Climate Change Impacts More Than Glacier’s Glaciers. By Peter Metcalf. New West.
Print Friendly
Ralph Maughan
Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University with specialties in natural resource politics, public opinion, interest groups, political parties, voting and elections. Aside from academic publications, he is author or co-author of three hiking/backpacking guides, and he is President of the Western Watersheds Project.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Snowpack this year seems to be over 100% of average. That should help. Did Glacier always have glaciers? The answer of course is no.
Over 100% of average snowfall will most assuredly NOT help if all of that snow melts in the hotter than normal summers this region has been and likely will to continue to have. You see, glaciers aren’t just about the accumulation of snow in the winter. I would argue that the more important factor in whether a glacier shrinks or grows is not the wintertime accumulation of snow but the summertime melt. We could have a 200% year, but if it is all gone by the time the snow flies next season, it’s all for naught.
And Glacier has had glaciers since AT LEAST the start of the last ice age, which *ended* 14,000 years ago…
14,000 years is the blink of an eye in geologic time. When the earth reaches unprecedented global temperatures then call me. Until then please don’t feed me the line of bull that human caused carbon dioxide emissions have anything to do with the global climate. You know it doesn’t, and its high time somebody set you guys straight. I know I won’t change your mind, but I refuse to let this stuff pass without comment. To those of you with open minds, do some independent research and come to your own conclusions on the human “causes” of climate change. It’s bogus.
Monte,
Are you trying to convince us that the millions of tons of fossil fuels that are burned each year, a major source of carbon dioxide, along with the tons of methane gas which has inceased 145% in the past 100 years and is 20% more effective at trapping heat than CO2 has no effect on climate change? The Amazon Rain Forest has the capability of absobing 2 billion tons of carbon annually and is being destroyed at a rate of 6417 acres per hour, yet you want us to believe that this has no effect whatsoever on global warming. The arctic tundra and permafrost contains some 30% of the earths carbon and is melting and releasing its carbon at an allarming rate The only thing bogus here is your arrogant delusion that we can continue our exploitive and destructive practices with no consequences.
I truly believe that global climate change is going to be the main issue that helps convert the Republican Party into a permanent minority party.
This issue will prove, more than others, that the Republicans have no ability to prepare the U.S. for the problems of the future. The Republicans have staked their national credibility on this issue, and the record is clear: Republicans have denied climate change at every level for years, and have insisted that climate change is a myth and poses no threat to humans at all.
If climate change ultimately becomes undeniable, the Republicans will be seen about as respectfully as flat-Earthers are today. Their political stock will reach the bottom of the abyss, and the Republicans will find themselves in the permanent politcal minority in the U.S.
How can America trust a political party so blind? How can America trust a political party that ignored science and embraced corporate interest over their service to the American people?
Monty, you Republicans have sealed your own doom. You have staked your future politically to climate change. It is truly only a matter of time before the argument over climate change will be over. What will your denials be worth then?
I think it will take a political disaster of epic proportions to return Republicans back to controlling power of the U.S. government. The zenith of the conservatives’ political fortunes is behind you, and the lights are slowly going out on you guys, Monty.
Monte – do set us straight. I’ve read a the arguments that aim to disprove AGW, and I am not convinced from a scientific point of view. I would absolutely LOVE to know that humans are not the major cause – it would make things so much eaiser! So far, that’s not the case. Please, do help me understand why I should not be worried…