12 more glaciers that haven’t heard the news about global warming

[Oddball]

The glaciers are melting! The glaciers are melting! The glaciers are…uhhhhh…never mind.

Turns out the IPCC’s chicken little story that all the Himalayan glaciers are melting is just another exaggeration. Or fraud. Take your choice. You know, like the stats coming out of East Anglia CRU. And its claim that Antarctica is melting. And that Greenland’s ice cap is melting. And that sea levels are rising. And that the polar bears are dying. Fact is, some glaciers are retreating, but many others around the world are growing.

1. Himalayan glaciers are growing, not shrinking
2. Alaska’s Hubbard Glacier. Growing. A lot.
3. Norwegian glaciers. Growing again.
4. Glaciers growing on Canada’s tallest mountain
5. North to Alaska and more growing glaciers
6. Glaciers are growing in California. California?
7. A glacier is growing on Washington’s Mt. St. Helens.
8. Glaciers are growing in France and Switzerland, too
9. New Zealand’s largest glaciers are growing

10. Russia’s glaciers are growing, too
11. Argentina’s Perito Moreno glacier is, you guessed it, growing
12. Iceland’s Breidamerkurjokull glacier. Yup, it’s growing, too.

12 more glaciers that haven?t heard the news about global warming | IHatetheMedia

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Are they taking vitamins?

 

[concept]

The glaciers are melting! The glaciers are melting! The glaciers are…uhhhhh…never mind.

Turns out the IPCC’s chicken little story that all the Himalayan glaciers are melting is just another exaggeration. Or fraud. Take your choice. You know, like the stats coming out of East Anglia CRU. And its claim that Antarctica is melting. And that Greenland’s ice cap is melting. And that sea levels are rising. And that the polar bears are dying. Fact is, some glaciers are retreating, but many others around the world are growing.

1. Himalayan glaciers are growing, not shrinking
2. Alaska’s Hubbard Glacier. Growing. A lot.
3. Norwegian glaciers. Growing again.
4. Glaciers growing on Canada’s tallest mountain
5. North to Alaska and more growing glaciers
6. Glaciers are growing in California. California?
7. A glacier is growing on Washington’s Mt. St. Helens.
8. Glaciers are growing in France and Switzerland, too
9. New Zealand’s largest glaciers are growing

10. Russia’s glaciers are growing, too
11. Argentina’s Perito Moreno glacier is, you guessed it, growing
12. Iceland’s Breidamerkurjokull glacier. Yup, it’s growing, too.

12 more glaciers that haven?t heard the news about global warming | IHatetheMedia

How is this possible?

It's the warmest year since the big bang. The warmest decade since God rested on the seventh day.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is why we need a civics and literacy test before something can be qualified as a glaciers!! These glaciers are too dumb to know that they should be shrinking under the unrelenting heat of imaginary AGW

 

[Dr Grump]

NZ's glaciers are growing? link............

 

[Bfgrn]

It's official – glaciers will disappear within decades, after all. – Telegraph

By Geoffrey Lean Environment Last updated: January 27th, 2010

Just as you may have thought it was safe to go back onto the glaciers, two new reports have come out to say that they are melting rapidly after all, indicating that many will disappear within decades.

The first, from the official World Glacier Monitoring Service, is especially relevant because the body has been at the forefront of exposing the now notorious mistakes on the melting of the Himalayan glaciers in the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It says that the almost 100 glaciers it regularly surveys around the world showed a continuation of “the global trend in strong ice loss over the past few decades” in 2007/2008, the latest year for which figures have been analysed.

Prof Wilfried Haeberli, the Service’s director, says: “The melting goes on”. He adds that it was “less extreme” that year than in the immediately preceding ones, but points out: “What’s really important is the trend of ten years or so, and that shows an unbroken acceleration in melting.”

He went on to say that, as temperatures continue to rise, many glaciers will disappear with decades. Even if global warming slowed down from its present rates “in the Alps about 70 per cent will be gone by the middle of the century, and mountain ranges like the Pyrenees may be completely ice-free.” Other vulnerable ranges include parts of the Andes and the Rockies.

The second study – from the University of Calgary, in Canada - confirms the crisis in the Rockies, reporting that one quarter of the glacier area cover in the province of Alberta disappeared between 1985 and 2005, and predicting a further 82 per cent decline by the end of the century.”It’s a bit bleak for the glaciers” says Dr Shawn Marshall, who led the study. “It’s just a matter, as the decades go on, of the ice rolling uphill until it is out of sight.”

He has no doubt that man-made global warming is to blame. “Some part of the 20th century story is natural”, he says, “but in the past 50 years there’s no way to explain it from those natural changes. The sun has been in a cooling cycle.” In “all the world’s glaciated mountain ranges”, he adds, the story is the same: “widespread glacier retreat, accelerating in the last 20 years.”

Prof Haeberli repeated that big glaciers at much higher altitudes, as in the Himalayas, could last “centuries” but added: “It’s centuries, not millennia, and not many centuries.”

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

World Glacier Monitoring Service


Preliminary glacier mass balance data 2007/2008

1 Summary of the balance year 2007/08

Preliminary mass balance values for the observation period 2007/08 have been reported now from more than 90 glaciers worldwide. The mass balance statistics (Table 1) are calculated based on all reported values as well as on the data from the 30 reference glaciers in 9 mountain ranges (Table 2) with continuous observation series back to 1980.

The average mass balance of the glaciers with available long-term observation series around the world continues to decrease, with tentative figures indicating a further thickness reduction of 0.5 metres water equivalent (m w.e.) during the hydrological year 2007/08. The new data continues the global trend in strong ice loss over the past few decades and brings the cumulative average thickness loss of the reference glaciers since 1980 at about 12 m w.e. (see Figures 1 and 2). All so far reported mass balance values, given in Table 3, are tentative.

Table 1: Overview on mass balance data 2007/08. Statistics are given for all reported glaciers (ALL) and for the available 'reference' glaciers with continuous long-term observation series (REF).


Figure 1: Mean annual mass balance of reference glaciers. pdf

Figure 2: Mean cumulative mass balance of all reported glaciers (black line) and the reference glaciers (red line).pdf

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Glaciers throughout the solar system must have signed a suicide pact; they're even disappearing on Pluto!!

 

[Truthmatters]

Some Glaciers Growing Due to Climate Change, Study Suggests

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Some Glaciers Growing Due to Climate Change, Study Suggests

"Some glaciers in Pakistan's Upper Indus River Basin appear to be growing, and a new study suggests that global warming is the cause. "

Abbott: What causing the glaciers to shrink?

Costello: I don't know

Abbott: Third Base

Costello: Third base is causing the glaciers to shrink?

Abbott; No, but Global Warming is!

Costello: Seriously?

Abbott: I've never been more seriouser! Guess what's causing the Glaciers to grow?

Costello: What?

Abbott: Second Base...and Global Warming

Costello: Wait a second, I thought you said Global Warming was causing the glaciers to shrink

Abbott: Absolutely!

Costello: And it's also causing them to grow?

 

[Oddball]

Some Glaciers Growing Due to Climate Change, Study Suggests

 

[Truthmatters]

Meteorological data compiled over the past century show that winter temperatures have been rising in parts of the Western Himalaya, Karakoram, and Hindu Kush mountain ranges (map of Pakistan).

But the region's winter snowfall, which feeds the glaciers, has been increasing. And average summer temperatures, which melt snow and glaciers, have been dropping.

"One of the surprising results we found was a downward trend in summer temperatures," said David Archer, study co-author and a hydrologist at Newcastle University in the United Kingdom.

"That seems to be at odds with what people would expect, given the news about glaciers melting in the Eastern Himalaya." (Read "Himalaya Ice-Melt Threat Monitored in Nepal" [March 2006].)




some people just hate science

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Meteorological data compiled over the past century show that winter temperatures have been rising in parts of the Western Himalaya, Karakoram, and Hindu Kush mountain ranges (map of Pakistan).

But the region's winter snowfall, which feeds the glaciers, has been increasing. And average summer temperatures, which melt snow and glaciers, have been dropping.

"One of the surprising results we found was a downward trend in summer temperatures," said David Archer, study co-author and a hydrologist at Newcastle University in the United Kingdom.

"That seems to be at odds with what people would expect, given the news about glaciers melting in the Eastern Himalaya." (Read "Himalaya Ice-Melt Threat Monitored in Nepal" [March 2006].)

some people just hate science

Q: What is causing the glaciers to melt?
A. Manmade Global Warming

Q: What is causing the glaciers to grow?
A. Manmade Global Warming

And that's what we call "settled science"

I say the Moon might well be hollow because that's the only direction that makes any sense once you understand the science, this Global Warming stuff is a total fucking joke

 

[Truthmatters]

I know science is just too complicated for your small brain so let the smart people get the real work done.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I know science is just too complicated for your small brain so let the smart people get the real work done.

Yeah, that must be it.

People who paste articles without understanding, or even reading them are the shits.

 

[Truthmatters]

I read it , I understood it too.

You did not.

 

[Bfgrn]

I know science is just too complicated for your small brain so let the smart people get the real work done.

Unlike liberalism, with its fundamental belief in the long-range power of ideas, conservatism is bound by the stock of ideas inherited at a given time. And since it does not really believe in the power of argument, its last resort is generally a claim to superior wisdom, based on some self-arrogated superior quality.

The difference shows itself most clearly in the different attitudes of the two traditions to the advance of knowledge. Though the liberal certainly does not regard all change as progress, he does regard the advance of knowledge as one of the chief aims of human effort and expects from it the gradual solution of such problems and difficulties as we can hope to solve. Without preferring the new merely because it is new, the liberal is aware that it is of the essence of human achievement that it produces something new; and he is prepared to come to terms with new knowledge, whether he likes its immediate effects or not.

Personally, I find that the most objectionable feature of the conservative attitude is its propensity to reject well-substantiated new knowledge because it dislikes some of the consequences which seem to follow from it - or, to put it bluntly, its obscurantism. I will not deny that scientists as much as others are given to fads and fashions and that we have much reason to be cautious in accepting the conclusions that they draw from their latest theories. But the reasons for our reluctance must themselves be rational and must be kept separate from our regret that the new theories upset our cherished beliefs. I can have little patience with those who oppose, for instance, the theory of evolution or what are called "mechanistic" explanations of the phenomena of life because of certain moral consequences which at first seem to follow from these theories, and still less with those who regard it as irrelevant or impious to ask certain questions at all. By refusing to face the facts, the conservative only weakens his own position. Frequently the conclusions which rationalist presumption draws from new scientific insights do not at all follow from them. But only by actively taking part in the elaboration of the consequences of new discoveries do we learn whether or not they fit into our world picture and, if so, how. Should our moral beliefs really prove to be dependent on factual assumptions shown to be incorrect, it would hardly be moral to defend them by refusing to acknowledge facts.
Nobel laureate F. A. Hayek

 

[Truthmatters]

He wont understand that either but its a great read.

 

[Oddball]

I understand Hayek just fine.

I also understand that Jethro is a total intellectual fraud, who cherry picks the writings of people like Hayek for what he likes, while completely ignoring the other 95% of his work which runs completely against his authoritarian socialistic ideology.

 

[Bfgrn]

I understand Hayek just fine.

I also understand that Jethro is a total intellectual fraud, who cherry picks the writings of people like Hayek for what he likes, while completely ignoring the other 95% of his work which runs completely against his authoritarian socialistic ideology.

The truth DUD...e, you're the biggest phony on the board. A person that see himself as some self appointed, self righteous judge. There is nothing remotely libertarian or classic liberal about you or your beliefs, you are a far right wing hack...

Hayek's words continue to mocks you DUD...e, just as I do...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's amazing how many people at USMB labor under the delusion that cutting and pasting "E=mc^2" makes them Einstein.