Figure 1: They are preparing to fulfill their simple task to swim through areas where polar ice has melted in body suits.
What temperatures do such sharp women expect at the North Pole? Well, you can get the idea if you listen to a third intelligent woman, Ann Atwood, who helped to organize the expedition and who might actually be the ultimate intellectual mother of many of the hard-to-believe aspects of this story. She said: "They were experiencing temperatures that weren't expected with global warming." I kid you not. They didn't expect damn freezing temperatures at the North Pole because they live in the world of global warming.
What temperatures did they actually experience at the North Pole? Well, sometimes minus 58 degrees inside the tent and minus 100 degrees outside it. Women who remember their elementary school a little bit more could even find these numbers in tables or textbooks. Well, due to extreme cold temperatures, Liv Arnesen suffered frostbite in three of her toes while the batteries in their electronic devices stopped working.
Figure 2: Frostbite: photographic evidence of global warming (her third toe was actually worse than the picture shows). The climate change is sometimes really tough. :-)
The expedition meant to "bring attention to global warming" was called off.
They were clearly not far from their Darwin Awards that are given to the people whose death measurably increases the genetic quality of the mankind because the dead people demonstrate unusual stupidity that leads to their death. Much like the hijackers who believe that they will be given virgins in the Heaven, they must actually believe that there is a global warming that will protect them from frostbites at the North Pole. It's just like the Christian fundamentalists who believe that God will protect them from a lion.
My God, I hope that the lion is a Christian, too. And the lion says: God is great, God is good, and we thank Him for our food, Amen.Every person whose IQ exceeds the women's IQ at least by 40 points knows that the amount of "trend" warming - if we can talk about it at all - is so tiny that it can hardly be measured by accurate devices - about 1 degree Fahrenheit per century - and it can surely influence nothing qualitative whatsoever about the experience at the North Pole where the temperature is frequently 100 degrees below the convenient temperatures in our apartments. In fact, the global mean temperature didn't change at all since 1986 when Bancroft became the first women to cross the North Pole. How could then a rational person change her preparations because of the hypothetical "global warming"?
No sane person could have ever detected any "global warming signs" in his or her lifetime. The corresponding changes are tiny, completely negligible in comparison with the natural weather fluctuations and local climate variations, and can only be seen if you measure the temperatures very accurately and average them very carefully. And even if you are a scientist who does so, the interpretation is both unclear and irrelevant for the planning of similar expeditions.
The people who can't distinguish a 1 degree change per century from a 100 degree change per week - people who actually believe that the proverbial "global warming" is influencing our lives - are really so stupid that the humankind might benefit if they froze in the polar regions even if they're as physically fit as the two women are. Sorry if this conclusion sounds too cruel.
Well, at least these two women succeeded in bringing attention to global warming. And how do these wise women who "sounded extremely cold", as the third woman said, explain their experience when they're safe again? Has the story changed anything about their opinions?
Figure 3: On Monday, they were waiting for a plane on the Ward Hunt Island to take them to the Resolute Bay base camp in Canada and then to Minnesota.
You may guess. At least for the third woman who planned the trip, the answer is a resounding No: "But one of the things we see with global warming is unpredictability," Atwood said. Her belief is based on dogmas and no observations, no experiments, and no experience could ever influence it, not even if she brings two friends of her near death. Whatever happens to them is another proof of their belief. These are women who want to teach the world.
Note: the following paragraph is not recommended to our Christian friends because of its slight anti-religious bias. Thanks! ;-)
Some Christian fundamentalists are crazy but I haven't seen a Christian who would be comparably blinded as Ann Atwood - I haven't seen such a Christian at least for 10 years. Well, I am not sure whether Arnesen and Bancroft, two veteran explorers, share Atwood's opinions. If they don't, they will probably agree with me that an environmentalist is a person who is ready to sacrifice your life for her insane beliefs.
And that's the memo.
Via Marc Morano. See also news.google.com.
