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.

Comments

When will the denials stop?

[Anonymous Coward]

Every time it's proven that global warming is happening, we have people who insist that it isn't. We're not even at the point where we're trying to determine whether or not humans are responsible.

Again, we're just talking at the level of whether or not warming is happening, and it clearly is. The evidence is there, as is shown by the melting of glaciers in Peru and Greenland, a decade of warm winters in the northern US and Canada, ice-free passage through the Arctic Ocean, and so forth.

I'm just wondering when those people who are standing so steadfast against reality will admit that they've been wrong.

Re:When will the denials stop?

[Anonymous Coward]

the reason for disbelief isn't whether or not it is happening, It is over whether it is a short natural cycle that will cure itself in a matter of time or whether is it a long term cycle we need to do something about.

It doesn't matter if it's a long-term cycle or a short-term cycle. What matters is that it's happening, and it's really starting to affect us. For example, most people these days don't have more than a week or so worth of food stored up. So let's suppose the warming is just a short-term trend, lasting only a year. Even just one year of poor crop yields will send food prices through the roof. And as we saw in New Orleans so recently, even American civilization isn't as strong as we may think. The result will be major strife.

Re:When will the denials stop?

[LynnwoodRooster]

Exactly! I mean, my conjecture of the magnetic field being unstable is based upon models and some local phenomena, and drifting magnetic north fields. But we know it's flipped and been unstable in the past, so it must be now, because the models say so and we have localized data...

Kind of like the "Man's driving climate change" argument, eh?

Re:When will the denials stop?

[A beautiful mind]

I can't decide whether your post is a good example of subtle sarcasm or whether you're really are serious. I'm kinda hoping it's sarcasm.

Re:When will the denials stop?

[ccmay]

Yeah right, there's just an evil cabal of climatologists out to fuck the oil culture

Regardless of the truth or falsehood of global warming, or the anthropogenic component thereof, one thing is certain:

It has become a hobby horse ridden by assorted hard-Left statists anxious to make a grab for power and revenue that has been denied to them at the ballot box for many years.

They speak of carbon taxes, but there seems precious little concern about the "carbon" part and plenty of hand-rubbing over the "tax" part.

Unless and until private jets are confiscated from limousine liberals like Laurie David, and Barbara Streisand is driven out of her 20,000 square foot mansion with 10 separate HVAC systems, and the Kennedys are told to go fuck themselves as a thousand windmills are erected in their private yacht harbor, I'm going to assume they don't really believe what they are preaching. I think they see this as an opportunity to ram collectivist squalor down the throats of us peons, while they continue to enjoy every luxury that free-market capitalism can provide to a tiny elite.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Scientific "consensus" is not proof, especially when most of the "scientists" are not climatologists at all, but left-wing professors of social sciences and epidemiology and the like.

We know that natural processes alone can explain far greater variations in temperature than even the worst predictions of the alarmists. Palm trees once grew at the North Pole, and ice once lay a mile deep over Yosemite Valley and Chicago, before cavemen tamed fire. I'm not ready to dismantle Western civilization and hand it over to the proven failures who have given the world the likes of Zimbabwe and Cuba, without a lot better proof than mere statistical noise. The so-called "precautionary principle" is the the most ridiculous crock of shit that the human mind has ever produced, and that's saying something.

-ccm

Re:When will the denials stop?

[Doc Ruby]

Y'know, I worked on a couple of real Y2K projects. We replaced a couple of systems that would have cracked up on 1/1/2000, losing the corporations $millions, and in one case possibly interfering with patients receiving healthcare on time. But we fixed it. As did thousands of other geeks and managers working worldwide. Including several here in NYC I knew personally working on essential infrastructure on which many lives depended, and other people we knew nationwide working on essential realtime systems like transit control, etc.

But since we did a good job, minimizing damage to a negligible amount, lots of people today believe the Y2K bug was a hoax to stretch the Tech Bubble another year.

If farmers stopped feeding their cows "shitty food" (cows), Mad Cow would probably subside. But they aren't stopping.

Epidemics start with a few people. Bird flu is a very serious risk of pandemic. If we don't nip it in the bud, and prepare to cope with any resulting collapse, we will see extreme damage. There's no flu hysteria: the actual risk is certainly proportional to the amount of planning and mitigation underway. SARS was an actual epidemic in China, distinguished by extremely rapid spread under cover of official denial. Until the denial was broken and countermeasures reduced both the rate of infection and its mortality rate. SARS might have been beaten, which we'd expect to do to such a dangerous threat, but if we don't reform our denial systems (China's government has officially apologized for its denial and slowness), it will happen again, maybe SARS or maybe some other disease, and maybe with less success. Maybe even to the tipping point of permanent stability incubated in a global population. AIDS is a case in point.

African overpopulation underlies millions dead prematurely there over the past couple of centuries. Overpopulation without social, political or technical mitigation has overbalanced the continent into position for a collapse from Climate change that will make Rwanda look like Little Big Horn.

But of course those are just variously proportionate responses to variously strong risks, that the OP was denying en masse. As if there are no risks, just because they live in a society which usually recognizes expensive risks and minimizes/mitigates them evn if they don't notice. Especially with their head buried in the sand.

You want to talk about hysteria, let's talk about terrorism. Let's talk about the paranoia about meteorite annihilation, which is just propaganda to fund Star Wars.

Climate change is real. Citing all those atmospheric pollution problems we've mitigated is like citing Y2K. Denying it out of ignorance and fear might play with other ignorant, fearful people. But the science and history of similar cases of "Chicken Little" being right about the actual sky actually falling demand we come to grips with it. And with our society's irrational denial reactions. And with our inclination to deny these other extreme risks in our global civilization living increasingly closer to the edge.

Peru is not the only one in trouble

[Anonymous Coward]

A number of himalaya glaciers are disappearing fast. Once they do, India and Western/Central China are in great danger. As it is, Gorges dam (and the 2 new hydroelectrics being planed) is mostly fed by Glaciers that may disappear in less than 50 years. Worse, this water is used for some of the most fertile land in both countries. That would leave both with far less capability to feed themselves. China will almost certainly pull a W approach and pick a fight with neighboring country with plenty of water. In general, there is only 1 country; Russia.

NOT a problem for the water supply

[Gorimek]

It's hard to imagine how this would affect the "influx of mountain stream fresh water", other than temporarily increase it while the glacier is melting off.

The water isn't magically generated by the glacier, it comes from snow and rainfall in that area, which presumably will continue as before.

Re:NOT a problem for the water supply

[callmetheraven]

Yes, the total amount of runoff yearly will be the same, but if the glacier disappears, and there is no winter snow accumulation, there will be reduced runoff during warm dry months of summer, just like here in Montana. Winter snowpack accumulation/meltoff is crucial for year-round water supply in some climates.

Re:What isn't being said?

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple google search yields the info you obviously can't be bothered to hunt down. http://www.iceagenow.com/List_of_Expanding_Glacier s.htm

Re:A bit odd

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

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.

You haven't thought that through.

Even tho' tropical areas are likely to see a smaller temperature difference than a sub tropical or artic, they're also much more sensitive to said change. According to Real Climate's Tropical Glacier Retreat Page:

Generally speaking, lower glaciers which extend below the elevation where above-freezing air temperatures occur, are more sensitive to temperature. [Kaser and Osmaston 2002] calculate that such tropical glaciers are even more temperature-sensitive than midlatitude glaciers. A warming of 1 degree C is sufficient to raise the equilibrium line (below which net ablation occurs) by fully 300 meters. As we've already seen, warming is by no means unimportant to the 20th century retreat of the Lewis glacier (Mt. Kenya) in E. Africa. In other cases, the role of warming is yet more clear.

Re:Attitudes Towards Dissent

[Anonymous Coward]

+5 insightful from an intellectual dissident hiding in the shadows of anonymity.