Volcanoes melting Arctic ice cap?

Maybe the North Pole is being melted by the warm currents of the River DeNILE running through it?



(note: I am aware there are no penguins at the North Pole. I didn't draw the cartoon.)

 

Because I can't do it all/ I don't see it, etc.

On the other hand, I find it interesting that you didn't provide a link to show us your "major connection to ExxonMobil Corp" and therefor damming proof that LiveScience.com has an agenda which falls in line, because it is paid for by Exxon Mobil Corporation.

I just don't see it . . . care to enlighten us.

 

I'm not quite sure what you are saying. In post number~ I pointed out that livescience.com has a major presence from XOM. (From livescience.coms site) I don't believe that the board of XOM is real high on having climate change on the agenda.

Icarus

 

OK, OK, I finally figured it out.

I was looking for something like a member of the board of directors, a staff member, or Exxon Mobil being the money bags behind livescience.com.

Nope.

What did I find?

I found that after I turned off my NoScripts add-on in my Firefox3 browser . . .

. . . [drum roll please] . . .

Your "major connection" between livescience.com and Exxon Mobil Corporation is . . .

. . . [a second drum roll please, because this is a goodie!]

. . . A DoubleClick generated web advertisement! ound:ound:ound:

Yep, there it was in all its blazing glory . . . the "major connection" . . . the smoking gun proving that one should always consider the source.

- OK, I am now considering the source.

Icarus. YOU'RE FIRED!

 

The article was classic propaganda. Between the headline ("Huge Volcanoes"), and that particular rhetorical device, the casual reader will get the (entirely intended) impression that the melting of the polar icecap could easily be due to volcanoes under the ice. As usual, no outright lies, because ultimately this approach is more effective.

An important larger question is why -- why is this disinformation now being pushed? I mean, the icecap has been shrinking for at least the last 30 years, on average. It could be that this is just a routine part of the campaign to throw doubt on anthropogenic global warming. But I think it goes beyond that. I think this is to prepare the gullible public for an event of high symbolic importance: the melting of the icecap all the way back to the pole.

The realclimate.org discussion mentions the symbolic value of this. This is something that John Q. Public can grasp, all out of proportion to its actual significance in overall scheme of things. Realclimate quotes a seemingly reputable source giving 50/50 odds on a melt to the pole happening this year. So, the disinformation machinery needs to get cranked up in anticipation. I predict that if the ice continues to melt at the current pace this year, we'll see a steady stream of articles on ... the usual ... why the melting is not important, why it's all happened before, how the ice melts and refreezes every year, why it might be caused by something other than man, why it'll be a good thing, and so on and so forth. A scattershot of reasons why one should just shrug this off and get on with business as usual.

My point is that this is an event that even an uneducated person can grasp -- the icecap melted all the way up to the north pole. I think that the point of this and (I predict) similar articles is to provide a simple and appealing alternative explanation ("Huge Volcanoes") for those who would be inclined to shrug it off anyway. It doesn't matter what the cockamamie reason is. I'm sure that we'll see all varieties in the coming months. All that matters is that the stories provide a range of intuitively appealing excuses for people who want to continue to believe that this isn't a problem.

As they say in my industry, if you're the target, it's your job to fuzzy up the bullseye. In this case, the bullseye is the ice-free north pole.

 

I am a regular reader of livescience. If XOM has any influence on their reporting they hide it really well. The articles on livescience generally do indicate AGW is happening (Just like every other sci-tech magazine, website I read).