Scientists are shocked by a massive iceberg floating into waters near the Australian Island of Macquarie. New Zealand's Otago Daily Times reports that satellites have located the iceberg more than 12 miles north of Macquarie and headed toward currents that could draw it closer to New Zealand or out into the Pacific Ocean. The giant floating slab of ice, first sighted last week south of the sub-antarctic island, measures 2,300 feet long and 1,148 feet deep, as reported by Sky News.

Scientists fear that it will pose a serious hazard to ships as it breaks up and melts on its northward journey. The Sky News article quotes Neal Young, glaciologist with the Australian Antarctic Division (AAD) of the Australian Department of the Environment, remarking on how unusual it is to see an iceberg so far north. "If the current trends in global warming were to continue I would anticipate seeing more icebergs and the large ice shelves breaking up," Young said.

However, research published in January by the Science & Public Policy Institute says differently. According to Christopher Monckton, author of Warming Freezes the Southern Ocean: Another Mann-made Climate Change, temperatures in Antarctica have been cooling over the last half century. Moreover, "the extent of the sea ice surrounding the Antarctic continent has been growing slightly in recent decades, reaching a record extent late in 2007," says Monckton, quoting research from the University of Illinois. He also cites a number of scientists who refute data recently published in the journal Nature that claims Antarctica is warming. This data is not based on actual observation but on estimates from climate models concocted by Michael E. Mann, professor with the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University.

One of the scientists quoted by Monckton was NASA researcher Ross Hays, who said that in Antarctica, "the summer seasons have been getting colder.... December 2006 was the coldest December ever." Hays pointed out that research presented to the American Meteorological Society last year noted more than 70 percent of Antarctica was cooling. "With statistics you can make numbers go to almost any conclusion you want," Hays lamented. "It saddens me to see members of the scientific community do this for media coverage."

In the ADD press release, Neal Young also said this newest headlining iceberg "is likely to be part of one of the big ones that calved from the Ross Ice Shelf nearly a decade ago." Hays said that in his own experience as a forecaster in Antarctica he has witnessed a reversal in the annual receding of the Ross Ice Shelf observed in the late 1980s. He maintains that vehicles can now safely drive on the ice, though helicopters had to be used to transport personnel and equipment 20 years ago.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (9)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Flu-Bird said:

	Holy titanic batman So look a iceburg is comming up out of the ocean from ANTARCTICA and heading in the direction of KIWILAND but according to those global warming wackos from greenpeace and AL GORE this isnt suppost to happen THIS PROVE GLOBAL WARMING IS ALIE
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009
Votes: -2

..., Lowly rated comment [Show]

Jes said:

	@NobodyYouKnow 1. NASA researcher Ross Hays is a scientist and Monkton was quoting him and other scientists. 2. How big an iceberg is does not prove it did not break off the antarctic 10 years ago. 3. The breaking up off parts of ice shelves is natural and seasonal. 4. It would appear that there is hard evidence (and some anecdotal) that most of antarctica is not warming.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009
Votes: +4

LessHypeMoreFact said:

... Jes: 1: "According to Christopher Monckton" so you'd be ok with your plumber prescribing medicine as long as he quote real doctors? 2: seems irrelevant as the point seems to be that it can last longer and into warmer waters if its big. 3: While true that bergs, large and small, break off as the ice shelf extends, the recent collapse of major areas of ice shelf that were stable for millenia is not 'normal'. 4: Flatly false according to the major sciences. http://tinyurl.com/b6j3fe

report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009
Votes: +1

Flu-Bird said:

	Mad wacko scientist JAMES HANSEN has been one of those insane mad scientists types pushing this GLOBAL WARMING poppycock and he is still in NASA instead of the funny farm
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009
Votes: +0

Georg Limtricj said:

	Antarctic Cooling How is technology going to change industry and new business pop up if we accept one pole cools as the other defrosts. Sounds like my ice box it has its hot and cold cycles too on a coil. Perhaps this is normal.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 15, 2009
Votes: -2

Bonnie said:

	... There is a reason the term "global warming" is passé, and the new chic phrase is "climate change".
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 16, 2009
Votes: +1

NobodyYouKnow said:

... The two terms AGW and 'climate change' are totally separate issues. AGW is the warming of the global average surface temperature (ocean and land). This impacts the temperature of the air which then drives climate. This is now solid science that is hard to attack since there are few 'chinks' in the data or understanding. That said, the ISSUE of agw is not a warmer surface but the EFFECT of theat on climate regimes. And that is the 'related' issue of 'climate change' which is still in the infancy of understanding. We know that it isn't a good idea because we have huge investments in 'things as they were' but we also have not much choice. We will have to put up with SOME climate change even if AGW is reigned in enough to moderate the peak levels. However, that is off topic. The issue is whether icebergs in New Zealand waters are relevant to AGW. No they are not. Large icebergs always last long enough to get into temperate or even tropical waters. They are just rare so the event is not common.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 17, 2009
Votes: +0

JohnS said:

AGW is not the warming of the global average surface temperature. The two terms AGW and 'climate change' are totally separate issues. AGW is the warming of the global average surface temperature (ocean and land). This impacts the temperature of the air which then drives climate. NOT. AGW is the purported part of climate change that can hypothetically be attributed to man. Anthropogenic Global Warming. Man caused global warming. Climate is always either warming or cooling. Right now, it is cooling again. Note that the warmest of the last 15 years was 1998, and it was not warmer than 1934. If we are warming, why has it not exceeded 1998 in 11 more years? JohnS

report abuse vote down vote up

December 07, 2009
Votes: +0