Slashdot Mirror


World's Largest Tropical Glacier Vanishing

Socguy wrote with a link to a CBC article about the rapidly disappearing Peruvian glacier known as the Quelccaya ice cap. The world's largest tropical glacier was a hot topic this past Thursday at the meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Glaciologist Lonnie Thompson, and a team of Ohio state scientists, produced the stunning news that Quelccaya and similar formations are melting at a rate of some 60 metres per year. While polar ice caps have commanded attention in the discussion of global warming to date, these tropical caps are crucial to the well-being of ecosystems relying on an influx of mountain stream fresh water.

6 of 462 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What isn't being said? by MarkRose · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wikipedia actually has an article full of data regarding exactly that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_s ince_1850 . If you don't believe what's written in the article, check out the references. The global conclusions are quite clear.

    --
    Be relentless!
  2. A bit odd by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is odd on a couple counts. First, Lonnie Thompson has undoubtedly been aware for a couple decades that Quelccaya has been melting away (I used to work in a different university's ice core lab, and we used to collaborate with Lonnie). Second, based on both climate models and historical records I'm pretty sure that what we refer to as "global warming" shouldn't have a huge impact on tropical glaciers. During both glacial and interglacial periods the significant temperature changes were in subtropical and especially arctic areas - tropical areas saw very little change. What this means is: even if we'd never dumped tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, Quelccaya would still likely be melting away right now.

    This isn't meant as an argument in the debate over human-caused global warming; it's just an argument that Quelccaya is probably not good supporting evidence for either side.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  3. Re:What isn't being said? by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 5, Informative
    But there are also glaciers nearby that are advancing instead of receding.

    Can you back up that statement with a link, or did you just pull some highly speculative piece of bullshit out of your ass?

    So the question to ask is: How many tropical glaciers are advancing or staying the same instead of receding? The report does not say, so it is impossible to draw any global conclusions.

    Fucking retarded. TFA talked about other glaciers & a few seconds research would have lead you to Tropical Glacier Retreat analysis.

    Throughout the Tropics, glaciers are in retreat. Well-documented examples include Quelccaya [Thompson, et al. 1993], Huascaran [Byers, 2000; Kaser and Osmaston,2002], Zongo and Chacaltaya [Francou,et al 2003; Wagnon et al. 1999] in S. America; and the Lewis, Rwenzori and Kilimanjaro (more properly, Kibo) glaciers in East Africa [Hastenrath, 1984; Kaser and Osmaston, 2002]. There have been indications of widespread retreat of Himalayan glaciers, including Dasuopu in the subtropics, but a quantitative understanding of this region must await peer-reviewed analysis of the recently completed 46000-glacier Chinese Glacier Inventory.
    In short, you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about.
    --
    There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
  4. Re:When will the denials stop? by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Informative

    "That, of course, has yet to be proven."

    Depends on what your definition of "proven" is. The certainty in the attribution of the total of all significant +/- forcings is 90% or higher (ref: 2007 IPCC-SPM, figure SPM-2). The forcings attributed to humans outweighs all other forcings combined. ie: It is 90% certain that humas are responsible for greater than 50% of the total warming effect obserevd.

    Note that the IPCC is by it's nature a conservative document, as it should be when 2500 "scientists agree". This means that at very best there is a 10% chance humans are not the cause and as each day passes with no viable alternative explaination combined with data sets that continue to improve, the certainty will increase.

    Having said that, it is true the cause is not as certain as the observed warming itself but like all scientific concepts the idea will never be "proven", the best we can hope for is "virtually certain", eg: it is "virtually certain" the sun will rise in the morning but not "absolutely certain".

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  5. Re:When will the denials stop? by Capsaicin · · Score: 4, Informative

    This recent article linking cosmic rays and global warming is the start.

    This has already been debunked I'm afraid.

    --
    Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
  6. Re:When will the denials stop? by Capsaicin · · Score: 4, Informative

    Remind me... are these the same scientists, or different ones, that attested with equal certainty as to human activity causing Global Cooling?

    Different ones. Also there were a handful of climatologists calling cooling (judging by the infamous Newsweek article, I still have not been shown a peer-reviewd paper arguing cooling), almost the entire profession agree that we are facing a warming trend, plus that it is man-made.

    See this is how it works. In the 70s a handful of climatologists (contra the mainstream of the profession) argued for global cooling. In the 90s a handful of climatologists (contra the mainstream) argued that Global Warming was not occuring. In both these instances the mainstream of the profession was proved correct.

    --
    Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke