End of Ice: Voodoo Science Himalayan Glacier Crisis Rises from the Dead

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

If you thought the “Voodoo Science” Himalayan glacier crisis died when its main backer, former IPCC head and alleged sex pest Rajendra Pachauri was forced to resign, think again; the glacier crisis is back.

A third of Himalayan ice cap doomed, finds report

Even radical climate change action won’t save glaciers, endangering 2 billion people

At least a third of the huge ice fields in Asia’s towering mountain chain are doomed to melt due to climate change, according to a landmark report, with serious consequences for almost 2 billion people.

Even if carbon emissions are dramatically and rapidly cut and succeed in limiting global warming to 1.5C, 36% of the glaciers along in the Hindu Kush and Himalaya range will have gone by 2100. If emissions are not cut, the loss soars to two-thirds, the report found.

The glaciers are a critical water store for the 250 million people who live in the Hindu Kush-Himalaya (HKH) region, and 1.65 billion people rely on the great rivers that flow from the peaks into India, Pakistan, China and other nations.

“This is the climate crisis you haven’t heard of,” said Philippus Wester of the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (Icimod), who led the report. “In the best of possible worlds, if we get really ambitious [in tackling climate change], even then we will lose one-third of the glaciers and be in trouble. That for us was the shocking finding.”

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/04/a-third-of-himalayan-ice-cap-doomed-finds-shocking-report

The full report is available here.

The organisations behind the glacier crisis report;

  1. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) Kathmandu Nepal
  2. Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies Dhaka Bangladesh
  3. Ministry of Finance, Government of Nepal Kathmandu Nepal
  4. International Ecosystem Management Partnership United Nations Environment Programme and Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy, Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing China
  5. Central Himalayan Environment Association Nainital India
  6. Institute of Tibetan Plateau Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing China

Source: Authors and affiliations

No doubt the Chinese Academy of Science authors are right now lobbying President for life Xi Jinping to immediately shut down all Chinese coal stations, to save the Himalayan water catchment.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
131 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
richard
February 5, 2019 6:07 am

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261436319_Are_the_Himalayan_glaciers_retreating

A 10 year study from satellite data found …

“Among these, 1752 glaciers (86.8%) were observed having stable fronts (no change in the snout position and area of ablation zone), 248 (12.3%) exhibited retreat and 18 (0.9%) of them exhibited advancement of snout”

Steven Mosher
Reply to  richard
February 5, 2019 6:55 am

dumb move;

“Two thousand and eighteen glaciers representing climatically diverse terrains in the Himalaya were mapped and monitored. It includes glaciers of Karakoram, Himachal, Zanskar, Uttarakhand, Nepal and Sikkim regions. Among these, 1752 glaciers (86.8%) were observed having stable fronts (no change in the snout position and area of ablation zone), 248 (12.3%) exhibited retreat and 18 (0.9%) of them exhibited advancement of snout. The net loss in 10,250.68 sq. km area of the 2018 glaciers put together was found to be 20.94 sq. km or 0.2% ( 2.5% of 20.94 sq. km).”

MarkW
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 7:02 am

Dumb move. 10 years, that’s weather not climate.

Graemethecat
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 7:12 am

So loss of 0.2% of the total area glaciated in 10 years is disastrous, according to you?

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  Graemethecat
February 5, 2019 8:45 am

Graemethecat;

I believe in this case, Steven is with us, not against us. It happens from time to time.

John Endicott
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
February 5, 2019 11:31 am

Maybe, maybe not. that’s the problem with his stupid drive-by’s, they’re so vague one can interpret them however one wishes.

beng135
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 7:28 am

dumb move;

Changing glaciers don’t have anything to do with driving cars.

LdB
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 8:00 am

I blame the 0.2% on all the volcanoes that the global warming is causing to errupt.

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  LdB
February 5, 2019 11:13 am

I blame the sun god of the Rautes.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
February 6, 2019 5:36 am

Which means:

The Rautes Totems is every living in the Himalayas.

They will presist for Himalaya eternal life.

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
February 6, 2019 10:16 am

It may be the “End of Ice” in the Himalayas but not in Greenland.
“In 2018, Greenland’s total surface mass budget (SMB) is almost 150bn tonnes above the average for 1981-2010, ranking as sixth highest on record”

https://www.thegwpf.com/greenland-ice-sheet-sixth-highest-on-record/

BTW – Did DMI move or hide their surface mass budget page? I can no longer find it.

Sara
Reply to  LdB
February 5, 2019 1:18 pm

Naw, naw, naw! You guys have it all wrong!!!

Blame AlGorebull. He emits so much CO2 every time he opens his piehole (never mind the other orifices) that he alone is responsible for the rise of CO2 levels and climate change in the Himalaya, all his lonesome!!!

I have a Himalayan cat. She told this is how it works, so it has to be true!

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  LdB
February 6, 2019 5:22 am

Farmer Ch., never heard of

https://www.google.com/search?q=the+sun+god+of+the+Rautes.&oq=the+sun+god+of+the+Rautes.&aqs=chrome.

interesting information anyway.

A Sun God too. h/t

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Johann Wundersamer
February 6, 2019 10:18 am

thumbs up

John Endicott
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 8:17 am

0.2% loss in 10 years, so? And your point, Mosh? (you did have a point right? Oh wait, I forgot who I was talking to, Mr. pointless drive-by Mosh, so no point to be found.)

John Tillman
Reply to  John Endicott
February 5, 2019 8:24 am

Also, that’s area. Volume would be even less.

Latitude
Reply to  John Tillman
February 5, 2019 1:24 pm

of course, because it makes it sound worse….

To get there 1/3 gone in 20 years…..they are using the models that predict a 6C increase

…so they are also saying temp are increasing .3C a year

Robertvd
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 8:40 am

Strange because when I look at this page most of the time Himalaya temperatures are far below normal as most high mountain ranges all over the globe.

http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp6

So it must be less precipitation like on mount Kilimanjaro.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 8:45 am

10 years = 0.2%
100 years = 2%
1000 years = 20%
5000 years = 100%
in 5000 years our grand****children will not know what Himalayan glaciers are.

John Tillman
Reply to  vukcevic
February 5, 2019 8:56 am

Except that the Holocene might end in just 3000 years.

Reply to  John Tillman
February 5, 2019 9:20 am

I’ll bet you a bottle of finest Scotch whisky that it will not.

MarkW
Reply to  John Tillman
February 5, 2019 10:23 am

3000 year old year old Scotch?

Reply to  John Tillman
February 5, 2019 11:15 am

No, 3012 years old, the bet matures in 3ky, got already bottle of 12 year old Glenlivet, and if I win the bet expect the same in return or appropriate monetary recompense with compaund interest included.
Interested ?

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  John Tillman
February 5, 2019 1:03 pm

I think Javier was giving 2000 — 4000 for the beginning of the next stadial.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  John Tillman
February 5, 2019 1:06 pm

That would be about 3T$.

ColinD
Reply to  John Tillman
February 5, 2019 10:28 pm

Ah, but the Anthropocene will end much sooner if the climate astrologers have their way. Less food, power and back to the stone age.

Highlfight56433
Reply to  vukcevic
February 5, 2019 12:31 pm

The temperature this morning rose by 10 F in an hour. By the same time tomorrow it’ll have risen 2400 F.

Garland Lowe
Reply to  Highlfight56433
February 5, 2019 1:51 pm

240?

Rich Davis
Reply to  Highlfight56433
February 5, 2019 6:11 pm

Umm, no. It’ll take ten days. Still terrifying though. Amazing that people still doubt science.

🙂

old construction worker
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 3:03 pm

‘At least a third of the huge ice fields in Asia’s towering mountain chain are doomed to melt due to climate change’ or not if we go into another little ice age. But then again if we don’t go into another ice age and the “World’s Average Temperature” does rise then snow will be replace with rain so the “2 billion people” have nothing to worry about. They woill still have fresh water

John Peter
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 11:48 pm

What about ‘error bars’?
Are they greater or smaller than 0.2%?

Petit_Barde
Reply to  richard
February 5, 2019 8:01 am

richard :
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261436319_Are_the_Himalayan_glaciers_retreating

A 10 year study from satellite data found …

According to this study, the rate of shrinking of the Himalayan Glacier is 0.2% per decade between 2000 and 2010.

If we assume the same rate of shrinking for the decades to come (a mean rate of 0.2%), 98,4% of the Himalayan glacier will remain in 2100.

The mean loss rate for a total shrinking of 36% by 2100 is 3.7% per decade, which is 18,5 times more than the observed rate so far … hmmm

Sara
Reply to  Petit_Barde
February 5, 2019 4:44 pm

Hey, fella! I hate to tell you this, Paul Barde, but you can NOT use an inconvenient truth on someone who made a movie with that title!!! That is a definite NO-NO!!!

Bryan A
Reply to  richard
February 5, 2019 12:33 pm

Probable simple solution would be to build dams along the moraine fronts and trap the water now. That way, IF they melt into obscurity, their water will remain useable as will any further precipitation that melts in the summer. Also an excellent potential source of Hydro Energy

John Tillman
February 5, 2019 6:09 am

And yet glaciers in the Karakoram range are growing:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/9206785/Himalayan-glaciers-growing-despite-global-warming.html

The Siachen glacier in the eastern Karakoram on the disputed Pakistan-India border is however indeed shrinking, thanks to a battle being fought upon it since 1984. Both sides have used explosives to blast fortifications within it, and regularly fire artillery barrages at each other.

H.R.
Reply to  John Tillman
February 5, 2019 6:16 am

John Tillman wrote: “Both sides have used explosives to blast fortifications within it, and regularly fire artillery barrages at each other.”

I’m sure that’s been accounted for in the Business As Usual climate models.

John Tillman
Reply to  H.R.
February 5, 2019 6:38 am

No doubt that heat and CO2 produced by warfare have been factored in. After all, many of the GIGO computer gamers pushing “climate change” were also in on the “nuclear winter” hoax.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
Reply to  John Tillman
February 5, 2019 9:13 am

This is an interesting point. Likewise I am baffled by how, if there is a potential problem with Antarctica as claimed by many scientists, they seem quite content to build ever increasingly large and power hungry bases all over the delicate margins of the continent and we hear no word of criticism about the growing number of tourist cruise ships churning up the ice margins and polluting the sea. A bit like the absurdly oversize floating liners doing their best to wash away the foundations of Venice without a word of sense from the Venetians.
All we need now is a renewed cruise by the ship of fools to the Himalayan glaciers. Up the creek without a paddle springs to mind…

February 5, 2019 6:10 am

Given that in 2007 the AR4 report told us that Himalayan glaciers would be gone by 2035 the suggestion that only a third will be gone by 2100 comes as a huge relief. At this rate of waning alarmism the glaciers will be growing again by 2116.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  Eric Huxter
February 5, 2019 6:56 am

you missed the errata

MarkW
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 7:03 am

Errata? Is that the new name for Climate Science?

Reply to  MarkW
February 5, 2019 8:25 am

3 years to publish the errors and a further 2 years for the Guardian to notice from a peer reviewed publication with an average of 3 pages per author. It so hard to spot errors in Climate Science when they are consistent with the narrative.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 7:04 am

Just the sarc tag

brians356
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 5, 2019 8:48 am

Doesn’t matter. Mankind cannot and will not do anything to affect those glaciers anyway, so why whine about them?

Bryan A
Reply to  Eric Huxter
February 5, 2019 12:36 pm

On a bright note…ALL current global warming alarmists WILL be gone by 2100

Reply to  Bryan A
February 6, 2019 2:55 am

Bryan A
February 5, 2019 at 12:36 pm

You forgot about the 5 year old and teenage climate experts in all those marches.

John Endicott
Reply to  Alastair Brickell
February 6, 2019 7:30 am

Yeah but hopefully they’ll have grown up and learned a little something about the real world between now and then, such that *if* they’re still alive 81 years from now, they won’t sill be alarmists about a non-issue.

Ron
February 5, 2019 6:12 am

“Even if carbon emissions are dramatically and rapidly cut and succeed in limiting global warming to 1.5C, 36% of the glaciers along in the Hindu Kush and Himalaya range will have gone by 2100.”

Almost everyone alive today will have gone by 2100. By then those remaining will have found alternative water supplies! No one will die because of these glaciers melting.

Graemethecat
Reply to  Ron
February 5, 2019 6:37 am

The Guardian will be gone long, long before 2100.

john
Reply to  Graemethecat
February 5, 2019 6:48 am

But none too soon!

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Graemethecat
February 5, 2019 7:25 am

But think about it: unemployed journalists (actually, meda workers is a better term, most of them can’t be considered journalists by any stretch of the imagination), become coders.

More coders makes for better models.

Better models eventually catch up to observed data.

And with fewer uneducated media workers trying to tourqe every piece of apocolyptic bad news for clickbait, good news will prevail.

Well, I can dream, can’t I?

Bryan A
Reply to  Caligula Jones
February 5, 2019 12:39 pm

If more coders make better models, we need more Super Coders

knr
Reply to  Ron
February 5, 2019 6:47 am

as will the people that made these BS claims in the first place and therefore they will be in no position to be asked why they got it so wrong , ‘which is lucky ‘

Reply to  knr
February 5, 2019 8:50 am

I suppose that the the research quality is as good as that telling us arctic ice disappeared in 2013.
Wait, it didn’t .

LdB
Reply to  Ron
February 5, 2019 8:02 am

The right handed sharks will have got them all by 2100.

MarkW
Reply to  LdB
February 5, 2019 8:25 am

How does a right handed shark swim up a river? Wouldn’t it keep beaching itself?

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  MarkW
February 5, 2019 1:12 pm

Not if they swim alongside left handed ones.

GeologyJim
Reply to  Ron
February 5, 2019 8:47 am

Well, as long as “the Science is Settled” and the glaciers are “doomed”, let’s just party!

The kids and grandkids will just sort it out for themselves

After all, our grandparents never warned us about cell phones, GPS, AI, Facebook, zombie movies, or crappy rap “artists”

Bryan A
Reply to  GeologyJim
February 5, 2019 12:37 pm

Careful what you say about cRAP Music

DD More
Reply to  Ron
February 5, 2019 12:41 pm

In regards to Water Supplies.
” 1.65 billion people rely on the great rivers that flow from the peaks into India, Pakistan, China and other nations.”

Isn’t this talk about Glaciers size? The definition which is – ‘Ice that Doesn’t Melt All Year’. Has nothing to do with yearly supply.

Stephen Wallace
Reply to  DD More
February 5, 2019 7:53 pm

Yeah I don’t get it.
You can’t drink ice.

You can drink water however. Which is the result of melting ice.
I fail to see the issue here.

richard
February 5, 2019 6:13 am

Moreover in the Himalayas –

“Vital forests wiped out. Despite the importance of the forests, they are cleared at a rapid rate, often illegally and by local communities’

It is thought that deforestation has effected the glaciers on Mt Kilamanjaro.

Editor
Reply to  richard
February 5, 2019 7:23 am

richard,

This was my first thought as well. As I recall, it was land use changes due to deforestation apparently causing a decrease in local precipitation. It’s not so much that temperatures had increased past the freezing point, but rather the glaciers were ablating at a normal pace, but not being replenished from snowfall. (Or something like that.)

This feels like the mountain equivalent of coral reefs dying due to algae growth…which was blamed on warmer oceans, but was ultimately due to over-fishing of Parrot fish.

rip

Carl Friis-Hansen
February 5, 2019 6:14 am

Even if the melting is true, what does it matter? I understand from the article that water supply is the issue, and whether the H₂O is in form of snow or whet water, it is to me a question what changes there might be to the precipitation. If it becomes warmer along the way, then some of the smart people say the accumulated humidity will increase, causing more precipitation.
Just a thought.

LdB
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
February 5, 2019 8:09 am

Apparently it’s doomed even if we cut to zero, so they have 80 years to adapt, so get onto it those affected.

matthew dalby
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
February 5, 2019 4:31 pm

Good points, averaged over long time periods the amount of water in rivers is equal to the amount of precipitation.
More importantly, and this is never mentioned in these scare stories, how much of the water in the Himalayan rivers is from glacial melt, and how much is from snow melt. Places like California show that is is perfectly possible to rely on snow melt from non glaciated mountains, so even if all Himalayan glaciers disappeared (however unlikely that is) provided there was still snowfall in winter then there would still be water in the rivers in spring and summer.

Craig
February 5, 2019 6:16 am

““This is the climate crisis you haven’t heard of,”

Has Josh done a cartoon on the Aesop’s fable of the climate scientist who cried crisis?

Tom in Florida
February 5, 2019 6:17 am

“The organisations behind the glacier crisis report…”

Well, I don’t suppose any of those organizations listed might be looking for some cash reparations now would they?

Bubba Cow
Reply to  Tom in Florida
February 5, 2019 9:44 am

That was the first thing they asked for in the “study”.
I leafed through the original “study”. It wasn’t research. It was a review of the literature for the apparent purpose of asking for more “study”.

confession and pet peeve: this, and many others are hailed as a “new study” or “research” (their words). This was a term paper at best.

SMC
February 5, 2019 6:17 am

Weren’t the Himalayan glaciers originally supposed to melt by 2030 or 2035 or something like that? Just moving the goal posts. Got to keep the doom and gloom going, the leftist’s don’t have anything else going for them (except resisting Trump, raising taxes, resisting Trump, closing down businesses, resisting Trump, putting people out of work, resisting Trump).

Ken Irwin
February 5, 2019 6:20 am

The argument put forward by Gore years ago was that the melting glaciers threatened the water supply of India etc. ?

This is an internally inconsistent argument – the glaciers store water – increased melting equates to increased water run off. And vice versa increasing glaciation reduces water run off.

The Ganges is fed by precipitation and seasonal snow-melt.

You can’t have it both ways (I forgot ! If you are an alarmist this is always permissible).

February 5, 2019 6:29 am

I wonder how Mankind managed to survive the ramp up to the Medieval Warm Period without the plethora of climate soothsayers we enjoy today? Oh Soothsayers, what do your portents say? How much longer must we suffer before sheep & cattle can once again graze on the green meadows of Greenland? Before verdant fields yield rye and barley in abundance again?

Caligula Jones
Reply to  JMichna
February 5, 2019 7:30 am

Back in those enlightened times, soothsayers who soothed the wrong sayings were usually killed, and sometimes eaten when things didn’t happen when they said they were going to. Or happened when they didn’t say anything.

Not going to say we should return to such enlightened times, but perhaps we could just, you know, stop giving people have been wrong so long about so much platforms.

Latitude
February 5, 2019 6:34 am

They get away with this mess because people can’t comprehend how big all those glaciers are….

Assume they are right…..that still leaves 2/3…which is massive

Coach Springer
February 5, 2019 6:42 am

The report cannot scientifically sustain “will” and either uses “might” or “could” in connection with findings or is willfully fraudulent.

February 5, 2019 6:47 am

Even if the glaciers melt, the countries have the ability to build dams for water storage. Unless the glaciers are shrinking due to a decline in precipitation, which is not noted as happening, regulation of runoff can be done by other means.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Tom Halla
February 6, 2019 3:50 am

my thought also build dams
however theres bound to be a nepali greenpeas affilate mob ready to find a rare something or other so building dams would be verboten..better the people go without water than some slime mould be “risked”
the usual tactic

john
February 5, 2019 6:55 am

I have a question for the many knowledgeable inhabitants of this site. Even if the glaciers in such areas decrease, wouldn’t there just be less snowfall and more rainfall? And isn’t the issue how much water arrives far, far downriver where people and crops are?
When I was young ( 60’s and 70’s) I recall there being several devastating floods in Bangladesh associated with the combination of spring melt in the Himalayas coupled with the monsoon.
Wouldn’t a scenario of less snowfall/ runoff and more rainfall provide a steadier supply of water downstream with less flooding?
Always been my assumption about this issue.

Bryan A
Reply to  john
February 5, 2019 2:16 pm

It is more how much water arrives downriver during the summer melt season (Yes glaciers always have and always will have summer melt seasons). I believe that the glaciers act like dams for sourcing pre monsoon summer water.

February 5, 2019 6:58 am

RCP 8.5 Science Fiction all over again.

TDBraun
February 5, 2019 6:59 am

Those glaciers are supposed to be the main source of water for over a billion people, a resource that is already strained, so losing 1/3 of the source would indeed be a serious problem, especially since the population there might continue growing. It is a reasonable concern.

But the report conflicts with other reports, and there are many decades between now and then for alternatives to be found, mitigation efforts to be made, etc. I wonder for example what potential there is for more reservoirs to be constructed to conserve the water, while also providing hydro power.

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  TDBraun
February 5, 2019 7:17 am

You have a point. The Romans in the past, they did some good engineering work to sort out water supply, draining and general infrastructure. The water supply for Copenhagen, by the way, was done by an underground wooden pipeline from a lake about 25km away, back in the mid 1600.
If we want drinking water, we have to be a bit constructive, and so does the Asian populations.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
February 5, 2019 7:42 am

Ditto for the “oh noes, we’ll be under water” crowd: much of the Netherlands has relied on similarly “old” tech for centuries to keep the sea at bay (although the new tech is also amazing).

But seriously: we had another short flood here in Toronto. The 30cm of snow we had last week was melted by a 12 degree (C) day yesterday. The Don River rose a bit, but the main difficuly is that once it reaches Lake Ontario, it is met by a 90 degree turn and a mass of concrete due to industrialization from the 1800s.

I mean, I was about 8 and helping my dad to drain our parking lot and could understand that water doesn’t like angles much and tends to like to flow straight-ish. But I guess it takes millions of dollars of engineering studies (and environmental impact, etc.) to NOT do anything. Again.

thomas
Reply to  TDBraun
February 5, 2019 12:51 pm

If over a billion people currently depend on glaciers for water, then they depend on melt water, not current precipitation.

If we STOP the melting, they will be imperiled.

Rod Evans
February 5, 2019 7:09 am

The AGW alarmists crisis story sausage machine, has been told to keep pumping it out 24/7 clearly.
Stand by for the next sausage story to be extruded probably the Andes mountains study reveals, the snow and ice is melting during the summer at a rate twice that seen last winter…

troe
February 5, 2019 7:12 am

We all know the “It’s worse than we thought” sub genre of climate fiction. They crank it out by the pound like True Detective pulp fiction novels of the 40’s.

Much of the media functions as their public relations department.

February 5, 2019 7:18 am

This is such nonsense!

If the glaciers were the water source, than they have to melt before the water can be used. And they seem to be afraid of that same melting that would make the water available to people. You can’t have your cake and eat it.

Water supply depends on precipitation, glaciers are just a long-term buffer.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Tom van Leeuwen
February 5, 2019 7:27 am

Let them eat moraine.

iain russell
Reply to  Tom in Florida
February 5, 2019 1:50 pm

Terminal!

Bryan A
Reply to  Tom van Leeuwen
February 5, 2019 2:10 pm

Glaciers are full of Hard Water

Alan Tomalty
February 5, 2019 7:27 am

Why Mosher remains a believer in this crap just demonstrates the power of Al Gore’s Church of Climatology. If there really was catastrophic global warming; all the glaciers would be in retreat.

MarkW
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
February 5, 2019 8:31 am

It demonstrates the power of a steady paycheck.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  MarkW
February 5, 2019 10:01 am

Considering his CV (English major and marketing) and from my own experience how that can translate into a less than steady paycheck, he should consider himself lucky:

http://www.populartechnology.net/2014/06/who-is-steven-mosher.html

ilftpm
Reply to  Caligula Jones
February 8, 2019 1:03 am

I remember how he once bragged that he took “DiffyQ” at Northwestern. I personally doubted it.

Why? When I took differential equations, my classmates were math majors, physics majors, engineering majors, and chem majors. In later years you could add some econ majors and CS majors.

I never met an English major who took it. Basically, people who were strong in math and science didn’t major in English. They were practical people, and there were plenty of well-paying jobs for their talents and university-trained skills, which was not the case for English majors. The English degree was for artsy people who relished fictional stories and poetry.

Some years ago I heard another person talking about her spouse’s (an engineer’s) college math experience, and she used a term that sounded like “DiffyQ”– it took me all of 2 seconds to realize she was saying “Diff EQ”, which is an actual published abbreviation in some college semester-course schedules.

I suspect Mosh, while working with engineers and software developers overheard fellows talking about Diff Eq, but being a former English major unfamiliar with the subject, mis-translated it.

February 5, 2019 7:29 am

Glaciers provide only 4% of the runoff of the Ganges.
R. Armstrong, D. Alford, and A. Racoviteanu, A preliminary assessment of the role of glaciers in the hydrologic regime of the Nepal Himalaya, Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 11, EGU2009-10794, 2009

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Hans Erren
February 5, 2019 7:47 am

You can’t bring facts here, sir, this is the Perpetual Panic Room…

Jon Scott
February 5, 2019 7:30 am

A glacier is a river, albeit where the water is in a solid phase. Input = Ouutput. It takes hundreds of years for input to become output so if ur glacier is shrinking above the iceline certainly look back 200or 300 years if you can and there you will find the cause. Is it just me or is that 2 Trillion a year industry which tries to pass off propaganda as science getting lazy?

Jon Scott
February 5, 2019 7:37 am

Notice the repeat science denier off the cuff “due to climate change”. The literature and its even poorer relative the MSN abound with this toxic statement but when was the last time you saw it qualified even in a pal reviewd climate industry rag? Serious science requires that the author qualify any statement attributing a process to this or that otherewise the paper will never see the light of day. How much lower can 2 trillion dollars a year can take people?

troe
February 5, 2019 7:45 am

” Is it just me or is that 2 Trillion a year industry which tries to pass off propaganda as science getting lazy?” Jon Scott

Fat, dumb, and happy. Why not when you get a free pass on whatever work product you crank out. Reminds me of a position I had working with the idiot namesake of a company’s CEO. We called him the third rail. Anything went as long as you didn’t mention sonny’s obvious shortcomings.

Steve Oregon
February 5, 2019 8:15 am

Man made glaciers to combat man made climate change?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/apr/22/the-ice-stupas-of-ladakh-solving-water-crisis-in-the-high-desert-of-himalaya

comment image?width=860&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=ba543fead7762e1acaa4bf101380af17

bonbon
February 5, 2019 8:31 am

Aha, we are getting closer to Tibet, or rather Bon-Po as they call it – the home of animism, magic and the Dalai Lama’s version of necromancy, Budhism. Churchill’s Top of the World, the favored retreat of the SS.

Since Marco Polo’s Venetians and the Mongol Horde this area has tried to disrupt the Silk Road.

Right now, China’s BRI, Belt and Road Initiative, the New Solk Road, is giving the Venetian’s new home, City of London, a fit of rage. When Trump and Xi arrange a world without that medieval fossil, the rage reaches fever pitch.

Thr irrationality behind Gore et Al has its roots precisely there – the chickens are going home to roost!

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  bonbon
February 5, 2019 9:13 am

I think you hit the nail, bonbon.

Johnathan Birks
February 5, 2019 8:34 am

So even if we take dramatic action destroy the economies of the developed world, it won’t matter, but let’s do it anyway!

Good to know where people’s priorities lie.

bonbon
Reply to  Johnathan Birks
February 5, 2019 8:54 am

Exactly the thinking of Gengis Khan – the only place he did’nt touch was Bon-Po (Tibet) – he adopted their necromancy while 30% of China was slaughtered or eliminated by disrupting infrastructure. Marco Polo served as finance ministed for the Khan in Samarkhand laundering English silver. Central banking is a Venetian invention.

Trump and Xi stand right now in the way of this neo-Venetian lurch. Follow the money trail – it actually leads to Bon-po.

Derg
February 5, 2019 8:53 am

“…to immediately shut down all Chinese coal stations..”

I can’t help but think of Luke Skywalker pleading to C3PO, but in this case, pleading to Xi

“Will you shut up and listen to me? Shut down all the garbage mashers er a coal plants on the detention level. will you? Do you copy? Shut down all the garbage mashers er a coal plants on the detention level.”

ResourceGuy
February 5, 2019 8:57 am

Let’s see a live feed of air quality in major subcontinent cities.

February 5, 2019 8:59 am

OK, suppose, just suppose, that this dire forecast is true. Would that not mean that precipitation would simply be spread more or less evenly throughout the year, and that rivers and streams would have a more or less constant flow, rather than being trapped in the form of ice for 6 or 8 months at a time?

Steve O
February 5, 2019 9:04 am

” …36% of the glaciers along in the Hindu Kush and Himalaya range will have gone by 2100. If emissions are not cut, the loss soars to two-thirds, the report found.”

If emissions are not cut, my guess is the loss soars to 38%.

michael hart
February 5, 2019 9:08 am

We’ve been here before, haven’t we? If they wanted to I’m sure they could easily write a model that indicates the Indian Monsoon will lead to long-term glacier expansion due to increased precipitation in the region. But they currently don’t want to, it’s that simple.

Either way, their uncertainty/measurement-error bars are going to be larger than any currently measured changes.

February 5, 2019 10:47 am

Bonpo are the early, pre-Buddhist peoples and religion of Tibet. You are ignorant to speak of that with which you are not familiar. The most profound knowledge, beyond your dreams, was stored in Bod, “Tibet”.

bonbon
Reply to  Poems of Our Climate
February 6, 2019 2:27 am

Right, and the SS went looking for it there. Came back with their insignia – a skull and crossbones.

Drinking yak milk from human craniums after the dinner call with human bones on the large gong – how quaint!

bonbon
Reply to  bonbon
February 6, 2019 2:35 am

The fact that Yale’s Skull and Bones jolly club had the same rituals (not sure about yak milk though) tells something about the shared mentality of Genghis Khan and the malthusian warmunists.

hunter
Reply to  Norman Blanton
February 6, 2019 5:56 am

Another lying climate elephant in plain sight but ignored by the climate fanatics.
Technology to reduce soot and other forms of actual pollution from coal could have been made decades ago.
Instead we have the war on coal (the war on the poor) and the waste of funds in windmills.
Technology to vastly reduce soot could have been created and made easily available to the developing world by now.
The prosperity and benefits if abundant low cost power could be transforming the the world to the better.
Instead we still, thanks to the climate cult, have soot spewing away.

gringojay
February 5, 2019 12:20 pm

N.W. Himalaya’s rainfall pattern show variable climate swings between ~2,000 years ago & ~3,700 years ago. There were droughts in the region (about)~3,400 & ~3,200 & ~3,00 0& & ~2,500 to 2,400 years ago (worst) ; plus ~ 2,100 years ago.

The precipitation went down in the region creating a general trend from ~3,700 to ~3,000 years ago. An interlude of increased rain ran from ~3,000 to 2,800 years ago. Then again rainfall decreased from ~2,700 to 2,400 years ago; followed by another increase in rainfall from ~2,400 to 2,300 years ago. Then there was a decrease in rainfall from ~ 2,300 to ~2,100 years ago; which was followed (after the exceptionally dry ~2,100 year ago drought) by increased rainfall from ~2,100 to 2,000 years ago.

Presumably there were N.W. Himalayan glacial alterations during these periods. Over the E. Himalayas we see indications glaciers were undergoing changes .

The Bengal region where rivers meet the sea reveal that after our closest in time Glacial Maximum that shoreline changed coming inland ~250 to 300 kilometers by about ~7,000 years ago. An earlier estimated regional sea level rise occurred from ~ 11,500 to 9,000 years ago; this, in some sectors, amounted to ~60 meters higher sea level.

The monsoon rains had been increasing at the above & thus we can infer glaciers were more extensive. Apparently there was so much sediment coming from the mountains that deposited downstream the shoreline shifted back seaward for about ~ 100 kilometers.

People adapted. I think shall again.

Ewin Barnett
February 5, 2019 12:40 pm

No explanation yet as to how northern Illinois was buried under a mile of glacial ice about 25,000 years ago. Too long ago. Doesn’t count.

Jack
February 5, 2019 12:57 pm

An utter confusion is reigning in the world’s mainstream climatoalarmist media regarding this old/new red herring.
The french newspapers Le Figaro, the New York Times, usatoday.com are speaking of TWO THIRDS of the Himalaya glaciers threatened by the warming while the Irish Times, The India Express, Scientific American, CNN.com etc… say that only ONE THIRD of these glaciers will disappear.
Exhillarating usual journalist’s bullshit

Bryan A
Reply to  Jack
February 5, 2019 2:18 pm

This is because the Former view the cup as 2/3 empty while the Latter view it as 2/3 full

hunter
February 5, 2019 1:42 pm

It was a crap claim when it was debunked (first by skeptics) nearly ten years ago.
Nothing has changed in the data to change that with today’s claim.

Alan Ranger
February 5, 2019 2:58 pm

Everybody seems to have missed the GOOD news here.

“Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world (see Table 10.9) and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate. Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 km2 by the year 2035 (WWF, 2005).”(IPCC AR4 WG2 Ch10, p. 493).

Seems like the trillions of climate change dollars have been well spent. We’ve now got an extra 65 years before Armageddon.

February 5, 2019 4:56 pm

I had thought the ipcc had made a full retraction of that story. Are they running out of really really scary stuff?

https://tambonthongchai.com/2010/07/22/himalayan-glaciers-melting-again/

https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/01/05/climate-change-indias-rivers-running-dry/

Michael Jankowski
February 5, 2019 5:00 pm

“…Even radical climate change action won’t save glaciers, endangering 2 billion people…”

Well then it sounds like it’s “settled” then. So adapt.

February 5, 2019 5:35 pm

As mentioned the Glaciers are just a buffer, equivalent to a Dam. The important factor is does it snow. If it does the glacier advances and of course the leading edge melts.

So if indeed the world is warming, even by such a small amount as the point seven, .7 C, since 1880, then we will have had evaporation. So the fact that the glaciers are still there since at least 1880, it must mean that it have been snowing.

MJE

Admad
February 5, 2019 10:29 pm

old white guy
February 6, 2019 5:12 am

good. one article here today says we need the water to cool power plants and we are using too much of it.

hunter
February 6, 2019 5:58 am

The climate obsessed return to their failed predictions like dogs returning to their vomit.

Johann Wundersamer
February 6, 2019 6:04 am
Johann Wundersamer
February 6, 2019 6:10 am
beng135
February 6, 2019 7:37 am

More scare-mongering crap. Little of the water from the Himalayas is from melting glaciers — it’s from rain/snow.

%d bloggers like this: