Global Warming data:
Himalayan glaciers not melting because of climate change, report finds
Himalayan glaciers are actually advancing rather than retreating, claims the first major study since a controversial UN report said they would be melted within quarter of a century.
That’s NOT what the study says. Science reporting is crap, and the Telegraph sucks. I don’t say this because I just read the journal article, I say it because THAT’S WHAT THE TELEGRAPH’S OWN REPORTING SAYS:
The new study by scientists at the Universities of California and Potsdam has found that half of the glaciers in the Karakoram range, in the northwestern Himlaya, are in fact advancing and that global warming is not the deciding factor in whether a glacier survives or melts.
Their report, published in the journal Nature Geoscience, found the key factor affecting their advance or retreat is the amount of debris – rocks and mud – strewn on their surface, not the general nature of climate change.
Glaciers surrounded by high mountains and covered with more than two centimetres of debris are protected from melting.
The melting of glaciers is a complicated process. Those glaciers between high mountains (providing shade, I assume) and covered in debris are growing while others are melting. So access to direct sunlight may be a critical factor? Okay.
What does this say about Anthropogenic Global Warming? Does it counter the theory? If all 264 glaciers were growing, I’d say ‘maybe, YES.’ So no. Does it support AGW? On its face, no.
To me, it says that climate change is not so monstrous a beast that it’s overwhelming all other factors and turning the world into a big pool of water overnight.
More generally of AGW stuff — what can we say? I think we can all agree on these three things:
1.) Carbon dioxide is DEFINITELY a greenhouse gas. It absorbs and returns infrared radiation (heat).
2.) The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is DEFINITELY up over the last 100 years. Up something like 35%.
3.) The temperature of the globe is DEFINITELY creeping up over the last 100 years. Probably longer. The 10 hottest years on recent record (since 1880) occurred since 1997:
No matter what anybody else tells you, if they can’t agree on those three things, there can be no discussion. I’ve been trying to wrap my head around this complicated issue, and that’s where I’m convinced by the data.
Meanwhile, Don Surber’s version of ‘crunching the data’ amounts to ‘NYAH NYAH.’ While the new study probably adds much more detail to the understanding of the dynamics of Himalayan glaciation trends, eclipsing a previous report that said all glaciers were retreating, HA HA HA:
Three years after this [previous] report was issued — after it received a Nobel Prize — teh UN changed teh date to 2305, citing a typo.
This came in the wake of Climategate which pretty much was the last nail in the coffin for this crackpot theory.
I love how the right trot out the most unserious, un-schooled, overwrought dinks to debate science. Don thinks that stolen e-mails make reams of data disappear. Very sensible. He probably thinks the Earth will suddenly stop warming tomorrow, and everybody will just somehow realize it, and there’ll be a big parade where we carry Don our shoulders to a convention hall full of football trophies, chicken wings and beer.
You want to know why I believe this study over the UN? Because it makes sense.