Alpine Glaciers Shrank Thousands Of Feet During NASA’s Coldest Years On Record

Alpine glaciers rapidly shrank  during the twenty years prior to 1902.

16 Aug 1902 – Alpine Glaciers Disappearing. – Trove

NASA says earth was cooling, and very cold during that time.

graph.png (1130×600)

NASA also says shrinking glaciers are proof of global warming.

Early Warning Signs of Global Warming: Glaciers Melting | Union of Concerned Scientists

Global warming and global cooling both cause glaciers to melt.  Because, science.

Experts say Glacier National Park will be ice-free by 1948.

29 Dec 1923, Page 5 – at

And 2002

05 Mar 1952, Page 1 – The Post-Standard at

And 2020

No More Glaciers in Glacier National Park by 2020?

And 2044

Climate Change Threatens to Strip the Identity of Glacier National Park – The New York Times

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Alpine Glaciers Shrank Thousands Of Feet During NASA’s Coldest Years On Record

  1. Lasse says:

    Little ice age made snow stay and form glaciers.
    A catastrophe!
    Warming from cold days made climate more pleasant and more people survived, population grow and industrial revolution made us fat and lazy.
    Warming is a health problem but not a climate problem.

    • griff says:

      Many river systems depend on glacial meltwater… certainly the tourist economies of the Alps depend on snow/glaciers. Locally, this is a disaster, losing glaciers

      • Robertv says:

        Just ask Hannibal.

        Colder would kill the tourist economies. What is the Carbon Footprint of a ski resort ? Only those that have can afford to stay in a place like that, those filthy rich.

      • Gator says:

        And nobody died from lack of water during warmer times Ms Griff. We have plenty of water, and we know where to find it now. The only people without water now, lack it because you haters refuse to spend money on real problems. Real people are dying right now because your high priests insist on spending resources on a nonissue.

        These were the bad projects. As you might see the bottom of the list was climate change. This offends a lot of people, and that’s probably one of the things where people will say I shouldn’t come back, either. And I’d like to talk about that, because that’s really curious. Why is it it came up? And I’ll actually also try to get back to this because it’s probably one of the things that we’ll disagree with on the list that you wrote down.

        The reason why they came up with saying that Kyoto — or doing something more than Kyoto — is a bad deal is simply because it’s very inefficient. It’s not saying that global warming is not happening. It’s not saying that it’s not a big problem. But it’s saying that what we can do about it is very little, at a very high cost. What they basically show us, the average of all macroeconomic models, is that Kyoto, if everyone agreed, would cost about 150 billion dollars a year. That’s a substantial amount of money. That’s two to three times the global development aid that we give the Third World every year. Yet it would do very little good. All models show it will postpone warming for about six years in 2100. So the guy in Bangladesh who gets a flood in 2100 can wait until 2106. Which is a little good, but not very much good. So the idea here really is to say, well, we’ve spent a lot of money doing a little good.

        And just to give you a sense of reference, the U.N. actually estimate that for half that amount, for about 75 billion dollars a year, we could solve all major basic problems in the world. We could give clean drinking water, sanitation, basic healthcare and education to every single human being on the planet. So we have to ask ourselves, do we want to spend twice the amount on doing very little good? Or half the amount on doing an amazing amount of good? And that is really why it becomes a bad project. It’s not to say that if we had all the money in the world, we wouldn’t want to do it. But it’s to say, when we don’t, it’s just simply not our first priority.

        Why do you hate poor brown people and Griff?

        • Robertv says:

          And again and again it is shown that when societies become richer, the population decreases without the mass killings the ‘greens’ prefer.

      • spike55 says:

        So now they get rain instead, griffool !!!

        You do know climate changes , NATURALLY , don’t you

        Or are you one of those “Climate Change DENIERS”?

        • Disillusioned says:

          The trained seal, poll parrot BIG LIE to come forth from that type of question is the proverbial, ‘The kind of climate change™ happening now is happening faster now than at any time in history … and has a human fingerprint all over it.’

          (The fingerprint is of the BIG LIAR’s middle finger.)

      • Robertv says:

        Don’t forget The Alps biggest export product.

        Which uses milk from the by greens so hated cow.

  2. griff says:

    And of course the rate of decline has increased since 1980 and they are on course to go completely.

    General summary

    Detailed summary of the decline -37 consecutive years of lost mass.

    • Lasse says:

      Global brightening has given us 10% more sunshine since 1983.(SMHI-Sweden)
      15% more sun hours. This affects the spring snow cover. Spring comes earlier.
      A health hazard if You have white skin. But good for farmers!

    • spike55 says:

      Natural warming oyut of the COLDEST period in 10,000 years.

      A period during which most of those glaciers can into being.

      Or were you IGNORANT of climate history yet again, griffool.

      You are just a low end CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER

    • spike55 says:

      Why just choose 37 years, griffool

      Let’s look at Mt Baker glaciers.

      • Bob Hoye says:

        I used to ski “Mt. Baker” in the early 1960s.
        Actually, the ski area was on Mt. Shuksan which seemed to lean against Baker.
        In looking it up, Baker ski area holds the record for total snowfall in a season.
        1140 inches in 1998-1999.

    • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N says:

      Why would anyone be so intent on keeping water solid unless it’s for purely political points and $$$ scoring having already brainwashed the masses into believing a frozen river is somehow better for fish?

      Hope your dreams come true Griff and the water pipes in your house go glacial. That might learn ya somethin’.

    • Gator says:

      Ms Griff, you are so FOS.

      IF you really cared about people, you would quit your rabid march to mass genocide, and you would stop hating poor brown people. But you do not care about anything other than your sick leftist agenda. You now know the truth, for many months now I have shown you the consequences of your campaigning, it is causing millions to starve to death every year.

      So stop pretending to care about your fellow man, and just admit that in your world poor brown people are better off dead.

      • Robertv says:

        If you are looking for a racist find a progressive. They could not survive without the ‘Free Phone’ people. So they will NEVER get them out of poverty.

    • tonyheller says:

      Scientists say Glacier National Park will be ice-free by 1948

    • Bob Hoye says:

      There is an old saying in physics that too many “warmers” seem to rely upon:

      “If you keep your data-base short enough ot will fit your theory.”

    • Snowleopard says:

      @ Grif

      “And of course the rate of decline has increased since 1980 and they are on course to go completely”

      Well Duuuh!

      The bottom point of the PDO cycle occurred just about then, so what would you expect??

      Plot the “rate of decline” from 1934 to get a better picture, You need at least sixty plus years so you can see the effect of the PDO cycle. It would be better to have more. Points taken approx. sixty years apart will show the actual warming out of the little ice age.

      If you think CO2 is a major factor compare glacier loss from 1838-1898 with 1958-2018. I think you will find much greater loss in the first period when almost all agree human emitted CO2 was not significant.

  3. arn says:

    The more real data we get about real climate of the last century(s)
    the more we will see that any (let’s say 30 year) period could have been used
    to “prove” global cooling or global warming.

    The best proove are still the islands-neither they nor their populations are disaopearing as result of AGW and sea level rise,as there are no results,
    except some parasitic examples who take money to be compensated for global warming while there is nothing to compensate as soon as we take a closer look.

  4. billtoo says:

    i just want to know if they ever found otzi’s snow shoes.

  5. DM says:

    Reinforcing today’s point: On the other side of the earth, AK glaciers also retreated during the late 1800s and early 1900s. In fact, the Exit Glacier’s 1889-1914 annual pace of RETREAT was more than 1.2x the 1993-2015 pace. For more info, see Tony’s prior post

    FYI, I visited Exit Glacier in June 2018. One of the more stunning features is the magnitude of the retreat from 1889 to 1914. About 30% of the glacier’s total retreat (1815-2015) occurred between 1889 & 1914. In contrast, 1889-1914 accounts for only 12.5% of the 200 year time span. Date markers along the approach road and hiking trail mark the retreat.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.