What is Happening In Antarctica?

Happening in Antarctica: Coming Attraction-Deltas of Animal House

2011-03-24T21:31:00.005-05:00

Lessons on Inductive Reasoning:

Deltas of Animal House

Happening in Antarctica : Is it a bird?

2011-03-24T18:12:00.004-05:00

Prestige brings in grants and support for Harvard. There are people, places, and things, that have very little to do with that. Where world class grantsmanship is more ancestral, traditional, and less competitive, prestige in the opposite of what you desire. Can Antarctic research be done in an Hawaiian library? Is there an hereditary line of Greenland mestizo-eskimos supported at NSF, perhaps connected with Admiral Peary?

Happening in Antarctica : Antarctica Melting?

2009-05-27T13:30:00.002-05:00

A postdoc publishes a paper based on his doctoral thesis, but ... in his defense presentation consisting of only 35mm slides flipped by someone else, it was indicated that his snow pit samples had melted in transit from Antarctica. He was given his degree regardless. In his paper he claims to be making analyses of ice cores on the Siple Coast. What gives? Here we look a little at his paper, which is included here.

For many, their dissertation is a pinnacle of their careers, an unparalleled achievement, and a compilation of hard, dedicated work over a considerable stretch of time, and an advance in knowledge. The defense is an opportunity to present these ideas to an audience familiar with the work, both as an acknowledgment and approval. Why then, did Richard Alley not have a defense? Instead he told us his thesis melted, and so he had someone show 35mm slides he had made from the day he spent in Antarctica (in total) down in his snow pit. He was not available for comment, questions, or anything. So it appeared that whatever he had done in his pit had melted and so he was going to attempt to acquire his PhD, regardless.

So it was a surprise to me to see that Richard had written a paper on ice core analyses. I wondered, "Where did he get the cores from? What sort of analysis did he perform? Here is his title :

ICE CORE ANALYSIS ON THE SIPLE COAST OF WEST ANTARCTICA (Annals Glaciol, 1988)

It is somewhat nondescript but it give the impression that he did a big study, and also his unpublished dissertation title is : TRANSFORMATIONS IN POLAR FIRN. Whatever transformations he observed, they must have been on these Siple Coast ice cores. Now, why didn't Richard give a talk on these transformations rather than tell us his samples melted? And, why did the faculty let him get away with essentially saying he was going to do nothing for his degree?

Now, I admit I never read his thesis, and it was because of the talk he gave, and the lack of any field work that he did. Admittedly, some transformations are observable in melted ice. The density, I would guess would increase to about 0.92 g/cc.

The thesis is unavailable, so I looked up his paper. Does anyone actually read these? Possibly they just copy bibliographic elements from one paper to another if the title seems appropriate if the author is familiar and positioned at the top of the bibliographic list. This gives the individual a good representation in the science citation index, for example.

One striking fact that emerged : Richard actually did have firn samples from two sites cored by PICO, with density measurements made by D. Susman. Now, Richard himself did measure the snow pit densities at UPB camp (upper 2 meters). So it was not really ICE CORES, but firn cores. Ice gives the impression of drilling into the deeper part of the ice mass, which no doubt was the impression Richard hoped to make. But there were no ice cores, just firn cores that in part possibly melted into icy firn cores.

SO what sort of an analysis did Richard perform? I looked at his conclusions. Restricted to density measurements, any analysis would have to be about that. He says strata in firn record an annual signal. Is that his analysis? That is common knowledge, isn't it? I suppose Richard is telling us he actually saw that in his pit. The one novel statement, not taken directly out of a textbook, is that strong longitudinal deviatoric stresses may affect densification. Now that might require an analysis worthy of consideration. Measured longitudinal stresses will correlate with higher rates of densification. Nope, actually there are no measured longitudinal strains, nor any stress analysis, and so for all we know, the measurements might be erroneous and possibly caused by the simple melting of samples. This, and Ian Whillans, his former graduate advisor, the one who promised Alley a faculty position as an undergraduate, had spent years measuring strains on the Siple Coast including the very locations of the firn cores, and this did not impress Richard at all. Was Ian faking these measurements? Do not ask me. He had a reflector and a EDM device, and some aluminum poles. Richard also did not have any analysis of the ice stream motion to guide him. Was it because there was no realistic model?

This paper is a complete misdirect, giving the impression Alley had ice core analysis experience, when in fact there were no ice cores and no analyses. If he is involved in other analyses, hopefully they will not be as superfluous as this one.

One analysis I would like to see is: if these two cores, the one on ridge BC and UPB, are nepotistic cores, i.e. if they are related, somehow generically, or whether they are dissimilar because of their strain history and provenance. I guess we will just have to wait and see what further analyses Richard Alley will perform for us (or have someone else perform for us).

Another analysis, similar to those in geology(a place where Richard often lifts his ideas and applies them to ice), is to examine the metamorphic changes induced by destressing samples, and thermal cycling of samples. Clearly this places a limit on the information that can be retrieved from cores. This is especially important because Alley's later ice core results in Greenland were observationally difficult and never made by anyone previously, this despite he had only this prior experience with Siple Coast cores.

Since Alley was in the field 1 day, and within earshot of the main Jamesway always, is it possible he was unaware of either surface melting or rain on Whillans Ice Stream? He had only one core. Percolation of surface melt could both explain the UpB camp core, and also irregularities within the temperature profile. If this was an in situ condition, Alley would not know because he was not there when the drilling occurred. It is altogether possible that Alley never saw the firn cores himself, which is fortunate because he chills easily!

Not only did he miss detecting possible melting, but ... he leaves the impression without saying so, that maybe the melting at UPB was natural. He included the lower part of the core in his analysis, even though his study was based on density and the density is anomalously high. So what would an uninformed person think, "Is Antarctica melting?"

I include a copy of his paper to demonstrate the aptness of this commentary.

Happening in Antarctica : Cui bono?

2009-04-17T08:30:00.000-05:00

There have been a couple of mysterious deaths in Antarctica. In one case a USARP fellow just wandered away from a remote camp and was never seen again. I have never understood this, and perhaps someday I will. I would like to tell you about the other case : the death of Dr. Edward Thiel.

Ed grew up in small town America, as an all American boy. He pledged allegiance to the flag, believed in God, tried hard in school, probably was a boy scout, enjoyed playing in the snow, and ice skating. In high school he had won an award from the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) for his patriotism. He attended and became a junior faculty member at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He worked with George Woollard and had done exploratory work in Antarctica using seismological, gravity and magnetics measurements. His position working alongside military people in Antarctica was a comfortable one. He often worked with them in aircraft flights used to measure the earth's magnetic field to search for anomalies : possible ore bodies, volcanoes and other crustal signatures. His wife worked in the department as a staff member. Altogether a success story for Wisconsin.

Then, things changed. As often happens, new people enter a department for various reasons, often waiting for a more permanent position. Albert Crary and Charles Bentley, both from Columbia, were looking for permanent positions after their earlier explorations in the Arctic and Antarctic. Crary, the senior of the two obtained a permanent postion in Washington as Chief Scientist of USARP, while Bentley, was hanging out at Wisconsin, joining the geophysical group doing Antarctic research there already. There was a gap of ten years between the time he acquired his PhD in 1950, and when he popped up at Wisconsin. Whatever Bentley's background, which included traverses in Antarctica and spending extended periods way down in Antarctica, he did not acquire faculty membership at Columbia. Two other Antarctic groups existed, one at OSU that focused on the geology/glaciology, and the Wisconsin group that did geology/ geophysics. So it was natural for Bentley, who was educated as a Everett Darrow pre-law/geophysicist, to join the Wisconsin group as an extended post-doc. Besides being a polar explorer, Bert Crary was also connected with Soviets. He was responsible for teaching them how to monitor nuclear explosions using geophysical equipment similar to that used for geophysical exploration work. Crary was also involved in spying on SAC flights, at a time when the Soviets were curious about the US putting nuclear weapons on longrange aircraft (1947). After this nuclear work, Crary turned his attention to polar work as the US Army engaged in a cold region project at Camp Century in Greenland. Later his interest became Antarctica, as it did for the Soviets also.

With his comrade Crary in Washington influencing funding and the orientation of the glaciology program, Bentley decided he could get rid of the former participants in the Wisconsin program. Bentley brought his own interest in seismology to the program, and proceeded to discourage participation by others who were in the program. He became aggressive in defense talks, and soon Ed Thiel found himself in trouble. With his mentor and former advisor, George Woollard having decided to leave the department, Ed decided to move to Minnesota.

The forte of Bentley being his participation in traverses along which he detonated seismic shots every 1 km to establish ice thicknesses; Thiel had done similar work. Some of this early work was suspect because of wind noise, deep ice, and substantial amounts of water at the glacial bed. Then in 1959 Professor Evans of Cambridge University initiated the use of radar for this purpose, making seismic sounding for glacial depth obsolete.

Ed was going to set a new record for an airborne traverse, covering the distance of 3,500 miles from McMurdo Station(US) to Mirny Station(USSR), in a modified P2V Neptune Bluebird, a twin engine jet aircraft with a bombay specially modified with an extra fuel tank for the long distance flight. The use of an extra tank like this is common practice. After a night over at Mirny Station, the Neptune was to fly a short hop to Wilkes station, and then after a full refuelling at Wilkes fly
the long return trip to McMurdo.

What was uncommon about the flight besides the distance, was that a military aircraft was being flown in and around a major Soviet Station at the height of the Cold War. in this craft, Ed was measuring the magnetic field with recorders in the cabin of the craft. This was routinely done as a means of exploring the subglacial geology, but the Soviets may have thought it was being used as a surveillance tool - spying on their base and its activities. Why the flight went like this to Mirny is unclear. Would it not have been as scientifically meaningful to fly directly to Wilkes and back instead? Who suggested the flight to Mirny? Was it Crary back in Washington at NSF?

Without fear, Ed and the crew of his VX-6 aircraft flew to Mirny, and stayed the night. They left for Wilkes the next morning and fully fueled up for the return trip to McMurdo. On takeoff with JATO assist the aicraft climbed into the air and "an intense, uncontrollable inflight fire developed in the landing gear-bomb bay fuel tank area. Within a minute the aircraft banked to the left, dipped, and crashed; On November 9, 1961 five of the nine crew members burned to death including Dr. Thiel. He was just 33 years old.

Although the official explanation was that the Neptune suffered damage from sustrugi on takeoff, who could not have wondered if the tank had been sabotaged at Mirny Station? An Aussie at Wilkes reported that the tank was loose prior to the takeoff. If so, how did it get that way? Sustrugi at Mirny? When they bolt these tanks in and attach hoses with clamps to the fuel system, no doubt that installation would have been firm, and checked prior to takeoff at McMurdo. The only other reasonable explanation was the disruption of the aircraft structure itself due to sastrugi, at Mirny. Would someone have noticed this at Wilkes?

Whatever the explanation, two years later Bentley became a UW-Madison faculty member and sole geophysicist at NSF in the Antarctic Program. His specialty besides purging other people from the program, was to use his fluency in Russian to improve relations with the Russians. So with Russian journals in hand, he prepared for his first season in Antarctica as a professor. His glacial expertise: sounding ice thickness with seismic shots, even though that was obsolete since 1959.

Did Ed inadvertently collect magnetics data that showed Russian noncompliance with the Antarctic Treaty just two years earlier? If he had, it would have been the only time anyone has collected any data verifying compliance or noncompliance with the 59 International Treaty. Despite the US program being held to high standards by people like Bentley, the Russians probably have never honored the Treaty in the least, except accidentally, giving the commercial use of Antarctica solely to the Russians for 50 years.

If people had known Charles Bentley was the son of Elizabeth Bentley, the Red Spy Queen, would that have changed anything? Did anyone care about Bentley's trips to the Soviet Union? Was he given special consideration by the state department in trade for his mother's testimony? Did anyone care about Crary being a spy? Was the organization of NSF's science program, an error in judgment? Did a faction in the US throw Ed under the bus, just like James V. Forrestal?

Today you can go to Walmart and purchase as a dietary source of Omega-3 fatty acids, encapsulated Antarctic krill. Presumably it is the Chinese doing this currently, a signatory of the Antarctic Treaty. Two quadrants of Antarctic waters have ben reported to be sterile or nearly so because of the harvesting of these creatures low in the food chain. The US has had no commercial development in Antarctica of any kind, while other countries are placing the eco-system in peril and nothing is being done about it. All these years satellites could have been used to monitor activities there, and nothing has been done.

Happening in Antarctica : Another Joke?

2008-11-12T16:09:00.013-06:00

Milton Berle, a notorious joke collector, was busy stealing yet another joke when a comedian, he said, made him laugh so hard, "I nearly dropped my pencil." Today, though, standards are different : Jokes are a serious matter. It places food on the table for a fledgling comedian. To steal a vintage joke, actually demonstrates your own lack of understanding the humour crowd.

So what of people engaged in polar work, that do not actually do any polar work? Do they get so cold thinking of going to cold regions that they have to get up and tweak the thermostat, whilst contemplating the climate? Are these guys real researchers? Let me present a case in point.

That's Willi Dansgaard on the left, smoking his ubiquitous pipe, while not merely posing for a photo. Look at his clothing. Here is a man that not only came up with isotopic ideas that changed what people were able to do with ice cores, he also was excited enough to "be there". He did not doff those clothes for a photo. You can tell they are used. He does not just show up for a day to say he had been in a cold place to have his picture taken and then just leave - promoting the polar work in that manner (synthetically). Hmm, maybe Willi was onto something.

When a person borrows from one source they call it plagiarism, when they borrow from several sources they call it research.

This was once thought to be an apt idea. Today, though, in some circles, borrowing from one source is also called research (actually more like just a little reading), and published refereed articles are seldom reviewed properly, etc, etc. One person asked me, "If you paraphrase, is it really plagiarism?" How about if the person you borrow from doesn't care, or is dead? I responded by saying that someone who is so into publishing articles to pump up his count that he frequently plagiarizes should write for a scientist, not be the scientist. When familiar ideas appear in a slightly different guise, with a different name attached, I begin to wonder about these things. Do some people have a free license?

Dr. Richard B. Alley, a professor of geosciences at Pennsylvania State University and chairman of the committee, compared abrupt climate change to a light switch, while gradual climate -- what most climatologists study -- is like a light dimmer. Press upward on a dimmer, and the light brightens a little. Press more, and the light brightens more. With a switch, press lightly and nothing happens. Press hard enough, and the light abruptly turns on.

''What the research shows is that there are switches as well as dimmers in Earth's system,'' Dr. Alley said.

Alley is often given credit for discovering climate switches from his ice cores and one imagines someone refining cold room techniques to up the quality of observing cores. Actually these "switches" were discovered by Willi Dansgaard, but he called them Dansgaard-Oeschger events. Alley should have called them by the proper name. The credit belongs to them. Frequently Alley is given the credit mistakenly, because of the manner in which he presents information to people.

This is the book Richard threw together, like so many things he does, entitled The Two Mile Time Machine. Has he reached new conclusions in his ice core work about climate? If you are looking for it, do not be surprised if you cannot find anything, except the work of others summarized or reviewed by him. Hence all the work is dated, even at the time of his writing. Even the title rings of Willi, the man whose shoulders Richard stands. In 1971 Willi and Claude Lorius described ice cores as "going deep into the ice is like sticking a thermometer backwards in time." Where is thy grace Richard? He never mentions the Europeans in his book, at all.

If fact, Richard was so devoid of actual research results, he lied, and broadcasted that he worked on ice cores at the University of Wisconsin in his doctoral and post-doctoral program. In fact, he never did. Surely if he had, he would have published at least one paper about it, nes pa?

There is something poohy when there is no credit given and "scientists" act like illiterate animals. As Henry Paulson would say "Boys, lets get the credit rolling again."

Happening in Antarctica : A Real Biology Program?

2008-03-22T10:43:00.005-05:00

I have indicated how the VIP's that visit Antarctica are shown the same cod, and told the story of fish-born anti-freeze. I wonder if you could take a cod for a ride on a cold day in the ocean? Now more interesting biological information is emerging from Antarctica. But, is the US NSF program involved?

New giant marine species have been found. In fact, people connected with New Zealand's National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research hope to categorize up to 150 new species of marine life, from these two months of field Antarctic work alone (see StarTribune). The KIWI article says only small scale studies have been performed previously in the Ross Sea area, and so this is a bonanza of new biological information. So, VIP's take note : Years went by and NSF gave you nothing but a fish story in return for the taxpayer's money. All along, there was a bonanza of scientific data available, right where the main US base exists. Ask yourself "Is USAP research being performed honestly?" Meanwhile the Russians have been filling up their boats, probably putting some species out of existence due to over-fishing -- But the USAP program continues on ...

Happening in Antarctica : Buy a position at Caltech/JPL

2008-03-15T23:26:00.009-05:00

Is it possible to buy a position for someone at CALTECH/JPL? Many people have their applications ignored or rejected. Perhaps when people are bribed for some people to get in, this makes it more difficult for others who are without bribes. You can pay the annual tuition yourself (quite expensive). If your faculty advisor is in the NSF Antarctic Program, however, he can buy someone a graduate position with public money! Why use your own?

In Geodynamics/Glaciology, people want to fix the position of points for the sake of mapping and measuring surface deformations. So, say your Ohio State University (OSU) faculty advisor, funded on a Polar Program NSF grant, knows your parents and wants to help you get into the Seismological lab at Caltech. What could he do for you? Well, he cannot just give grant money away to someone. Here's an idea : "How about purchasing a bunch of expensive equipment from the relative of a faculty member at Caltech, with the understanding that the faculty will do a favor for you - like give someone a graduate research assistant position?" Guess how much moola takes to get into Caltech this way?

Well by OSU/Caltech standards in 1985, it required a mere 1.2 million dollars. That is correct! This is what it cost to get the position. The purchase involved 25 or so MX1502 Magnavox doppler geoceivers from an LA company. The geoceivers were used for glaciological research in Antarctica, and approved by Jane Dionne at NSF.

Well, this is nothing new, is it? After all, people will make purchases and one is free to make purchases where one wants. Well, it was known to all investigators that doppler JMR models were available for half the price. Nope, OSU did not want the JMR models. Then people became aware that GPS field units were available or soon to be available. The price for these was approximately the same as the JMR model. Why use doppler geoceivers when you can use the more advanced dual-frequency GPS receivers (available from Trimble in 1985) ? It did not seem to make sense to make this purchase -- of what were actually obsolete satellite receivers -- for twice the price of GPS units. People were wondering : "Why were they purchasing someone's entire inventory of obsolete geoceivers?" The request was made for the MX1502's, and NSF rapidly approved without questioning the purchase, and the deal was done. In two years all the receivers were scrapped and replaced with GPS units.

One OSU undergraduate student got a graduate position at Caltech.

One might wonder if this is the best way to select talent. Well, in a future posting I will examine a typical study done by this person, and you can judge for yourself!

Happening in Antarctica : Lenticular Clouds in Antarctica?

2008-02-29T06:28:00.017-06:00

Are there lenticular clouds in Antarctica? I recall seeing them hugging the top of Mt. Erebus, so evidently they are present. This suggests the possibility that surface topography influences climate. I wonder if climate models take this topographic-cloud effect into account? Well, actually, clouds are an embarrassment to climate modelers. The climate crisis may come and go long before the problem of clouds is solved.

Well lets make a few climate runs. Interesting... runaway global cooling. Oh ... That should be a minus sign. Okay, now. Run this again. Wow ! Runaway global warming. There seems to be some undesired feedback, so let me fix that term to a constant. Oh, time is up. Damned computer is slow. I need to write my abstract. What should I say? To be safe, I must say my model seems to indicate runaway climate warming! And we have a definite need for more powerful computers.

In my post of February 6th entitled "Happening in Antarctica : Climate terror!", I indicated :

Right from the beginning the problem of the climate was linked to the problem of clouds. Who could predict them? What causes them?

In the February 15th issue of Science, p. 889, In "Another Side to the Climate-Cloud Conundrum Finally Revealed" , Richard A. Kerr says (as if to respond to my blog and in a politically sensitive manner induce the community to consider clouds) :

Clouds have always given climate modelers fits. The clouds in their models are crude at best, and in the real world, researchers struggle to understand how clouds are responding to—and perhaps magnifying—greenhouse warming. As a result, cloud behavior is the biggest single source of uncertainty in climate prediction.

I tried to consider Dr Kerr's model, and to make it work I let the ground heat up before the cloud rolled over. I assumed, you know, that the cloud would form. And I found, I believe, the ground heating will dissipate the cloud slightly faster without the CO2. But this really does cause one to pause and reconsider...

Scientists and politicians are not fooled about the Man-Induced Climate Warming (MIGW) Hoax : not really. Who is fooled? Possibly Bush, the Hindus and the Chinese, right? We, as scientists must learn to say these things sincerely, and convincingly, if we have not already. I am worried though, about NAS and NRC giving the president a bunch of bull, and then in the future, if it should ever happen that scientists need urgent consideration, that we will not believe them.
I would say their credibility is in the toilet. They have dishonored themselves. We were hoping for innovation. I wonder if the global scientific community actually believes it is really the end of science, we having reached the limits of knowledge. If so, why are we wasting our money?

When the president needs the word on global warming, we all know who he goes to : John Marburger and Ed Gillespie. With this new cloud information, John and Ed, we are turning the corner here. Even so :

John Marburger refuses to stand up to big polluters and act to reduce dangerous greenhouse gases, the cause of global warming. Despite overwhelming consensus in the scientific community, John Marburger denies that the "science is in" on carbon emissions causing global warming and instead repeats right wing propaganda funded by oil and gas companies.

Can you believe it? He says the models are not good enough. That'll be a few carbon demerits for him. He better pad the budget to improve those models, right? It is the least he can do.

Let me see now. Scientists should tell local people about global issues like global warming, so they will write their Congressman to increase their science budgets. That is like giving your job to the Chinese, skimping on petrol so the Chinese can use it, and then thanking the scientist for telling you to do this for yourself. In this way, we the US, can promote slave labor, and aggressive Communism. What do they take us for? Why not do the opposite and request a budget reduction of about 50%, to separate the wheat from the chaff?

There are scientists also considering that the US scientific community take a loyalty oath, and I'm all for that. The sooner the better.

Happening in Antarctica : Sastrugi !

2008-02-28T13:15:00.004-06:00

Sastrugi is Russian for "There's a rut there!". The singular is sastruga. The Russian meaning underscores the difficulty in walking over these wind-blown features. The ridges may be 1 meter high though usually smaller(25cm) . The ridges are often as hard as concrete; the material between the ridges usually is softer. I can personally attest that walking two kilometers over sastrugi is quite tiresome.

Happening in Antarctica : Albert P. Crary, Entrepreneur?

2008-02-26T14:23:00.006-06:00

Albert Crary has diverse biographical information about him published on the web. He is well known for his long time involvement in the NSF polar program (USAP) in Washington DC, and for being an adventurer. There is a dark side to his personal history, however. His linkage to Columbia University has been somewhat obscured, his affiliation with Russians, his flying weather balloons over Area 51, and his involvement in nuclear test monitoring. I wonder why?

Albert Crary was a poor farm boy, the second oldest of seven children. He had a knack for physics, however, and left the farm behind. He worked with Maurice Ewing at Columbia, as they developed methods for remote sensing in the ocean. He became involved with nuclear test monitoring, and helped to develop the equipment and methods based on seismological principles and methods. He shared this information with the Soviets, as well as his personal knowledge of US tests. In project MOGUL, one must ask why they were flying balloons over Area 51, when anywhere else would have served their purpose. Why did they run away from their crashed balloon acting like they knew nothing about it? The Air Force assumed it had been done by aliens, that is, foreign people spying on Area 51. Surely they were correct in assuming it was a spy operation, and we all know that Crary was a participant.

His association with spies and Soviets led to his personal ascendancy in the Antarctic program. His adventuring on the ice caused him to gain popularity with politicos that gave him a prominent position in the Polar program. He boasted of being the first person to visit both Poles. Part of his attraction may have been his background in remote sensing - the plausible ability to track Soviet activities from afar, based on technology similar to that used in monitoring nuclear blasts, and tracking Soviet submarines.

His spying activity kept the Soviets abreast of all US activities in Antarctica, and his participation on the ice helped to oust ardent supporters of Admiral Byrd, who they denounced as an alcoholic. Was this the triumph of civility over the militarization of Antarctica? No, it was the loss of US political interest in Antarctica to "Bolsheviks", who strongly discouraged any American interest in Antarctica. The continent was lost.

Under the guise of Environmentalism, Russian supporters helped create the Madrid Protocol that prohibits all mining exploration and development, and protects all flora and fauna until the year 2041, when the Treaty can be renegotiated. Crary helped to forge this sensitivity at NSF as deputy director and then director of the Division of Environmental Science at NSF. As the 80,000 empty 55 gallon barrels left at Wilkes Station would attest as well as all the other NSF garbage (see Happening in Antarctica : Garbage Treatment Improvements), one might well conclude environmentalism was never Crary's actual strong suit. As far as I know, no one ever gave Crary credit for his environmental sensitivity. While NSF keeps the US in compliance, it has overlooked all the violations of other countries, including member countries. Of course, Moscow has been a large violator. One estimate is that two quadrants of Antarctica are virtually sterile because of Russian fishing. I was there as Greenpeace landed on the Antarctic shore; NSF giving them an icy welcome. Only Greenpeace seems to be actually concerned about the Antarctic environment. Perhaps we should make contributions so Greenpeace can launch a spy satellite to keep tabs on what is actually taking place. So the Madrid Protocol actually calls on US interests to stay out of Antarctica until 2041, while other countries (recently including China) make inventories and developmental plans. In some cases countries may be carrying out those plans as I write this.

Bert Crary and Charlie Bentley were pals. Both worked at Columbia, and in polar programs, received support from NSF, and had a close association with the Russians. I shall write another segment on Bentley, shortly. Let it suffice for the present, to relate the story about Crary's death. Bentley had made several trips to the Soviet Union, one that included his wife, under the guise of preparing a book with a Soviet scientist. Shortly thereafter Crary died, and Bentley claimed to have been at his deathbed when Crary offered him 38 million dollars for the Antarctic Program. Twenty-seven of these went for building the Crary Science Center, and 11 went to pay for Bentley's
"research" program at the University of Wisconsin, an institution of fading socialist glory, which seems to have resurrected itself at Berkeley these days. That was very generous of Crary. But, where in the hell did he get that money?

Crary was the second oldest son of a farm family in upstate New York. He whole career consisted of going to Antarctica, and working at NSF in Washington DC. That is no way to accumulate that kind of money, is it? As Charlie Wrangel said, "If I lose an election, I have to look for a job."

There are three possibilities. One is that the money came to Crary from ITT, a science support contract company that served the Antarctic program for many years with no competitive bids. After he left NSF, Art Brown of ITT might have given him a few bucks, thanking him for his support. Another possibility is that Soviets gave the money to Bentley, and they used Crary as a proxy (something the Soviets did frequently and still might today). Why would the Soviets do this? To pay Bentley for his support over the years and to keep the program as it was - just a dunsel program that would not stimulate any American interest. Of course obtaining the money this way, to influence an American program, would have been treason. Too bad Reagan never got far into examining NSF, its policies, and personnel. The other possibility would be a combination of both of these.

Today USAP is no different than it was back then. Foreign influence is unabated. The contract company is Raytheon instead of ITT. Only some of the names and faces have changed.

Happening in Antarctica : No Faithful Friends Left?

2008-02-21T13:02:00.008-06:00

For approximately 100 years man's best friend accompanied the explorers of Antarctica. Today, they are banned from the continent. I believe that makes Antarctica the only continent that bans dogs. Is that sensible? Was this clause included in the Antarctic Treaty to help Raytheon?

Dogs are a species apart from all others in that they are intimately linked to humans. They are not the products of natural selection but intentional breeding programs intended to make them the useful companions of people. Interestingly, early dogs used in Antarctica were actually bred from the dogs used by the Innuits. Amundsen's dogs were the first creatures to reach the South Pole. Admiral Byrd used dogs bred from those used to penetrate the interior of Alaska during the Klondike years. Besides making continents available to people with sleds, these wonderful dogs were also bunkmates and companions of man, easing tensions in difficult places, and making life out on the ice seem more hospitable.

So why would anyone want to ban these dogs from Antarctica? Have they committed atrocities?
Well, actually no. To my knowledge not one dog has ever been found guilty of the slightest crime. They do not even drink or smoke, and have never found guilty of serious deception.
They would still be useful for travel in Antarctica, and for rescue in difficult terrain, as well as positive elements psychologically.

Can concerns about seal distemper be serious when vaccinations exist? Have all the eskimo's seals died from distemper? If necessary the Antarctic Secretariat could have imposed licensing. When one considers the exigent danger of salmonella from feeding wildlife contaminated food being a far more serious concern, the myth that Antarctica is pristine like Mars, uninhabited by germs is silly to a high degree.

Live without doggies? Don't be silly!

Happening in Antarctica : Recalling the Great Promise of Antarctica

2008-02-19T15:46:00.005-06:00

Prior to the great race to the moon, there had been an earlier pursuit to explore and tame the great Antarctic. As Neil Armstrong had done with Apollo and the LEM, Admiral Byrd had taken the first stage of his mission on the sea, and in a second stage, flown an aircraft over the South Pole. What did Antarctica have in store for the US? No one was positive, but FDR was certainly interested. What started out as a private Bostonian capital venture, had become a government program.

Perhaps nothing will match the energy that had been expended by Americans in Antarctica like Admiral Byrd and his exploratory programs. He had filled in the blank areas in maps. He had started geological, geophysical, and biological programs. It is no mistake that people have named so many things after him. He was organized, had a clear mission, and we can all be proud of what he did for our country. To counter the Russians in 1946 Secretary Forrestal created Operation Highjump. The US :

assembled a huge amphibious naval force for an Antarctic Expedition expected to last six to eight months. Besides the flagship Mount Olympus and the aircraft carrier Philippine Sea, there were thirteen US Navy support ships, six helicopters, six flying boats, two seaplane tenders and fifteen other aircraft. The total number of personnel involved was over 4,000. The armada arrived in the Ross Sea on 31 December 1946, and made aerial explorations of an area half the size of the United States, recording ten new mountain ranges. The major area covered was the eastern coastline of Antarctica from 150 degrees east to the Greenwich meridian.

This activity was terminated 6 months early without explanation. The large invasive spread of Communism throughout Eastern Europe, Asia, and elsewhere were paramount concerns at the time. This included a Soviet military presence in Antarctica. This confrontation may have helped fuel the idea of a "Cold War".

According to Paul Siple the Antarctic program outgrew the Admiral. Arguments within the US administration led to a shift away from American dominance in the region, to a more sedate secondary role as a monitoring presence. With the suppression of Admiral Byrd from the Antarctic, the golden age of American involvement in Antarctica had passed.

Bolsheviks within the US Antarctic Service degraded the Admiral, and dismissed this man who:

had amassed twenty-two citations and special commendations, nine of which were for bravery and two for extraordinary heroism in saving the lives of others; who was awarded the Medal of Honor, the Congressional Life Saving Medal, the Navy Distinguished Service Medal, the Distinguished Flying Cross, the Navy Cross, and had three ticker-tape parades

"as a senseless drunk".

He is buried in Arlington cemetery.

Happening in Antarctica : Very Easy Degrees! Top Support!

2008-02-18T14:41:00.020-06:00

We all believe in being competitive, and in earning what we obtain, like positions and degrees.
Some people, though, do not. For some reason Antarctica is a magnet for some of these
people.
Take these two characters. Both are from the Chicago area.

The guy on the left is the infamous Clarence Darrow. Clarence staged the "Scopes monkey trial" to demonstrate that scientific evidence for evolution was being impeded in schools because religious groups wanted their children to believe the bible instead. So he made a name for himself. Actually, this was part of his Communist agenda - the suppression of religion.

What has this to do with Antarctica? Well, the guy on the right is Donald Blankenship. He is in the Antarctic glaciology program as a geophysicist, having gone through his academic program as a privileged person. He was allowed to fudge data, plagiarize, misrepresent facts, misinterpret results, and still he obtained his PhD degree.

Darrow is less well known for his organizing the US Communist Party. He was constantly on the move, traveling by train throughout the US, spreading his message in the pre-television era; going forth from his office at the University of Chicago, he seemed to spend little time at the University and more time scheduling, populating, and attending Party meetings. He established two primary socialist's routes: one extending from Chicago to Los Angeles, and another from Chicago to New York City. In New York he established the Communist school at Columbia. It was there that the US Communist Party joined together with a cell of the Soviet Secret police, thus linking east and west. At Columbia Darrow's brother Everett, was a law professor. His responsibility was to streamline as many Communists into law as possible for Clarence claimed that the Party required them. The Communists were so influential at Columbia that one had trouble getting a degree if you had not taken classes at the Communist school and declared yourself a loyal member of the Party. People were abused and forced out who did not follow the Communist leadership. Many would-be lawyers who were in these programs found themselves to be practicing courtroom attorneys before they knew they had even been in law school. The Party had really corrupted the academic program at Columbia,though popular with fresh immigrants who knew no one in America.

Some see Darrow as a hero, others see him as crook and a thug. He defended murderers and thugs who supported the Party. If murderers were found guilty, he raised the issue of the inhumanity of the death penalty. People in New York claimed they did not know the difference between Communists and the Mafia.

Donald Blankenship is in the Antarctic glaciology program as a geophysicist, having gone through the academic program as a privileged person. He was allowed to fudge data, plagiarize, misrepresent facts, misinterpret results, and still he obtained his PhD degree. In all his years as a graduate student, he only did one seismic wide-angle experiment, and tha the did badly. Despite this, he was given several grants and he picked out the ones he liked the best although at his prelim-exam he could not solve for the field of a dipole. He was allowed to abuse other students with impunity. At his defense, only his advisor Bentley supported him; Bentley having claimed he needed to catch a plane to subvert any questioning. For some reason people were calling Bentley "Uncle Charley". If, as a member of the academic community, you got in Bentley's way somehow, or diminished "his nephew", he would threaten to destroy you.

This is germane to the climate debate because Charles Bentley, Donald Blankenship and Richard Alley were responsible for intentionally misrepresenting the glaciology in West Antarctica circa 1987. Bentley was the their graduate advisor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. West Antarctic glaciology is now claimed to simply have been badly misinterpreted by Richard Alley who says more study is necessary. He is now looking for long-term grant money to supposedly improve upon the b**it they spread around earlier.

Alley, who also obtained an extremely streamlined academic degree (he claimed to be promised a faculty position as an undergraduate (from a person who was already dead), was/is publishing papers by plagiarizing without doing any research. He is one of the main US proponents of Man-Induced Global Warming (MIGW).

One might note that what happened in these academic programs at Wisconsin and Columbia were similar to what is purported to be happening to people who oppose MIGW - easy degrees for the academic faithful, with exploitation and abuse for outsiders. You could not be bright if you did not go along with them. When they made up stories about West Antarctica, one was forced to go along with it, or your career was threatened. They harassed you by following you around, interfering with your neighbors and coworkers. Professors felt they owned you if they gave you a degree.

Are these two men related? Look at their photos and judge for yourself.

Why did these people lie about Antarctica? It is a long story and so I will present it in parts.
One reason though, was that they were totally willing to take license and make up stuff for its effect. In fact for years, Bentley used his research program as a front for his politics.

Happening in Antarctica : Garbage Treatment Improvements

2008-02-15T14:17:00.004-06:00

We have said that NSF's research program does not pack out its garbage. CBS has
responded by interviewing a contract company worker in McMurdo :

These changes are recent and a welcome change from the way NSF has traditionally operated, at least in regard to garbage. This is not all there is to this story, however...

For many years (since 1900 possibly) there has been no removal of US garbage from Antarctica. So it has just accumulated. Japan, has had a similar problem, but their program has been less intense and shorter lived than the US program :

TOKYO, Japan (AP) -- Japanese researchers in Antarctica are getting serious about cleaning up the half-century's worth of garbage piled up at their base on the southernmost continent, an official said Thursday. Building materials, cast-off snow vehicles and fuel drums have collected at the research base since the first expedition was launched in 1956. By 1998, the garbage weighed about 550 tons and research teams began clearing the pile. Now, those efforts are being accelerated in an international effort to clean up Antarctica. Japan's Science Ministry hopes to send the remaining 370 tons of garbage home within four years, ministry official Suguru Suzuki said. Posted: CNN, Thursday, June 17, 2004 10:47 AM EDT (1447 GMT)

The USAP program has a bigger problem. There are military people in addition to the USAP people. I believe the military has taken a pro-active stance, whereas NSF tends to diminish the problem's importance for the sake of budget. Indeed recent kitchen refuse and pop cans are being neatly crated up for transport back to the states. However, in the bay around McMurdo lurks a garbage graveyard similar to Pearl Harbor, or Solomon Islands. Standard NSF practice was to drag refuse out onto the sea ice and leave it there for the spring thaw. Many of the same people who ran this operation like a mining town, are still administering the NSF program today.

In the news you get the story of the helicopter retrieved, which makes a nice photo-op, but they neglect to tell you about all the refuse out in the field camps, and frozen sewage. For years garbage was thrown into open pits. I do not know if the remote field camps continue to throw refuse into burn pits, but I haven't heard anything to the contrary. I wonder if the Co2 and soot from these pits might contaminate surficial measurements? Holes were/are burned into the ice for sewage deposition. Years and years of this practice at the South Pole station, has endangered the safety of their water supply. The danger here is obviously to the personnel at the station. One guy quipped "There is no danger to the wildlife." If there had been bears, as they have in Prudhoe Bay, they would've been more careful with their refuse. Perhaps we should bring some polar bears there.

Besides ocean stowage around McMurdo, there are now covered dumps where once garbage decorated the surface. What happens to this? In refuse pits at lower latitudes they biodegrade. In McMurdo this process would be very slow. It just sits there. At least its out of sight. This is not unlike the process one would have on the moon. It is expensive operationally to transport this stuff there and back. They are researchers, right? Maybe this garbage is not green, and they could find out what could be done.

The problem of McMurdo sewage remains a problem, and has been a problem all along. See Fecal Coliforms in Antarctica. No doubt this impact is serious, as thousands of people shuffle through this area enroute to remote field camps. So McMurdo sewage continues to flow into the ocean water.

So we conclude that the CBS report is really misleading. It is about as accurate as saying Chinese factories are clean, neat, and wonderful places to work. Have you seen those reports? No doubt environmental groups need to continue to press for improvements.

Happening in Antartica : Vodka comrade?

2008-02-14T14:11:00.004-06:00

Drinking is fairly ubiquitous, especially in places where people are seriously bored. Antarctica is no exception. The 1991 Russian invasion of both NSF and the USAP, roughly coincident in time with Man-induced Global Warming (MIGW), has provided a new twist. See Phil Jacobson's blog for this McMurdo story. Actually there are many watering holes in McMurdo. The booze is fairly inexpensive, it keeps you warm, and helps you sleep, right?

One geological field group repeatedly ordered cases of booze and were only sporadically answering radio check-ins. After several months of this word was getting out: NSF might have to do something. They were stressing supplies.

For the uninitiated, here are the sites in McMurdo one can go for a few drinks, to relax and dream about Antarctica. You might note that alcohol is not transported far from the boats, prior to consumption. McMurdo is reminiscent of an old mining town, except there is no mining. Its a good place for a gay old time though. Penguins and seals, by virtue of the Antarctic Treaty, are forbidden to participate, unless they obtain a variance.

Happening in Antarctica : Looking Forward to Seeing "Bubbles" in Auckland

2008-02-13T16:58:00.005-06:00

Global Warming? Be serious. A correspondent takes a ride to Antarctica. Neat trip. I wonder what he is going to report on. Let's see. We could show him the old fish and relate the anti-freeze story. We sure got alot of mileage out of that one. We find another reporter falling for the same old fish routine. What next? Maybe send him on a trip the pole, and talk to Ken the driller man. Who's paying for this anyway? (see here).

CBS reporter talks to Ken Taylor. Ken is stuck out in the cold, drilling ice cores. He is an easy target for the correspondent. Ken winces. He is caught banging on his computer with his fist. Damed LINUX system will not boot properly. Ken and equipment do not always get along, but as Ken says "I never lose." If it doesn't work, Ken usually hammers it. Correspondent asks Ken about the cores. Now realize, Ken is a little frustrated, he has no library out here, and his computer will not boot, and so he mentions bubbles. Actually Ken uses bubbly ice in his Kahlua and Drambuie, but he knows better than to mention that. How about Global Warming Ken? Well, he says, "It is bad, and the CO2 is all from mankind. It shows up in the bubbles." Ken drills it. He acts like he must get back to his important work, and so the reporter leaves.

Actually CO2 levels for the past 1000 years have fluctuated slightly between 270-290 ppmv. At 4,700 years before present there was a peak at 315 ppmv. Current levels are at 360 ppmv. Anthropogenic CO2 is at least an order of magmitude less than natural sources which include oceans, vegetation, soils, and detritus.

Ken is Chief scientist of of the National Science Foundation's West Antarctic Ice Sheet Divide (WAIS Divide) Ice Core Project, a team of scientists, engineers, technicians, and students from multiple U.S. institutions. It sounds like Ken has his mind made up, even before he places the cores into their boxes for transport back to the states in Colorado.

There Richard Alley will have a chance to practice making measurements on them. His dissertation talk was entitled "The Defense that Melted", because often this is what happens to these cores if no precautions are taken - they melt. And so we were disappointed. Not even any firn density measurements from his firn cores. Shouldn't he have to do something for his degree? The Danes had a better system but it requires people to make core measurements on the ice sheet and these guys do not like the cold, and do not like to travel! Really! Alley says his wife Cindy really does not like him to travel. Where have we heard that one before? As a graduate student Richard only went to Antarctica once, and then for only 2 days. Seems like a waste for only two days, to travel all that distance, doesn't it? Richard would tell you they only count the number of times you have been there, not how long you have been there. It's like publications. On the bright side, I do not think Richard has ever despoiled the Antarctic continent, never having gone to the bathroom south of 60 degrees. Must be nice.

So the cores are placed into refrigerators and hopefully they will not suffer catastrophic melting again. They will suffer from serious thermal re-equilibration, and all the attendent metamorphoses of the cores. But so what? Details, details.

Happening in Antarctica : Bloomberg as Terrorist?

2008-02-12T12:00:00.000-06:00

There is an article in the New York Sun in which Mayor Bloomberg compares man-induced global warming (MIGW) to terrorism. Believe me mayor Mike, if you put CO2 on a burning building, the flames just go out. MIGW is not terrorism; it is a fiction.

If you buy the argument that people have to be frightened into conserving to avoid international conflict, then the mayor is doing the right thing. I believe the American people would conserve if politicians engaged in promoting products and services that are energy conscious, rather than frightening people with the weather, which is taken to be humorous and actually hurts the cause of hydrocarbon conservation.

I am afraid Mayor, that you are coming up short on this issue.

Happening in Antarctica : Climate terror !

2008-02-06T10:56:00.000-06:00

Some scientists have used climate scares to attempt to increase both their ties to politicians and to increase their project funding. Are we fooled? What should be done about this practice?

A scientist makes a claim : The sky might be falling.
A scientist gives an informative talk: Skies have fallen and will again.
Finally a scientist makes a request : Please increase my funding so I can study whether or not the sky is falling.

These tactics had been more friendly in the past, but after 9/11 they have taken on a more sinister tone that borders on fraud; scientists are making false claims to frighten people. Sometimes these people are barely credible, but the public assumes they know what they are talking about.

The latest case in point is reported in the current issue of science (A Closer Look at the IPCC Report, Science Jan 25, 2008, pg. 409-10). Concern on the part of some climatologists is about whether Antarctica is melting or not. Richard Alley of Penn State gave a talk to the IPCC indicating a concern and knowledge about Antarctic glaciers and ice sheets. His input reinforced the conclusions of the IPCC. He was nodding agreement in France. Now he is saying he needs to study more to know what the situation actually is. He needs to acquire ice cores and look at the paleoclimate in Antarctica. So there is an existing crisis - it may be too late - but we will just have to wait for Alley to do his work. I wonder if Alley is working on the weekends, rushing to understand. Actually I haver never known him to work on a weekend or after 4 PM. He needs to train himself on how to examine ice cores as a start.

The problem here according to the scientists, is Congress. They have held up incremental funding in 2007. They have had to get along at 2006 funding levels which is bollixing everything. It is Rep. John Dingle's fault, for being an enemy to science by asking questions. Actually Congress has been remiss for several decades in interrogating scientists about spurious results, or complete lack of results despite ever increasing funding. They have practically turned NSF into a social welfare system.

Another such case among many is the CFC scare. CFC's were destroying the ozone over the earth and life might be destroyed. So far, we have survived. Is it because there was a movement started to curtail the use of CFC's? In hindsight, the scientists that created the scare say that the value in making their claims was at least partly because of the induced political movement. As to whether or not CFC's are responsible for the ozone hole is a matter of debate however. The same scientists that made the initial claims are still studying the situation, and probably require more funding. The hole seems to be increasing without the addition of CFC's. Conclusion : Third worlders possibly stocked up on spray cans of deodorant.

Since 1980 or so, people noticed there was funding for climate research when other sources of funding has dried up. More and more they flocked in to this arena. Right from the beginning the problem of the climate was linked to the problem of clouds. Who could predict them? What causes them? They have a paramount role in determining surface temperatures - yet no climate model took them into account because they had not developed any methods to deal with them. This is still the case ! There is no sense in delving into every idea, no matter how inconsequential when this big problem is sitting there like the Sphinx in Egypt.

Now, every academician, his uncle, cousin, nephew and niece are in on the climate problem. There are so many that soon we shall soon have a climate crisis ! We have "climatologists" with airplane tickets, two assisting undergraduates, a ruler, a thermometer, some sticks and cellophane, and they are doing this research stuff in cold regions. Wow! Read my lips. Cut my taxes! Arrest the instigators of this. They are bad for science, bad for the economy, and their forays are bad for the environment. Did you know that feeding penguins has resulted in the penguins contracting salmonella? These people should get a honest job.

Some people have called them eco-terrorists. There is just one problem with that. They do not care about the environment. If they did, they would do real science. I was fooled for a time also, believing they wanted to maintain a clean world. In fact, many of these people are eco-slobs, and they do not even pack it out. Some are affiliated with foreign groups and governments. They are no friend of the polar bear, believe me. Just look at McMurdo if you would like to see how they regard the environment. The amount of junk left out on the ice for it to melt into the bay around McMurdo, is like an iceberg made out of garbage - you only see the tip.

Whatever happened to responsible scientists? They did studies, they reached a consensus, and they reported their results and informed the politicians and the public. Today they start by announcing a result and then repeatedly demand funding to do research. Is this not "Feax Science" ? When does it get labeled as a racket punishable by RICO laws? They are a disservice to their country and they block talented individuals from investigating the way it really is, if anyone cares about that.

Please Dr Feax, do not intimidate us, hurt us or our science programs, and stop ripping us off !

Happening in Antarctica : McCain for President of Antarctica?

2008-01-30T21:01:00.000-06:00

I voted for John McCain as an Independent, and I decried the way the two party system discriminated against a third party candidate. In his case, in retrospect, I guess I am glad they did! His views on Science are postively toxic.

The message is getting out. Our economy depends on innovation, and hence we rely on a technocratic system that rewards innovation. Some candidates are responding to this. Not John McCain. He has shown some concern about global warming and has travelled extensively as part of a congressional group tasked with trying to discern what is going on with the climate. He has travelled to McMurdo and the South Pole (2006-2007), and doubtlessly he is part of the delegational group that went there because of the adventure of the trip, more than there being an actually serious attempt to accomplish something. He got a handful of "Dog and Pony" shows, surely. I have endured many of these VIP fiascos. I recall being angry that the science projects were interrupted or terminated, but that is me.

Having talked with many Antarctic researchers, they express several things to me. One is, "Honesty is poverty". You have to lie now and then to get ahead. Another is : "No one really cares what you say about Antarctica anyway", and "No one can verify anything we do because we control access and few actually care to come down here in any case." These dispirited people are happy enough taking their government money and spending it in New Zealand and Hawaii on their return. If you wanted to bolster up a fledgling positivism about Science in Antarctica, you could not depend on the likes of John McCain to help you out.

What did Senator McCain learn from his travels? This evening in the Republican debate for President, candidate McCain said he is concerned about global warming. He does not believe we should cut our emissions unless the Hindus and Chinese do likewise. We should think "nuclear". "If there is no global warming", he says, "We are nothing out conserving oil".

He is saying in other words, I do not know if the scientists know what they are talking about, if they are being honest or not. We can form a policy regardless. So he has learned really nothing from his travels. He has doubts about the scientists, possibly grave doubts. If they are lieing, we can form a policy and there is no harm done.

So polar scientists there you have it from the horses mouth. It makes no difference if you are BS'ing or not: you may still enjoy yourself if you come down, by beach-combing and hiking. Whatever the case do not be upset with Senator McCain. Above all else, he wants to be liked.

Happening in Antarctica : Antarctic Glaciology Fails IPCC

2008-01-21T13:48:00.000-06:00

Despite all the inadequacies of the IPCC report on global climate change, they concede one major fact about Antarctica : Very poorly understood glacial dynamics for West Antarctica. There is a new report on this in the recent issue of Science (Jan 18).

H Jesse Smith in his Science article (Science, V319, N5861, p. 259) entitled "Whither Antarctic Ice", examines the mass balance of Antarctica as a mean to deduce global climate trends. Broadly, it is understood from gross observation that the interior of E. Antartica remains cold, and at the periphery in W. Antarctica and the peninsula, there has been a warming. Mass balance in W. Antartica, however, depends on knowledge of the dynamics of W. Antartic Ice Streams. The IPCC report would not consider existing knowledge reliable or well-understood. That is a surprise, since it has made many far-reaching conclusions on other topics, based on many questionable hypotheses.
Why the caution here then?

Could it be that an intense NSF study of the Western Antarctic Ice Sheet (including the Ross Ice Shelf and the Siple Coast) concluded that West Antartica was stable, and was unchanging for the last 50 years, and likely to remain so for 400 years if not 1 million years, and then everyone watched as West Antartica proceeded to melt and large ice shelves to calf?

In one major study broad conclusions for the ice stream region were based on a single point measurement. It is not that this is all the data there is, but rather that there has been intentional misrepresentation in this situation, and no one to correct it. Also investigators seldom go the field themselves and leave it up to students to carry out the programs unsupervised. This, and no cross-checking, and one can only imagine the importance of NSF's results. One student involved in these studies, now a researcher and contributor to the IPCC report, claimed to have done considerable ice core studies, and had in fact, never looked at more than a few ice slides made from a microtome. He now leads an ice core lab.

I guess we will just have to wait until these guys retire, and then hope they are not replaced with their graduate students, right? Perhaps the Inspector General will pick up on them, and the justice department will continue its aggressive prosecutions. Its a good thing the system works, because of the human impact on the climate and its immediacy.

Happening in Antarctica : Climate Report

2008-01-18T13:54:00.000-06:00

There is a link to the World Climate Report here. They have an interesting post on reports about climate change in Antarctica that shows scientific reports totally reversing themselves, from global melting, and then suddenly global cooling (ice thickening).

Why the US Antarctic Program is Money Poured into a Black Hole

2008-01-18T08:24:00.000-06:00

The US Antarctic Science Program never had a sensible mission. The policy that created the Antarctic Program was a US tactical decision made in 1960. The science program was an excuse for a US presence, has scientific results that are never checked or examined by any other agency, and since its inception has been severely corrupted by outside influences.

Ronald Reagan wanted to abolish NSF, and perhaps he had his reasons. One of them might have been the corrupted Polar Program. The Antarctic program is a good example of a government program that has no purpose, is strongly influenced by groups anti-alined with US interests, and never ends. Could Iraq continue for 50 years like the Antarctic Science program? Possibly.

Can we rely on scientific findings from Antarctica? Peter Jennings said it succinctly something like this : "They are telling us it is cooling and the ice is thickening, and they are also telling us that it is warming and the ice is thinning. What in the hell is going on here?" Peter died before he got an answer. A Congressional committee looked into this same matter. Scott Borg from NSF, when faced with stark contradictions between NSF and NASA results said something to the effect that this was what his observers had told him. They all scratched their heads. Concern about an Antarctic datasets was unusual.

The Soviets began the exploration of Antarctica in the modern era. They began in 1955, to explore the environment, and to search for resources. Their primary interests were mining and fishing. They occupied the terra firma, that is the part of the Antarctic that was underlain by continental crust, i.e. above sea level.

As Johnny come lately, the US strategy was to thwart all territorial claims, so tactically they occupied the South Pole and established an air route to maintain station resupply, something the US has done ever since. The primary utility for this station has been establishing satellite orbits. Most of the region occupied by the US groups is underlain by ocean or oceanic crust, i.e. below sea level.

NSF established a Polar Programs office in order to coordinate and support US activities in Antarctica. A man responsible for passing nuclear monitoring technology to the Soviets, was put in charge of the program, I would presume, largely as an oversight. This same individual was connected to Soviet agents and spies in the US, involved in passing nuclear secrets to the Soviets in the 1940's. Spies also accompanied Admiral Byrd to the ice. It was their intention, apparently, to monitor all military activity and to curtail or arrest all commercial interests of the US in Antarctica.

This strange arrangement has continued to this day. In the early 1990's during the Clinton administration, an influx of Soviets scientists again flooded the ranks of NSF and also the Polar Programs. There is no real mission in the Antarctic. There is a contract company not unlike Halliburton that provides logistic support and supplies for the program. The scientists, this contract company, and the Russians are the prime movers in determining what happens to the US Antarctic Program, and this largely is thus, under the control of the Russians. Their sole concern to is maintain this situation for as long as possible, at the US taxpayer expense. While this is taking place, the Russians have been repeatedly accused of resource extraction which they have denied. The US on the other hand, has extracted nothing, has not studied the natural resources of the region, and has been the only country actually held to account in violating the Antarctic Treaty which prohibits commercial development but permits research.

So, then, is it any wonder that Antarctic scientific information is unreliable? Some of these same groups are involved in the global warming debacle. When Congress was checking into discrepancies in reports from Antarctica, was it being sincere? Reagan knew there were problems at both NASA and NSF. He sent Ed Meese to NASA, and James Watt to spook the Russian affiliate scientists in the US Antarctic Program. Although some inroads were made at NASA, NSF basically was left untouched. It makes no sense to alter US policy based on either NSF or NASA results unless they cleanup these programs first, and impart a sensible mission. If America needs to rely on its innovation, we are doomed since our science programs are preplanned to fail. I think the US government is possibly afraid to take on these groups, and the problem in an open society is constant vigilance is necessary. We have lived with this, rather than taking on the challenge. Our government has yet to properly assess blame even for passing nuclear secrets to the Soviets back in the 1940's, even though they must have known it had been people connected with the Columbia physics department in New York.

The US Antarctic Program is more poorly organized than McMurdo Base.