It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Himalayan glaciers have lost no ice in the past 10 years, new study reveals.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   

The U.N. got it wrong on Himalayan glaciers -- and the proof is finally here. The authors of the U.N.’s climate policy guide were red-faced two years ago when it was revealed that they had inaccurately forecast that the Himalayan glaciers would melt completely in 25 years, vanishing by the year 2035. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and director general of the Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) in New Dehli, India, ultimately issued a statement offering regret for what turned out to be a poorly vetted statement. A new report published Thursday, Feb. 9, in the science journal Nature offers the first comprehensive study of the world’s glaciers and ice caps, and one of its conclusions has shocked scientists. Using GRACE, a pair of orbiting satellites racing around the planet at an altitude of 300 miles, it comes to the eye-popping conclusion that the Himalayas have barely melted at all in the past 10 years. "The GRACE results in this region really were a surprise," said University of Colorado at Boulder physics John Wahr, who led the study. Some previous estimates of ice loss in the high Asia mountains had predicted up to 50 billion tons of melting ice annually, said Wahr, who is also a fellow at the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences. Instead, results from GRACE pin the estimated ice loss from those peaks -- including ranges like the Himalayas and the nearby Pamir and Tien Shan -- at only about 4 billion tons of ice annually. Bristol University glaciologist Jonathan Bamber, who was not part of the research team, told the Guardian that such a level of melting was practically insignificant. "The very unexpected result was the negligible mass loss from high mountain Asia, which is not significantly different from zero," he told the Guardian. Read more: www.foxnews.com... e_lost_no_ice_in_the_past_10_years%2C_new_study_reveals#ixzz1m5zTreqU


I recall hearing about the mass melting years ago and the panic to fix earth before we all drown. Good to know we're all still going to be okay...at least from flooding by icecap melting.




posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Rule of thumb: Whenever the UN does a study, just go with the opposite of whatever the study says and 90% of the time you will be right.

Bad day for the Global Warming religion.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by saint4God
 


Wanting to add the link to The Gaurdian...
10 year study shows that indeed no ice was actually lost in the
The Himalayas and nearby peaks,

No ice lost in past 10 years, study shows
www.guardian.co.uk...

Those with a dire need to prove othewise beware a new carbon tax and credit
exchange scheme follows.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Thanks for this, I was waiting for the "Fox News lies!" response.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by saint4God
 


S&F

Its obvious the World is going through changes.

Yes,man can screw things up........(Fukushima Nuclear plants built on a giant fault an example)

I believe the Earth is in a cycle that man hasnt witnessed,or has studies for it.

The Sun might be the true culprit.

Going to be hard for the UN to tax the Sun,for climate change.....but Im sure they will try.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
Going to be hard for the UN to tax the Sun,for climate change.....but Im sure they will try.


Not really, they'll tax us because we're receiving the sun on their earth in which we inhabit. Ere go, unless you can prove that you've received no sun for the year (mandatory vitamin D testing), expect incoming tax for their 'provided service'.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
expect incoming tax for their 'provided service'.


Yes, and if they mess up the atmospheric balance in the future,
and geoenigineer the planet, they will tax us again to stop releasing
Sulfate Aerosols, and maybe by then they will have ruled that Vitamin D is a drug,
and the Sun needs to be regualted by the FDA.

edit on 11-2-2012 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by saint4God
 


Yet more cherry picking and out of context quoting. Try this quote from the same source as yours:


A breakdown of the data does, indeed, show huge regional variations and uncertainties about the rate of decline in ice mass across the world's largest GICs. Whereas the wider Himalayan region recorded, on average, no appreciable loss, regions such as Alaska, Greenland and Antarctica saw significant declines in ice mass. In total, the world's largest GICs lost between 443-629bn tonnes of meltwater. This is causing sea levels to rise by about 1.5mm a year on average, concluded the study, in addition to the 2mm a year caused by expansion of the warming ocean.

Nuff said I think.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Another classic example of Global Cool Warming at its finest.

Only a matter of time before we enter into a mini warm ice age of ever so slight temperature variation.

Doom Doom Doom.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by yorkshirelad



A breakdown of the data does, indeed, show huge regional variations and uncertainties about the rate of decline in ice mass across the world's largest GICs. .



Did you read that?


"Variations, and uncertainties" .

Far from conclusive, or proving incontrovertible warming.
edit on 11-2-2012 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by yorkshirelad
 


It's not out of context, we're talking about Himalayan glaciers here. I didn't say there was no melting anywhere, but if you'd like to go there, to highlight (or cherry-pick, whichever term makes people happy), this sentence here from your quote, "This is causing sea levels to rise by about 1.5mm a year on average". I wouldn't sell any beachfront property just yet.


edit on 11-2-2012 by saint4God because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by yorkshirelad
 




It's not out of context, we're talking about Himalayan glaciers here. I didn't say there was no melting anywhere, but if you'd like to go there, to highlight (or cherry-pick, whichever term makes people happy), this sentence here from your quote, "This is causing sea levels to rise by about 1.5mm a year on average". I wouldn't sell any beachfront property just yet.


well let's not cherry pick then:

"The very unexpected result was the negligible mass loss from high mountain Asia, which is not significantly different from zero."

The melting of Himalayan glaciers caused controversy in 2009 when a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change mistakenly stated that they would disappear by 2035, instead of 2350. However, the scientist who led the new work is clear that while greater uncertainty has been discovered in Asia's highest mountains, the melting of ice caps and glaciers around the world remains a serious concern.

"Our results and those of everyone else show we are losing a huge amount of water into the oceans every year," said Prof John Wahr of the University of Colorado. "People should be just as worried about the melting of the world's ice as they were before."

link

"not significantly different from zero" = same as it's always been... i.e. not contributing to ocean rise.

"greater uncertainty" = they were caught in a lie and trying not to admit it.

"People should be just as worried about the melting of the world's ice as they were before." = this is not the proof global warming is a fraud you were looking for *waves obi-wan style hand*

Sorry the Jedi mind-trick is not working on me!

edit on 11-2-2012 by pianopraze because: forgot link



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join