Thank you Mr. Asher for debunking the old submarine
at the North Pole myths. The subs used their SONAR
to find a natural weak spot in the existing ice before
they surfaced. There was ice at the pole when they
surfaced. Now, thanks to polar amplified global
warming there will be no ice at the North Pole.

On Jun 30, 2:45*pm, William Asher wrote:
george wrote:
On Jul 1, 1:22 am, Roger Coppock wrote:
Global Warming to Melt North Pole Ice Cover For First Time in Recorded
History!
Jason Mick (Blog) - June 30, 2008

Obviously Jason (and you) need to catch up on a wee bit of history
where a nuclear submarine surfaced at the North Pole some time back
around 1959

http://www.strangecosmos.com/content/item/131289.html

HMS Sovereign took part in Operation Brisk during 1976. The submarine
surfaced at the geographical North Pole as part of the exercise on
20th October 1976.

Or just recently
http://www.athropolis.com/news/submarines.htm.
My advice is for you to use Google

Obviously you (and the other skeptics here) need to catch up on a wee bit
of oceanographic terminology. *The image of the Skate in 1959 clearly shows
multi-year ice in the background (and very thick multi-year ice from the
looks of it (with a huge pressure ridge in the distance)). *The image of
the three subs from 1987 and the one from 1976 that someone else linked to
on the John-daly.com website are similar, showing boats in leads. *All
"subs at the N. Pole" images are of them surfacing in a refrozen lead,
which is what they do. *They find a lead, or a recently frozen one and
punch through it since they can't penetrate multi-year ice. *They do not
show submarines surfacing at the north pole in open water.

Open water to an arctic oceanographer is very different from leads in pack
ice. *The explanation on John-Daly.com is about what you would expect, and
is laughable when he explains "see those leads of open water?" *"Leads of
open water" is an oxymoron to an oceanographer since you can't have leads
in open water. *Open water is ice free. *Leads occur in pack ice. *

If the N. Pole becomes open water (i.e., ice free, not leads in pack
ice) this year, that is fairly different and should give you pause for a
moment. *Unless of course, you are like John Daly and don't understand how
dumb it is to say "leads of open water" or not recognize what that Skate
image and the others really show. *My advice to you is to learn the
difference because it is not semantic. *

I know you are scared of climate change because like a lot of things you
see it as taking away your core liberty of consumerism. *But that fear
doesn't give you free reign to talk nonsense. *

--
Bill Asher

Roger Coppock wrote in
:

Thank you Mr. Asher for debunking the old submarine
at the North Pole myths. The subs used their SONAR
to find a natural weak spot in the existing ice before
they surfaced. There was ice at the pole when they
surfaced. Now, thanks to polar amplified global
warming there will be no ice at the North Pole.

Roger:

It is by no means certain the pole will be ice free, at least this year.
However, if you google around you can find trends in multi-year ice
coverage from IceSat (I think the string is something like "icesat multi-
year trend" and it will dig out a powerpoint from the IceSat technical
lead (no pun intended) at JPL). The decline in surface area coverage of
multi-year ice is more remarkable than an ice-free pole, since a lot of
the multi-year ice is grounded against Greenland and its areal extent is
not so susceptable to variability.

Here's an example:

http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaice...04_Figure6.png

As an aside, one of the other things that can happen with multi-year sea
ice is that the top part melts, forming a shallow lake. But since the
ice is several meters thick there is still an underlying ice sheet. Some
of the "leads" in the 1987 image in John-Daly.com (the one with the three
subs) look to me like surface melt, not actual leads. But it's hard to
tell from a single image taken at a slant.

--
Bill Asher