Archaeologica.org

Ah ha! I've caught the sonofabitch!

Roy.

Does anyone know of any long term measurements of Glacial melt water flows?
I can't find any info anywhere.

Roy.

Hi Roy,

See if either of these help:

Retreat of glaciers since 1850
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of ... since_1850

Current sea level rise
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise

Thanks Mich, but I'm afraid not.
What I'm trying to find out is if any groups had measured the volume of water from a Glacier/s over any period.
When a Glacier retreats the tendency is to assume that temps have risen, and if a Glacier/s advances to say that temps have dropped.
Unfortunately that isn't necessarily the case.

Roy.

I recall a Nat Geo special which showed that water running under the glaciers was accelerating the melting process.

Unfortunately, as I recall, their conclusion was that there was running water under the glaciers because the glacier was melting.

There was a report very recently Min that has changed some of that. Under a mile of ice for example temp changes are not going to be felt. One thing that will increase the water flow underneath a Glacier is speed, as the speed increases friction causes an increase in melt water.
A major reason for an increase in speed is an increase in precipitation.
The reason I am trying to find out more is that it seems to me that measurements of flow from a Glacier would seem to be the only monitor that makes sense.
Check me out on this.
Two things are necessary for a Glacier to form. One is a low temp, which away from the poles can virtually only be achieved by altitude. The other requirement is precipitation.
Without precipitation no Glacier can form regardless of how low the temp is.
So we have our Glacier, precipitation increases, leave temp the same. The Glacier will advance down slope under increased weight on the higher slopes. Meltwater flow should increase.
Reverse the situation, precitation falls, the Glacier should retreat and melt water flow reduce.
All this with no change in temperatures.
If this is so why is it that no one seems to be monitoring melt water flows?

Roy.

I'm surprised at this recent article:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/e ... 026317.ece

I've always felt that global warming is a reality, just not man-made. The earth, in my opinion, has been slowly warming for the last
20,000 years, interrupted by the Younger Dryas. Unfortunately it has become politicized and is a source of contention, especially in light of the current mood of the country.

I imagine that this group of scientists, stating that GW may not be true is also political. Also unfortunate IMO.

From the horse's mouth..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm

Roy.

Good article Digit. I worry that there are too many people out there that think GW is not happening at all. On the other hand, I
worry that almost nobody realizes how close we are to the next Ice Age. Check out the Milankovitch Cycle.

See you later Dig.

Hey, Beags. Good to see you're still alive and kicking.

As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.

Wow.... Al Gore write that?

Wow.... Al Gore write that?

Or one of the 12 disciples perhaps.
When scientists/politicians/religious leaders et al take a stance I've always felt that efforts should be made to explain why they take that stance as opposed to any alternative and give a frank appraisal of the alternative. Instead what usually happens is that they attempt to rubbish it, thus attempting to suppress the parts they don't agree with.
The snag with that is one chip off their argument tends to lead to further chips and a rearguard action. We see this with the 'club' and we have seen it with western Christianity.
Now how much more validity would be given to MMGW if a balanced view was demonstrated? Phillips has now been forced to admit that GW as ceased, permanently or otherwise, and others are now stating 'well we might be wrong on the minor points, but the science is solid.'
So then I ask, 'if that is so why has GW stopped and why has it taken years of denial?'
How many people who have seen the pictures of retreating glaciers are aware that many glaciers are in fact advancing?
Which begs the question why Phillips, Gore, and Mann for example have never mentioned the fact if their case is so strong?
Here in the UK we are led to believe that the Polar Bear is an endangered species, yet those who claim this patently ignore the fact that it is not on CITES list and never has been.
My belief is that these people have greatly damaged the cause of science for many years to come, what ever the eventual outcome my be.
Methink the lady doth protest too much!

Roy.

I must have missed the part where he said it had "ceased."

E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible?

I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.

Section B. That's science techno babel for nowt.
Here...
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/ ... -scientist

http://www.speroforum.com/site/article. ... ew+Ice+Age

This is just one list..
http://www.iceagenow.com/List_of_Expanding_Glaciers.htm

Some Himalayan glaciers are advancing, this can only be due to changes in the preciptation patterns as it seems the retreats are on one flank and the advances on the other flank.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/mobile/science/ ... 355837.stm

either that or the antis are playing the same selective games, if so my argument still stands, the standing of the scientific community is being destroyed.
Honest mistakes will and do occur, no quibble with that at all, when data is selective I object!
Is this what we want?

http://newsbusters.org/node/8249
Bring on the auto de fe?

Roy.

On NOVA tonight was a special on the runaway glacial melting caused by water and global warming.

http://video.pbs.org/video/1108763899/


Dig, there is every probability that you will not be able to play this video on your side of the pond. Rokcet has had similar problems in the past. Therefore, you might try to connect via a proxy server such as

http://www.hidemyass.com/


Click on the link above and then copy and paste the pbs.org link above into the search box where it says youtube by default. Then click on Hide My Ass and see what happens. At worst, it won't work.

Oddly, the program is sponsored by Exxon Mobil which is odd for a program on what those scum suckers are doing to the world.