One was
talking about glaciers melting, another about tropical forests in trouble.
On the walk your guide will
talk about glaciers, mountain building and the New Zealand climate.
These days, there is a lot of
talk about the glaciers melting due to global warming.
How dare
they talk about glaciers in the 1850's (um, see Skeptical Science), or that «impacts claimed by the IPCC to be likely in the distant future are claimed to be already evident.»
Not exact matches
His session allowed him to
talk about how human climate change in national parks is melting
glaciers, raising sea level, killing trees, and causing other impacts.
Nine - year - old Jairus Patterson correctly responds that he thinks it's
about how
glaciers move because the passage
talks a lot
about how many feet
glaciers can move per day.
We
talk about ice melter a lot and felt it was only right to address the ice melt of the
glaciers.
We're not
talking about your hotel room or expedition ship, but the mountains, national parks, ice cliffs and
glaciers aren't exactly Wi - Fi friendly.
She did take us over for a look at the face of the
glacier (which you can only get a good look at in a boat) and
talked about a bit of history.
However, the idea is simple, and I've
talked about this much in many presentations this winter: Take the amount of ice you need to get rid of from Greenland to raise sea level 2 m in the next century, reduce it by your best estimate of the amount that would be removed by surface mass balance losses, and try to push the rest out of the aggregate cross-sectional area of Greenland's marine - based outlet
glaciers.
Oerlemans's reconstruction of global temperatures (largely from mid latitude
glaciers) is entirely independent of the much
talked about temperature records from other paleoclimate proxy data (e.g. Moberg and others, Mann and others, Crowley and others).
Striking how this blog
talks about polar bears, hurricanes, melting
glaciers, melting sea ice, disappearing frogs, intelligence estimates, the snows of Kilimanjaro, drought, famine, insect infestations, too much rain, lack of rain, and who knows what else, and links it all to AGW.
We are
talking about a retreat that is unstoppable because we think we have enough evidence to say that these
glaciers will keep retreating for decades and even centuries to come....
As long as were
talking about the cryosphere, many (if not most) of the world's mountain
glaciers will be gone in 100 years:
We're not
talking about day trading here, we're
talking climate and long range trends like a steady decline in sea ice over decades, shrinking
glaciers world - wide, deforestation, etc..
How can we
talk to our readers
about glacial melt when the
glaciers are actually growing in the Karkoram region of Pakistan?
Penn State professor Sridhar Anandakrishnan
talks about the importance of studying «huge» Thwaites
glacier.
Now you say
glaciers and
talk about Greenland and Antarctica.
«In recent years many people have
talked about «the melting
glaciers of Kilimanjaro».
By the way, since we are
talking about retreating ice, here is a picture showing the retreat of the
Glaciers at beautiful Glacier Bay, Alaska.
The problem is in the difference between constructive criticism («hey, I think X is a better way to describe process Y than what the IPCC said... I'm going to publish a paper saying so, and give
talks about it, and maybe it X will be reflected in the next IPCC report) to destructive criticism («hey, one sentence in one chapter in WGII was wrong
about the melting of Himalayan
glaciers.
And if you are not sure
about the benefits of mitigation — I recently went to a
talk by an Indian scientist who spoke
about the melting Himalayan
glaciers and his fear that, if we don't stabilise the atmosphere, they will go and stop feeding those major rivers that provide water and make agriculture possible for 1 - 2 billion people.