http://www.eturbonews.com/21762/snow-slowly-building-mount-kilimanjaro
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “the science is absolutely certain”
- Electricity Is Proportional To CO2
- AI Climate Math
- AI Math
- Al Gore’s Arctic Forecast
- Mann Says He Was Correct
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “under the Intermediate Scenario”
- “carbon emissions may have now peaked”
- Record Arctic Sea Ice Growth
- “4th Hottest Summer”
- Killing Joshua Trees To Save Them
- NASA Sea Level
- “getting smaller”
- “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Rapidly Accelerating Sea Level Rise
- Technology Advances
- “The Hour Of Decision”
- “fair & equitable”
- Michael Mann Continues His War
- Time Travelling Satellites
- Time Traveling Satellites
- Adult Content On X
- The Climate Of 1923
- Arctic Report Card
Recent Comments
- Terry Shipman on Electricity Is Proportional To CO2
- arn on “the science is absolutely certain”
- czechlist on Electricity Is Proportional To CO2
- arn on Electricity Is Proportional To CO2
- Gordon Vigurs on Electricity Is Proportional To CO2
- Gordon Vigurs on AI Climate Math
- Greg in NZ on AI Math
- Greg in NZ on Electricity Is Proportional To CO2
- conrad ziefle on Electricity Is Proportional To CO2
- Disillusioned on Mann Says He Was Correct
That’s gotta hurt.
Steve,
Yeah. Who could possibly question the scientific qualifications of a reporter from eTurbo news! I assume this will be included in the science section of next IPCC report.
I’m not qualified to see snow. It might be an illusion.
How about making a simple counterpoint to the entry instead?
I find a big hole in the article,but refrained from pointing it out,for the purpose of waiting for people like you,to provide a reason on why we should not be hasty with the snow report.
As usual you flopped big time.
You are so clever.
It would probably be more accurate than some the WWF stuff the IPCC usually peddles.
Don’t you mean “more accurate than ALL of the WWF stuff”?
If it comes from the WWF, it is a lie. Period.
Guess the date:
“BUT the coming of the new climate is most noticeable above the world’s snow lines. Glaciers present the most striking evidence. The American geographer, F. E. Matthes, has reported that “glaciers in nearly all parts of the world receded regularly during the last sixty years but especially rapidly during the 1930-40 decade.”
All glaciers examined from Greenland through Scandinavia to Europe are shrinking. And the shrinkage is not limited to high latitudes. Some glaciers in the European Alps have vanished completely. In East Africa, the glaciers on three high volcanoes—Kilimanjaro, Mt. Kenya and Ruwenzori have been diminishing since they were first observed in 1880. The vast Muir Glacier in Alaska’s Glacier Bay has retreated a full 14 miles since 1902.”
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/18233023?
And the date?
September 1951
Odd that it’s remained an icon of global warming long after it was shown that the snow/ice losses had very little to do with any temperature changes. The bigger question is if we’ll see similar behavior with the Arctic? If so, as suyts said above “that’s gotta hurt”. Honestly, if the Arctic rebounds significantly over the next five years, it could nearly completely kill the movement.
-Scott
scott,
depends on what you mean by “rebounds” if ice coverage and multi year ice goes to level from 30 years ago, and stays there for a while I think you are absolutely correct.
It took a lot longer than 5 years to fully recover from the mid 20thC low point and will do so again.
However even a partial rebound over the next 5 years create big problems for the alarmists.
I suspect though that they would blame it on “short term weather” and carry on regardless. There is far too much invested in the global warming movement for them to give up so easily.
…and a couple of years before that:
“GLACIER melting and disappearance in the Arctic regions has created a suspicion that the earth is becoming warmer…
Along the Rift Valley, in Africa, and in Central America, a retreat of glaciers has been noticed, and the signs of a changing climate are reinforced by the migration of fish in the North Atlantic to unusually high latitudes…
Spitzbergen, which was open to navigation only three months a year not long ago, is open for seven months now. To cap it all, land which the Vikings cultivated in Greenland and Iceland (which has been under ice for 1000 years) is bare again
now.”
The concept of “Global Warming” had been identified back in 1950, but unlike today, the sane minds clearly prevailed over the insane ones:
“Other thinkers on the subject point to the great amount of volcanic activity in recent years, and suggest that the air percentage of carbon dioxide is increasing as a result.”
..and this:
“When the scientists find out, there will be the problem of what to do about it. The answer may be that they can do nothing except “wait and see.”
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/48615215?
~January 1950
Glacier advances and retreats within 20 years:
“WAR DEAD GIVEN UP BY GLACIER.
The melting of a glacier 9,000 feet up on Mt. Adanello in the Dolimites, has revealed the bodies of one Italian and 15 Austrian troopers, who were presumably killed in an engagement on May 6, 1916. All bodies were in an excellent state of preservation.”
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2429745?
~23 Sept 1936
clearly the answer is to assign all climate scientists “climate commissars” to make sure that they don’t miss the snow on Kilimanjaro and read all the newspaper articles about global warming in the 50’s. it worked for the Soviets with the military in 1918-22. I think I know who would be my pick for Climate commissar Czar!
It would be great if climate scientists actually knew something about history before they made hysterical historical claims
Wrong model. Read “1984.” Winston Smith’s job was to go through the old newspapers and remove or revise all the inconvenient items. That’s the model that the “hide the decline” folks have in mind for us.
Nice how they still have to say ‘climate change’ as a causal effect from the melting ice (1st para).
That’s right – I forgot…. it was (anthropogenic) climate change that caused the snow to melt, but it will be natural variation that brings it back.
Steve,
I was replying to Tony.
While the article was encouraging.It was very spare on specific details.
Notice that Tony never did explain his objection to the article.
That means he is still running on B.S.
Sunset,
TOTAL BS. Imagine questioning a tourism magazines science. After all in order to get “proof” of something just send the reporter there. I am surprised Steve is not warning people in the lowlands of Tanzania about the imminent glacierization of the entire mountain based on this exacting information.
What could anyone possibly object to in this article? It fully summarizes all the studies related to snow on Kilimanjaro, integrates it with original ground breaking research and comes to an ironclad conclusion that incorporates every factor perfectly.
I’m not qualified to see snow. Only a professional climate scientist with a computer model can see snow.
Steve,
you are of course right. the idea of having scientists decide these things is ridiculous. After all scientists just sit in offices and invent stuff based on computer models with data that they just change at will to fit their theories.
I mean really. Compare your your penetrating comprehensive link to this shoddy piece of work from where your arch enemies, Christie and Spencer work.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110305112136.htm
“A tiny fraction of that ice cap still exists. Surveys in the 1880s estimated that glaciers covered about 20 square kilometers on the mountain. From 1912 to now, the glacier area on Kilimanjaro has decreased from 12 square kilometers to less than two.”
and then there is all this gobbledegook about forests, surface roughness, air patterns, cloud formation that just confuses the issue.
I reiterate my call for climate change commissars, and they should have NO scientific training whatsoever, so that they don’t get fooled by all that extraneous garbage.
Gawad!
I knew it was a tourism magazine.
It really does not matter if it came from bachelor father magazine.It is the DETAILS and sources in the article that matters.
I pointed out that the article was “It was very spare on specific details.” That means I was not really satisfied with what it stated.
I want more detailed information to be convinced that this is recovery trend to get excited over.
Gee,stop being a dick!
Sunsett,
You don’t get it do you? DETAILS are what confuses the issue. A tourist magazine reporter sees more snow= recovery complete.
Anything else is just scientists groveling for grant money.
I hear from the leading scientists in the world that all the Himalayan glaciers will be gone in 24 years.
Steve,
astute of you to bring up an issue where the IPCC admitted a mistake. It is too bad everyone in the climate debate will not admit when they make a mistake about something they have harped on for months and then are proven to be completely wrong.
I’m sorry. Manhattan really is underwater.
Steve,
too bad Hansen never said that. But there WAS someone who repeated over and over again false information that he DID say it, when the actual quote has been available for 10 years.
I hacked the Salon web site and made the interview up.
Steve,
that’s NOTHING. I tracked down every book that contained the actual interview and scribbled in the new lies so it wouldn’t embarrass Hansen. And I bribed Reiss to lie as well. You know the book that is highlighted in the Salon article where the information came from? The book that was printed BEFORE the Salon article.
I really love that you keep letting me bring this up. it is most gentlemanly of you.
All of hansen’s forecasts have come true.
Steve
But your constant insistence that Hansen made the quote never will.
Hansen never made any of those quotes about 5-20 meters sea level rise, hottest temps since the dinosaurs, …. they were all fabricated by dishonest newspaper reporters to frame him.
I wonder if Al Gore will tell us that this increase in snow & ice on the peak of Mt. Kilimanjaro is entirely consistent with what they’ve been telling us all along.
Kilimanjaro’s Summit Glaciers
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N39/C1.php
Back to Africa: Kilimanjaro Update
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/07/28/back-to-africa-kilimanjaro-update/
Then we have this:
ABSTRACT
In recent years, Kilimanjaro and its vanishing glaciers have become an ‘icon’ of global warming, attracting broad interest.In this paper, a synopsis of (a) field observations made by the authors and (b) climatic data as reported in the literature
(proxy and long-term instrumental data) is presented to develop a new concept for investigating the retreat of Kilimanjaro’s glaciers, based on the physical understanding of glacier–climate interactions. The concept considers the peculiarities of the mountain and implies that climatological processes other than air temperature control the ice recession in a direct manner. A drastic drop in atmospheric moisture at the end of the 19th century and the ensuing drier climatic conditionscare likely forcing glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro. Future investigations using the concept as a governing hypothesis will require research at different climatological scales. Copyright ? 2004 Royal Meteorological Society.
http://www.geo.umass.edu/faculty/bradley/kaser2004.pdf
Similar to what the link I posted said.
Hard to believe we agree on something@!
Many climate ‘pundits’ including Dr Kevin Trenberth ( IPCC Lead author 2007) have been saying that Mt Kilimanjaro snowcap could disappear by 2020!
It would be interesting to wait & see if the Kilimanjaro snowcap does indeed start to disappear by 2020! The chances of its disappearance completely by 2020 look smaller and smaller now.
Quite possibly, this Mt Kilimanjaro ‘scare’ may bite the dust just as the scare about ‘Himalayan glaciers melting away by 2035 as claimed by IPCC 2007′ is now biting the dust! The author who first mentioned about “Himalayan glacier melt-down by 2035’ is NOW in total denial about ever making such a claim!
Oh, the wonderdul science of global warming & glacier meltdown scare!
Madhav Khandekar Expert Reviewer 2007 Climate Change
The photo shows some snow. Assuming it’s a recent photo, it at least shows that there isn’t no snow, per the dire past warnings of “climate experts”.
I wonder how much glacier melting through the 20th century is tied to the global brightening/dimming/brightening cycles of 1920-40, 1960-80, 1990+?
I’m sorry. Manhattan really is underwater.
No – it’s rising.
http://www.racontours.com/archive/coastline_anim.php
The bitterness and disappointment is tangible when things don’t seem to be following the AGW line. People must have a catastrophe. It’s what they live for…how ironic.
Add this news about Kilimanjaro. It turns out Lonnie Thompson’s predicitons were a bit off:-
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/03/snows_of_kilimanjaro_defy_global_warming_predictions.html
Snows of Kilimanjaro defy global warming predictions
[snip]
“Unfortunately, we made the prediction. I wish we hadn’t,” says Douglas R. Hardy, a UMass geoscientist who was among 11 co-authors of the paper in the journal Science that sparked the pessimistic Kilimanjaro forecast. “None of us had much history working on that mountain, and we didn’t understand a lot of the complicated processes on the peak like we do now.”
[cont.]
Tiny,
Good grief,
Not ANOTHER scientist who is willing to actually admit a mistake!
Too bad we don’t have more people like him in this climate debate! People who when shown clear proof that they were wrong about something are willing to admit it, even when they repeated the misinformation over and over again.
Eventually they had to admit that they didn’t know as much about the glacier as they thought or end up like Baghdad Bob. It is no measure of humility to admit your prediction was wrong when it’s only four years away from it being obvious.
The new tactic is to push predictions so far into the future that the scientists will be retired before they have to account for any mistakes.
Maybe in future climate predications should be made in French quatrains, there’s a whole bunch of experts on those.
That way the prediction is right no matter the real event.
Gorestradamus?
More like Borestradamus. Doomsday prophets are boring. Since known history a multitude of doomsayers have appeared. Weird cultural phenomenon that. Obviously one day they’re all going to be right. The world as we know it will end.
Just their timescales are a bit off
Obviously it is snowing more up there. Glaciers need continued replenishment by precipitation or they will disappear. Gravity has a lot to answer for.
OK…so it appears what Lonnie Thompson is saying is that they had no real idea about what they were talking about when they made the prediction, yet they went ahead and made it anyway.
I’m seeing a pattern here.
To me it appears that Lonnie Thompson is a heretic who will never receive any more grant money because he has spoken against the religion of Global Warming.
therefore if he DOES receive grant money that means the religion is not as controlled by the forces of Gore as some people here believe.
Of course the fact that he is a scientist and admits to making mistakes separates him from others who will not admit even the most clear cut obvious irrefutable mistake , so he gets a bit of credit in my book.
Your fly on the wall was present when Reiss spoke to Hansen, so you are privy to the details of their conversation.
Steve,
Oh. maybe you are not aware of this but there is actually a BOOK that was written by Reiss, that has the details from the conversation from the actual notes he took. And the book was published before the interview that you quoted form dozens of times in this blog. The interview that had the book prominently emblazoned upon the webpage, that you and mr. WUWT and numerous others never bothered to check.
This is also quite funny as you and others accused ME of questioning the veracity of the article, which I never did to my eternal shame. Even though NONE of Hansen’s writings or public statements said anything like that quote. Not even the newspaper clippings that you post say what that quote attributed to him. Yet you can’t even admit being wrong on this one thing that is so blatantly obvious that you are wrong about.
I’ll put you down for Manhattan being underwater in 29 years.
Steve,
I NEVER said I agreed with that assessment.
I just wondered if it was ever possible for you to admit you were wrong about something.
Are you completely daft?
My capacity for “forgiveness of an error” in in direct proportion to the damage caused by the error.
In the case of these ridiculous alarmists, they are screaming about the sky falling before they fully understand the dynamics of gravity causing acorns to fall….costing billions of wasted taxpayer dollars in the process.
In my NCAA tournament bracket I predicted that Pitt would beat Butler in the second round and advance all the way to the finals. In retrospect I really wish I didn’t make that prediction, I hadn’t watched enough Pitt basketball to fully understand that they would choke. Nevertheless, it is my belief that Pitt will beat Butler in the NCAA Tournament, it did not happen this year as I originally predicted, but it will undoubtedly happen in the coming decades, it may be 10 yrs. from now or 50, it doesn’t really matter it will happen, I will be vindicated.
Petrossa,
So are you saying that the dozens of times Steve has talked about this quote instead of the actual science was quibbling? Funny that is what I kept saying.
glad we agree.
One area I might disagree is that if someone is unwilling to admit an irrefutable mistake, that makes them much less credible, since it shows they are not interested in the truth more than their ego or ideology
Geez. It’s the weather. Global warming? Weather. Global cooling? Weather. Climate change? Weather. Al Gore? Jackass screwing tax pagers out of their money, like most politicians.
It will always have snow, as long as Tanzania gets rain!