Glaciers are still shrinking from global warming

Almost always, truth runs deeper than a single shallow newspaper story. Especially when the subject is global warming, a subject that has been studied in depth by climate scientists.

This morning Google News led me to a Christian Science Monitor story, "Global warming mystery: some Himalayan glaciers getting bigger." Yes, but only some. And not a lot bigger.

Then I came across another more inclusive story in the Guardian by Jonathan Bamber, director of the Bristol Glaciology Centre, "The glaciers are still shrinking -- and rapidly." 

With glaciers and ice sheets covering such a diverse range of latitudes (from the tropics to the poles) and altitudes (from sea level to over 6,000 metres), it is not surprising that there are regional variations in their behaviour. Such variability should not, however, distract from the broader and more important story unfolding, which is one of profound and likely irreversible changes to global land and sea ice cover. Taken as a whole, the evidence for sustained changes to the cryosphere is clear.

The impacts these changes are having on water resources, sea-level rise and climate feedbacks are already observable and significant. Some recent predictions of the increase in sea levels by 2100 exceed one metre. Loss of Arctic sea ice results in enhanced warming of the Arctic Ocean due to a strong positive feedback.

Most glaciologists believe we are witnessing unprecedented changes to land and sea ice. The burning question is not if, but how fast, land and sea ice will disappear, and what we can do to mitigate and adapt to these changes.

That's the deeper truth. Global warming is real. It's happening. And we've got to mitigate and adapt to it.

Comments

[wayne]

It's planet X fault :D

[Willie R]

Mitigation of human-caused climate change involves the reduction of the release of carbon into the atmosphere. Apparently, that is not going to happen until all governments can agree upon an equitable distribution of the hardships involved in achieving this reduction. And we all know nothing is going to happen unless some conditions of deprivation are forced upon populations by way of law. And those who will feel the effects of such mitigation are those of us who enjoy the privileged lifestyle of freedom of mobility.

Outlawing gas-guzzling SUV's and incandescent light bulbs will not even make a dent in total carbon release. Energy rationing will destroy the economy, because the "economy" consists of using up energy.

It seems the the USA's current method of mitigation is to keep all third-world countries on the defensive so that their energies are used up in self-defense projects rather than infrastructure improvements that would mobilize their populations. Asian Indians and Chinese are far better off behind a water buffalo-powered cart than behind the wheel of a fossil-fueled vehicle.

We can semi-confidently predict the likely progression of events connected with global warming. The arguments now center around whether there is enough time to develop renewable energy sources before much of the globe becomes uninhabitable for those without enormous amounts of money.

Pro-active climate change proponents say that it's time to start suffering now. On the starship Enterprise, Lieutenant Worf often perplexed his shipmates when he uttered the Klingon expression: It is a good day to die.