We’re dooooooooooomed

! This post hasn't been updated in over a year. A lot can change in a year including my opinion and the amount of naughty words I use. There's a good chance that there's something in what's written below that someone will find objectionable. That's fine, if I tried to please everybody all of the time then I'd be a Lib Dem (remember them?) and I'm certainly not one of those. The point is, I'm not the kind of person to try and alter history in case I said something in the past that someone can use against me in the future but just remember that the person I was then isn't the person I am now nor the person I'll be in a year's time.

A report from the US National Snow & Ice Data Centre says that 2008 started with more Arctic sea ice than the start of 2007 but it is now down to the area covered this time last year.  It says that the extra ice was thin so it melted quickly.

The BBC is trying to turn this into a doom and gloom story about climate change with a dodgy prediction that the Arctic will be ice free by 2013 – something that would cause a 7 metre rise in sea levels.  Which is absolute bollocks, of course.

Scientists have already admitted that the next decade will see global cooling and that average temperatures for the last few years have decreased.  We also know from historical records that the “record low” amount of Arctic sea ice the BBC refers to is still bigger than it was a thousand years ago when the Vikings settled Greenland.

So, the facts are:

  • There was more Arctic sea ice at the start of the year than there was at the start of last year
  • There is currently the same amount of Arctic sea ice than there was at the same time last year
  • The average temperature of the planet is decreasing and is expected to continue decreasing for the next decade
  • There is more Arctic sea ice than there was a thousand years ago

Only a committed climate change propagandist could come up with a doom-laden prediction out of something positive.

Technorati Technorati Tags: ,


  1. Axel (1214 comments) says:

    but the arctic ice is in the water, so surely, if it melts, it wont raise sea level, like a big ice cube, covered in polar bear poo!

  2. wonkotsane (1133 comments) says:

    It would because ice floats pretty well meaning most of it is on top of the water. The ice displaces an amount of water quite a lot smaller than its mass so if the entire Arctic ice cap melted we would be right royally fucked to put it bluntly. Good job it’s not going to melt, eh? 😉

  3. I Albion (9 comments) says:

    I put ice cubes in my gin and tonic…if the ice melts the glass does not over flow it stays at the same level,as when the ice went in

  4. KeithS (80 comments) says:

    Sorry Wonko, estimates of the volume of an iceberg below water put it at around nine tenths. Some of that volume may be trapped air, displacing even more water than that frozen in the iceberg. Hence, when the ice does melt, it doesn’t raise the surrounding water very much, if at all.
    However, that doesn’t detract from the points you raised in your article.

  5. wonkotsane (1133 comments) says:

    Is that the case for the actual pack ice though Keith? The iceberg is a big chunk of ice broken off and when I’ve seen them on the TV you see them break off and slip down into the sea where they float with most of their mass under the water. The ice that makes up the content is higher out of the water than icebergs are I believe although I could be wrong.

  6. KeithS (80 comments) says:

    To be honest, I don’t know.
    I’ve seen films of people scuba diving under ice and it looks pretty thick above them, but…….

  7. Rumourfarm (6 comments) says:

    If the ice is in the water already it will not change the depth of water when it melts. You should have paid attention in school instead of drawing swashstikas on your books. Although some of the ice (~10%) is above the water, ice actually expands when it freezes so the bit under the water displaces the same amount of water as if it was all just water; so when it melts and all the water is erm…. in the water and there’s no difference in the depth. The shit will really hit the fan when the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets melt because they’re not in the sea already. I really hope you live on a flood plan Wonko.

  8. wonkotsane (1133 comments) says:

    You’re a bit of a cock aren’t you?  I take it you’re one of the “climate change deniers are holocaust denying nazis” brigade?

  9. steadmancinques (34 comments) says:

    Hope that your sojourn in Holland went well.
    Rumourfarm is right however; if he wasn’t, ice wouldn’t float, just think of Archimedes in his bath.
    However, the melting of the Greenland ice cap would be a different story, but it might be useful to remind people that Greenland wasn’t called Greenland because it was covered in ice. Viking colonists set up thriving farming communities in the Middle Ages. They were going strong in 1350, but when the next ship to pay a recorded visit went around 1500, (yes, I know that no-one apparently visited for 150 years), they were all dead; and it just carried on getting colder. Similarly, the Vikings called Newfoundland, ‘Vineland’, but I couldn’t recommend a current vintage.

  10. Rumourfarm (6 comments) says:

    That’s right Wonko, resort to insults when confronted with something you don’t understand. I find it hilarious that you people denounce the science as fabricated garbage when it suits you and then pounce on the slightest shred of data that can be interpreted as against the climate warming argument.

    By the way, I don’t think climate change deniers are nazis, I just think they’re stupid. Whats even more amusing is that a huge chunk of these people go to church and follow a god that doesn’t have a shred of evidence in support of their existance, yet they deny climate change when 99% of scientists on the planet can provide evidence that it is happening and we are to blame. I suppose that’s a different argument altogether tho.

    The swashstikas comment was more aimed at your good self wonko and all your immigrant hating, liberal bashing, change fearing friends.

    Love and kisses


  11. wonkotsane (1133 comments) says:

    I’m not a socialist and I’m not a white supremecist and I’m not a Hindu so why would I draw swastikas on anything?

  12. axel (1214 comments) says:

    I think the issue is, some of us beleive the climate change is something that is happeneing of its own volition and potentially made worse/more so by human intervention and some of us seem to beleive that the earth is a steady state device that does not change on its own and can only be our fault.

    You need to reach a consensus

  13. Rumourfarm (6 comments) says:

    The consensus here is that Wonko is a white supremecist, he just doesn’t realise it. Happy bashing Wonko

  14. wonkotsane (1133 comments) says:

    Consensus where?

  15. axel (1214 comments) says:

    well, you cant deny you are white? Or is it a picture of your favourite football kicker?

    Supremecist, I’m sure you’ve said you have been right on several occasions and on several other occassions you have been right too.

    So i guess that makes you right by word, intent, deed and thought.

    So, younfg lad, come quietly and accept it is a fair cop!

    Rumourfarm, do me,do me do me, tell me what you think about me, i’m fascinated!

  16. Rumourfarm (6 comments) says:

    Well Axel I’m not familiar with your work so would hesitate to brandish you with any such title as Wonko immediately. I’d need to see some proof of predudice or some proper right wing views first for you to be a propper nut job like Wonky. All that comes to mind is the Anti-spam keyword I see before me – cucumber…………..

  17. axel (1214 comments) says:

    Rumour, do my 700 odd comments here not give you enough to go on?

    My key word is ‘Pot Pourri’ I guess that makes you long and green and me purple and smelly 🙁

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.