Glaciers in Washington's Olympic Mountains will be gone by 2070, study concludes (to live in, food)

[rjshae]

It's almost like some people with vested oil money don't want us to believe that humans can influence the climate. Huh.

[Igor Blevin]

Another hilarious 50-year prediction with zero accountability, which when it fails to materialize will long be forgotten.

Anybody posting this crap should be required to post and explain 3 previous failed climate predictions and explain why this one is "different".

[dozerbear]

Originally Posted by Transmition

They only analyzed apocalyptic claims, not all claims that predicted warming, and a load that weren't even by scientists. It's a complete misrepresentation of their results to say that science didn't predict warming, the study was about how claims are presented and perceived by the media and public.

Interesting. Of the three articles I posted, the first one from the NYT says, "A number of climatologists" the second from the Post-Crescent (Wisconsin) says "Scientists", the third from the Chicago Tribune says "Many climatologists" all who predicted an ice age was coming soon. If you have any evidence of predictions of global warming from that era please post them. The point is, all of these chicken little predictions, all of which I posted made by scientists, were spectacularly wrong. Very likely the one in the OP is also.

If you're not convinced of how severe the issue of global cooling was 50 years ago, here is a letter from Brown University to President Richard Nixon in 1972.

Originally Posted by rjshae

It's not that inaccurate to predict there will be a future ice age. The Milankovitch cycles are an inexorable part of the Earth's orbital variation. The hard part is predicting exactly when the next ice age will happen.

No kidding. This planet is going to have ice ages until our sun runs out of hydrogen to burn. However, if not specific, all of these predictions were for an ice age much sooner than later. Here are a couple from that era that are a bit more specific.







This article, although not specific, states: "Ice age coming fast." And "Rapid trends towards a mini ice age" which again points to the general consensus at the time that an ice age was coming sooner than later.




The Director at the National Center for Atmospheric Research and his leading scientist knew in 1974 that the earth was getting colder.





Two years later, Schneider wrote a book "Reflecting the consensus of the climatological community" which predicted global cooling and famine. Back in 1976, the science was settled. Global cooling. That sounds sort of familiar....

[rjshae]

Yes, individual scientists can make incorrect predictions. That's part of science, and it's healthy because it motivates further testing.

Climate myths: They predicted global cooling in the 1970s

A survey of the scientific literature has found that between 1965 and 1979, 44 scientific papers predicted warming, 20 were neutral and just 7 predicted cooling. So while predictions of cooling got more media attention, the majority of scientists were predicting warming even then.

The positive aspects of science is that it is a cumulative process that increases our understanding, and it is subject to independent verification. Sadly, disinformation is frequently used to obfuscate useful results in climate science. The drawback to that though is it also makes people skeptical of climate denial claims.

[MechAndy]

As I earlier mentioned there are lots of kooks out there.
Some are predicting the weather.
Some are predicting the day that Jesus returns.
Some are even wearing funny tennis shoes and are waiting for their aliens hiding behind that comet to take them away.

All I know is what I see.
Glaciers are disappearing.
Lakes have less water in CA.
Water is slightly getting warmer and there no longer is an abalone season.

[JackieLovesSun]

Originally Posted by rjshae

Yes, individual scientists can make incorrect predictions. That's part of science, and it's healthy because it motivates further testing.

Climate myths: They predicted global cooling in the 1970s



The positive aspects of science is that it is a cumulative process that increases our understanding, and it is subject to independent verification. Sadly, disinformation is frequently used to obfuscate useful results in climate science. The drawback to that though is it also makes people skeptical of climate denial claims.

well said.

[Urban Fatigue]

with regards to logging being the best way to manage, bear in mind as well that older trees sequester more carbon than young ones do. Managing the underbrush seems like a good idea but logging, I disagree.

[primaltech]

I've only been in Seattle less than 3 years, and seems like there's been a ton of "record hottest day", "record hottest month", etc. And a lot of other types of records or near-records and weird weather. Yesterday was a record hottest day.

The hottest day ever in Seattle was last year, and I believe 3 of the 4 hottest days in Seattle history were all last year.

And of course there's plenty of cold weather too, but the climate clearly appears to be slightly warming. It's definitely not cooling. Plus a lot of anecdotal comments from everyone about how you used to not need A/C in the summers here, and now it's become a near necessity.

That day it hit 108 here last year, it was funny because I don't think I ever experienced 108 in Atlanta, or I can't recall it. Ironic, I lived over 36 years in the south, moved up to literally the furthest north city in the country, and experienced my hottest temp.

[509]

Read this book....on natural climate change over the past 10,000 years.

https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520...-without-water

UC Berkeley professor that believe in man caused climate change.....but read the book on natural climate change over the past 10,000 years.

It makes man caused climate change SMALL POTATOES compared to historical climate regimes.

[rjshae]

Originally Posted by 509

Read this book....on natural climate change over the past 10,000 years.

https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520...-without-water

UC Berkeley professor that believe in man caused climate change.....but read the book on natural climate change over the past 10,000 years.

It makes man caused climate change SMALL POTATOES compared to historical climate regimes.

It's the rate that matters. Natural climate change tends to happen over many millennia, allowing large life forms to adapt. Anthropogenic climate change is much more rapid, resulting in extensive disruption.

How often do ice ages happen?

This is how the 100,000-year cycle works: Ice sheets grow for about 90,000 years and then take about 10,000 years to collapse during warmer periods. Then, the process repeats itself.