or Thomas.
commented 2015-07-29 07:12:42 -0400
“But the fact is four corporations own all of American news, and they are all equally scared of losing Budweiser or whoever as their advertisers. The greatest propaganda coup of the American right has been to convince its citizens that we are in the grip of a liberal conspiracy. As a result, Obama is to the right of Richard Nixon on most issues. And there is we believe, certainly some space to exploit there.” He pauses, smiles, concludes his lesson for the day. “And we, Vice, aim to exploit it.”
This article was amended on 25/03/13 to clarify the starting point of Spike Jonze’s involvement with Vice. Qoute from http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/mar/23/shane-smith-vice-interview

Positive News is owned by it’s readers http://positivenews.org.uk/about/positive-news/
commented 2015-07-29 03:15:36 -0400
It has been established that the Science is Wrong on G.W.
What concerns me more is our government total lack of backbone in standing up to this hoax.
commented 2015-07-28 21:43:49 -0400
Al Gore sounds like he could be a good over-the-top fiction writer.
commented 2015-07-28 20:33:43 -0400
“Let’s all get behind THEREBEL.MEDIA and fund it monthly just like we were subscribed to it.”

Already do. :)
commented 2015-07-28 20:00:55 -0400
Absolutely right on the mark, Peter, and this is what I mean about THEREBEL.MEDIA bringing Canadians news that you just won’t see in the Watermelon MSM. C’mon folks, I’m donating $30.00 per month to THEREBEL.MEDIA, and I’m not rich, but I consider it good value for money. Let’s all get behind THEREBEL.MEDIA and fund it monthly just like we were subscribed to it.
commented 2015-07-28 16:02:54 -0400
Eileen said, "I am as concerned about our environment as the rest of you, but, in my own limited way, I try to do something practical about it such as planting trees, etc. "

I echo that statement. I am also very concerned about the environment. That is why I am against this Global Warming theory because it is false and takes away from the real pollution issues such as waste land fill sites, toxic waste dumps, coastal cities dumping raw sewage into the ocean, actual toxic gasses such as Carbon Monoxide and related toxic gasses emitted from the burning of fossil fuels.

Planting trees is a very practical way to “install” more air filters on the planet and provide more trees or harvesting. The cessation of trawling ocean floor which can destroy coral reefs.

The billions pumped into the fake GW scam takes money from solving these real environmental issues.
commented 2015-07-28 15:38:50 -0400
As a causation of global warming/climate change, many scientists adhere to the anthropogenic global warming theory. However, I would prefer that the proper “scientific theory” model be used, and that this “theory” instead be viewed as a hypothesis which can be subjected to rigorous scientific testing over time. “A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be proven or rejected, just like hypotheses. Theories can be improved or modified as more information is gathered so that the accuracy of the prediction becomes greater over time.” At the moment, there exists much doubt as to whether the prediction is accurate. Only time will tell.
To use conflicting scientific data to categorically state something is true simply because it is, and then to profit off such statements is demeaning to those who are sufficiently educated and who wish to further question the data. Worse yet is the hypocrisy that is displayed by those who fear monger, but who continue to leave giant carbon footprints behind themselves (Gore, Suzuki, etc.)
I am as concerned about our environment as the rest of you, but, in my own limited way, I try to do something practical about it such as planting trees, etc.
commented 2015-07-28 15:10:58 -0400
ROBERT BARBER says," I study ecosystems and their constituent parts, and it’s pretty clear that many species of animal are going to become extinct when subject to an environment that changes too quickly."

And this is blamed entirely on man? Seems awfully omnipotent to me. Nothing we can or don’t do will slow or stop these events from happening. It would make more sense to me to prepare for these inevitable variabilities.
If they can make the masses believe that they are responsible, they will be able to manipulate the masses. The ultimate power trip. Truly totalitarian. The bottom line is, we are being played. Does anyone really believe Al Gore cares one hoot about the effects of climate change on the earth? He sees the money making scheme of the century, and is positively giddy over the power potential.
commented 2015-07-28 14:40:12 -0400
The same concerns about Arctic warming were raised over ninety years ago. The U.S Monthly Weather Review of November 1922 contained a report from the US Consul in Bergen, Norway, saying “The Arctic seems to be warming up. Reports from fisherman, seal hunters and explorers who sail the seas about Spitzbergen and the eastern Arctic , all point to a radical change in climatic conditions, and hitherto unheard-of high temperatures in that part of the earth’s surface.”

The article goes on to say “Ice conditions were exceptional. In fact so little ice has never before been noted. … Many old landmarks are so changed as to be unrecognizable. … At many points where glaciers formerly extended far into the sea they have entirely disappeared.”

You can see the full report at docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/050/mwr-050-11-0589a.pdf.

Obviously, Arctic melting is not a new or unprecedented phenomenon. It was remarked upon over ninety years ago. Furthermore, in order for us to be remarking on Arctic melting today, there must have been a major freeze-up between then and now. This seems to indicate that Arctic melting comes and goes.

What about navigating the Northwest Passage? Has this ever been done before? Actually, yes. Some seventy years ago in the nineteen forties the RCMP schooner St Roch did it several times. In 1940-1942 she sailed across the Arctic ocean west to east, and in 1944 made the east to west return trip. During the period 1944-1948 she again patrolled Arctic waters. The St Roch was not a 30,000 ton nuclear-powered ice breaker, but was instead a 300 ton wooden schooner. Granted, she was a tough little boat designed for Arctic conditions, but she had no real ice-breaking capability, so there must have been open water for her all the way.

Later on, in the 1960’s, 70’s and 80’s, the Arctic froze up again. The current generation of senior Arctic scientists all began their careers in this time frame, so their personal experience has always been that the Arctic is an unbroken expanse of ice. Then, starting some time in the 1990’s, the Arctic began unfreezing. Ice cover, particularly with satellite imagery to record it, visibly decreased over a period of ten to twenty years. Yikes, they said, this is unprecedented (at least it’s never happened in our experience) – it must be due to global warming.

Even the most rabid global warming enthusiasts generally concede that there would have been very little man-made global warming before 1920, so it’s difficult to ascribe the documented Arctic warm-up at that time to human causes. Furthermore, the period when the Arctic froze up again, beginning about 1960, was just when man-made release of carbon dioxide really got into its stride. Having the Arctic warm up when there isn’t much CO2 being produced, then cooling down when there is doesn’t fit too well with global warming theory.

So here’s an alternative theory. Arctic ice comes and goes for its own good reasons in about a seventy year cycle. (On this basis we should be more or less at the warm peak in the Arctic and be heading back to freeze-up conditions in the next ten or fifteen years.) I’m not going to speculate as to what those reasons might be, but one thing I am fairly confident of is that ascribing the current warm period in the Arctic solely to man-made global warming, as the climate change enthusiasts would have us do, is not an argument which stands up to detailed examination.
commented 2015-07-28 14:32:18 -0400
It is also sad that it is hard to get unbiased opinions. So often I hear news items on the news by people who I thought would be a little more responsible. One good example is every so often including recently we hear reports of a planet being discovered that may contian ice or water and everyone jumps on the band wagon hoping their might be life. I WISH, but the reality is there is so much more requirements in order for life to exist that the odds are so ridiculously low that they should already know it isn’t possible. Serious scientists know this and yet they play along. Why? Partly because they want to believe and partly because they get their funding and it sure helps if you look like you are making progress. I know this is a bit off topic but it is just one example of many how you are not always getting a straight story even within the scientific community.
commented 2015-07-28 14:23:49 -0400
I try to keep an open mind but I do get tired of one side trying to shut down the conversation. That is not how science is supposed to be done. Any honest scientist would welcome the best and strongest evidence both for and against their theories and would not want to silence their critics or suggest that having dialogue might give them credibility. If your evidence is strong enough then eventually one idea will win out and replace another. No on here denies climate change happens, it always has. No one here denies animal species have died off. The fact that the dinosaurs are no longer with us proves that, however man wasn’t present to cause their mass extinction and we would like more evidence that the climate change is actually being caused not by man but by nature as it has in times past and when as in my province we have just had two of the coldest winters we have experienced in the past 30 years, we would like to know how this is not evidence against global warming? I don’t deny that people can have an influence on their environment but I also remember that 30 years ago the scientists were all lined up saying the ice age was returning and I also saw a news item I believe on CTV just a few weeks ago where Nasa was still claiming the ice shelves were going to be gone by 2015 and yet other sources claim they have increased over the last few years? The most troubling aspect of all this is that one side would want the other to just shut up. That is not how science is done.
commented 2015-07-28 14:01:56 -0400
Why can’t we have a class action suit against Al Gore, David Suzuki, and many others? A real massive class action tort court. How many plaintiffs?
commented 2015-07-28 13:59:45 -0400
Helena, going to Vice for any environmental information is like relying on the CBC for truthful reporting on Conservatives.
There are as many sources out there which say that indeed the Greenland ice sheet is growing as say its melting.

Why can’t the believers of the man made climate change religion, consider for one moment that this is a social engineering ploy. They are allowing themselves to be controlled.
commented 2015-07-28 13:52:19 -0400
I wonder how rich Al Gore is now. When he left the WH, he was said to be worth less than 10 million, but a few years back, was said to be worth roughly 70 million,although who knows,except his Accountant. I read recently that the EU carbon trading scheme is still going on full bore,and Al of course, was a part of that scheme,as he was with the Chicago carbon exchange. In Europe, carbon credits are traded to the tune of 243 billion per year,and Al’s trading company is right there in the middle of it all, taking their cut.

243 billion is REAL money, so how much is Al worth these days,and is any of it finding it’s way into secret Swiss bank accounts? But I guess those are questions we shouldn’t ask of the man who is saving the planet.
commented 2015-07-28 13:37:50 -0400
While listening to the Savage Nation Michael mentioned in his 25 years of boating in the San Francisco area the bay has not risen or fallen 1 centimeter in 25 years, So much for global warming, This is what the religion of climate change, global warming should do with the billion of dollars they have scammed for us tax payers they should build an island next to the island that communist China is building in the South China Seas.
commented 2015-07-28 12:51:19 -0400
Robert Barber, you just don’t get it do you? It is scientist who say milk is good for you one day and bad for you the next. I am sure students of Natural Systems and Ecology 50 years from now will marvel at how naive you were. Please go and look at what they were teaching in the 70’s and 80’s about Humanities. According to those teachings, mankind should not exist today. The climate outcome of the future will be determined by forces other than mankind.

Now look at the consequences of what people like you preach. Erin Berney just made some great comments. We take food away from the poor and try to make fuel with it. What part of this stupidity do you not understand? In the seventies, in a well televised protest, David Suzuki successfully prevented a business from getting established in a town in northern BC. Today, that town has an unemployment rate of 75% and almost the whole town is hooked on drugs. I guarantee you that this town would have been better off if Suzuki was not around. Do you understand what the Keystone pipeline prevention is costing us? What benefits would it give to Health Care, Education, and social programs if that pipeline was built. Instead we take money away from these programs and and subsidize windmill projects. So when you are talking about the poor around the Equator. It is environmentalists like you who are responsible for strifes.

People like Gore and Suzuki should be criminally charged. And please add Child Molestation to Suzuki’s charges.
commented 2015-07-28 11:39:06 -0400
Robert says, “Now are you guys saying that everything me and my fellow students have been taught is a lie fabricated by our lecturers?”

All evidence disproves the Global Warming theory. 18 year no increase in the global mean temperature when the CO2 level has been rising steadily. The polar caps, both, are increasing, not decreasing. Less natural disasters than previous years.

Why cannot the climate scientists that believe in this Global Warming theory look at what is happening around them? It contradicts their theory.
commented 2015-07-28 11:12:36 -0400
“Science is based on probability”. Nice to hear you admit that it’s not carved in stone the way the “climate change” warriors would have us believe. Well, I for one, think that you, your fellow students, and yes even your lecturers are “probably wrong”. But that’s that’s just my opinion and what the hell do I know?
commented 2015-07-28 10:37:56 -0400
I’m studying Natural Systems and Ecology at the University of Nottingham.
Now are you guys saying that everything me and my fellow students have been taught is a lie fabricated by our lecturers? Science is based on probability, no scientist will confirm anything with certainty, even physical constants such as the speed of light are known within certain confidence levels. Obviously Al gore was giving a worst case scenario, which is what SOME of the models say. So what Marjorie Spacek has commented below is just an example of grabbing anything you can as a last attempt to believe climate change isn’t happening.
Unfortunately for the planet, the worst affected places will be nearer the equator, generally countries that are poorer and less able to deal with the consequences. Ironically, countries such as America will feel some of smallest effects of climate change, even though they are the main contributors. That’s why the summit in Paris makes perfect sense, these countries will fall the hardest in a rapidly changing climate.
Futhermore politicians aren’t taking all our money in taxes to combat climate change, in fact very little is being done to solve the issue, much to the alarm of the scientific community. I study ecosystems and their constituent parts, and it’s pretty clear that many species of animal are going to become extinct when subject to an environment that changes too quickly. Many ways of life are already in jeopardy such as those living around Lake Enriquillo in the Dominican Republic; they’ve had their way of life utterly destroyed by changes in climate and weather.
So in summary, stop spreading lies, because ultimately it will bite your kids in the butt.
commented 2015-07-28 10:24:26 -0400
Like David Suzuki, like Al Gore, like Catherine Porter – all need to rely on pure lies to further their narrative. Sad, really.
commented 2015-07-28 09:53:27 -0400
This has been so sad in its entire compass: diverting attention from real problems, creating a distrust of all science, providing access to all sources of information (the mainstream media) by unscrupulous types, creating the impression in the world that politicians in the West are easily mislead, seriously harming the poorest of the world, etc. We have had the spectacle of leaders of the major countries of the West minimizing real dangers by placing the “global warming caused by humans” as the “most serious problem facing mankind!” This is so bizarre, and so truly evil, that it boggles the mind! The entire charade has been condemned by the statements of the global warming proponents themselves. They have stated repeatedly that it is simply a means to an end with no basis in reality, and the end they seek is a frightening one. Notice that the language used is full of probabilities: “some models show,” “could be,” “if,” “could be interpreted,” “75% of models,” etc. In New Brunswick, this summer so far has been 11 C degrees cooler than average. Now in my ninth decade, I have seen many such cool summers and many such violent winters as the two most recent ones. Climate changes in cycles.
commented 2015-07-28 09:50:41 -0400
since the ice-age was averted in the ‘70s, the fashionable liberal “cause” has been global warming, climate change, global weirding, and who knows what else. trillions of dollars have been collected (as taxes) to ’fix’ it. what has happened with all this money? don’t tell me that it’s hiding in the ocean.
commented 2015-07-28 08:48:43 -0400
Well AL Gore may have been wrong here but nobody can dispute that he did invent the Internet.
commented 2015-07-28 07:42:32 -0400
The worst offenders on both sides of the world are, as follows: the socialists in western civilized countries who, most of them, are firm believers in global warming, and the Chinese on the other hand, who don’t give a rat’s ass on the aforementioned theory and are too happy to oblige gullible fools as Obama and Gore and take all the manufacturing jobs from the western societies.

Socialism and liberalism are mental and social diseases which will have as an end result the return of humanity to the Bolshevik era of Lenin and Stalin. Go for it, progressives!
commented 2015-07-28 02:37:15 -0400
AGW hype always seems to come back to Al Gore. There have been several such stories about record high arctic ice levels in the past few years, but have you noticed that these stories tend to be reported only when some hapless team of climate scientists was rescued, diverted or somehow had their research trip interrupted? If the arctic sea ice grows and expands but there are no faithful global warmists around to measure the changes, did it really happen?
Why is it A-OK for Mr. Global Warming Himself to profit from the sale of a failing media corporation to Al Jazeera, which is largely funded by middle eastern oil, and the media doesn’t bat an eye? Gore justifies the sale, and his multi-million dollar payout, by claiming Al Jazeera has “the highest quality, most extensive, best climate coverage of any network in the world.” Really?? And the mainstream, western media just accepts this? It’s like they all said, “Oh, well. He’s got a point, there”, and didn’t bother inquiring further. Moreover, they seem not to have even been offended by it.
Meanwhile, Gore and his partners paid $70 million for the already ailing media outlet, and after further mismanaging it to the point of almost needing creditor protection (while Gore raked in $1.2 million in salary and bonuses each year), sold it for a cool $500 million to Qatar-controlled, crude-funded, jihadist Al Jazeera, and the SEC doesn’t even launch an investigation. I suppose the SEC was too busy going after Conrad Black and Martha Stewart at the time to pay much attention.
Al Gore may not control the media, but he sits on the boards of both Apple and Google (and when I learned that, I vowed to go PC and forever more use Bing). And, he influences disastrous government policies like the 2009 U.S. ethanol mandates, which sparked literal “tortilla riots” in parts of Mexico over the rapidly escalating price of corn. Something like 40% of Mexicans get half their daily caloric intake from tortilla, and these mandates caused widespread starvation and malnutrition. The Forbes article “Blood and Gore” has now replaced “Bulled by a Gore” as my favourite headline (see: http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/11/03/blood-and-gore-making-a-killing-on-anti-carbon-investment-hype/)
Even Gore admits the policies were a “mistake”, but somehow dissociates himself from any and all responsibility.
<-- /_page_stream.html -->