See Comments down arrow

The end of glacier melting as we know it

24 Jan 2024 | News Roundup

You may recall the IPCC’s fiasco over their exaggerated claims about Himalayan glaciers disappearing by 2035 due to global warming. It was such a foul-up that they had to release one of their rare Corrections (rare not because they are rarely needed but because they can so rarely be shamed into issuing one.) In other winter news from the wacky world of climate change, a new paper in Nature explains that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking not due to warming of the ice cap but to cooling. But never fear, that’s also due to due to warming. It would be.

For some reason the dopey authors of that paper include, as the opening of their abstract, that:

“Understanding the response of Himalayan glaciers to global warming is vital because of their role as a water source for the Asian subcontinent. However, great uncertainties still exist on the climate drivers of past and present glacier changes across scales.”

Great uncertainties? Great snakes! But fear not. We know what’s happening at a Platonic level if not at a factual or logical one. Thus “We show that a decrease in maximum air temperature and precipitation occurred during the last three decades at Pyramid in response to global warming.”

Right. A decrease in maximum temperature in response to global warming. (At the Pyramid station on Everest, not some place in Egypt.) And how, pray tell? Well:

“Reanalysis data suggest a broader occurrence of this effect in the glacierized areas of the Himalaya. We hypothesize that the counterintuitive cooling is caused by enhanced sensible heat exchange and the associated increase in glacier katabatic wind, which draws cool air downward from higher elevations.”

Gotta love “reanalysis data”. It beats the heck out of the observational kind if you have an ax to grind. And in case you’re not a cool person who uses katabatic in everyday conversation, you won’t be helped by “Katabatic winds arise from adiabatic warming due to air subsidence and cooling of the near-surface air by sensible heat exchange with the glacier surface.” But you might by “a wind that carries high-density air from a higher elevation down a slope under the force of gravity.”

The main point here is that they “hypothesize” that cooling is caused by warming, then create a computer model that says yes, it might happen, and call it a scientific discovery. And so “The proposed conceptual model reconciles the apparent discrepancy between the observed local cooling and the accelerated glacier mass loss in Himalaya.” Whew.

Or maybe not, because of their statement that “Himalayan glaciers have been losing mass consistently, with an acceleration in the last five decades, including at the iconic Mount Everest.” Consistently? For how long? Quite a while, apparently, if it has accelerated in the last five decades. But when did meaningful man-made warming kick in?

Not, surely, a century ago, or even half a century. So we’re looking at a natural warming and melting process, right? Right guys and gals? Huh? And if it accelerated in the last five decades it must mean around about oh say 1974 so even that phenomenon occurred before even James Hansen or Michael Mann says AGW became significant. So what you really proved is that today’s melting, while complicated, is pretty obviously the continuation of a long-term natural trend that magically became man-made at some point that doesn’t show up in the data sets but hovers over the metaphysics.


6 comments on “The end of glacier melting as we know it”

  1. I have a Scientist friend who lives in Kathmandu. She was main author on a group study of climate change in the Hindu Kush and Himalayas. She noted that the chief threat to their glaciers was indeed Carbon pollution, not the media’s variety but the real thing, ie. Soot from the Chinese and Indian coal fired power stations.

  2. My first reaction to measurable/observable ice-melt would be to check for changes to ground temperatures, and as Mr. Packwood notes, any dirtying-up the surface by soot. Air temps would have to be sustained at 32F and nothing but sunshine otherwise.

  3. Recently, a receding glacier in Norway revealed a road constructed 1000 years ago. There are two possible explanations for this. 1: the Vikings knew how to construct roads underneath glaciers a 1000 years ago, unlike us mere mortals today. 2: the glacier did not exist there 1000 years ago because the climate prior to the little ice age was warmer as it is today. Which of these two do you find credible.

  4. I'm a Viking descendant and have always thought we were clever. Tunneling under glaciers to build roads is not only impressive, it makes perfect sense. Thanks for that JW Riggs.

  5. These people(the climate alarmists) just make it up as they go along.And in the AGW community you have to go along to get along.As in getting grant
    money or remaining employed at your desired vocation. So yeah,warm causes warming,and cold too causes warming!@ J WRiggs,I believe # 2 is the correct answer,the only credible answer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *