Apologetics, Global Warming, News
Leave a Comment

It’s so annoying when the facts don’t line up with your theories


Why is the Antarctic ice bed over twice as thick as global warming scientists expected it to be. Image Antarctic Ice Christopher.Michel | Foter | CC By-NC

Why is the Antarctic ice bed over twice as thick as global warming scientists expected it to be?  Image Christopher.Michel | Foter | CC By-NC

[by Dean Smith] The journal Nature Geoscience is reporting more bad news for those promoting man-made global warming.

Not only is the size of the ice bed growing in the Antarctic, but using  a robot — an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) —  a group of scientists from the UK, US and Australia have discovered that the Antarctic ice bed is over twice as thick as their global warming computer models said it should be.

This is significant as using these same models, scientists were predicting (due to melting ice in the Antarctic and Arctic) rising oceans would sink islands and swamp coastal areas. This fear mongering was just one of the reasons activists were clamoring for governments to  spend billions of dollars to cut C02 emissions.

Using the AUV, that can go to depths of 100 feet (30M), the scientists were able to get an exact measure of the ice’s thickness in the Antarctic.

In the article, Ted Maksym, with the Woods Hole Oceangraphic Institution in Massachusetts, said:

“With the AUV, you can get under ice that is either difficult to access or difficult to drill, and in each region, we found some really thick ice, thicker than had been measured anywhere else.”

Based on their global warming computer models, they were expecting to find ice averaging 3 to 6 feet thick  (1 to 2 meters) instead they found the average to be over double that — 5 feet to 18 feet thick (1.5 meters to 6 meters).

They were also expecting to find maximum ice thicknesses of 16′ (5 meters), instead they found spots where the ice was upwards of 60′ thick (20 meters).

Dr. Guy Williams with the Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies based in Tasmania made this honest statement about their findings:

“…we were biased towards thinner ice.”

What I find most disturbing is how they used the word “surprised” to describe these findings. This suggests researchers had started with a theory and were looking for evidence to prove it, rather than letting the facts determine their theory. With computer models the proverb still holds true — garbage in, garbage out.

Read more:

Related:

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.