Kilimanjaro's snow melt not sign of warming(algoreAlert)

[White_Male_Canada]

Oops, another Big Lie lil` all caught in again. 8)

Kilimanjaro's shrinking snow not sign of warming

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The snows of Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania have been diminishing for more than a century but probably not due to global warming, researchers report.

While the retreat of glaciers and mountaintop ice in the mid-latitudes -- where much of the world's human population lives -- is definitely linked to global climate change, the same cannot be said of Kilimanjaro, the researchers wrote in the July-August edition of American Scientist magazine.

Most of the retreat occurred before 1953, nearly two decades before any conclusive evidence of atmospheric warming was available, they wrote.

"It is certainly possible that the icecap has come and gone many times over hundreds of thousands of years," Mote, a climatologist, said in a statement.

[LG]

Oops, another Big Lie lil` all caught in again. 8)

Kilimanjaro's shrinking snow not sign of warming

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The snows of Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania have been diminishing for more than a century but probably not due to global warming, researchers report.

While the retreat of glaciers and mountaintop ice in the mid-latitudes -- where much of the world's human population lives -- is definitely linked to global climate change, the same cannot be said of Kilimanjaro, the researchers wrote in the July-August edition of American Scientist magazine.

Most of the retreat occurred before 1953, nearly two decades before any conclusive evidence of atmospheric warming was available, they wrote.

"It is certainly possible that the icecap has come and gone many times over hundreds of thousands of years," Mote, a climatologist, said in a statement.

Oh, so you can cut and paste? Incredible. Do you want a cookie for that?

Unlike you, some of us can actual read and understand the article the piece you quoted is based on rather than resort to googling "global warming" for random articles.

The Reuters article is an oversimplification. Try and get your head round the original paper as published in American Scientist that the news piece is based on.


The fact that the loss of ice on Mount Kilimanjaro cannot be used as proof of global warming does not mean that the Earth is not warming. There is ample and conclusive evidence that Earth's average temperature has increased in the past 100 years, and the decline of mid- and high-latitude glaciers is a major piece of evidence. But the special conditions on Kilimanjaro make it unlike the higher-latitude mountains, whose glaciers are shrinking because of rising atmospheric temperatures. Mass- and energy-balance considerations and the shapes of features all point in the same direction, suggesting an insignificant role for atmospheric temperature in the fluctuations of Kilimanjaro's ice.

It is possible, though, that there is an indirect connection between the accumulation of greenhouse gases and Kilimanjaro's disappearing ice: There is strong evidence of an association over the past 200 years or so between Indian Ocean surface temperatures and the atmospheric circulation and precipitation patterns that either feed or starve the ice on Kilimanjaro. These patterns have been starving the ice since the late 19th century—or perhaps it would be more accurate to say simply reversing the binge of ice growth in the third quarter of the 19th century. Any contribution of rising greenhouse gases to this circulation pattern necessarily emerged only in the last few decades; hence it is responsible for at most a fraction of the recent decline in ice and a much smaller fraction of the total decline.

I believe you've just lost the argument (or your sad excuse for an argument). Again.

Have a nice day :D

[White_Male_Canada]

Algore`s lie was exposed long long ago, this is just another nail in his Big Lie coffyn. And it`s disingenuous if not outright deceptive of you to claim man-made CO2 is THE CAUSE.

" A drastic drop in atmospheric moisture at the end of the 19th century and the ensuing drier climatic conditions are likely forcing glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro.” (International Journal of Climatology )

"increased incoming shortwave radiation due to decreases in cloudiness - both effects of the drier climatic conditions - plays a decisive role for glacier retreat by increasing ablation, as demonstrated for Mount Kenya and Rwenzori" (Kruss and Hastenrath, 1987; Molg et al., 2003b)

"modern glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro is much more complex than simply attributable to 'global warming only'." Indeed, they say it is "a process driven by a complex combination of changes in several different climatic parameters [e.g., Kruss, 1983; Kruss and Hastenrath, 1987; Hastenrath and Kruss, 1992; Kaser and Georges, 1997; Wagnon et al., 2001; Kaser and Osmaston, 2002; Francou et al., 2003; Molg et al., 2003b], with humidity-related variables dominating this combination."

[trish]

Excellent recap LG: I know that WMC agrees because he didn't respond to any of your points.

[White_Male_Canada]

Excellent recap LG: I know that WMC agrees because he didn't respond to any of your points.

:lol:
It is possible, though, that there is an indirect connection :lol:

Trish the AGW/NEP Stalinist.

I don`t deal in, “possible, indirect” maybe perhaps chance. That`s conjecture, not science.

And I repeat myself:

Algore`s lie was exposed long long ago, this is just another nail in his Big Lie coffyn. And it`s disingenuous if not outright deceptive of you to claim man-made CO2 is THE CAUSE.

" A drastic drop in atmospheric moisture at the end of the 19th century and the ensuing drier climatic conditions are likely forcing glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro.” (International Journal of Climatology )

"increased incoming shortwave radiation due to decreases in cloudiness - both effects of the drier climatic conditions - plays a decisive role for glacier retreat by increasing ablation, as demonstrated for Mount Kenya and Rwenzori" (Kruss and Hastenrath, 1987; Molg et al., 2003b)

"modern glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro is much more complex than simply attributable to 'global warming only'." Indeed, they say it is "a process driven by a complex combination of changes in several different climatic parameters [e.g., Kruss, 1983; Kruss and Hastenrath, 1987; Hastenrath and Kruss, 1992; Kaser and Georges, 1997; Wagnon et al., 2001; Kaser and Osmaston, 2002; Francou et al., 2003; Molg et al., 2003b], with humidity-related variables dominating this combination."

Algore in AIT, was blaming man-made CO2 for the disappearing snows of Kilimanjaro.


-snows have been disappearing since 1880.

-More snow disappeared before Hemmingway published his famous novel (1936) than after.

-In 1880, CO2 levels were approximately 290ppm

-“Rather than changes in 20th century climate being responsible for their demise, glaciers on Kilimanjaro appear to be remnants of a past climate that was once able to sustain them.” Cullen 2006

[trish]

you repeat yourself and once again fail to read and understand what others have said.

[White_Male_Canada]

you repeat yourself and once again fail to read and understand what others have said.

The fact that I repeat myself indicates you fail to comprehend that algore blamed AGW for the lack of snow and ice on Kilimanjaro:


The fact that the loss of ice on Mount Kilimanjaro cannot be used as proof of global warming...

Algore`s claim has been debunked over and over and no one denies that climate changes, as it has and forever will, until the Sun turns into a redgiant.

And I repeat myself:

Algore`s lie was exposed long long ago, this is just another nail in his Big Lie coffyn. And it`s disingenuous if not outright deceptive of you to claim man-made CO2 is THE CAUSE.

" A drastic drop in atmospheric moisture at the end of the 19th century and the ensuing drier climatic conditions are likely forcing glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro.” (International Journal of Climatology )

"increased incoming shortwave radiation due to decreases in cloudiness - both effects of the drier climatic conditions - plays a decisive role for glacier retreat by increasing ablation, as demonstrated for Mount Kenya and Rwenzori" (Kruss and Hastenrath, 1987; Molg et al., 2003b)

"modern glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro is much more complex than simply attributable to 'global warming only'." Indeed, they say it is "a process driven by a complex combination of changes in several different climatic parameters [e.g., Kruss, 1983; Kruss and Hastenrath, 1987; Hastenrath and Kruss, 1992; Kaser and Georges, 1997; Wagnon et al., 2001; Kaser and Osmaston, 2002; Francou et al., 2003; Molg et al., 2003b], with humidity-related variables dominating this combination."

Algore in AIT, was blaming man-made CO2 for the disappearing snows of Kilimanjaro.


-snows have been disappearing since 1880.

-More snow disappeared before Hemmingway published his famous novel (1936) than after.

-In 1880, CO2 levels were approximately 290ppm

-“Rather than changes in 20th century climate being responsible for their demise, glaciers on Kilimanjaro appear to be remnants of a past climate that was once able to sustain them.” Cullen 2006

[trish]

The fact that I repeat myself indicates ... that you have nothing more to say.

[LG]

Crazy_white_guy wrote

I don`t deal in, “possible, indirect” maybe perhaps chance. That`s conjecture, not science.
Your comment underlies your limited grasp of science. Feedback cycles, for example, are indirect links between a cause and an effect. Do you not accept them either?

Anyway, read it and weep (I've included the first paragraph because, unlike you, I am fair and do not selectively leave bits out of the text I refer to- I simply highlight the bits that prove me right):



"Kilimanjaro is a grossly overused mis-example of the effects of climate change," said University of Washington climate scientist Philip Mote, co-author of an article in the July/August issue of American Scientist magazine.

Mote is concerned that critics will try to use the article to debunk broader climate-change trends.

He hastens to add that global warming is, indeed, responsible for the fact that nearly every other glacier around the globe is melting away. Kilimanjaro just happens to be the worst possible case study.

Rising nearly four miles from the plains of eastern Tanzania, Kilimanjaro has seen its glaciers decline steadily for well over a century — since long before humans began pumping large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, Mote points out.

Most of the world's glaciers didn't begin their precipitous declines until the 1970s, when measurable global warming first appeared.

And by the way, it's "coffin" not "coffyn". And "Hemingway", not "Hemmingway".

[White_Male_Canada]

I simply highlight the bits that prove me right):
[i]

"Kilimanjaro is a grossly overused mis-example of the effects of climate change," said University of Washington climate scientist Philip Mote, co-author of an article in the July/August issue of American Scientist magazine.

Mote is concerned that critics will try to use the article to debunk broader climate-change trends.

He hastens to add that global warming is, indeed, responsible for the fact that nearly every other glacier around the globe is melting away. Kilimanjaro just happens to be the worst possible case study.



Algore chose pictures and statistics carefully to give viewers a false impression that anthropogenic CO2 caused the declining snow on Kilimanjaro in AIT:

"This is Mount Kilimanjaro 30 years ago...And this is it last year. Within the decade there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro."

Thanks for playing along in debunking algore.

[LG]

I simply highlight the bits that prove me right):
[i]

"Kilimanjaro is a grossly overused mis-example of the effects of climate change," said University of Washington climate scientist Philip Mote, co-author of an article in the July/August issue of American Scientist magazine.

Mote is concerned that critics will try to use the article to debunk broader climate-change trends.

He hastens to add that global warming is, indeed, responsible for the fact that nearly every other glacier around the globe is melting away. Kilimanjaro just happens to be the worst possible case study.



Algore chose pictures and statistics carefully to give viewers a false impression that anthropogenic CO2 caused the declining snow on Kilimanjaro in AIT:

"This is Mount Kilimanjaro 30 years ago...And this is it last year. Within the decade there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro."

Thanks for playing along in debunking algore.

:screwy
I wasn't arguing about Gore. I was debunking your bullshit argument. And now that it's been thoroughly disproven, you have the nerve to prattle on about Gore. Gore has more scientific knowledge in his pinky fingers than you have in your whole brain.

Furthermore, Gore's movie came out long before the scientific paper. And the paper mentioned that there may indeed be indirect links. The author mentioned that man-made global warming is a fact and warned against conservative asswipes using the paper to try and disproof the scientific truth. And he points out that human activities have caused other snowcaps and glaciers to melt. Did you read that part?

You have once again failed to answer any of my points. Do you have difficulties reading, are you a moron or just a liar?

[White_Male_Canada]

"Kilimanjaro is a grossly overused mis-example of the effects of climate change," said University of Washington climate scientist Philip Mote, co-author of an article in the July/August issue of American Scientist magazine.

Mote is concerned that critics will try to use the article to debunk broader climate-change trends.

He hastens to add that global warming is, indeed, responsible for the fact that nearly every other glacier around the globe is melting away. Kilimanjaro just happens to be the worst possible case study.



Algore chose pictures and statistics carefully to give viewers a false impression that anthropogenic CO2 caused the declining snow on Kilimanjaro in AIT:

"This is Mount Kilimanjaro 30 years ago...And this is it last year. Within the decade there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro."

Thanks for playing along in debunking algore.




Furthermore, Gore's movie came out long before the scientific paper. And the paper mentioned that there may indeed be indirect links. The author mentioned that man-made global warming is a fact and warned against conservative asswipes using the paper to try and disproof the scientific truth. And he points out that human activities have caused other snowcaps and glaciers to melt.

Been here, done that is why I haven`t bothered with your misinformation. But you continue your boring bullshit so here we go moron.

A partial list of glaciers that are growing:

NORWAY
Ålfotbreen Glacier
Briksdalsbreen Glacier
Nigardsbreen Glacier
Hardangerjøkulen Glacier
Hansebreen Glacier
Jostefonn Glacier
Engabreen glacier
CANADA
Helm Glacier
Place Glacier
ECUADOR
Antizana 15 Alpha Glacier
SWITZERLAND
Silvretta Glacier
KIRGHIZTAN
Abramov
RUSSIA
Maali Glacier
GREENLAND

NEW ZEALAND
All 48 glaciers in the Southern Alps have grown
SOUTH AMERICA
- Argentina's Perito Moreno Glacier
UNITED STATES
- Colorado (scroll down to see AP article)
- Washington (Mount St. Helens, Mt. Rainier* and Mt. Shuckson)
(scroll down to see photo of Mt. Baker)
- California (Mount Shasta - scroll down for info)
- Montana (scroll down for info)
- Alaska (Mt. McKinley and Hubbard).

And the Antarctic Ice Sheet is growing thicker. That`s why Mote states, " nearly every other glacier ..."

You`re misinformation and bullshit is based on a narrow time frame in a desperate attempt to incite fear. The big picture shows that we are coming out of a cooling period and are witnessing another deglaciation event on a global scale after just another one of those periods of massive glacial advances, that Little Ice Age.

So try get over yourself. It`s happened before and will happen again.

[trish]

Gee, why are all those glaciers growing, I thought the GREAT SWELL in the SOLAR FLUX was responsible for melting everything. Are you flip-flopping again, WMC?? Flip-flop, flip-flop...

[White_Male_Canada]

Gee, why are all those glaciers growing, I thought the GREAT SWELL in the SOLAR FLUX was responsible for melting everything. Are you flip-flopping again, WMC?? Flip-flop, flip-flop...

You`ve gone nuts sport. You constantly confuse natural climate change with anthropogenic. The ratio of glaciation/deglaciation is about 30-70 moron.

And where specifically have I stated, " the GREAT SWELL in the SOLAR FLUX is responsible for melting everything." ?

Besides the specific study of east africa showing an abrupt drop in air humidity around 1880(all caused by man of course) and,

"increased incoming shortwave radiation due to decreases in cloudiness - both effects of the drier climatic conditions - plays a decisive role for glacier retreat by increasing ablation, as demonstrated for Mount Kenya and Rwenzori" (Kruss and Hastenrath, 1987; Molg et al., 2003b)

Man-made, of course.

8)

[trish]

address the contradiction...according to you those glaciers should be melting

[qeuqheeg222]

just wait till them europeans lose their beloved alps...i bet within 25 yrs all cars in europe will be electric or that far fangled hydrogen shit we have yet to see..when those alps melt away and they run out of water real changes will occur...they already have better mpg standards which our car companies cant seem to figure out..

[LG]

...a whole bunch of crap...

Hang on. You're saying that:

-Glaciers are indeed melting and retreating and always have been...but actually they're growing.
-Philip Mote is right about the melting of the snow on Kilimanjaro not being directly due to human-induced climate change...but there's no such thing as indirect effects.
-Philip Mote is right in saying that the Kilimanjaro snow is melting for reasons other than man-made global warming...but he's wrong in saying that other glaciers and snowcaps are melting due to global warming.
-Philip Mote is right about saying that Kilimanjaro should not be a poster boy for climate change...but he's wrong in saying that this fact shouldn't be used by skeptics trying to debunk the consensus theory.
-Therefore Philip Mote is a genius who's proven your theory...but he's a moron for disagreeing with you.
-Gore made his movie before the research by Mote was completed...yet Gore was lying because he should have known that Mote would prove him wrong.
-All of us have played along with "debunking" Al Gore...even though the only person we debunked is you
-"Modern glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro is much more complex than simply attributable to 'global warming only'"...yet will not accept that the word 'only' implies that global warming may play a part.
So all I can surmise is that:

-You've selected one part of a movie to try and disprove Gore (unsuccessfully)... and failed to understand the point of the whole film.
-Gore's film won him awards and he has been shortlisted for the Nobel Prize...you are just a gun-loving neo-conservative schmuck from Canada who can't make up his mind and watches too much Fox news.
-You think the joke is on us.......see if you can fill in the blanks on this one.

I think there's medication for your condition.

[White_Male_Canada]

...a whole bunch of crap...

Hang on. You're saying that:
[list]
-Glaciers are indeed melting and retreating and always have been...but actually they're growing.
-Philip Mote

Leftists are usually correct only 50% of the time, if that. The fact that details and facts leave you confused and in the dust is not my problem. Comprehension problems stemming from too much minutia usually means your just plain stupid and had better read more books.

[LG]

...a whole bunch of crap...

Hang on. You're saying that:
[list]
-Glaciers are indeed melting and retreating and always have been...but actually they're growing.
-Philip Mote

Leftists are usually correct only 50% of the time, if that. The fact that details and facts leave you confused and in the dust is not my problem. Comprehension problems stemming from too much minutia usually means your just plain stupid and had better read more books.

Wrong answer, cowboy. In fact, it's not even an answer.

This has nothing to do with "leftists" it has everything to do with an understanding of science and how it works. It should not even be a political issue, but you and your fellow neocons have made it one.

Go kiss Rush's big, fat ass and leave us in peace.

[White_Male_Canada]

Wrong answer, cowboy. In fact, it's not even an answer.

This has nothing to do with "leftists" it has everything to do with an understanding of science and how it works. It should not even be a political issue, but you and your fellow neocons have made it one.

That`s hilarious seeing it`s a politician who`s lied and exaggerated his whole life now attempting to ride the anthropogenic GW Big Lie all the way to power and the bank. :lol:

Now we find you playing dumb in an effort to cover your ass and the AGW hoax. You`re AGW is built on nothing more than speculation, misinformation, flawed science, junk science, and computer model scenarios propagated as truth.

You`re nothing but a new-age-jesus-told-us-there`s-no-more-laws-do-whatever-feels-good-tree-hugging moron.

Go fuck a tree knot hole retard. 8)

[trish]

Hey ASSHOLE…how’d you know that meant you WMC?
1. You insist that if the globe warms it’s got to warm all over, everywhere, uniformly in time.
2. You claim the globe is warming because of a great swell in the solar energy flux.
3. But you also claim that in some places glaciers are growing.

So what’s up with that? Are you stuck in a contradiction. Is that why you keep ignoring the question? Warm is cool and cool is warm. And when you worm your slimy way out of that one tell me why SOHO can’t confirm your marvelous theory of increased solar flux.

“Leftists are usually correct only 50% of the time” Gee, I can’t find this proposition in any of my texts on climatology. Perhaps you can tell us how it applies to the calculation of the thermal expansion of a volume of sea water.

[White_Male_Canada]

Hey ASSHOLE…how’d you know that meant you WMC?
1. You insist that if the globe warms it’s got to warm all over, everywhere, uniformly in time.
2. You claim the globe is warming because of a great swell in the solar energy flux.
3. But you also claim that in some places glaciers are growing.

So what’s up with that? Are you stuck in a contradiction. Is that why you keep ignoring the question? Warm is cool and cool is warm. And when you worm your slimy way out of that one tell me why SOHO can’t confirm your marvelous theory of increased solar flux.

“Leftists are usually correct only 50% of the time” Gee, I can’t find this proposition in any of my texts on climatology. Perhaps you can tell us how it applies to the calculation of the thermal expansion of a volume of sea water.

That`s rich coming form a girl who`s sphincters` been stretched from here to oblivion. 8)

You don`t even know if you`re agruing agw or natural weather patterns anymore.

You`ve gone psycho.

[trish]

The elasticity of mine or anyone else’s sphincter is quite irrelevant to the fact that find yourself in a paradox and continue to post assaults because you don’t have viable defense.

1. You insist that if the globe warms it’s got to warm all over, everywhere, uniformly in time.
2. You claim the globe is warming because of a great swell in the solar energy flux.
3. But you also claim that in some places glaciers are growing.

Failure to address the point will be regard as concession.

[White_Male_Canada]

The elasticity of mine or anyone else’s sphincter is quite irrelevant to the fact that find yourself in a paradox and continue to post assaults because you don’t have viable defense.

1. You insist that if the globe warms it’s got to warm all over, everywhere, uniformly in time.
2. You claim the globe is warming because of a great swell in the solar energy flux.
3. But you also claim that in some places glaciers are growing.

Failure to address the point will be regard as concession.

I`m not addressing faux issues invented by a delusional nut when she herself doesn`t even know when she`s arguing agw or natural changes and doesn`t recognize when I`m referring to agw, natural change or scenarios dreamed up by other posters.

Failure to get a grip on reality means no one cares what words you think I said , invent and then place in my mouth.

[trish]

The issues are of your own invention. Go back and read your own posts. I accept your concession.

[White_Male_Canada]

The issues are of your own invention. Go back and read your own posts. I accept your concession.

Now you`re inventing concessions.

Until you figure whether you`re arguing agw, natural weather or scenarios of others and until you can understand which ones I`m referring to then it`s futile for anyone except a good psychiatrist and a syringe of thorazine.

[trish]

I said,
Failure to address the point will be regard as concession.



WMC said,
I`m not addressing faux issues invented ...

Therefore, WMC concedes. No invention, it's just a fact that you can't get out of your own tangle.

[qeuqheeg222]

got that national geographic with the article on the shrinking ice huh??wmc

[White_Male_Canada]

I said,
Failure to address the point will be regard as concession.



WMC said,
I`m not addressing faux issues invented ...

Therefore, WMC concedes. No invention, it's just a fact that you can't get out of your own tangle.

The only tangle is the one that involves hair around your bunghole.

The reality is you`ve invented a false contradiction and now press me to accept the contents of your imagination as reality when in fact the truth is, if you had read my posts, is that I`ve also previously exposed the fallacy of the agw religionists stating Antarctica was melting when we all know it is not and is actually growing. The agw religionists pointed to data from only the peninsula and not the continent as a whole.

You`ve lost, the AGW religion is swiss cheese, nonsense.

[trish]

WMC has claimed each of the following:

1. You insist that if the globe warms it’s got to warm all over, everywhere, uniformly in time.
2. You claim the globe is warming because of a great swell in the solar energy flux.
3. But you also claim that in some places glaciers are growing.

If I'm misrepresenting you it should be easy to tell us to which of the above items you no longer subscribe. Once again, if you do not respond directly to the question, we will regard your avoidance as concession.