Glaicer NP

[sawyerloggingon]

The warmer cult loves to point at Glacier NP losing glaciers as an example and result of AGW. This site may be worth reading.

" Tree-ring studies indicate that retreat of the recent glaciation began about 1850. When Glacier National Park was established in 1910, there were more than 150 glaciers within the national park compared to about one fourth of that number now. Retreat rates appear to have been slow until about 1910. There was a period of rapid retreat during the mid- to late 1920s. This corresponds to a period of warmer summer temperatures and decreased precipitation in this region. Several of the larger glaciers separated into two smaller glaciers at this time. The Jackson and Blackfoot Glaciers separated as did the Grinnell and Salamander Glaciers. If the current rate of recession continues, it is estimated that there won't be any glaciers in Glacier National Park by 2030."Recent Glaciation – dating from about 6,000 years ago

Today, we are living in a relatively warm interglacial period. All remnants of the Pleistocene ice have disappeared. There are no active glaciers in Waterton Lakes National Park; however, the last survey in Glacier NP resulted in 37 named alpine glaciers. They are of relatively recent origin, having formed in the last 6,000 to 8,000 years. They probably grew rapidly during the Little Ice Age that started about 400-500 years ago and ended about 1850. However, they work in the same way as larger glaciers of the past.

Geology - Glacier National Park

 

[Deuce]

I'm not sure what you think this is showing. Explain.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

I'm not sure what you think this is showing. Explain.

Mainly that a lot of these melting glaciers were formed or at least enlarged by the little ice age and that it was in the 20s that the glaciers started melting at todays rapid clip. Then there is the fact that it wasn't that long ago in geological history that GNP was 100% covered in ice, ice that has been melting since the last major ice age with the exception of the little ice age period. What did you get from the site, dare I ask?:lol:

 

[Deuce]

Mainly that a lot of these melting glaciers were formed or at least enlarged by the little ice age and that it was in the 20s that the glaciers started melting at todays rapid clip. Then there is the fact that it wasn't that long ago in geological history that GNP was 100% covered in ice, ice that has been melting since the last major ice age with the exception of the little ice age period. What did you get from the site, dare I ask?:lol:

Ice melts as temperature increases, and grows as temperature decreases. But I already knew that, so am wondering what new information I should glean here.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Ice melts as temperature increases, and grows as temperature decreases. But I already knew that, so am wondering what new information I should glean here.

Okie Dokie, :lol:

 

[Deuce]

Okie Dokie, :lol:

So you don't have anything for me? You didn't have a point in posting this?

Okey dokie.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

So you don't have anything for me? You didn't have a point in posting this?

Okey dokie.

Point seems obvious to me but if you don't see it I won't waste my time esplainin it to you Lucy.

 

[Deuce]

Point seems obvious to me but if you don't see it I won't waste my time esplainin it to you Lucy.

Translation: don't want to expose my "point" to rebuttal.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Translation: don't want to expose my "point" to rebuttal.

From the OP:

"The warmer cult loves to point at Glacier NP losing glaciers as an example and result of AGW. This site may be worth reading."

Now, what do you think my point is? The key word here is "think". THINK Deuce THINK! :lol:

 

[Deuce]

From the OP:

"The warmer cult loves to point at Glacier NP losing glaciers as an example and result of AGW. This site may be worth reading."

Now, what do you think my point is? The key word here is "think". THINK Deuce THINK! :lol:

And for some reason you provided no explanation as to why this site would disagree with AGW in any way. Think man, think.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

And for some reason you provided no explanation as to why this site would disagree with AGW in any way. Think man, think.

Where does it agree with AGW?

 

[Deuce]

Where does it agree with AGW?

It doesn't. Nothing on this page really discusses the underlying causes of various historical or present temperature trends.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

It doesn't. Nothing on this page really discusses the underlying causes of various historical or present temperature trends.

HUH? We reading the same link?

"Today, we are living in a relatively warm interglacial period."

"They probably grew rapidly during the Little Ice Age that started about 400-500 years ago and ended about 1850."

"Tree-ring studies indicate that retreat of the recent glaciation began about 1850." (End of the little ice age)

"Retreat rates appear to have been slow until about 1910. There was a period of rapid retreat during the mid- to late 1920s. This corresponds to a period of warmer summer temperatures and decreased precipitation in this region"

Everything seems perfectly normal according to this site, same ole same ole, no mention of the AGW hypotheses.

 

[Deuce]

HUH? We reading the same link?

"Today, we are living in a relatively warm interglacial period."

"They probably grew rapidly during the Little Ice Age that started about 400-500 years ago and ended about 1850."

"Tree-ring studies indicate that retreat of the recent glaciation began about 1850." (End of the little ice age)

"Retreat rates appear to have been slow until about 1910. There was a period of rapid retreat during the mid- to late 1920s. This corresponds to a period of warmer summer temperatures and decreased precipitation in this region"

Everything seems perfectly normal according to this site, same ole same ole, no mention of the AGW hypotheses.

It doesn't address the cause of those temperature changes at all, because its a freaking blurb about geology in GNP. Climate change isn't the subject of this page, so I'm not sure why you'd expect it to mention AGW.

Not everything is about climate change, quit obsessing.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

It doesn't address the cause of those temperature changes at all, because its a freaking blurb about geology in GNP. Climate change isn't the subject of this page, so I'm not sure why you'd expect it to mention AGW.

Not everything is about climate change, quit obsessing.

So you wanted it to say why there was an ice age? Why there was a little ice age? Why there was warmer temps and less rain in the 20s? Why we are "living in a relatively warm interglacial period"? You are right, everything is not about AGW, the earth does what it does before, during and after the AGW hoax, you're learning.:lol:

 

[Deuce]

So you wanted it to say why there was an ice age? Why there was a little ice age? Why there was warmer temps and less rain in the 20s? Why we are "living in a relatively warm interglacial period"? You are right, everything is not about AGW, the earth does what it does before, during and after the AGW hoax, you're learning.:lol:

No, you're the one who came up with ridiculous notion, not me. This page doesn't poke any holes in AGW whatsoever, nor does it support it. I'm sorry you're so upset about this.