The Glaciers Are Still Melting
That headline, from an excellent online story at Foreign Policy’s website, is obviously not one you will see at Climate Depot. And that’s a shame, because the writer, Stephan Faris, makes some very important points, while also not downplaying the recent IPCC mistakes and bad behavior of climate scientists.
For example, he writes:
The IPCC’s critics do well to examine the panel’s claims carefully. Science and policy are both served when mistakes are uncovered (the IPCC has since fended off similar accusations over its predictions about the fate of the Amazon). And though there’s no doubt that many critiques are motivated more by ideology than truth-seeking, that doesn’t excuse researchers who allow their passions to spill into their findings.
Isn’t that a passage ripe for Climate Depot readers? Or this one:
The world has no shortage of advocates. What it needs is a dispassionate source.
So Marc, I dare you. Step off message for just a minute and link to this FP story.
It is so hard to differentiate between truth and exaggeration in this climate controversy. Thanks for the insights.
What the article doesn’t mention is the other problem with the IPCC report contention re: glaciers – that the melting of the glaciers will devastate the entire region due to lack of water once they’re gone.
I’ve seen claims that the glaciers supply ALL of the water for the region and that’s purely foolish. Have you ever seen, much less tried to drink, glacial outflow? The embedded four will clog a water filter in 2 days, and if used witout filtering, it’ll scour your intestinal tract.
The other problem with the contention is that, IIRC, the glaciers contribute on the order of 1% of the present water supply to the region. So the claims of utter disaster for the region once the glaciers are gone are simply overblown.
What IS of concern is the “reason” for the glacial “retreat”. Glaciers retreat when the precipitation fails to keep up with the melting – as on Kilimanjaro. And that’s supposedly a “weather pattern” vice “climate”. So – what caused the change in the weather pattern? In the case of Kilimanjaro, it was land use issues. Man-caused? Absolutely. But not compatible with AGW dogma.
In India – maybe we should look at other factors than CO2 and temp? One of the problems with the AGW dogma is that it interferes with the conduct of “real” science by making automatic, knee-jerk assumptions about causes without real research into root causes.
Glacial retreat is a symptom – not the disease. Treating symptoms might make one “feel better”, but it’s not a cure.