Whiskers <> wrote in
news::
> On 2010-10-23, chuckcar <> wrote:
>> OldGringo38 <> wrote in
>> news:i9ut4g$5r4$:
>>
>>> I hope that there is Internet Service in Hell so you can still post
>>> here when it's all over with.
>>>
>> The fact of the matter is that the north pole ice is at the lowest
>> point that it has ever been in recorded history.
>
> 'Recorded history' in this instance going all the way back to the
> first satellite photos of the region in 1978. That's just a blink of
> an eye in terms of 'climate change'.
>
No, it goes back to the Franklin Expedition and the repeated attempts to
find it, And as for satellite pictures of the north, 1978 is off by at
least 10 years.
> As it happens, within that tiny record, 2007 was the year with least
> summer ice in the Arctic.
>
> <http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/>
>
>> Hell just this last month
>> some idiot in a Kodiak boat crossed the north west passage. Something
>> that 30 years ago was impossible most years in *any* boat. Even
>> icebreakers.
>
> The first reliably recorded successful trip through the 'North West
> Passage' was Amundsen's in 1906.
>
> <http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/features/northwpass/franklin.html>
>
I never said it was impossible, just extremely dangerous. Until this
decade.
> But the Vikings (of course!) probably found their way from the east to
> Ellesmere Island at the northern end of Baffin Bay. Wikipedia says
> that Juan de Fuca claimed to have sailed from the Pacific to the
> Atlantic and back in 1592, and Bartholomew de Fonte claimed to have
> sailed from the Atlantic to the Pacific in 1640. If those claims are
> true, then an open North West Passage isn't such a new thing.
>
Yeah, right. Wooden boats that would be cut to pieces by the ice. Not
a chance. Even Franklin had his steel clad.
> An RCMP schooner made the passage from Pacific to Atlantic in 1940,
> after over-wintering and taking a total of 28 months; in 1944 the
> return trip took only 86 days. The journey has become almost
> commonplace since then.
>
It certainly has *not*. It's like trying to cross Greenland in the dead
of winter by foot. Pure ice. The easiest route involved going through a
"river" of ice coming straight from the pole. That's what got Franklin. The
part from north of Sask. to Alaska is the easy part.
Look at this map.
http://tinyurl.com/2ut88zq
See that island right in the center that looks sort of like an upside down
arrow head? That's the trouble point. If you go north of it, you would run
into pack ice - that is a solid impassible sheet. If you go down the east
side you run into the ice flowing from the pole as you reach the 6:00 point
or later coming from underneath. There *is* no more southerly route short
of going by land, that land to the east of that island is one big penninsula.
If you want to know more, Look up Pierre Burton. Now deceased, but a very good
history writer. The only complaints historians have about him is that he
makes it interesting.
--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )