• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fox: Global Warming Shrinking Glaciers

NWRatCon said:
I'm going to try this one more time, and then I'm going to go where rationality reigns.

Assume you have a cooler of water. It's a ten gallon cooler. What is its storage capacity? Ten gallons. Some of that content is water, some (occasionally) is ice. As the ice melts it becomes water. What's the capacity of the cooler? Ten gallons.

There is only one way of adding to that cooler - pouring in more water. But, here's the problem. There is a hole in the cooler, so the water runs out, and there is no lid on the cooler, so some of it evaporates. You can pour in water with a gallon jug. If you pour 20 gallons of water into the cooler, where does it go? Oh, it overflows and it can't be captured so you lose it. What's the capacity of the cooler? Ten gallons.

Now, assume you have a second cooler, it has 20 gallons of only ice in it. But, here's the ingenious part, as the ice melts it runs into the first cooler! You can add to the second cooler, but only add ice. If you don't add ice to the second cooler, it will eventually stop running into the first cooler. If you don't add water to the first cooler, it will eventually dry out.

The first cooler represents the dams and reservoirs we all depend on for our water. Western drought brings Lake Mead to lowest level since it was built. (Climate.gov) The second cooler represents the snows in the mountains and glaciers. Northwest Snowpack Map (USDA)

Is the picture becoming clearer?
Click to expand...

Lake Mead is lower due to the renegotiating of Colorado river rights. More of it is used upstream now. Your coolers are not subject to the river laws.
 
Media_Truth said:
Nice analogy! The Southwest US is in a very extended drought. They got a little relief this Fall from some El Nino weather, and they are hopeful that this will continue through the Spring. Lake Mead is low, but Elephant Butte in New Mexico is extremely low.

Southwest Drought Status and El Nino Update | Drought.gov

Reservoir levels vary.
Many are starting the water year well below average and will likely remain low because soils are dry from the drought.

Lake Mead (AZ): 40% of capacity (lower than one year ago)
Lake Powell (AZ): 40% of capacity (lower than one year ago)
Elephant Butte and El Vado (NM): 7% of capacity
Navajo (NM): 51% of capacity
Click to expand...

Come on, guy. California has been getting excess rain and snow for quite awhile now. You can't just keep calling it a 'drought'.
 
Tans said:
Come on, guy. California has been getting excess rain and snow for quite awhile now. You can't just keep calling it a 'drought'.
Click to expand...
Uhm... Wasn't the past 6 months of good precipitation preceded by 10 years of drought?

We can't look at a few months in isolation, we have to look at long-term trends.
 
Visbek said:
Uhm... Wasn't the past 6 months of good precipitation preceded by 10 years of drought?

We can't look at a few months in isolation, we have to look at long-term trends.
Click to expand...

Here's what the long term trend looks like for California according
to NOAA's Climate at a Glance:

CaliforniaPrecipitationNOAA CAG.jpg

Here's the Southwest:

SouthwestPrecipitationNOAA CAG.jpg
 
Media_Truth said:
It's a nice story, about dealing with the drought and drying up of wells in the Dewar province of India. I admire the rainwater catchment ingenuity. As you are probably aware, not all soils are adequate to sustain a pond. Here is the original linked article, which describes the depth of the problem..

Rising Temperatures Could Melt Most Himalayan Glaciers by 2100 - The New York Times

One of the most complete studies on mountain warming, the Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment was put together over five years by 210 authors. The report includes input from more than 350 researchers and policymakers from 22 countries.
...
The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment touches on the phenomenon of elevation-dependent warming. Though it is well known that temperature changes due to increased levels of greenhouse gases are amplified at higher latitudes, like in the Arctic, there is growing evidence that warming rates are also greater at higher elevations.
...
Around South Asia, the impact of climate change has already intensified. Brutal heat waves are becoming unbearable, making people sicker and poorer, and diminishing the living standards of 800 million people.
...
A government report released last year found that India was experiencing the worst water crisis in its history. About half of India’s population, around 600 million people, faced extreme water scarcities, the report found, with 200,000 people dying each year from inadequate access to safe water.

By 2030, the country’s demand for water is likely to be twice the available supply.
...
In neighboring Nepal, rising temperatures have already uprooted people. Snow cover is shrinking in mountain villages, and rain patterns are less predictable. Fertile land once used for growing vegetables has become barren.

“Water sources have dried up,” said Pasang Tshering Gurung, a farmer from the village of Samjong, which is about 13,000 feet above sea level.
Click to expand...

Which bit of that says that the source of water for the village used to be a glacier and now they don't have water because it has melted?

I don't know why that particular village has a water shortage. The many villages in India which are solving their water issues with better rain water catchment often used to have problems which have been exasperated by over using pumped water out of wells. Maybe the particular village has done this.
 
Tans said:
They both melt more in the summer. Nothing says a snowfield has to go away completely either, yet it is not a glacier.
Click to expand...

If it does not survive a summer it is not glacial.

It can be not a glacier and still be glacial ice. It can be on top of a glacier and still not be glacial ice.
 
Tim the plumber said:

Which bit of that says that the source of water for the village used to be a glacier and now they don't have water because it has melted?

I don't know why that particular village has a water shortage. The many villages in India which are solving their water issues with better rain water catchment often used to have problems which have been exasperated by over using pumped water out of wells. Maybe the particular village has done this.
Click to expand...

Your post ignores the fact that, with a dynamic well-water system, the wells replenish. Why don't you read the article? It goes into great detail. It's much more than India that is affected by the dwindling supply of Himalayan water. And it's much more than your cited village.
 
Media_Truth said:
Your post ignores the fact that, with a dynamic well-water system, the wells replenish. Why don't you read the article? It goes into great detail. It's much more than India that is affected by the dwindling supply of Himalayan water. And it's much more than your cited village.
Click to expand...

Whilst the ice mass of the glacier is reducing the effect of the glacier is to increase (to a tiny degree) the amount of water available.

The article does not go into any meaningful detail. There is no mention of the frequency of dry years, the deviation from any sort of statistically expected variability of climate in this region.

I know that you require actual thinking rather than the stuff you like but it is needed.
 
Steve Case said:
Here's what the long term trend looks like for California according
to NOAA's Climate at a Glance:

View attachment 67254820

Here's the Southwest:

View attachment 67254819
Click to expand...

Thank you. From your graph, which is hard to see, you don't agree that the Southwest US is in a long-term drought? If you look back to about 1998, there is a lot more area under the average than there is above the average. Did you not believe the previously posted report from Drought.gov?
 
Tim the plumber said:
Whilst the ice mass of the glacier is reducing the effect of the glacier is to increase (to a tiny degree) the amount of water available.

The article does not go into any meaningful detail. There is no mention of the frequency of dry years, the deviation from any sort of statistically expected variability of climate in this region.

I know that you require actual thinking rather than the stuff you like but it is needed.
Click to expand...

This YouTube video summarizes the issues.

YouTube

Here's the source organization for the HIndu-Kush Himalaya report. I'm sure they'll have much more information.

HIMAP
 
Media_Truth said:
This YouTube video summarizes the issues.

YouTube

Here's the source organization for the HIndu-Kush Himalaya report. I'm sure they'll have much more information.

HIMAP
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not going to watch your silly video. If you have a decent point to make then make it. If you want to divert me away with spending time on drivel it was a nice try but no good.

The second link does not contain any information.

I have pointed out before that just linking to something without quoting from it is a typical act of the religious when they know they have lost. In fact both tactics are so typical.
 
Media_Truth said:
Thank you. From your graph, which is hard to see, you don't agree that the Southwest US is in a long-term drought? If you look back to about 1998, there is a lot more area under the average than there is above the average. Did you not believe the previously posted report from Drought.gov?
Click to expand...

The 1895-2018 time line averages out to 14.4 inches per year and 1998-2018 averages out to 13.9 inches per year.
 
Visbek said:
Uhm... Wasn't the past 6 months of good precipitation preceded by 10 years of drought?

We can't look at a few months in isolation, we have to look at long-term trends.
Click to expand...

No, it wasn't. Liberals just keep calling it a 'drought'.
 
Tim the plumber said:
If it does not survive a summer it is not glacial.

It can be not a glacier and still be glacial ice. It can be on top of a glacier and still not be glacial ice.
Click to expand...

Try reading my post again.
 
Media_Truth said:
Your post ignores the fact that, with a dynamic well-water system, the wells replenish. Why don't you read the article? It goes into great detail. It's much more than India that is affected by the dwindling supply of Himalayan water. And it's much more than your cited village.
Click to expand...

It isn't dwindling. The Ganges river system is simply getting more and more use as population increases in the region.
 
Media_Truth said:
Thank you. From your graph, which is hard to see, you don't agree that the Southwest US is in a long-term drought? If you look back to about 1998, there is a lot more area under the average than there is above the average. Did you not believe the previously posted report from Drought.gov?
Click to expand...

No, it is not in a long term drought. No, I don't believe the report from drought.gov. It's propaganda. Lake Mead is lower now because of renegotiation of the river compact. More of that water is used upstream. Populations have been increasing you know. So has irrigation.
 
Tans said:
No, it is not in a long term drought. No, I don't believe the report from drought.gov. It's propaganda. Lake Mead is lower now because of renegotiation of the river compact. More of that water is used upstream. Populations have been increasing you know. So has irrigation.
Click to expand...

Clearly you don't live in California, or Arizona, or anywhere in the Southwest. California is officially drought-free (U.S. News)
California is drought-free for the first time in seven years after a winter of heavy rain and snow, scientists announced Thursday.

According to the National Drought Mitigation Center and the U.S. Drought Monitor, at least part of the state experienced a drought for 376 straight weeks. On Thursday, 7 percent of the state was still facing abnormally dry conditions, but not dry enough to constitute a drought.
Click to expand...

Some people won't consider anything that doesn't support their pre-conceived conclusion as "valid."
 
Last edited:
Steve Case said:
The 1895-2018 time line averages out to 14.4 inches per year and 1998-2018 averages out to 13.9 inches per year.
Click to expand...

But, that only covers the average for the whole State, not where the rain is falling, or when, or how much at a time. It's great to get rain, unless it's all at once. Oroville Spillway To Open After Dam Failure Of 2017; Historic Flooding Causes Nebraska Dam Failure. But, we all know that weather is just a liberal ploy, and climate has a liberal bias.
 
Tans said:
No, it is not in a long term drought. No, I don't believe the report from drought.gov. It's propaganda. Lake Mead is lower now because of renegotiation of the river compact. More of that water is used upstream. Populations have been increasing you know. So has irrigation.
Click to expand...

Lake Mead’s enemies are both natural and man-made. Climate change has placed the Colorado River basin in a long-term drought. Meanwhile, human demands for water from the Colorado have far outstripped what it can provide.

“We’re in the 19th year of a drought,” observes Robert Glennon, an expert on water policy at the University of Arizona, “and it’s pretty obvious that climate change is having a devastating impact.” That places a premium on interstate cooperation to address the drought’s consequences — chiefly how to apportion what is certain to be a diminishing supply of Colorado water.
Click to expand...
Despite signs of interstate cooperation, the decline of Lake Mead isn’t near being solved. I know, I know, you can't trust scientists.... Or science. Or facts. They're all liberal propaganda.
 
Tim the plumber said:
Well, I'm not going to watch your silly video. If you have a decent point to make then make it. If you want to divert me away with spending time on drivel it was a nice try but no good.

The second link does not contain any information.

I have pointed out before that just linking to something without quoting from it is a typical act of the religious when they know they have lost. In fact both tactics are so typical.
Click to expand...

Gosh Tim, it's almost like you use the same "typical acts" and "tactics" as "the religious when they know they have lost".

Great video you posted below on the Beliefs and Skepticism forum. Shame you didn't actually quote from it yourself. :mrgreen:

Tim the plumber said:
YouTube

Why do religious believers hate reality so much?

A video which seems to sum up the issue of trying to communicate with the god-bothers.
Click to expand...
 
Steve Case said:
The 1895-2018 time line averages out to 14.4 inches per year and 1998-2018 averages out to 13.9 inches per year.
Click to expand...

I guess I got my answer. You don't believe drought.gov. I am not going to concern myself with the method used for your numbers. Here is a drought map of the US from January 2019, and a report from Arizona:

Drought - Arizona State Climate Office

Arizona is currently in our 21st year of a long-term drought. Drought in the West is a long-term concept where a single dry year does not constitute a drought. Since Arizona has an arid and semi-arid climate, extreme variability in precipitation is normal, and drought is characterized by a string of drier than normal years, often interrupted by a few wetter than normal years. Currently most watersheds in the state have experienced only 7 or 8 normal or wetter than normal years during the past 21 years.

us-drought-map-january-8-2019.jpg
 
Quaestio said:
Gosh Tim, it's almost like you use the same "typical acts" and "tactics" as "the religious when they know they have lost".

Great video you posted below on the Beliefs and Skepticism forum. Shame you didn't actually quote from it yourself. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

You posted a link in answer to my question that had no information in it. You are the one doing the religious style anti-debate thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom