Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
China Earth Transportation News

Helicopter Rescue For All Passengers Aboard Antarctic Research Ship 168

Posted by timothy
from the who-pays-for-all-that-rescuing? dept.
The BBC reports (with video) that all aboard the ice-trapped MV Akademik Shokalskiy have been rescued by helicopter, after more than one icebreaker attempt to reach the vessel directly proved too challenging. Also at the New York Times, which reports "The twin-rotored helicopter, based on a Chinese icebreaker, the Xue Long, or Snow Dragon, flew several sorties across miles of packed ice to pluck scientists, tourists and journalists from a makeshift landing zone next to the marooned MV Akademik Shokalskiy research vessel."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Helicopter Rescue For All Passengers Aboard Antarctic Research Ship

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Global warming. (Score:1, Insightful)

    by i kan reed (749298) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @11:17AM (#45845779) Homepage Journal

    Yes, and the ice dispenser in my freezer is also supporting evidence for your position, as long as we're not going to look at useful aggregate data.

  • Re:Global warming. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by i kan reed (749298) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @11:23AM (#45845845) Homepage Journal

    Care to cite this data? The OP is bringing a hell of a lot more evidence to the conversation than you are.

    The fact that you think they had any evidence at all is far more a reflection on you than me.

  • GJ (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 02, 2014 @11:27AM (#45845893)

    I love good news, it's a shame there is not more of it.

  • LOL (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Charliemopps (1157495) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @11:28AM (#45845903)

    So I was watching this whole thing on the news and they never mentioned once that this expedition was meant to show the melting ice and such in hopes of showing the effects of global warming on the icepack. Now, I do believe Global warming is a thing... and we need to deal with it. But the clear bias by the media outlets isn't doing anyone any favors.

  • Re:Global warming. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by i kan reed (749298) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @11:37AM (#45845999) Homepage Journal

    No, actually, it's called climate change, at least originally, because that was a euphemism developed by a conservative think tank to make the results sound more palatable. It's called climate change now, because not all parts of the globe would warm. Unpredictability is just weather being weather, and has very little to do with climate at all.

  • by i kan reed (749298) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @11:41AM (#45846035) Homepage Journal

    The ice caps do not expand overnight. How is it an isolated event?

    Instead, alarmists use isolated events as evidence for their position, and decry those who want the raw data and point out that the overall trend is a cooling, not warning - which goes against ALL theories (that we are coming out of an ice age, that man is causing global warming, that the sun is getting hotter)

    Now, I can't deny the presence of people who went "Katrina was caused by global warming," but their being wrong doesn't excuse you ignoring incredibly reliable data from people who know what they're talking about. No more than idiots blathering about super-volcanoes "being due" excuse people who deny the existence of plate tectonics.

    You can always find someone hyperbolic and wrong to disagree with, it doesn't make your position right.

  • Re:Global warming. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by i kan reed (749298) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @11:43AM (#45846047) Homepage Journal

    I don't know. When do economic models predict I'll win the lottery?

  • Re:Global warming. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by oodaloop (1229816) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @11:49AM (#45846123)
    Also, there's more going on that just CO2 levels and gradual heating. We're cutting down forrests, polluting the air and water with hundreds of thousands of chemicals, killing off life in the largest mass extinction since the dinosaurs died, paving over and building on top of ecosystems with reckless abandon, ad nauseum. In short, we're changing the environment in many ways at once, not just increasing levels of greenhouse gases. Climate Change seems more descriptive to me than Global Warming.
  • Re:Global warming. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by i kan reed (749298) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @12:05PM (#45846297) Homepage Journal

    If you can't recognize single incident evidence as more than just being a smart ass than you don't understand the idea of evidence. You flap your lips a lot but you never say much. Step up or shut up.

    Doubling down. Okay. If bank of America's stock is down today against yesterday, what does that say about where the DJI will be next year?

    Congratulations, if you said anything at all, you're an idiot who jumps to conclusions.

  • Re:Global warming. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by i kan reed (749298) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @12:11PM (#45846345) Homepage Journal

    I gave my real answer, actually.
    It was "I don't know." Which is appropriate because climate data has no relevant to day-to-day weather. And I illustrated that point with a similar question.

    Rather than address the main point, you compared me to nazis(not wanting to damage the economic output of the world by excessive emissions is ethically identical to genocide), made up claims I've never made, and made yourself sound like a crazy person.

  • Re:Global warming. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by i kan reed (749298) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @12:19PM (#45846441) Homepage Journal

    The real questions would be the kind answered with study of climate data, you know, wide-scale, multi-measure temperature assessments. The fake question would be "how much does ice at one point near the Antarctic matter?"

    Melodrama would be blowing up angrily when your idiotic point is compared against an obvious parallel.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 02, 2014 @12:39PM (#45846633)

    loosing the vessel

    Well, if they could get it loose there wouldn't be a problem.

  • Re:Global warming. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kookus (653170) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @12:45PM (#45846685) Journal

    you're being trolled.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 02, 2014 @12:52PM (#45846757)

    Since it has a required predicate, to whit: "According to their models, there would be a sea of water there".

    According to their models, there was nothing about an absence of sea ice.

  • Re:Global warming. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by LordLimecat (1103839) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @01:09PM (#45846977)

    polluting the air and water with hundreds of thousands of chemicals,

    Credibility dropped here, as you fell off the deep end; your claims went from "sort of vague" to "downright hysterical". Every time I hear someone use the word "chemicals" in such a fear-mongering way, I wonder whether they are aware that water is a chemical too, or that its the worlds biggest fear-word. Oh no, chemicals, theyre so bad for you -- except for all of the ones necessary to support life.

    Which specific extinction are you referring to, by the way? There are a number of species which are being removed from the endangered list as they are making a comeback (eagles for one), so that its pretty hard to swallow claim that we're in the middle of the biggest extinction event in the last epoch, especially given how vague and handwavy your whole post is.

  • by i kan reed (749298) on Thursday January 02, 2014 @04:06PM (#45849195) Homepage Journal

    "Truth is in the middle" is an idea that assumes there's a fundamentally equal basis to "both sides." When it comes to science v. ignoramuses+shills, that's not really going to work.

    Some points are wrong forever, and climate change denialism is one of them.

If God is perfect, why did He create discontinuous functions?

Working...