Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

Turns out the poles aren’t melting, not that our media or government will say anything

New Zealand sent 18 people to Lima in Peru for a talkfest about doing?”SOMETHING, ANYTHING, PLEASE” about global warming. Eighteen people flying across the Pacific ocean to talk about how we can contribute to stopping the poles melting.

It never occurs to these morons that stopping such talk-fests would be a good start.

We are about to likely send even more people to Paris for the next talk-fest, but it turns out the poles don’t need saving, not that you will ever read about in NZ media or hear from our government.

In fact, the poles are “much more stable” than climate scientists once predicted and could even be much thicker than previously thought.

For years, scientists have suggested that both poles are melting at an alarming rate because of warming temperatures – dangerously raising the Earth’s sea levels while threatening the homes of Arctic and Antarctic animals.

But the uncertainty surrounding climate change and the polar ice caps reached a new level this month when research suggested the ice in the Antarctic is actually growing.

And there could even be evidence to suggest the polar bear population is not under threat.

Ted Maksym, an oceanographer at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, conducted a study in which he sent an underwater robot into the depths of the Antarctic sea to measure the ice.

His results contradicted previous assumptions made by scientists and showed that the ice is actually much thicker than has been predicted over the last 20 years.

Dr Benny Peiser, from the Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF), said this latest research adds further proof to the unpredictability of the supposed effects of global warming.

He said: “The Antarctic is actually growing and all the evidence in the last few months suggests many assumptions about the poles was wrong.

“Global sea ice is at a record high, another key indicator that something is working in the opposite direction of what was predicted.” ? Read more »