Glaciers disappearing from Glacier National Park

[Old Rocks]

Rate of change is rather important, as is the fact that never before has there been a couple of billion people depending on the agriculture that the glacier melt provide water for in the last part of the growing season.

http://www.grid.unep.ch/glaciers/pdfs/6_10.pdf

 

[DiveCon]

Rate of change is rather important, as is the fact that never before has there been a couple of billion people depending on the agriculture that the glacier melt provide water for in the last part of the growing season.

http://www.grid.unep.ch/glaciers/pdfs/6_10.pdf

you DO understand that eventually those glaciers would melt away and be gone, right?
its just that they are doing what they naturally WOULD do anyway

 

[Old Rocks]

Rate of change is rather important, as is the fact that never before has there been a couple of billion people depending on the agriculture that the glacier melt provide water for in the last part of the growing season.

http://www.grid.unep.ch/glaciers/pdfs/6_10.pdf

you DO understand that eventually those glaciers would melt away and be gone, right?
its just that they are doing what they naturally WOULD do anyway

Do you understand that by the Milankovic Cycles, these glaciers should either be holding, or growing? No, of course you do not. Real science is beyond your ken.

 

[DiveCon]

Rate of change is rather important, as is the fact that never before has there been a couple of billion people depending on the agriculture that the glacier melt provide water for in the last part of the growing season.

http://www.grid.unep.ch/glaciers/pdfs/6_10.pdf

you DO understand that eventually those glaciers would melt away and be gone, right?
its just that they are doing what they naturally WOULD do anyway

Do you understand that by the Milankovic Cycles, these glaciers should either be holding, or growing? No, of course you do not. Real science is beyond your ken.

bullshit
if they werent melting then those people you fuss about not having water wouldnt have the water

 

[code1211]

Rate of change is rather important, as is the fact that never before has there been a couple of billion people depending on the agriculture that the glacier melt provide water for in the last part of the growing season.

http://www.grid.unep.ch/glaciers/pdfs/6_10.pdf

you DO understand that eventually those glaciers would melt away and be gone, right?
its just that they are doing what they naturally WOULD do anyway

Do you understand that by the Milankovic Cycles, these glaciers should either be holding, or growing? No, of course you do not. Real science is beyond your ken.

That is factually incorrect. The Eccentricity of the orbit and the Inclination of the axis are both changing to produce increased insolation for the Earth and particularly for the Northern Hemisphere.

Absent any impact from any other cause and assuming that the Milankovitch cycles have the needed power to do so, they would be producing the melting seen in the glaciers of the Northern Hemisphere.

Certainly, the conditions exist to create increased insloation in the Northern Hemisphere due solely to the Milankovitch Cycles.

NOAA Paleoclimatology Program - Orbital Variations and Milankovitch Theory
<snip>
What does The Milankovitch Theory say about future climate change?
Orbital changes occur over thousands of years, and the climate system may also take thousands of years to respond to orbital forcing. Theory suggests that the primary driver of ice ages is the total summer radiation received in northern latitude zones where major ice sheets have formed in the past, near 65 degrees north. Past ice ages correlate well to 65N summer insolation (Imbrie 1982). Astronomical calculations show that 65N summer insolation should increase gradually over the next 25,000 years, and that no 65N summer insolation declines sufficient to cause an ice age are expected in the next 50,000 - 100,000 years ( Hollan 2000, Berger 2002).
<snip>


Milankovitch cycles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

<snip>
The amount of solar radiation (insolation) in the Northern Hemisphere at 65° N seems to be related to occurrence of an ice age. Astronomical calculations show that 65° N summer insolation should increase gradually over the next 25,000 years. A regime of eccentricity lower than the current value will last for about the next 100,000 years. Changes in northern hemisphere summer insolation will be dominated by changes in obliquity &#949;. No declines in 65° N summer insolation, sufficient to cause a glacial period, are expected in the next 50,000 years.
<snip>

More recent work by Berger and Loutre suggests that the current warm climate may last another 50,000 years.[17]
<snip>

 

[westwall]

Please note in the article below that the advance of the Glaciers in the areas that are the cause celeb for this thread are probably products of the period of the Little ice Age.

An interesting point.

I presume that theory suggests that the current "global warming" theory might be thought of as merely a continuation of recovery from the mini ice ages

It is generally agreed that there were three minima, beginning about 1650, about 1770, and 1850, each separated by intervals of slight warming.[5].

Is that what's going on?

Well, we can hope that is true, I guess.

source

Geologic studies of the Owens Valley in CA say exactly that. They have been extensively studied over the last 100 years and show a very clear cyclic pattern of advance and retreat of alpine glaciers.

 

[westwall]

you DO understand that eventually those glaciers would melt away and be gone, right?
its just that they are doing what they naturally WOULD do anyway

Do you understand that by the Milankovic Cycles, these glaciers should either be holding, or growing? No, of course you do not. Real science is beyond your ken.

That is factually incorrect. The Eccentricity of the orbit and the Inclination of the axis are both changing to produce increased insolation for the Earth and particularly for the Northern Hemisphere.

Absent any impact from any other cause and assuming that the Milankovitch cycles have the needed power to do so, they would be producing the melting seen in the glaciers of the Northern Hemisphere.

Certainly, the conditions exist to create increased insloation in the Northern Hemisphere due solely to the Milankovitch Cycles.

NOAA Paleoclimatology Program - Orbital Variations and Milankovitch Theory
<snip>
What does The Milankovitch Theory say about future climate change?
Orbital changes occur over thousands of years, and the climate system may also take thousands of years to respond to orbital forcing. Theory suggests that the primary driver of ice ages is the total summer radiation received in northern latitude zones where major ice sheets have formed in the past, near 65 degrees north. Past ice ages correlate well to 65N summer insolation (Imbrie 1982). Astronomical calculations show that 65N summer insolation should increase gradually over the next 25,000 years, and that no 65N summer insolation declines sufficient to cause an ice age are expected in the next 50,000 - 100,000 years ( Hollan 2000, Berger 2002).
<snip>


Milankovitch cycles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

<snip>
The amount of solar radiation (insolation) in the Northern Hemisphere at 65° N seems to be related to occurrence of an ice age. Astronomical calculations show that 65° N summer insolation should increase gradually over the next 25,000 years. A regime of eccentricity lower than the current value will last for about the next 100,000 years. Changes in northern hemisphere summer insolation will be dominated by changes in obliquity &#949;. No declines in 65° N summer insolation, sufficient to cause a glacial period, are expected in the next 50,000 years.
<snip>

More recent work by Berger and Loutre suggests that the current warm climate may last another 50,000 years.[17]
<snip>

Exactly correct. Please note the sentence that states the insolation should increase GRADUALLY OVER THE NEXT 25,000 years. For people who don't have a handle on geologic time that means the temps don't rise all at once....it means that it takes thousands of years for the effect to be felt...are you paying attention olfraud?

 

[mdn2000]

Glaciers are growing, here is partial quote of the "partial list" from the link.

List of expanding glaciers

Here's a (partial) list of the specific glaciers that are growing

NORWAY
Ålfotbreen Glacier
Briksdalsbreen Glacier
Nigardsbreen Glacier
Hardangerjøkulen Glacier
Hansebreen Glacier
Jostefonn Glacier
Engabreen glacier (The Engabreen glacier
is the second largest glacier in Norway. It is a
part (a glacial tongue) of the Svartisen glacier,
which has steadily increased in mass since the
1960s when heavier winter precipitation set in.)

Norway's glaciers growing at record pace. The face of the Briksdal glacier,
an off-shoot of the largest glacier in Norway and mainland Europe, is growing by an
average 7.2 inches (18 cm) per day. (From the Norwegian daily Bergens Tidende.)

Choose "English" (at top of the page), choose "Water,"
then "Hydrology," then "Glaciers and Snow" from the menu.
You'll see a list of all significant glaciers in Norway.
(Thanks to Leif-K. Hansen for this info.)
CANADA
Helm Glacier
Place Glacier

Glaciers growing on Canada&#8217;s tallest mountain
17 Nov 08 &#8211; The ice-covered peak of Yukon's soaring Mount Logan
may be due for an official re-measurement after readings that suggest
this country's superlative summit has experienced a growth spurt.

 

[CrusaderFrank]