From the Cliff Mass Weather Blog
Cliff Mass
The Seattle Times had a startling revelation on its front page last Sunday: the top of Mount Rainier is shrinking due to global warming (see below).
According to this article, the frozen ice cap at the summit is melting “as the atmosphere warms.” Unfortunately, this claim is false and can easily be shown to be untrue. Another error-filled article by the Seattle Times Climate Lab, a journalistic enterprise funded by climate activists.
Why is this claim obviously false?
Because the top of Mount Rainier is so high that temperatures at the crest are consistently below freezing, even with a warming planet.
In addition, the added moisture associated with global warming would tend to INCREASE the amount of snow at that elevation (warm air can contain more water vapor than cooler air).
Let me demonstrate that the top of Rainier is not melting from global warming.
The crest of Mount Rainer is 14,410 ft above sea level. The nearest upstream upper-air observation location is the NOAA/NWS radiosonde launching site at Quillayute, located on the northern Washington coast. Below is the climatology of the melting level at this location, with the melting level being the elevation at which the temperature falls to freezing. Above the melting level, temperatures are below freezing. The red line is the elevation at the top of Mt. Rainier. This graph is based on over 50 years of data.
Notice something in the figure? The freezing level is virtually always below the top of Mt. Rainier (the crest of Mt. Rainier is below freezing nearly all the time).
Has the freezing level ever reached the top of Rainier? Yes, but not recently.
The following figure shows the daily climatology of the freezing level of the air approaching western Washington (again based on the radiosonde sounding at Quillayute). The horizontal red line shows the elevation of the top of Mt. Rainier. The light red line shows the daily highest freezing level. The black line is the daily average freezing level, which is around 2000 ft during the winter and 6000-8000ft in summer.
Between November 1 and April 1, the snow accumulation season, the freezing level has only reached the crest of Mt. Rainier twice. Over the summer about 20 times.
Now the key point, All these above-freezing temperatures at the creest were in the historical past, with NO RECENT cases. Let me prove this to you.
Here are all the dates when the freezingly level at Quillayute ascended above the top of Mt. Rainier.
Twenty-six dates. The most recent was 2006, 18 years ago.
Let me repeat. 18 years ago.
Most of the “warm” events were in the 1950s and 1960s. There is no trend toward more above-freezing temperatures at the top of Mt. Rainier. In fact, the evidence suggests just the opposite.
Thus, warming temperatures are not the cause of reduced snow at the top of our favorite mountain.
The claims of the Seattle Times front-page article are demonstrably false. Global warming is NOT causing loss of snow at the top of Mt. Rainier.
Now, let me be clear, warming lower down on Mt. Rainier (say at 6000 ft) is happening and that could impact snow and glaciers well down the mountain. BUT NOT THE CREST AS DESCRIBED IN THE ARTICLE.
If snow/ice is being lost at the top of Rainier it has to be for other reasons, such as less precipitation, strong winds, or human impacts.
The Seattle Times Climate Lab repeatedly publishes climate-related articles that are incorrect. Articles that hype or misinform about climate change. The Seattle TimesClimate Lab is supported by outside money, groups with a climate advocacy agenda.
Our region deserves factual, rigorous journalism on this important subject. Climate Lab is failing to provide it.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Cue Friederike Otto and her tea leaves…
When an extreme weather event occurs, people often ask: is climate change to blame?
https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/about/
Friederike says, you bet.
Ask Friederike, if it’s an extremely nice day- is that also due to human caused climate change? After all, a really nice day- might, if AGW is true, be colder and not so extremely nice. Ergo, AGW must then be the cause of that perfect day!
Friederike Otto has a doctorate in the philosophy of science, now working at Grantham
Shes the Freud of the climatologists, able to explain their dreams
I’ll bet she wears a slip, purchased from Freud.
Neil deGrasse Tyson has a doctorate in the philosophy of astrophysics.
I think we need less philosophers.
I guess you don’t know what Ph.D stands for!
In most cases it stands for Post Hole Digger.
We would be better served if we were to use a ‘magic 8 ball’
And Mt Everest is growing because of global warming, or just the opposite.
A young Lyndon Johnson applied for a teaching job in Texas.
He was asked if he thought the world to be round or flat.
He answered: I can explain that either way.
He was hired
True story
Friederike deals in circular logic. Climate is defined as 30 years of weather in a given area.
Therefore, weather change must occur for 30 years before climate can change, by definition.
Claiming climate change causes climate change is disingenuous.
What about Kilimanjaro? or Look a squirrel!
“Another
error-filledterror-filled article by the Seattle Times Climate Lab, a journalistic enterprise funded by climateactivistspsychotics.”Fixed it.
Misplaced reply to Rud
Nice post. It is amazing that they publish alarming stuff so easily refuted.
Really lessens their credibility.
How can you lessen NO credibility, Rud?
(to answer my own question, I guess there is a “tipping point” where credibility lessened to below zero becomes “Kamala”)
However Rud, the data presented in the article was not refuted, no evidence was presented to show that the summit of Mt Ranier was not now lower in height. The ice summit is now lower than it used to be, a fact not addressed other than to say it can’t be due to melting. Although they admit that the ice and glaciers are melting further down the mountain but don’t seem to realize that ice can flow in response to that.
There’s also no evidence presented by the Seattle Times that this is unusual in any way.
Since when is the summit of a mountain measured to the snow or ice covering the actual mountain? This would obviously be highly variable. It would be like measuring water depth in an ocean harbor without taking the tide into account. The summit of Rainier should be to rock, not snow or ice.
Since 1956 apparently. Check this out:
?d=1501×2048
So time to panic now?
60 Minutes was caught changing Kamala’s stupid answers into less stupid. The media doesn’t care.
All sit down interviews are shortened to fit the time between ads available
What you are comparing is a separate program Face the Nation showed one answer while Sixty Minutes showed a different answer
Interviewers repeat many questions as the person gives a waffly answer, so they get repeat answers too
As Phil. noted it was not refuted. There is an observation that the summit has been lowered. That is not refuted here. The rest is theory.
The focus on freezing point is narrow minded. Absent glacier flow, the main loss mechanism for ice below freezing is sublimation. And that is highly temperature sensitive. Here is a table of vapor pressures:
How was this lowering caused by CO2?
Although sublimation does cause snow and ice loss, remember that Rainier is an active volcano with very warm ground in most areas.
Is, and has been for a long time. What is different now?
So CO2 warming is warmer than volcanic warming. Got it.
Well… it’s been that way always. Nothing is different.
Nothing. As the photo’s Phil posted above indicate the amount of snow/ice cover variers substantially over time. It appears that the elevation of Mt. Rainier’s peak could change substantially year-to-year or season to season. Apparently an avalanche could reduce the peak by many feet within a few minutes. Snow and ice are ephemeral, rock endures.
Get it through your THICK skull that Dr. Mass never disputed the slight reduction in elevation, he is disputing that it is melting due to a warming atmosphere which he soundly debunked using official data.
You continue to be dishonest on this that exposes your disregard for the truth.
They have credibility? Who would of thunk?
I welcome these Global Warming (false) narratives, in that I hope the True Believers rush up to the top of Ranier and have a party, and just for fun, call it the DONNER PARTY. Waiting….waiting….
What the article said was that the ice cap had shrunk and provided data to corroborate the claim, no evidence has been produced to contradict that in this article!
Again, no indication that this is unusual in any way.
Is there land movement? It is a volcano, after all.
That occurred to me as well.
This is a very active area geologically.
Active volcanoes do experience inflation and deflation due to volcanic processes. As you might expect this is closely monitored by the USGS as Rainier is one of the most dangerous volcanoes in the Cascades; if not the most dangerous in the US. Just look up Osceola Mud Flow. https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mount-rainier/
Well lowest since 1956 so not usual on that timeframe, the rock remains in the same place and the ice has declined relatively.
How do GPS readings compare with older non-gps readings?
Cant compare as they were done using different methods which could have had more error +or-
“Gilbertson’s findings are sound, said Larry Signani, who headed the first survey of the mountain using GPS in 1988 for the Army Corps of Engineers and again several times in the subsequent decades.
The original elevation of 14,410 came from the first-ever survey of the mountain in 1956, Signani said. And while the following measurements varied slightly as the techniques changed throughout the years, the elevation remained pretty much unchanged.
But a survey in 2010 started to show that the Columbia Crest had sunk several feet, Signani said. The formation has clearly melted away even more in the years since, which Gilbertson’s findings confirm, he said.”
The ice at summit doesn’t have to melt to decrease. Elevation levels could change if seasonal wind shifts from the continent bring dryer winds across to the glaciers. Sublimation will occur in sub-freezing temperatures regardless, like ice cubes will disappear in a freezer.
Yes. Blame the wind I say
Since there is reduced air pressure at the summit, sublimation is good candidate to account for loss of snow.
No what it said was that the top of Mt. Rainier had reduced due to global warming. What Clif is saying is that it may well have reduced but GW was not the cause.
It said that it was caused by “melting as the atmosphere warms”. Cliff confirmed that it was warming lower down “let me be clear, warming lower down on Mt. Rainier (say at 6000 ft) is happening and that could impact snow and glaciers well down the mountain”. So the atmosphere there is warming, Cliff thinks it has to warm above the freezing point to effect the ice cap, as Nick points out that’s not necessary as sublimation could have the indicated effect. Cliff is making a classic Tony Heller mistake.
Cliff Mass thinks Ice melts a 0 deg C. Why some people are surprised by this is beyond me.
The article states the lower elevation of the ice cap on Mt Rainier is caused by atmospheric warming.
The article makes no mention of ice sublimation, so any reference to that in regard to debunking the article premise is a red herring.
The Times claims that it is a WARMING atmosphere causing the decline but that is refuted by data showing it is below freezing at the summit 99.98% of the time while Dr. Mass says it could be reduced snowfall as a cause.
He never disputes a small elevation decline, he was disputing that warming atmosphere temperature was the cause, read the article again since you missed some details obviously.
I read the article and the original Seattle Times article and didn’t miss anything, Cliff didn’t understand how a warming atmosphere (which he acknowledged) could effect the ice without going above freezing.
Do you know the difference between “affect” and “effect”?
Warming well below the summit. You’re conveniently ignoring that. Mass addressed what the Times article said, that’s all. They said the ice loss at the peak was due to warming air temps. It was not. It’s pretty simple.
Mass acknowledged that the atmosphere in the vicinity was warming, he was just obsessed with it being above the freezing point at the summit, which is not necessary for reduction of the icecap, a classic Tony Heller mistake!
LOL, you didn’t establish that at all neither did the Seattle times who specifically states that it is MELTING due to warmer atmosphere which Dr. Mass duly refuted showing the temperature data that it is below freezing 99.98% of the time.
You need better glasses…..
So 14,400 +/- a snowbank….
Actually an icecap
Wow 22 redthumbers who can’t accept facts!
There were lots of forest fires last year in the North West. Does any black carbon soot deposit on the snow?
John McPhee’s “Annals of the Former World” on continent building is a rich but rewarding slog through geological time (700 pages). The continents and seas rise and fall. Mountains are pushed up and crumble. Great writing.
Now the highest point is ROCK (Source #1)! Not ICE like it was 18 years ago. Anyhow it is a Volcano. How about if the internal heat from the mountain melt the12 feet thick ice some years ago? (Source #2). And if not internal heat, then warm athmospheric river is the possible, but much less likely event.
Source #1: ”Dr. Gilbertson said. “On the Southwest rim I measured I measured 14,399.6, so about 14,400. So, that’s now the highest point I’ve measured on the mountain and that’s rock.” From Seattle University:
https://www.seattleu.edu/newsroom/2024/a-shrinking-mountain.php
Source #2: Is it venting, Scientists say no! https://youtu.be/J1CLU_UQdSU?si=zSDKRlQv-VfPK5PY
Yep and is why snowfall will eventually overtake snow melt and the current interglacial comes to an end.
Snowfall trend at Paradise Motel is upward:
Ranier will reduce its top sooner or later. You can kiss Seattle goodbye when it does.
Very nice Cliff.
“The Seattle Times Climate Lab repeatedly publishes climate-related articles that are incorrect. Articles that hype or misinform about climate change.”
lying is not okay. The Seattle Times Climate Lab needs to be held accountable as well as all other lying mainstream media outfits.
A late response to some comments here.
Cliff Mass specifically cites Seattle Times saying Mt. Rainier is declining due to climate change (ice cap melting, as the ST article specifically claimed). He showed that could NOT be true.
He never claimed Rainier summit was not now a bit lower—that is unknowable since the accuracy of earlier metrics does not compare to those later.
As to Kilimanjaro, sublimation from deforestation is the reason see essay ‘Snows of Kilimanjaro’ in ebook Blowing Smoke for a pictorial depiction. Sublimation from deforestation does NOT apply to Rainier.
Amazing, Cliff points out a basic climate alarm untruth, and nitpickers try to lessen the blow using irrelevant (to the post) arguments. Whack a mole again.
“Cliff Mass specifically cites Seattle Times saying Mt. Rainier is declining due to climate change (ice cap melting, as the ST article specifically claimed). He showed that could NOT be true”.
No he didn’t, he showed he doesn’t understand the sublimation process and assumed that the summit temperature needed to be above the freezing point for the summit to decrease. The Seattle Times didn’t use the term ‘climate change’ they said it was due to the atmosphere warming, something Cliff agreed with saying “warming lower down on Mt. Rainier (say at 6000 ft) is happening”. .
“He never claimed Rainier summit was not now a bit lower—that is unknowable since the accuracy of earlier metrics does not compare to those later.”
I take it you didn’t read this: ““Gilbertson’s findings are sound, said Larry Signani, who headed the first survey of the mountain using GPS in 1988 for the Army Corps of Engineers and again several times in the subsequent decades.
The original elevation of 14,410 came from the first-ever survey of the mountain in 1956, Signani said. And while the following measurements varied slightly as the techniques changed throughout the years, the elevation remained pretty much unchanged.
But a survey in 2010 started to show that the Columbia Crest had sunk several feet, Signani said. The formation has clearly melted away even more in the years since, which Gilbertson’s findings confirm, he said.”
Also: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/10/13/is-the-top-of-mount-rainier-shrinking-due-to-global-warming/#comment-3981351
Please explain how warming NOT at the summit still melts the summit.
Warming lower down the mountain implies warming at the summit (lapse rate), it doesn’t have to be above the freezing point to reduce the ice. As shown in the table posted by Nick a temperature increase will increase the equilibrium vapor pressure over the ice therefore the ice volume will reduce.
It is not demonstrated at all that a reduction in the elevation of a piece of ice near the summit of a 14,400 ft tall volcano is due to “melting”. As I explained in a more detailed comment below, there are several processes at least that could cause the reduction in elevation at the top of a piece of ice perched at the top of a mountain … lesser snowfall (which varies year to year and decade to decade regardless of any warming or cooling); ice slippage (due to gravity – snow and ice routinely slips in mountainous areas in the winter with peak snow pack, think “avalanche”, just due to the weight of the ice, a steep downhill slope, and/ or compaction of the ice and snow below it, and due to seismic activity – with Rainier being an active volcano with regular seismic activity); and due to sublimation of the solid ice to airborne vapor, a typical response to sunlight and low relatively humidity and high winds – all of which are present at the summit of a 14,400 ft tall mountain.
Rud, why did you bring up Kilimanjaro?
Evidence?? We don’t need no stinkin’ evidence.
Every year 3rd week of August I fly out to vancouver island for a fishing trip, this is two years in a row that there was still first year, white snow on top of the older grayer ice which means those coastal glaciers are growing.
Regardless of the regional recorded temperature record, which is only a proxy for temperatures at the peak of Mount Rainier, there are actual recorded height measurements available for the mountain. Originally established more than a century ago via survey triangulation, the official height at the top of what is called “Columbia Crest”, which is known to be covered with ice year around was 14,410 ft above MSL. More recent reported measurements https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2024/10/mount-rainier-shrinking-according-new-measurements indicate that Columbia Crest peak ice has indeed been reduced in elevation, and another point that is rock rather than ice based is now the actual summit of the mountain at 14,399.6 =/- 0.1 ft based upon GPS survey quality data (the plus or minus of 0.1 ft is the universal standard of precision for official GPS land surveys). And that the top of the Columbia Crest ice pack is now 14,389.2 ft Indicating that Columbia Crest elevation has been reduced by 20 ft since 1910.
Now, do these measurements indicate “melting”? Not necessarily. Ice thickness will vary year to year due to the volume of snowfall at the peak. Ice also sublimates (going directly from solid state to water vapor, a process that is greatly accelerated at very high elevations due to the relatively low relative as well as absolute humidity. Dew point decreases at a rate of approx. 1 deg F per 1,000 ft change, dew point being the temperature at which water vapor condenses to liquid water. High winds also tend to increase ice sublimation, and the average wind speed at an elevation of 14,400 ft. is relatively high though I have not found any anemometer data for that location. Aviation winds aloft data for specific locations, such as nearby Seattle indicate wind speeds at 14 K feet somewhere in excess of 40 mph for today, which is probably a fairly typical day.
Other factors can also affect the elevation of an ice pack at the summit of a mountain, such as snow and ice moving downhill due to gravity, including abrupt avalanches, as well as seismic activity that can cause both ice slides as well as compaction of the underlying ice. Mount Rainier is an active cone volcano in the “ring of fire” surrounding the Pacific basin, and is obviously seismically active.
So simply assuming melting is the only explanation for reduction in peak elevation of a piece of ice at the top of a mountain is unsupported, and it must be assumed that sublimation and ice movement are likely to be significant contributors to any reductions in peak surface elevation. But this is altogether typical of warmunists and their eagerness to attribute every change in the physical world to man-caused global warming.
Seattle had substantially colder and drier than normal weather from February through June in 2024.
Since 01-JAN-2024, Seatle rain fall is 22% below normal.
By the way – “Climate Lab” dis-information editorials are on the front page of the Seattle Times at least one day per week.