Anytime I see the “canary in the coal mine” phrase being applied to some phenomenon related to climate, I know right away that the person using it hasn’t really put much thought into using the phrase, and that it is purely an emotional response. Photographer James Balog is the emotional user this time.
This misleading headline, photos, and story in the Daily Mail highlights the photo work of James Balog and the “Extreme Ice Survey” (EIS). They write:
This shocking time lapse video shows how a glacier has receded thousands of feet in just four years.
The footage of Alaska’s Columbia glacier was taken by expert and photographer James Balog and his team between May 2007 and September 2011.
Balog used to a climate change skeptic himself but eventually went on to start the Extreme Ice Survey (EIS), the most comprehensive photographic study of glaciers ever conducted.
His new documentary Chasing Ice will premiere at the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah, on January 21, the Huffington Post reports.
…
Balog told the Idaho Press: ‘Shrinking glaciers are the canary in the global coal mine.
‘They are the most visible, tangible manifestations of climate change on the planet today.’
Unfortunately, I can’t show you the video, because this is what happens when you try embed it in a blog or newspaper article:
So, you have to follow the link: AK-01 Columbia Kadin Narrated
It seems Balog is all about his film, paying speaking engagements, and photo shows, and less about “saving the planet”, since everything he does is heavily copyright plastered. Given that he only wants people to visit his website and see his talks/photo/presentations, I’ll not try to post any of his video or photos here given that he’ll likely squawk about it even though it would be considered fair use. He won’t like what I’m about to say.
Here’s the interesting thing though. In the video, Balog shows what glaciers do normally: calve to the sea, no surprise there. And yes, there was some reduction in the terminus between May 2007 and September 2011.
But is it really honest to show the glacier time-lapse with different endpoints (May versus September) when you know those endpoints have seasonal differences?
And, more importantly, is a four-year period statistically valid for comparison of anything climate related?
If any of us used four years worth of data to make a point about climate, our warmer friends would have a veritable cow. Tamino would call out the cherry picking brigade and scream about hiding/not using the whole data set. Dana1981 of “Skeptical Science” would dash off another get even missive calling us names in violation of his own site policy. Peter Gleick would create some new “worst climate deniers” list to denigrate us with for being so dumb as to use 4 years worth of data to try to make a point.
But, not one of those guys has uttered a peep about four years of glacier footage being used to make a point. Of course what they’ll say now in response is that “Watts is ignoring the ENTIRE glacier record with his four year criticism”.
So to head that off, and to keep in the spirit of photographic evidence, I am in fact going to show more than four years worth of Alaskan glacier data. Let’s have a look at what the USGS says about this glacier. They also have a page on glacier photography.
While they don’t have Alaska’s Columbia glacier in that page, they do have others. Here’s the photos of the Muir glacier in sequence. I’ve added captions for the dates the USGS says they were taken at:
It seems a good portion of the reteat happened well before 1950. They write about this photo sequence, bold mine:
Three northeast-looking photographs taken from a Glacier Bay Photo station that was established in 1941 by William O. Field on White Thunder Ridge, Muir Inlet, Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve, Alaska. The three photographs document the significant changes that have occurred during the 63 years between August 13, 1941 and August 31, 2004. The 1941 photograph shows the lower reaches of Muir Glacier, then a large, tidewater calving valley glacier and its tributary Riggs Glacier. Muir and Riggs Glaciers filled Muir Inlet.
The séracs in the lower right-hand corner of the photograph mark the location of Muir Glacier’s terminus. The ice thickness in the center of the photographs is more than 0.7 kilometers (0.43 miles). For nearly two centuries prior to 1941, Muir Glacier had been retreating. Maximum retreat exceeded 50 kilometers (31 miles). In places, more than a 1.0 kilometer (0.62 mile) thickness of ice had been lost. Note the absence of any identifiable vegetation and the numerous bare bedrock faces present on both sides of the glacier (W. O. Field, # 41-64, courtesy of the National Snow and Ice Data Center and Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve Archive).
The August 4, 1950 photograph, the first of two repeat photographs documents the significant changes that have occurred during the 9 years between it and the 1941 photograph. Muir Glacier has retreated more than 3 kilometers (1.9 miles), exposing Muir Inlet, and thinned 100 meters (328 feet) or more. However, it still is connected with tributary Riggs Glacier. White Thunder Ridge continues to be devoid of vegetation. In places, erosion has removed some of the till from its surface. (W. O. Field, # F50-R29, courtesy of the Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve Archive).
The August 31, 2004 photograph, the second repeat photograph, documents the significant changes that have occurred during the 63 years between the first and third photographs and during the 54 years between second and third photographs. Muir Glacier has retreated out of the field of view and is now located more than 7 kilometers (4.4 miles) to the northwest. Riggs Glacier has retreated as much as 0.6 kilometers (0.37 miles) and thinned by more than 0.25 kilometers (0.16 miles). Note the dense vegetation, dominated by Alnus, that has developed on the till cover of White Thunder Ridge. Also note the correlation between Muir Glacier’s 1941 thickness and the trimline on the left side of the 2004 photograph. (USGS Photograph by Bruce F. Molnia).
And here’s a map from USGS that James Balog will never, ever, show in his videos or photo essays, because it blows his argument (and meal ticket) right out of the water:
Note that the majority of the glacier retreat occurred well before CO2 was said to be a problem, when CO2 was at the “safe” level below 350 parts per million as espoused by weepy Bill McKibben and Dr. James Hansen of NASA GISS.
Balog may be an “expert photographer” but he’s a pretty shoddy historian. Maybe instead of “chasing ice” he should chase historical facts, it might help him be a skeptic again.
But none of these guys will ever show you this, it’s just too damned inconvenient.
h/t to Steve Goddard
Ok, now that was funny
As I was reading, I thought, well I’ll be darned Steve made this same post using the same pictures, etc
….When I got to the bottom I saw the h/t….LOL
Only in the screwed up world of climate science…would glaciers staying exactly the same or advancing…be a good thing
REPLY: Goddard did an incomplete job, and didn’t provide enough sources and references to everything. I felt it needed a proper treatment – Anthony
I prefer the Aug 31, 2004 photo. Looks so much more hospitable for humans than the other photos.
I’ve seen some of these videos. Once you see these clips you can’t take your eyes off them, they are astonishing and beautiful.
Of course they are wonderful visual documentation of how glaciers move and calve but that’s all. However they are being sold as evidence that human activity is the cause, therein is the lie.
Seems the guy needs a history lesson.
On her second visit to Glacier National Park in 1894, Mary Vaux (pronounced “vox”) was aghast at how the Illecillewaet Glacier had retreated since her previous visit seven years earlier. The lowest edge of the Great Glacier, as it was also known then, was clearly withdrawing upslope. We now know that most of the world’s glaciers were in retreat then, as they are now.
http://www.cmiae.org/Resources/glaciers-lichens.php
So, not only do we have (some, limited) evidence that neutrinos may travel faster than light, we now have conclusive evidence of CO2 molecules travelling backwards in time to destroy glaciers. This is big stuff, guys.
They don’t use canaries in coal mines because much better technology exists. We also have a rather large network of weather sensing instruments so staring at glaciers to measure climate isn’t needed. /sarc
what is really interesting is that comments have been disabled after 7 comments under that video they certainly don’t want people that are able to think for themselves to be able to put comments in.
Further strengthening your argument is the National Park Service description of the glacier history. According to the Glacier Bay Visitor’s Guide, there was no Glacier Bay in 1680. ”By 1750 the glacier reached its maximum, jutting into Icy Strait. But when Capt. George Vancouver sailed here 45 years later, the glacier had melted back five miles into Glacier Bay – which it had gouged out.” In 1880 the glacier had retreated 40 more miles and today you have to travel 65 miles up the bay to view tidewater glaciers. Also see “An overview of Selected Glaciers in Glacier Bay” for specifics on the glaciers today (http://www.nps.gov/glba/naturescience/upload/Overview%20of%20Glacier%20Bay%20Glaciers2.pdf).
What does he say to the Park Service, who’s handout shows that in 1680, there was no bay, but a valley with a river flowing thru it. To quote Glacier Bay today is the product of the Little Ice Age, a geologically recent glacial advance in northern regions. The Little Ice Age reached its maximum extent about 1750.
Also on the map, John Hopkins Glacier is currently past the 1929 and 1966 terminus.
I am always amused at how poorly prepared the warmanistas are for debate. This is what happens when you enter the ring with the predisposed notion that AGW is settled fact. You see sloppiness on such a rudementary level.
Considering the load of snow Alaska is getting this year, I wonder if we are going to see some glacial advance.
That video was so cool, there is nothing like watching the incredible natural forces it takes to make that much ice flow with that much plasticity, to make you realize how puny Human endeavors really are.
David L. says:
January 17, 2012 at 9:27 am
I prefer the Aug 31, 2004 photo. Looks so much more hospitable for humans than the other photos.
###
Makes me want to go fishing.
Anybody interested in Alaskan glaciers can go to http://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/p1386k/ and download the 2008 USGS Special Report. A lot of historical data in there.
Year 1902, http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/61382631?searchTerm=glaciers%20melting&searchLimits=
It so much more worse than we never ever can imagine;)
LOL! The USGS map actually has the notation “Little Ice Age”! And alarm bells didn’t start ringing at USGS when folks that shall remain nameless either started their “warming” graphs near the end of the LIA or ignored it altogether?
Really, you have to find this funny as we are, perhaps, still recovering from an Ice Age and, as such, of course the earth is warming!
Perhaps Mr. Balog should take up other forms of nature photography to prove global warming. Maybe take a picture of a frog on a log and return the next day to get photographic evidence that the frog is no longer on the log hence, the demise of frogs worldwide is imminent!
What a dumbass! But, I betcha’ it pays well!
This is part of the Natural Global Cycle of warming and cooling! It is what has been happening for millions of years and will continue to happen for million years. Allowing politicians to force us to drive electric cars to pay carbon indulgences and excessive energy cost “save the environment” won’t change a thing, but it will line the pockets of the warmist class’s.
Don’t you just love the big lie!
Why doesn’t this guy document Hubbard Glacier, the largest tidewater glacier in North America.
“Hubbard Glacier has advanced at a rate of about 80 feet per year since 1895.”
Check out: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-001-03/
Hubbard has twice closed the entrance to Russell Fiord during the last 25 years, and was within a hundred meters of doing it again this past summer. The warmers are always cherry picking. They should change from “Global Climate Disruption” next to “Global Climate Cherry Picking”.
Jason, they are not looking for debate. They merely throw out claims and hope the naive will eat them up. Far too many people only read headlines and have lost the ability to think for themselves.
I’m proud of the glaciers. Calling Jenny Craig was very brave and empowering. Looking good, glaciers!!
While Warmistas blather on about tipping points,
they blithely ignore all the societal tipping points:
bloated governments, terminal economies, shrinking populations,
failed education, stifled enterprise, moral bankruptcy.
Where’s the societal alarmism? Where’s the awareness of impendingl doom?
The same crowd prattling about laws of radiation balance
will trample upon the natural workings of societies and economies.
They’re as desparate to cover up their social destruction
as they are to manufacture climate fantasies.
Too funny; extreme ice survey has disabled the comments on every one of their calving videos. At least two of them were disabled within the last 5 hours. The rest have no recent comments so you don’t know when it happened.
My take; once some truthful comments (as opposed to the ‘I’ve been there, isn’t this terrible’ variety) started showing up, apparently the extreme ice survey people no longer wanted to have any feedback.
No room for inconvenient truth in the warmist camp.
Somebody is a very good photographer but needs to take an intro course on Glaciation.
If I was still teaching I could make good use of these time lapse sequences to illustrate the idea of a frozen river slowing moving down hill, how glaciers calve and the geomorphological residues of glaciation.
As “evidence” of climate change, nee global warming, this photographer is somewhere between hysterical fear mongering and blatant get rich quick self promotion.
Does anybody have a good reference on the state of the worlds glaciers in general. Somebody above comments that glaciers generally declining, which would seem to be in keeping with a gradual climb out of the little ice age. But I seem to recall comments to the effect that some glaciers in some parts of the world outside of the antarctic, are also increasing, or am I just imagining this?
Yes, as Clint Eastwood’s character “Munny” says in the movie Unforgiven: “Well, he should have armed himself” … which is good advice for skeptics and nonskeptics alike.
Yep, taken overall, the Earth’s glaciers are in retreat, and the rate of that retreat is accelerating.
Perhaps as Willis learns more-and-more about radiative transport, he will eventually be able to tell us why that retreat might be happening.
REPLY: Perhaps as you learn more about what primarily drives glaciers (precipitation) you’ll see that radiative transport isn’t much of a factor. – Anthony