The Global Warming Love Boat Hit an Iceberg

Environmental political science is now entrenched in the US media to the point that it has become blasphemy to question the credibility of Global Warming. Imagine a world where we must believe the end of the world is near because of our energy consumption and environmental practices of driving to work, and if you don't believe in the end of the world environmental disaster scenario then it is you who is the crazy fool.

Did you hear the tale of the cruise ship that went to Antarctica in search of global warming but instead hit an iceberg and sank? You probably did, you just didn't know you did. The New York Times covered the incident.

They were modern adventure travelers, following the doomed route of Sir Ernest Shackleton to the frozen ends of the earth. They paid $7,000 to $16,000 to cruise on a ship that had proudly plowed the Antarctic for 40 years.

But sometime early yesterday, the Explorer, fondly known in the maritime world as “the little red ship,” quietly struck ice.

There were the alarms, then the captain’s voice on the public address system calling the 100 passengers and the crew of about 50 to the lecture hall, according to passengers’ accounts on the radio and others relayed from rescuers and the tour operator.

In the lecture hall, they were told that water was creeping in through a fist-size hole punched into the ship’s starboard. As it flooded the grinding engine room, the power failed. The ship ceased responding.

How classic that those "modern adventure travelers" who "paid $7,000 to $16,000" are actually baby boomer's in search of global warming.

You’d never read this in the mainstream media: The owner of MS Explorer that sank, leaving a huge carbon footprint at the bottom of the Antarctic Ocean Friday is an acolyte of teensy-weensy carbon footprint crusader Al Gore.

G.A.P. Adventures CEO and Explorer owner, Bruce Poon Tip and Gore have similar ideals, “filling their schedules with speaking engagements on environmental change to educate global audiences.” And that’s straight off of www.gapadventures.com. In fact, as recently as last April, both Poon Tip and Gore gave presentations at the Green Living Show in Toronto.

Good thing Gore was otherwise occupied when 154 passengers and crew had to be rescued at sea when their eco-cruise ship struck ice in the Antarctic Ocean and started to sink early Friday morning.

Forgive me if I find that hilarious. These rich fools, who may or may not have realized that the ice shelf in Antarctica is actually increasing (not decreasing like the Arctic) paid thousands of dollars to be the next punchline of the latest media propaganda campaign. These myths are hard to shake though, as a kid growing up in the cold war I had to reeducate myself as an adult once I realized how brainwashed I had been.

In the cold war, everything nuclear was bad, whether it was nuclear power or nuclear bombs. OK, so I'm still not very fond of nuclear weapons, but I want more nuclear power. It amazes me the French power 88% of their nation with nuclear power, and we can't even build a new nuclear power plant today because of fear... of something.

What is it we are afraid of again? Oh that's right, nuclear radiation, because nuclear radiation killed hundreds of thousands of people right? Uhm, maybe not. For example, from Wikipedia on Chernobyl:

The Chernobyl disaster caused a few tens of immediate deaths due to radiation poisoning; thousands of related cancer cases are predicted over the coming decades. Since it is often not possible to prove the origin of the cancer which causes a person's death, it is difficult to estimate Chernobyl's long-term death toll.

That estimate was adjusted today. Why? Because science trumps political environmental science. Spiegel today tells us how many people actually died as a direct result of Chernobyl...

Officially 47 people -- members of the emergency rescue crews -- died in Chernobyl from exposure to lethal doses of radiation. This is serious enough. "But overall the amount of radiation that escaped was simply too low to claim large numbers of victims," explains Kellerer.

The iodine 131 that escaped from the reactor did end up causing severe health problems in Ukraine. It settled on meadows in the form of a fine dust, passing through the food chain, from grass to cows to milk, and eventually accumulating in the thyroid glands of children. About 4,000 children were afflicted with cancer. Less well-known, however, is the fact that only nine of those 4,000 died -- thyroid cancers are often easy to operate on.

That was over 20 years ago, in other words the hippy who wrote out the Wikipedia article is calling for "thousands of related cancer cases are predicted over the coming decades." Say what? So if they were 20 when Chernobyl melted down, they are 41 now, and now we are leaning in the coming decades thousands of the several hundred thousands in the region supposedly effected will develop cancer? Thank you Wikipedia, aka Captain F'in Obvious.

So Chernobyl is a bad example? OK, lets look closer at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. From Spiegel again.

The study included all residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who had survived the atomic explosion within a 10-kilometer (6.2-mile) radius. Investigators questioned the residents to obtain their precise locations when the bomb exploded, and used this information to calculate a personal radiation dose for each resident. Data was collected for 86,572 people.

Today, 60 years later, the study's results are clear. More than 700 people eventually died as a result of radiation received from the atomic attack:

• 87 died of leukemia;
• 440 died of tumors;
• 250 died of radiation-induced heart attacks.
• In addition, 30 fetuses developed mental disabilities after they were born.

That Speigel article is a great read btw. Check your child's history book, my 7th graders book says over 100,000 people died due to radiation, which is clearly another political science fact of life in education. I'm sure my schoolbook probably quoted some equally incorrect number when I was in school.

But in reality, fewer people died by radiation sickness in Chernobyl, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki than died on 9/11, but thanks to political scientific accepted myths the US can't build nuclear reactors today.

That's ok though, instead of fixing our energy supplies, we can complain about the environment, believe the sky is literally falling and the world is about to end, and while we are celebrating our faith in propaganda, we can all take a cruise to Antarctica in search of global warming, and even hit an iceberg.

What is the lesson here? Next time someone tells you about the dangers of nuclear energy, or how the world will end due to Global Warming, send them this picture of the ecohippy who had to have the Chilean Navy save her stupid baby boomer ass because her cruise ship in search of global warming hit an iceberg.

More pictures and coverage of the M/V EXPLORER sinking at Fred Fry's.