4 ms·

If only there were something that wasn't man-made that would integrate the temperature reading continuously over 100 years and display if the temperature is inc

If only there were something that wasn't man-made that would integrate the temperature reading continuously over 100 years and display if the temperature is increasing or decreasing. Anything that did that would probably be subtle and take data processing that the deniers would question. Oh Look: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/36224913/ns/us_news-environment/t/glacier-national-park-loses-two-more http://www.nbcnews.com/id/36224913/ns/us_news-environment/t/...

Shivetya 10y ago
We also have rain fall studies that show no change in sixty odd years, we have studies which can indicate or disprove about any point anyone can raise. Glaciers are interesting because they don't all melt at once and some increase while others decrease. Based on some skeletal and other findings with some retreating glaciers its pretty obvious it has happened before, long before we were having an effect. all articles like the one we have today is simply explain that its not a decided science and anyone claiming otherwise is just as bad as those who refuse to believe any changes occur. the question that must be answered is, are the estimates for change in line with what has occurred and is occurring and if not, why.
- Angostura 10y ago
  > its not a decided science and anyone claiming otherwise is just as bad as those who refuse to believe any changes occur. It may not be decided. It is very very probably science, however.
- erikpukinskis 10y ago
  > we have studies which can indicate or disprove about any point anyone can raise. What are you basing that belief on? How many studies did you spot check to reach this "studies can disprove about any point" determination? That's an exceedingly broad claim, and I'm skeptical you've done more than hand pick studies that support your worldview, but I would be incredibly relieved to be proven wrong.
EdwardDiego 10y ago
Well, yeah, but also, sometimes nah, because, for example, a slightly warmer ocean and atmosphere (and changes in weather patterns) will lead to more precipitation in some areas, and those areas could well be the névés of glaciers, where the increased input of of snow exceeds the increased melt-rate.

Shivetya 10y ago

We also have rain fall studies that show no change in sixty odd years, we have studies which can indicate or disprove about any point anyone can raise. Glaciers are interesting because they don't all melt at once and some increase while others decrease. Based on some skeletal and other findings with some retreating glaciers its pretty obvious it has happened before, long before we were having an effect. all articles like the one we have today is simply explain that its not a decided science and anyone claiming otherwise is just as bad as those who refuse to believe any changes occur. the question that must be answered is, are the estimates for change in line with what has occurred and is occurring and if not, why.

Angostura 10y ago
> its not a decided science and anyone claiming otherwise is just as bad as those who refuse to believe any changes occur. It may not be decided. It is very very probably science, however.
erikpukinskis 10y ago
> we have studies which can indicate or disprove about any point anyone can raise. What are you basing that belief on? How many studies did you spot check to reach this "studies can disprove about any point" determination? That's an exceedingly broad claim, and I'm skeptical you've done more than hand pick studies that support your worldview, but I would be incredibly relieved to be proven wrong.

EdwardDiego 10y ago

Well, yeah, but also, sometimes nah, because, for example, a slightly warmer ocean and atmosphere (and changes in weather patterns) will lead to more precipitation in some areas, and those areas could well be the névés of glaciers, where the increased input of of snow exceeds the increased melt-rate.