US Government Declines to Attend Zuckerberg's Green PR Stunt

Mark Zuckerberg

Mark Zuckerberg. By Presidência do México – Flickr, CC BY 2.0, Link

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg apparently had to visit Glacier National Park by himself last Sunday, after the US government reversed a decision to send a climate scientist to attend his presence.

Exclusive: Trump administration pulled top climate expert from Mark Zuckerberg’s national park visit

A climate change expert at the United States Geological Survey was set to join Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg in Montana last weekend to discuss the impact of global warming at Glacier National Park, but two sources with knowledge of the matter say the scientist was pulled from the visit by the U.S. Department of Interior just days before the event.

The decision has provoked suspicion from inside the USGS that the scientist’s appearance was canceled to minimize attention to the issue of climate change, according to one source.

Heather Swift, press secretary for the Interior Department, did not address directly that the climate scientist was pulled from the visit. Instead, she sent the following written statement to Mic:

“After reviewing the event proposal which was sent to the National Park Service, the NPS and Interior made a number of park officials available for the personal tour. He was given first-class treatment by the park rangers and had the opportunity to interact with a number of park officials and Gracie the ‘bark ranger’ during his visit, which came at the height of the busy season. Allocating government funds, personnel, and resources responsibly is the definition of good government and something we are dedicated to advancing at the department.”

The drop-ins, which Zuckerberg has documented on his personal social media channels, have taken him and Chan across the United States, raising speculation in political circles that Zuckerberg may be gearing up for a run for president in the future.

Zuckerberg has dismissed the idea that he’s planning to run for office.

Read more:

I must admit I had never heard of this public facility. Can I request a US government climate scientist be provided to attend my needs, if I ever visit Glacier National Park? Or is this sort of service only a possibility for visiting Royalty and Silicon Valley CEOs?

128 thoughts on “US Government Declines to Attend Zuckerberg's Green PR Stunt

  1. ..Can I request a US government climate scientist be provided to attend my needs, if I ever visit Glacier National Park?….
    You can request it as a much as you like. So can I, and I’m not even a US citizen.
    Whether the Department of the Interior pays the slightest attention to the request will depend on politics. Politicians regularly attend all sorts of events which give them a photo- opportunity, and the chance to be seen as caring/in tune with the youth/supporting good causes/patriotic/worried about an issue/anxious to help a minority….. Did you see Jeremy Corbyn at Glastonbury this year?

    • And to think, some want the voting age to be lowered to 16 in England, Wales and NI, as it has been in Scotland.
      The future of the planet will be determined by politically, socially and financially ignorant children.
      That’s why Corbyn’s popular, despite supporting terrorist causes (IRA, Hamas and Hezbollah), he appeals to the intellectually challenged only with his insane ideological politics.
      God help our country.

      • supporting terrorists seems to be common on both sides of the political fence in the UK. Don’t forget that the tory party is only clinging to power thanks to the Democratic Unionist Party which directly supports terrorists groups in Northern Ireland.

      • “The future of the planet will be determined by politically, socially and financially ignorant children.”
        It can be argued that it already is.

      • Geronimo
        Fair point, but it must be borne in mind that the IRA was/is trying to seize British sovereign territory. Is defence of the realm terrorism? Their activities are certainly akin to terrorism, but in WW2 the British mounted covert raids into German occupied territories that killed civilians, intended or not, was that terrorism or defence of the Realm?
        One man’s terrorist is another man’s liberator.
        Not that this is the forum to debate the question, but it’s something to think about.

      • diogenese2
        Sadly, it’s worse. We are being dictated to by governments, commanding countries (and States in the US, notably California and the mad Brown) convert to renewable energy and electric cars.
        The free market is being overrun by these bureaucrats with personal agendas, and that has historically ended in disaster.
        Matt Ridley published a nice example on his blog today, worth a read.
        Governments ought to stick to their brief, to defend their country from foreign aggressors and maintain internal security. Dictating the way we live our lives is unacceptable.

      • Looking at UK governments since 1997 I thought our future was already being “determined by politically, socially and financially ignorant children.”

      • Corbyn spoke with Sin Fein. Theresa May invited the DUP into the process of government. There sa difference!

      • Dave
        Corbyn expressed support for Hamas and Hezbollah. During the run up to the 2017 election, he steadfastly refused to condemn the IRA. Furthermore, “Between 1986 and 1992, Mr Corbyn attended and spoke each year at the annual “Connolly/Sands” commemoration in London to honour dead IRA terrorists and support imprisoned IRA “prisoners of war.”
        “The editorial board of a hard-Left magazine, of which Mr Corbyn was a member, wrote an article praising the Brighton bombing. In its article on the IRA attack, which almost wiped out Margaret Thatcher’s Cabinet, the editorial board of London Labour Briefing said the atrocity showed that “the British only sit up and take notice [of Ireland] when they are bombed into it.”
        Inviting the DUP, as political members of the UK government, to help with governance of our country, is an entirely reasonable, political strategy. NI is part of our sovereign state and like it or not, the DUP have, to my knowledge, never been convicted of terrorism.

      • Yep the man who has not got a mirror in his house,
        Not only is he an ex communist, but maybe a secret muslim ?

      • british occupation “defence of tge realm”? you gotta be kidding, just like Israel, they are also “defending themselves” sure ok got it

        • Mark – Helsinki
          NI is a democracy, just like England, Scotland and Wales. They are perfectly entitled to call for an independence referendum. So yes, it is part of the UK and entitled to be defended as such.

      • HotScot, I’ve had the notion that not only should voting be limited to taxpayers, but nobody should be allowed to vote until they’ve been paying taxes for at least 5 years.

        • I think a simple test would be adequate. Like: Who is your current Prime Minister? What is a referendum? What is the difference between a Socialist and a Libertarian? What do all the most despotic countries of the 20th Century like Nazi Germany, The USSR, China, Cuba and N. Korea all have in common? Pick 2 from the following 3.
          a) Right wing politics
          b) Left wing politics
          c) Destitution, failure, oppression, starvation, torture and seclusion.
          That ought to do it I think.

      • “And to think, some want the voting age to be lowered to 16 in England, Wales and NI, as it has been in Scotland.”
        Only for the independence referendum as far as I know – but still idiotic anyway. To expect children to express a coherent view on the fragmentation of a three hundred year old Union is to put it mildly bonkers. Only people with bonkers agendas ever push for lowering of voting age.

      • And exactly how do you define terrorists? Best AI can figure by watching world events today, the governments ARE the terrorists. Odd you choose 3 groups that fight against western governments but chose not to include ISIS. Says something, but I’m not sure what.

        • Watching world events from anything approaching western media is distorted and manipulated. Assad was, until several years ago, a respected world leader. If anyone were terrorists it was the Blair and Bush governments who lit the blue touch paper and really screwed up the middle east.
          ISIS isn’t a recognised government of any type. They have no central leadership and even if they wanted to negotiate something (whatever it might be) they can’t. It can’t be considered a government or organisation by any stretch of the imagination.

      • “And to think, some want the voting age to be lowered to 16 in England, Wales and NI, as it has been in Scotland.”
        Didn’t work for the Scottish Independence referendum though, did it?
        Seems the 16 – 18 year olds weren’t as stupid and brainwashed as Wee Eck and Wee Krankie expected them to be.

      • “Don’t forget that the tory party is only clinging to power thanks to the Democratic Unionist Party which directly supports terrorists groups in Northern Ireland.”
        No, it does nothing of the kind, very much the opposite in fact.
        You are confusing it with the Progressive Unionist Party, a different and far more noxious gang altogether.

    • Can I request a government scientist to defend the IPCC’s absurdly high climate sensitivity? I have about half a dozen ways to falsify the high sensitivity claimed by the IPCC and I would relish the opportunity to compel someone like Schmidt to try and explain them away in a recorded session that would find its way to wide distribution. I’ll bet I can even make him cry like a baby once he comes to the inevitable realization that his entire career has been wasted chasing a ghost.
      Any time I’ve tried to bring up any of the many falsification methods on RC, it’s either censored away or his minions aggressively insult me for having the audacity to question the ‘consensus’. He won’t support his pseudo science with physics because he can’t, moreover; he’s a coward, most likely because he knows that he doesn’t have the physics to back up his claims and if he’s deluded into believing that he does, then he’s definitely not a scientist. Anyone who purports to be a scientist must honor the scientific method above all else which is as important to science as the Hippocratic oath is to medicine.

  2. “Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg apparently had to visit Glacier National Park by himself last Sunday”
    Hardly. From the text:
    ” the NPS and Interior made a number of park officials available for the personal tour. He was given first-class treatment by the park rangers and had the opportunity to interact with a number of park officials and Gracie the ‘bark ranger’ during his visit, “

    • Nick,
      that’s funny.
      Zukerberg was supposed to meet a serious scientist for a deep and meaningful intellectual debate, but instead, he met some Park Rangers.
      With the greatest of respect to park rangers, the comparison is hardly appropriate.

      • and Zuckerberg’s qualifications in climate science are ??? ………… seems a highly sensible decision to avoid wasting a scientist’s time discussing climate with someone who appears to me to be a climactivist with an overblown opinion of their own importance.

      • I was under the impression from my grandchildren that peak facebook was reached some time ago and that the new technologies of linked in and snapchat are where the ‘cool’ are at.
        Mr. Zukerberg it seems heads a declining, dare I say, sunset bound industry in need of full time attention which he would be well advised to address.

      • ..instead, he met some Park Rangers.
        With the greatest of respect to park rangers, the comparison is hardly appropriate…..

        Um. The Park Rangers would know what is happening in the Park. The ‘serious scientist’ would know what his theories SAY is happening.
        If I wanted to know the truth I know which group I would listen to…

      • Dodgy Geezer
        And that is the malaise of our time. The climate dictum is marginalising scientists who really do contribute something other than hysterical self interest.
        This is the credibility gap we all now face in the future and after the climate nonsense is finally put to rest, science will have to rebuild its reputation if we’re not to regress to religion. Perhaps a wee bit exaggerated but there is no doubt, the credibility of science is being damaged. The term ‘expert’ is now roundly mocked even on the BBC.
        Any decent scientist would consult with park rangers across the country (whichever country it is) rather than simply relying on data to prove a case. Somehow I doubt Michael Mann consulted with anyone before producing his hockey stick predictions. Nor most of the myriad other ‘scientists’ relying on computers, the internet and like minded colleagues to create a climate crystal ball.
        But there are decent, honest, serious scientists out there on both sides of the climate debate.

      • The USGC made the mistake of paying attention to this idiot. The govt has no duty to debate anything with any citizen, although Trump should have sent one of the climate scientists who testified on the Hill , along with a video camera. Zuckerburg would have been exposed as
        a rather ignorant global warmist. Zuckerburg is not capable of debating much of anything, much less the climate.

      • He wanted a photo op; to be seen standing there bloviating on the ice with a “scientist” as a prop, nodding at everything he said. Fortunately, the gov’t. wouldn’t play, having better things to do.

      • Edward Abbey was a Park Ranger. He wrote Desert Solitaire and The Monkey Wrench Gang.

    • The Glacier National Park officials, rangers and bark ranger didn’t accompany Mr. Zuckerberg on his trip to the park, they were already there.
      Zuckerberg had requested that a USGS climate change expert accompany him on this trip. The government wisely said no.
      When we visit national parks, it’s usually just my wife and I. We don’t count the park rangers as people accompanying us.
      Semantics are a two-way street.

    • I see the park officials chose a very appropriate guide for Zuck—Gracie the Dog. I’m sure Zuck missed the message, however.

    • Is it just me or does Zuckerberg look ill at ease in that photo op?
      It looks as if he has been told to stroke the dog but is not quite sure about it.

      • IMO Zuckerberg looks ill at ease with life. What has he really accomplished to justify such fame? That has a way of weighing on a person.

      • “What has he really accomplished to justify such fame?”
        Yeah, he’s only built a company with a market cap in the top 10 globally faster than anyone in history.

    • I HAD wanted to go to Glacier National Park. I may have to reasses that. Perhaps if I go in the off season when the idiots are not out in full force. Is there a human being left on the planet that recognizes a DOG is not a human being?

      • I once visited Glacier, in May. Alas, the road to the sun was still closed due to snow, or lack of global warming.
        But the Montana Police were fantastically polite every time they issued me a $5 fine for speeding and then, somehow, intimated that it might be kinda optional on my part.

      • there may be a few?
        however they probably are the ones that think cats are human;-) lol WOOF!!

      • Glacier was quite lovely in July 1999 (or was it 1998?). I recommend Many Glacier Lodge. The staff will tell you about how at least one mountain goat falls through a skylight every winter. There is so much snow (!) that the lodge is almost completely covered, the animals unknowingly walk over the roof, and crash! Mountain goat in the common area.
        I remember the signage (and rangers) talking about how the glaciers were shrinking, but I do not remember warming hysteria. I might not have noticed (or paid attention). Even in high school, I realized that glaciation is not permanent. Sad that future people may not see these really cool things, but that is life.

    • Does this slob have more than 1 set of clothes? Good grief. Enough with the plain gray t-shirts already. Yuk, on Zuk.

  3. Allocating government funds, personnel, and resources responsibly is the definition of good government and something we are dedicated to advancing at the department.


  4. Many government agencies are feeling a tight budget, particularly in terms of travel costs and overtime. As others have pointed out, the park rangers and park employees were at the park, doing their normal jobs (and presumably, working their normal hours); the scientist would have been flown in from elsewhere – given the location of the park, his trip would have entailed not only notable travel costs but also overtime or compensatory time for at least some travel outside of normal hours.
    There could also have been government ethics rules involved as well – it would have been government support of a private cause and those have to be vetted thoroughly and at a high level to determine if it is in the best interest of the government to support.

    • Couldn’t Zuck just have brought his own climate scientist? Seems odd he didn’t just hire a climate scientist and take him along. Later, the scientist could write a peer-reviewed activist paper that supported whatever Zuck wanted it to. He missed a huge opportunity there. He’s slipping.

    • Too bad that message didn’t get through to Trump, who is burning through security and travel money at a shameful pace.

      • But think of the relative savings he’ll be responsible for … by not visiting the 51st through the 57th states. (and I hear the glaciers in those states are shrinking faster than anywhere else)

  5. “Mr President we have a problem – the Arctic ice is melting”
    “Stop taking satellite photos it might go away”
    “The glaciers are melting”
    “Only if there’s a scientist there to say so -anything else is anecdotal “

    • Dave. My country of origin is on the Artic circle and recovering from Weichselian glaciation. It’s still too cold for cultivating corn. During the year without summer at the end of the 19th century 10% of the population starved to death. I dare you to reveal your intentions.

      • Jaakko, yes. This summer has been cold, but in the 19th century there was famine in the family. Note also it was so cold in the midsummer, lakes froze and they were usable for horse sled traffic. So the ice was thick. The mild warming after that is beneficial and has helped us a lot. The difference between 1860 and 1935 is stark.

      • The population of Ireland declined to a half in the 1840’s to the famine. It was man made, yet they blamed the rain. Ireland at the time was an exporter of wheat and meat. I think That beats 10%
        That is history. I have no intention at all but would really like to avoid these things happening in the future.
        Also to a comment above comment to the hot scot Corbyn and May have talked with terrorists. May sought the support from those who’s party who even according to the Daily Mail have been involved with gun running

      • David it is not an either or and you should know it. In much of the temperate zone it does not really matter. In the more arid areas glaciers limit extreme flooding and I suspect those on those areas would like to keep their glaciers. So that is your answer but not to either of your suggestions.

    • Better get up there quick and fix it Dave. Can’t wait til it’s colder out, how about you?

      • It is currently a nice cool 54 deg F inside my trailer this morning. Temps fell to 51 F last night, 4 degrees cooler than forecast. A change is in the air, already.

    • Don’t look know, the Arctic has stopped melting.
      The glaciers have been melting since the end of the Little Ice Age.

  6. Hat tip to those in charge to recognize the charade for what it was and to give Zuckerberg a dog greeter. Fitting.

    • He should have asked the dog for an advice on improving the facebook’s held data security (see my comment below)

  7. Zuckerberg’s facebook has a lousy security. 2-3 years ago I attempted to register (in order to log in at WUWT , Climate etc and some engineering blogs by using the ‘f’ simbol) but found out that my email address I have used daily since late 1999, has been used by someone else.
    Since unable to get any response from that lousy company, at least I managed to block the access to the offending account by occasionally attempting to login with my email and surprisingly succeeding in changing the accounts password.

    • Bravo! Technological messes can often be resolved with a bit of creativity. Anyone who believes there is anything whatsoever on the net that is not open to the entire world is living under a rock in Antarctica. The net is a huge glass house and everyone has IPhones to record the data forever.

  8. Reminds us what was stopping this climate ‘scientist’ from taking personal time off and going anyway and if costs where an issue well Zuckerberg could have given him a lift in his private jet. and/or helicopter and his hardly short of cash to help out . Although of course how much he has is no one else business and certainly not the tax mans.

  9. Zuckerburg obviously has an aversion to decent clothing. Clinging to that college sophmore, computer programmer look. That won’t stop the ageing, fella.

  10. Should have sent a member of the Justice Dept’s anti-trust division to outline for him the ongoing investigation of his company for monopolistic activities and price gouging. Europe could have sent their anti-monopoly folks as well.

  11. Kind of OT, but has anyone noticed that dogs are far more successful in treating illnesses than medicine? There are seizure dogs, hypoglycemia dogs, PTSD dogs, therapy dogs. All of these things humans are complete failures at dealing with, yet the dogs are wildly successful. Maybe we need more dogs in science?

    • the dogs dont cure some of the above issues but they sure as hell beat being wired up to some digitech for pre warning of events like a seizure
      Im in the other side of it
      I can now pretty much “feel”when my epileptic dog is heading towards a seizure;-/
      im not as good as a dog with human precog but not too bad within a 24hr timespan.
      for ptsd n therapy theyre hard to beat;-)
      and some excellent dogs sniff cancers with high accuracy
      machines still cant do that so well.

  12. They should have dug deep and found a real scientist to send; an especially cantankerous one that demands data, testable hypothesis, and a who has a healthy distain for fancy statistics.

  13. We must make it colder. We must produce growing glaciers. We must make more ice at the poles. We-Can-Do-It and it will be glorious!! (idiots)

  14. If Zuckerbilge were the slightest bit interested in the truth, he could easily learn that GNP is simply doing what glaciers have aways done; ebb and flow. They grew during the LIA, and have ebbed somewhat since then. Nothing to do with man. If Gracie the “bark ranger” could talk, she could have told him that.

  15. The Greenland and Antarctic ice caps have been relatively permanent features throughout the Quaternary (possibly since the Oligocene in the case of Antarctica). If these ice masses melted, it would be a big deal. On the other hand, small glaciers and year-round Arctic sea ice have not been permanent features. They are relatively recent and probably rare features of the Holocene. The geological evidence indicates that the presence these small ice masses is anomalous.
    The “small glaciers” of Glacier National Park, Montana may have not existed during the Holocene Climatic Optimum (HCO). The geological evidence suggests that they formed about 7,000 years ago as the Earth’s climate began to cool after the HCO (Neoglaciation).

    The history of glaciation within current Glacier National Park boundaries spans centuries of glacial growth and recession, carving the features we see today. Glaciers were present within current Glacier National Park boundaries as early as 7,000 years ago but may have survived an early Holocene warm period (Carrara, 1989), making them much older. These modest glaciers varied in size, tracking climatic changes, but did not grow to their Holocene maximum size until the end of the Little Ice Age (LIA) around A.D. 1850. While they may not have formed in their entirety during the LIA, their maximum perimeters can be documented through mapping of lateral and terminal moraines. (Key, 2002) The extent and mass of these glaciers, as well as glaciers around the globe, has clearly decreased during the 20th century in response to warmer temperatures.
    The glaciers at Glacier NP were generally advancing from about 7,000 years ago up until the mid-1800’s, when Earth began to recover from the Little Ice Age…

    Climate reconstructions representative of the Glacier National Park region extend back multiple centuries and show numerous long-duration drought and wet periods that influenced the mass balance of glaciers (Pederson et al. 2004). Of particular note was an 80-year period (~1770-1840) of cool, wet summers and above-average winter snowfall that led to a rapid growth of glaciers just prior to the end of the LIA. Thus, in the context of the entire Holocene, the size of glaciers at the end of the LIA was an anomaly of sorts. In fact, the large extent of ice coverage removed most of the evidence of earlier glacier positions by overriding terminal and lateral moraines.
    Tree-ring based climate records and historic photographs indicate the initiation of frontal recession and ice mass thinning between A.D. 1860 and 1880. The alignment of decadal-scale climate anomalies over the early 20th century produced a period of glacial recession somewhat analogous to conditions experienced over the past few decades. The coupling of hot, dry summers with substantial decreases in winter snowpack (~30% of normal) produced dramatic recession rates as high as 100 m/yr from A.D. 1917-1941 (Pederson et al. 2004). These multidecadal episodes have substantially impacted the mass balance of glaciers since A.D. 1900.
    Glaciers are either advancing (increasing mass balance) or retreating (decreasing mass balance). They rarely sit still… Even if they do move glacially slow.
    7,000 years ago, Chaney Glacier began advancing, reaching the magenta perimeter in 1850…
    Since 1850, it has retreated to its current position.
    The coldest phase of the Little Ice Age (ca 1600 AD) was probably the coldest period of the Holocene. In Greenland, the Little Ice Age was about as cold as Pleistocene glacial interstadials.
    The questions I would pose to the Warmunists are:
    1. Would you prefer that Earth remained as cold as the Little Ice Age?
    2. Would you prefer advancing or retreating glaciers?

      • I’d bet no more than a handful of students on a specialist track are ever even EXPOSED to geologic history. They’re too busy being indoctrinated into revisionist SJW leftist causes, while adjusting their “gender.”

      • I was so relieved when my geology professors did not beat the drum on “climate change”. A few remarks that might have been a little over the top (but very mild compared to what is usually preached), but for the most part, very realistic. Best part was getting the emails encouraging students to go on a geology field trip to look for/at fossils on Earth Day – scheduled for the same time as the “climate march”. Not a single email about the so-called march, not a single mention in class. At a school with a climate change center (blech). I could be reading more into it than is there, but considering the political/academic climate (no pun intended)…

      • St. Mary Lake on the east side of the divide on Going To The Sun road is lovelier, IMHO. There is a parking/picnicking area on your way down from the pass on the lake side, that is especially magicial, if you leave the parking area and walk over to the lake and the bare rock peninsula sticking out into the lake. There used to be a cabins there, accessible only by boat, until the GTTS road went in during the CCC days. They fell into disrepair during WWII, and they tore it all down after the war, because the people just drove on by on the road.

    • “7,000 years ago, Chaney Glacier began advancing, reaching the red perimeter in 1850”
      Don’t yhou mean reaching the violet (or whatever color that is) line?

  16. “The decision has provoked suspicion from inside the USGS that the scientist’s appearance was canceled to minimize attention to the issue of climate change, according to one source.”
    Suuuure,if you think so.
    That national park is a favorite place for ignorant warmists, pushing the glaciers are vanishing because of a small increase in CO2 molecules in the atmosphere.
    What they don’t know is that those few glaciers still existing at the park was mostly created and grown during the LIA time. That is why they are slowly melting away now as the cool conditions of the LIA time has gone away.

  17. There’s something wrong when after visiting a National Park you come away so indoctrinated to the whole scam of climate change that you are ready to become an activist. What are we paying the Park Rangers for? Community organizing apparently. No thanks. I’m going to Flathead Lake. You can have your Glacier brainwashing.

  18. DM, I recall reading an observation made a few years ago, that stated that the reseeding glaciers are revealing old tree stumps.

    • It seems that the mini glaciers in Glacier National Park get a lot of press because they are retreating, but Hubbard doesn’t get any press, even though it’s the largest tidewater glacier in North America. Also Taku Glacier the largest glacier in the Juneau Icefield doesn’t get any press, because it is advancing.

    • Took a few pictures of Hubbard last month. The naturalist aboard the ship (Holland America, a great line–I recommend the 14-day round trip from Seattle) refused to be brought into discussion of climate change at the outset–too political, he said. But he did correctly note that Hubbard was advancing, while also (correctly? don’t know) that >90% of Alaskan glaciers were retreating.

      • Hell you don’t have to go to Alaska. Plenty of ice and snow here in the US still. July 5th I was on top of the mountain at the Grand Targhee resort at 10,000 feet looking at the 13,000 ft. peak of Grand Teton standing snow. The cornice on the peak I was standing on was still had a 30′ thick solid old snow with more covering the upper half of the valley below. They’re still skiing in some places out west in places in the rocky mountains.

    • Yep, in reference to this article about Zuckerberg. Theme being elitist leftists leaving their secure abodes to make the hazardous journey to meet us common rubes in flyover country in order to try and figure out how we could have been so stupid as to vote for and support someone like Donald Trump for president.

  19. The trouble with these mini-glaciers as people are calling them here, is that some are not glaciers at all. They are snowfields. An example is St. Mary’s glacier in Colorado–it ain’t one. The glaciers on kilimanjaro are snowfields I am pretty sure–never thick enough to compress all the snow into ice. Snowfields are probably very ephemeral and come and go with the smallest of climate variations.

  20. I hope Zuckerberg was instructed in the proper glacial pronoun gender neutrality. Some glaciers start out thinking they are lesbians and end up deciding to be hetero. Some hit a big ridge, bifurcate, and go BOTH ways. This is critical stuff to the American Academic.

Comments are closed.