WSJ: Himalayan Glaciers Are Melting at Furious Rate, New Study Shows

[ding]

there's never been an 80 year run-up in temperature as fast as this one.

Except for D-O events which were 5C swings over the period of several decades.

 

[Grumblenuts]

400 to 500 years is the SHORTEST TIME SCALE YOU SHOULD EXPECT to SEE any changes in ancient temperatures using these methods.

And more recently we see what's been going on far better. Makes one wonder why fossil fuel enthusiasts always go way TF back in time attempting to deny what we can so clearly see is happening now? But, but, look way over there.. where it's all like fuzzy.. yeah, that's the ticket!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And more recently we see what's been going on far better.

Science is awesome!!!

So what does science say was the previous fastest 400 year warming period?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How many extreme weather events happenedwea in 1522? In 1022?
I'm still looking.

Prior to 1850, there were no extreme weather events. There were no temperature anomalies anywhere on the entire planet. There were no floods, fires hurricanes or tornadoes

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Prior to 1850, there were no extreme weather events. There were no temperature anomalies anywhere on the entire planet. There were no floods, fires hurricanes or tornadoes

Damn you Industrial Revolution!!!!

Damn you to hell!!!!

 

[flacaltenn]

And more recently we see what's been going on far better. Makes one wonder why fossil fuel enthusiasts always go way TF back in time attempting to deny what we can so clearly see is happening now? But, but, look way over there.. where it's all like fuzzy.. yeah, that's the ticket!

Since you stumbled in late, the REASON we're chatting about 10,000 years ago is that some scientists have over-enthusiatically CLAIMED that our little 80 year WELL MEASURED warming spike is TOTALLY UNPRECEDENTED IN HISTORY going back X years. Well they NEVER actually said that -- and they never HONESTLY CAN because their methods dont have the time resolution necessary to FIND OR SEE any short 80 year long blips in studies of ancient climate.

Thanks for your concern bud..

 

[Grumblenuts]

Since you stumbled in late, the REASON we're chatting about 10,000 years ago is that some scientists have over-enthusiatically CLAIMED that our little 80 year WELL MEASURED warming spike is TOTALLY UNPRECEDENTED IN HISTORY going back X years. Well they NEVER actually said that -- and they never HONESTLY CAN because their methods dont have the time resolution necessary to FIND OR SEE any short 80 year long blips in studies of ancient climate.

Thanks for your concern bud..

You're welcome. Even though I said nothing indicative of 10,000 years ago.. bud. I was thinking more like in the hundreds of thousands to millions of years ago range. Sorry. Honestly, didn't mean to trigger your denier bone.. this time

 

[elektra]

another headline as science?
another headline abu dabba do finds to confirm his/her opinion?

some threads deserve ridicule, some users hear deserve nothing but ridicule

aba afck deserves nothing but ridicule

the WSJ is not a source for science, the article is not science, it is all opinion, use the article to find the study, then read the study and comment, abu dumb fuck does none of that yet everybody joins in????

nothing to see here except a bunch of...

 

[flacaltenn]

another headline as science?
another headline abu dabba do finds to confirm his/her opinion?

some threads deserve ridicule, some users hear deserve nothing but ridicule

aba afck deserves nothing but ridicule

the WSJ is not a source for science, the article is not science, it is all opinion, use the article to find the study, then read the study and comment, abu dumb fuck does none of that yet everybody joins in????

nothing to see here except a bunch of...

You shamed me into at LEAST going to LEEDS University and getting more of the actual science.

Someone on this thread posited the "soot from China" theory" and Abu characteristically DISMISSED that out of hand. But INTERESTINGLY, these are not ALL GLACIERS in the sense of deep connected ice masses. They studied 15 THOUSAND separate ice masses that grew to largest extent in the LIAge. Here's an interesting comment --

Himalayan glaciers melting at ‘exceptional rate’ | University of Leeds

www.leeds.ac.uk

Similarly, glaciers which have significant amounts of natural debris upon their surfaces are also losing mass more quickly: they contributed around 46.5% of total volume loss despite making up only around 7.5% of the total number of glaciers.

Dr Carrivick said: “While we must act urgently to reduce and mitigate the impact of human-made climate change on the glaciers and meltwater-fed rivers, the modelling of that impact on glaciers must also take account of the role of factors such as lakes and debris.”

Debris? Above the heavy vegetation line? Gotta be soot dont ya think? Not enough bird droppings to reduce 47% of the ENTIRE SURVEY ICE volume in less than 7.5% of the glaciers.. Prevailing winds? Dont know. But a fuckfull of people tippy toe around naming/blaming China for ANYTHING.

Anyways ONLY 7.5% of the "glaciers" are responsible for 47% of the ice volume loss? And more to the EAST than to the WEST and ALL had "Surface Debris"? issues. Sounds like someone is burying the lead environmental catastrophe here.

The other gem is -- they are measuring the shrinkage from the LATEST GROWTH EXTENT assumed to be LIce Age 500 yrs ago or so. But they dont have DATA on RATES of loss going back even 100 years on their 15,000 ice fields, because you can ONLY do that by satellite. They DONT KNOW whether they melted at an average rate or GREW and melted in quick bursts. So CLAIMING anything about 500 yr old RATES of ice recession is kinda weak and sketchy. Unless they sent teams to each to pick at the rubble and date stuff. (hard to carbon date stuff that young anyways).

abu afak -- See also the following post about a World Bank study,

 

[Grumblenuts]

Accelerated mass loss of Himalayan glaciers since the Little Ice Age - Scientific Reports

Himalayan glaciers are undergoing rapid mass loss but rates of contemporary change lack long-term (centennial-scale) context. Here, we reconstruct the extent and surfaces of 14,798 Himalayan glaciers during the Little Ice Age (LIA), 400 to 700 years ago. We show that they have lost at least 40 %...

www.nature.com

 

[Grumblenuts]

Debris? Above the heavy vegetation line? Gotta be soot dont ya think?

Perhaps you should study helpful visual aids a bit harder..

Himalayan glaciers are also declining faster where they end in lakes, which have several warming effects, rather than where they end on land. The number and size of these lakes are increasing so continued acceleration in mass loss can be expected.

Khumbu glacier pond chain. Image credit: Duncan Quincey, University of Leeds

 

[flacaltenn]

Which all prompted me to explore a bit MORE on this "story".. Seems I'm probably correct.

Glaciers of the Himalayas World Bank Report

Black carbon deposits originating from factories, cooking and vehicles are compounding the effects of climate change to speed up the melting of the Himalayan glaciers. More aggressively curbing black carbon emissions can slow glacier melt and improve the security of water resources in the...

www.worldbank.org

Melting Glaciers, Loss of Snow Pose Risks to South Asia Water Resources

WASHINGTON, June 3, 2021 – Black carbon deposits originating from factories, cooking and vehicles are compounding the effects of climate change to speed up the melting of the Himalayan glaciers. More aggressively curbing black carbon emissions can slow glacier melt and improve the security of water resources in the region, according to a new World Bank report.

“Recent devastating flash floods attributed to a collapsing glacier in the Himalayas were a sobering reminder of the sometimes disastrous effects of climate change and the dangers we have to protect against,” said Hartwig Schafer, World Bank Vice President for South Asia. “As glaciers shrink, the lives and livelihoods of many people downstream are affected by changes in the water supply. We can slow glacier melt by collectively acting to curb the black carbon deposits that are speeding the thinning of the ice. Regional cooperation to protect these resources will pay important dividends for the health and well-being of the people in the region.”

Glaciers of the Himalayas finds that in addition to changing temperatures and precipitation patterns, black carbon deposits – air-borne particles generated by incomplete combustion from brick kilns, diesel exhaust, and the burning of biomass – are accelerating glacier and snow melt in these ranges. Business-as-usual practices would further speed glacier melt, with harmful implications for the health and well-being of people in the region.

You can't replenish ice without SNOW COVER. And if the soot DESTROYS the snow cover -- you have retreating glaciers with NO WAY TO RECOVER.

This is the NORMAL mode of operation for "GW Science". You get PAID for research that loosely blames man/CO2 and HIDES the other -- very often LARGER reasons for the problem. NO ones' gonna fund your research if you are BLAMING the REAL polluters. Especially if their name is China.

Debris ? My ass.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Which all prompted me to explore a bit MORE on this "story".. Seems I'm probably correct.

Yeah, much better source than the WSJ, fo sho!

In 2020, the World Bank (WB) and the IMF are 76 years old. These two international financial institutions (IFI), founded in 1944, are dominated by the USA and a few allied major powers who work to generalize policies that run counter the interests of the world’s populations.

The WB and the IMF have systematically made loans to States as a means of influencing their policies. Foreign indebtedness has been and continues to be used as an instrument for subordinating the borrowers. Since their creation, the IMF and the WB have violated international pacts on human rights and have no qualms about supporting dictatorships. {... and more ... - great history review!}

We mostly started it and have kept it going for our billionaires to play with, but are no longer members? Huh?

 

[flacaltenn]

No, you lying son of a bitch, AOC does not say we are all going to die in 11 years. And you well know it. That is what I despise about people like you is that you are such damnable liars concerning people you don't like.

I thought you were becoming a geologist or something. Didn't know you were living under a rock for the past 8 or 10 years !!!

You FLAME ME bad.. OOOH that hurt. But not as much as laughing at what you're not following.

There are kids in elementary schools being given "12 Years to Live" tee shirts by NGOs to scare the piss out of them AND their parents. And it's NOT MY JOB to figure out WHY AOC can mangle ANYTHING like an IPCC so badly -- but SHE DOES DO THAT.. And I often wonder what tricks she pulled to get a degree from Boston U,

Ocasio Cortez: ‘The World is Going to End In Twelve Years If We Don’t Address Climate Change’

“Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: ‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?’” Ocasio-Cortez told interviewer Tanehisi Coates at an...

news.yahoo.com

During an event honoring Martin Luther King Jr. on Monday, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) cautioned the audience that climate change would “destroy the planet” by the year 2031 if people fail to address a generational challenge she likened to “Word War II.”

“Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: ‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?’” Ocasio-Cortez told interviewer Tanehisi Coates at an “MLK Now” event in New York.

And after she got some blowback on "ending in 12 years" she DOUBLED down on stupid and blamed others. With a retraction THAT NEVER CLARIFIED OR SHOWED SHE KNEW ANYTHING OF THE KIND THAT YOU ASSUMED SHE KNEW..

AOC says only a 'sea sponge' would believe her '12 years' doomsday remark, but most Dems bought it

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s claim that the world will “end in 12 years” unless climate change is tackled was accepted as a fact by two-thirds of Democrats, even though she said herself that only those with “social intelligence of a sea sponge” could actually believe it.

www.foxnews.com

Earlier this month, however, Ocasio-Cortez backtracked on the gloomy forecast and instead blamed the Republican Party for taking her humor and sarcasm literally.

This is a technique of the GOP, to take dry humor + sarcasm literally and “fact check” it. Like the “world ending in 12 years” thing, you’d have to have the social intelligence of a sea sponge to think it’s literal. But the GOP is basically Dwight from The Office so who knows.

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

But Rasmussen says that 46% of DEMS believe that the world IS gonna end in 12 years from GWarming -- so you're in great company.

 

[Grumblenuts]

This is a technique of the GOP, to take dry humor + sarcasm literally and “fact check” it. Like the “world ending in 12 years” thing, you’d have to have the social intelligence of a sea sponge to think it’s literal. But the GOP is basically Dwight from The Office so who knows.

Very well communicated to her desired demographic.. and funny! Good for her.

But Rasmussen says

And another great highly suspect source!

 

[flacaltenn]

Yeah, much better source than the WSJ, fo sho!

We mostly started it and have kept it going for our billionaires to play with, but are no longer members? Huh?

World Bank has weighed in on a lot of environmental aspects that plague the world. I have no doubt they based their grants and programs on SOUND science. That's what bankers do.. Besides, I've read this in the lit and nobody here at USMB is really discussing, so I just pulled a credible link. I KNEW THIS WAS an issue tho from papers that I've read in the science lit.

And did ya read what I wrote? NO SCIENCE gets funded by the $BILL of Federal funds that takes pokes at directly AT China for things that they can "whiffle ball" off as "debris" being a large contribution to their observed Himalayan melt like the whimps behind the WSJ version of Himalayan ice melting.

Only sources like World Bank can point that finger and not get it lopped the fuck off.

I haven't taken your brain hostage -- GO study it yourself. It's easy. I'll give ya a clue

Search term = soot destroying snow and ice in Himalayas

YOU're VERY WELCOME !!!!

Spoiler alert -- 1st return hit on Bing is from NASA and James Hansen (the godfather of GWarming) himself says that about 1/2 of the Himmy Ice decline is BECAUSE OF POLLUTION !!!!!

 

[abu afak]

Very well communicated to her desired demographic.. and funny! Good for her.

And another great highly suspect source!

Always beware when someone makes a claim about a source without Giving the Link.
Oft their withholding info.
The Poll he referred to is a Rasmussen/Heartland institute poll. (oft Heartland commissions/pays for the poll)
Infamous Heartland was started by Phillip Morris to deny Tobacco damage and now Denies Global Warming. (and gets money from Exxon. (above info Wiki)

Note the question "World ending in 12 years" to make them look nuts) as opposed to ie something more rational as the most (and perhaps only) serious danger choice.

`

 

[Grumblenuts]

Spoiler alert -- 1st return hit on Bing is from NASA and James Hansen (the godfather of GWarming) himself says that about 1/2 of the Himmy Ice decline is BECAUSE OF POLLUTION !!!!!

Fuck Bing, but your search criteria first returned:

The Rate of Global Warming During Next 25 Years Could Be ...​

https://insideclimatenews.org › News

Sep 15, 2021 — Former NASA climate scientist James Hansen urged Congress decades ago to act on climate change. Now he says he expects reduced aerosol pollution ...
Missing: godfather ‎Himmy ‎Ice

LOL. "Debris" > "soot" > "aerosol".. what next, cow sneezes?

Hansen said that, in this case, warming is being accelerated by the decline of other industrial pollutants that they’ve cleaned from it.

Plunging sulfate aerosol emissions from industrial sources, particularly shipping, could lead global temperatures to surge well beyond the levels prescribed by the Paris Climate Agreement as soon as 2040 “unless appropriate countermeasures are taken,” Hansen wrote, together with Makiko Sato, in a monthly temperature analysis published in August by the Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions center at Columbia University’s Earth Institute.

Declining sulfate aerosols makes some clouds less reflective, enabling more solar radiation to reach and warm land and ocean surfaces.

Yep, it's all that Chinese soot, goddammit! {"Gotta be soot dont ya think?"}

 

[Captain Caveman]

abu afak when do you think the world is going to "end"?

 

[Stann]

While everyone is focusing on Antarctica and Greenland, S Asia could lose much of it's Ag due to AGW.

""Glaciers across the Himalayas are melting at an extraordinary rate, with new research showing that the vast ice sheets there shrank 10 times faster in the past 40 years than during the previous seven centuries.

Avalanches, flooding and other effects of the accelerating loss of ice imperil residents in India, Nepal and Bhutan and threaten to disrupt agriculture for hundreds of millions of people across South Asia, according to the researchers. And since water from melting glaciers contributes to sea-level rise, glacial ice loss in the Himalayas also adds to the threat of inundation and related problems faced by coastal communities around the world.

“This part of the world is changing faster than perhaps anybody realized,” said Jonathan Carrivick, a University of Leeds glaciologist and the co-author of a paper detailing the research published Monday in the journal Scientific Reports. “It’s not just that the Himalayas are changing really fast, it’s that they’re changing ever faster.”
[.....]
The new finding comes as there is scientific consensus that ice loss from glaciers and polar ice sheets results from rising global temperatures caused by greenhouse-gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels."..."
[.....]
[.....]

Himalayan Glaciers Are Melting at Furious Rate, New Study Shows

Glaciers across the region are melting at an extraordinary rate, with new research showing that the vast ice sheets there shrank 10 times faster in the past 40 years than during the previous seven centuries.

www.wsj.com

Since those waters sustain almost 3/4ths of this world's human population that is extremely foreboding.