Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Peltoms' work makes Seattle Times headlines, 09-08-2015
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Scrooge
Famous Grouse



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 6966 | TRs | Pics
Location: wishful thinking
Scrooge
Famous Grouse
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 7:57 am 
NW's melting glaciers in a word: . 'DISASTROUS' Underscored by a great picture of Mauri's crew at work on Mt Baker's Sholes Glacier, two front page articles, and a beautiful double-page spread, inside. The main message: Northwest glaciers will lose 5-10% of their volume, this year! Way to go, Mauri! up.gif up.gif

Something lost behind the ranges. Lost and waiting for you....... Go and find it. Go!
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
cefire
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2010
Posts: 523 | TRs | Pics
cefire
Member
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 10:15 am 
rocker.gif Nice work!! dance.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
Tom
Admin
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 10:31 am 
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 6303 | TRs | Pics
gb
Member
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 11:39 am 
Thanks for the links, Tom. I've been aware of the existence of ice worms since the 70's when I first saw them. They seem most likely to emerge from the snow not that long after the sun has left a snowslope. I've never seen them on bare ice so I assume they need seasonal neve of snowfields and glaciers that have never melted in the past. I saw them once this year, on the snowfield west of Ruth Mountain, and thought it amazing since the snowfield is not that large and perhaps something like 40 or 50' deep. That indicates that this snowfield was once part of a much larger icefield on Ruth Mountain and yet, may not survive for long in the future.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
drm
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics
Location: The Dalles, OR
drm
Member
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 3:04 pm 
Quote:
Measurements in August by the Nooksack tribe showed the glacier, which feeds the Nooksack River, was losing a foot-thick layer from its surface every week.
Wow - a foot every week.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
albrightmd
Member
Member


Joined: 25 Jun 2012
Posts: 112 | TRs | Pics
albrightmd
Member
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 3:04 pm 
Unfortunately, nowhere in the article does it mention the greatest rate of glacial recession on Mt Baker over the past 100 years was during the period 1915-1945. Nowhere does it mention just 4 years ago we had an unusually snowy year with snow lasting almost until the end of August at Paradise Mt Rainier. Why weren't there comparable headlines in 2011 when snow was very late melting out? The only thing "disastrous" is the Seattle Times coverage of the subject. Why didn't the Seattle Times consult with Don Easterbrook of Western Washington University, a leading authority on the glaciers of Mt Baker?

Mark Albright Research Climatologist Washington State Climatologist (1987-2003) Dept of Atmospheric Sciences University of Washington
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
drm
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics
Location: The Dalles, OR
drm
Member
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 3:32 pm 
albrightmd wrote:
Why weren't there comparable headlines in 2011 when snow was very late melting out?
Maybe because that wasn't considered a disaster? But I understand what you're saying. The way news coverage works causes lots of biases, like how crime is reported. Most types of violent crime have been in retreat in most parts of country for years. But with most local news leading with the crimes of the day, few people know or accept that. He did say that it was "This is the single biggest volume loss in the last 50 years,” which implies that it was worse before that, like you say. The difference is that now we have a process going on that should make this kind of year more common in the future, while in 1915-1945 I'm not sure we did.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
albrightmd
Member
Member


Joined: 25 Jun 2012
Posts: 112 | TRs | Pics
albrightmd
Member
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 3:56 pm 
This just in from Prof Don Easterbrook:
Quote:
I'm just finishing a book on Mt Baker glaciations, which includes a lot of old photo and maps dating back to 1909 plus geologic evidence back to the Younger Dryas. One of the interesting thing that the maps and old photos clearly show is that the 2015 termini of all glaciers on Baker are significantly downvalley below their 1950 terminal positions, i.e., the Baker glaciers are more extensive now than they were 65 years ago!

Mark Albright Research Climatologist Washington State Climatologist (1987-2003) Dept of Atmospheric Sciences University of Washington
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
drm
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics
Location: The Dalles, OR
drm
Member
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 4:02 pm 
albrightmd wrote:
Why didn't the Seattle Times consult with Don Easterbrook of Western Washington University, a leading authority on the glaciers of Mt Baker?
“The people who are climate deniers are the people who are denying global cooling," Easterbrook told CNSNews.com. That's dated January 28, 2014. Nuff said there. http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/climate-scientist-who-got-it-right-predicts-20-more-years-global

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
drm
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics
Location: The Dalles, OR
drm
Member
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 4:18 pm 
PS - I did a little more looking and it seems that the fluctuation on Mt Baker is not typical of this region. Here is how the Nisqually Glacier has fared over recent years.
So using Mt Baker to show that things were worse in the 1940s seems to be a case of cherry picking. Most PNW glaciers have retreated far beyond their local peak size then. http://faculty.washington.edu/scporter/Rainierglaciers.html I saw another article that said that Baker's location and height make it unrepresentative of PNW glaciers.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Bernardo
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Feb 2010
Posts: 2174 | TRs | Pics
Location: out and about in the world
Bernardo
Member
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 7:55 pm 
I do not wish to discuss global warming with this post, but the chart makes it look like the current decline of the glacier is the continuation of a trend. Is this not the true?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
mountainsandsound
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Jun 2013
Posts: 203 | TRs | Pics
mountainsandsound
Member
PostTue Sep 08, 2015 9:54 pm 
Ah yes, old Don Easterbrook. Take a walk around Western and bring up his name with any other science profs on campus.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Slugman
It’s a Slugfest!



Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 16874 | TRs | Pics
Slugman
It’s a Slugfest!
PostWed Sep 09, 2015 3:12 am 
So, some late snow melt has something to do with glacial ice? Funny how someone can be ignorant of the difference between annual snow melt and the melting of glacier ice. They must also be the type that can't tell weather from climate. A crackpot. And I would like to see this supposed evidence that all Mt Baker glaciers are longer now than in 1950. Should be easy to provide, if it existed.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
GH_Hiker
Member
Member


Joined: 13 May 2015
Posts: 19 | TRs | Pics
Location: I'm right here
GH_Hiker
Member
PostWed Sep 09, 2015 7:53 am 
Blah Blah Blah, typical drivel from that socialist rag Here's what Cliff has to say about it. Cliff Mass

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
drm
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics
Location: The Dalles, OR
drm
Member
PostWed Sep 09, 2015 7:59 am 
Bernardo wrote:
I do not wish to discuss global warming with this post, but the chart makes it look like the current decline of the glacier is the continuation of a trend. Is this not the true?
If you don't want to discuss causes, then the phrase "continuation of a trend" just asks when did the current trend start. There was a period post WWII for a few decades when the trend reversed, causing glaciers to increase. Prior to that glaciers had been declining since the end of the "Little Ice Age", an overblown term for a cool period in the previous centuries. Apparently this reversal was stronger for the glaciers on Baker owing to the combination of it's height, latitude, and maritime climate.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Peltoms' work makes Seattle Times headlines, 09-08-2015
  Happy Birthday noahk!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum