Science: Himalayan Glaciers Stable Since 1992

What happens when actual real world science replaces conjecture, computer models, and overwrought hysteria?

Working in the Nanga Parbat region of northern Pakistan…used a multi-temporal/multi-scale approach based on historical data, repeat photography and satellite imagery to develop a 70-year history of the behavior of that region’s Raikot Glacier…two German scientists report that visual comparison of repeat photography indicates “relatively small rates of recession and surface changes over the last seven decades,” and they say that “in the 1994 image, no significant retreat of the glacier margin can be detected in comparison with 1985.”…they report that “glacier fluctuations over the past 70 years are characterized by retreat between the 1930s and 1950s, a marked advance between the 1950s and 1980s, and a relatively stable situation after 1992,” adding that “a general trend of reduced glacier thickness does not appear significant over the whole observation period.”” [Susanne Schmidt, Marcus Nusser 2009: Journal of Glaciology]

Damn you science, just damn you! (via C3 Headlines)

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

2 Responses to “Science: Himalayan Glaciers Stable Since 1992”

  1. Trish says:

    So, now the science is really in?????
    If I read this correctly, according to scientists, the ice fluctuates over time, but there is no sign of significant retreat, after the 90’s.
    Hmm, the 30’s to the 80’s were a real time of retreat.(of glacier ice)
    Dilemma is, there were far less pollutants in the world in the early part of the decades. And yet there is less retreat (warming) in the later, more current decades…in a time when there are far more people, and there is far more development worldwide. Seems to me that would (per their logic) constitute more warming, not less. Go figure.
    Who are these scientists anyway? I bet they are paid by Exxon Mobil. Or evil denier type Republicans.
    Or perhaps, they are just doing the scientist thing, and giving real data that was gleaned from real scientific tests.

  2. The true believers hate hen people actually usE the scientific method

Pirate's Cove