Is there anything more dangerous in the world today than the half-wits who still deny man-made climate change despite all the overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
I wonder what these clowns have to say to the families of the thousands of Nepalese and Chinese flash flood victims caused by a glacier melting? "It's all a hoax"?
Climate cycles are with us....weather man made or caused by humans, it's inevitable...BTW 8 billion humans will have an effect on the planet regardless of their soarce of energy...we should learn to deal with it...thinking we can somehow prevent it is naive. The focus should be to adapt to the changes while at the same time caring for the environment. Nobody wants to live in filth. We are at the peak of a warm cycle ...the next ice age is just around the corner, give or take a few centuries...adapt or die.
Climate cycles occur over long periods of time, tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years. The temperature rise we are seeing now can't be accounted for by the normal climate cycle or by short term natural variations.
You can't argue that 8 billion will people have an affect on the planet and then call it naive to believe we can't stop the effect we are causing. That's double think.
People are going to have to adapt because it's already too late to stop some of the effects of climate change. However prevention is far better and far cheaper than adaptation.
Are are not in a peak warm cycle. If not for man made climate change the planet would likely be slightly cooling. Th
As for the next ice age, its probably hundred thousands years away. A few centuries.. yeah sure.
If you crap in your own nest then there's a problem.
More ignorance. Have you ever heard about the Dust Bowl. Here are some floods that occurred before the man made climate change existed:
1931 China Floods (Yangtze and Huai Rivers): Widely considered the deadliest natural disaster of the 20th century, torrential rains and an overflowing Yangtze River caused widespread devastation affecting over 40 million people, with death toll estimates ranging from hundreds of thousands to millions due to drowning, starvation, and disease.Great Mississippi River Flood of 1927 (United States): The most destructive river flood in U.S. history inundated over 23,000 square miles (70,000 square kilometers) across multiple states, displacing hundreds of thousands of residents and accelerating the Great Migration.1954 Yangtze River Floods (China): Prolonged heavy summer rainfall kept major cities like Wuhan underwater for three months, resulting in an estimated 33,000 deaths.Great Flood of Paris (1910): Continuous heavy winter rains caused the Seine River to burst its banks, flooding central Paris for weeks and disrupting the city's transport and infrastructure
We are still dealing with just over 1 degree of warming, that can’t be causing every catastrophe. No Hurricanes aren’t worse, Forest fires are mostly man made, the results of extending the human footprint. Hot summers have always been with us.
But in Chicago, a perfect sample of the world’s second biggest land mass, we are about to have yet another summer without a 100 degree day. We have only had one 100 degree day since 2012….there were 12 hundred degrees days in the 1980s.
The lesson here is global warming is a tiny increment in temperature if it even exists, and has to be measured in numbers not hysteria
Whoooooosh!!!
So this is the guy wo Trump appointed head of the National Climate Assessment report. Wielicki who has no formal training in climate science is other wise known for making frequently posting criticism of established climate science, like making videos on the rightwing Youtube channel PragerU (the U standing for University, which it's not). Many of his claims have already been rebutted online as they are directly contradicted by the available evidence and some of other view are just far right conspiracy nonsense, such as climate policy is actually a vehicle for communism.
You can see why the Trump administration tapped him for the role. He's unqualified for it and he's already predisposed to ensure the next report aligns with the Trump administrations agenda.
Now he does make the point
"If it happened naturally in the past, we should expect it to happen naturally again in the future—regardless of atmospheric CO₂."
Which is very likely correct. But of course this ignores the point that man made global warming will almost certainly make these sort of events more frequent.
Otherwise this guy is exactly what he accuses others of being, a grifter.
Glacier
Glaciers have been moving since long before climate change was a thing...
Of course and once they reached a temperature when they started melting around 1850, the temperature doesn’t have to increase for them to continue melting…in fact the melting should accelerate as bright snow surfaces are replaced with less reflecting rock and also as the glacier reaches lower more protected terrain.
But hey climate agnostics are stupid hey? Not nearly as smart as the hyenas that are learning these things about glaciers for the first time….glad to help morons. Now go and ask AI, you have been educated just enough to ask a few questions.
ROFL!.
Ships have been sinking long before torpedo's were a thing too.
Yes, glaciers do move. The thing is, they normally move at about the same speed that hair grows. This one was different. This glacier broke off and plummeted for more than a kilometer in a few seconds.
Maybe you should run to AI to check if what I'm saying is factual.
LMAO!
Which is also common regardless of green agenda...Pieces of glaciers break off if it reaches the ocean, or a lake or the end of a cliff...more concerning is the fact that the Chinese engineers did not consider this eventuality when they designed their fans and other infrastructure...seems more likely to happen than a 1 in 200 flood.
"Yes, glaciers do move. The thing is, they normally move at about the same speed that hair grows that DDA runs."
Year Glacier/location Event Approx. scale / consequences
1892 Tête Rousse, France Glacier-related outburst/ice-water disaster Destroyed part of Saint-Gervais; ~175–200 deaths
1895 Altels Glacier, Switzerland Large hanging-glacier collapse ~4 million m³ of ice; 6 deaths, 169 livestock killed
1902 Kolka Glacier, Caucasus Major glacier collapse 32 deaths; same glacier catastrophically collapsed again a century later
1949 Glacier du Tour, France Ice collapse/avalanche 6 deaths
1962 Huascarán, Peru Hanging glacier/rock-ice collapse ~13 million m³ deposited; ~4,000–5,000 deaths
1965 Allalin Glacier, Switzerland Glacier tongue/ice collapse at Mattmark ~88 workers killed; one of the classic Alpine glacier-collapse disasters
1970 Huascarán, Peru Enormous earthquake-triggered rock/ice avalanche ~50–100 million m³; roughly 18,000–23,000 deaths around Yungay depending on estimate
Woosh indeed. Many, many whooshes…you apparently thought this was the first time
@Rooinek ….you would like me to make your case. But no, after the end of the Little Ice Age. Man made carbon was less than 10% of what it is today by the end of WW2. If that was the reason for those glacier collapses through 1950, by now the Alps should be sliding into Geneva.
@bobbok ….the Guardian really, that bastion of honesty? But once again the experts have found what they want to find. Here’s a history of exceptional heat and glacier failure and Chat’s well reasoned conclusions.
………
Yes. The sanity check weakens any simple claim that “major glacier collapse = exceptionally hot weather”.
Looking at the better-documented failures:
Event Immediate temperature/weather evidence Does exceptional heat look important?
Altels, Switzerland — Sep 1895 Contemporary observers specifically described 1895 as warmer than usual, and later modeling found that warming and meltwater could have reduced basal adhesion. The paper also notes several unusually hot preceding summers. Probably contributed
Kolka, Caucasus — Jul 1902 Historical evidence identifies major ice/rock falls and glacier instability, but I could not find a reliable quantitative temperature anomaly for the preceding days/weeks. Unknown
Huascarán, Peru — Jan 1962 A true ice avalanche occurred, but classic glaciological reviews explicitly say how the simultaneous failure occurred remained an open question. Not established
Allalin, Switzerland — Aug 1965 Glacier was in one of its recurring surge-like active phases. Meltwater was involved, but these active phases occurred every 1–3 years without catastrophic failure. The literature does not identify exceptional heat as the decisive trigger. Possible, not demonstrated
Huascarán — May 1970 Triggered by a M7.9 earthquake. No
Kolka — Sep 2002 Complex rock/ice collapse preceded by weeks of rock and ice falls. Researchers considered many mechanisms; the source zone was actually cold permafrost, estimated around −5 to −10°C. No clear exceptional-heat trigger
Aru-1, Tibet — Jul 2016 Nearby station data showed temperatures within the normal range; NASA explicitly says there was nothing unusual about temperature or rainfall. Another study did find unusually high precipitation. No
Aru-2, Tibet — Sep 2016 Same regional situation; researchers emphasize unusual glacier dynamics, basal conditions and mass balance rather than a short heatwave. No clear heat trigger
Chamoli, India — Feb 2021 About a +5 K temperature anomaly during the preceding week, plus heavy snowfall. But the detailed study says the proposed meteorological triggers lack a strong demonstrated mechanical connection and temperatures at ~5,000 m remained below freezing. Plausible, uncertain
Marmolada, Italy — Jul 2022 This is the strongest case: preceding 70 days had temperatures outside the 1990–2020 standard-deviation range and at record highs; excess meltwater produced high hydraulic pressure. Yes, strong evidence
Nepal–Tibet — Aug 2026 Ground temperature measured ~10 km away was reportedly the highest in the two-year sensor record, two days beforehand. Cause remains under investigation. Plausible, too early
What I think the sanity check tells us
Of the roughly 10 historical cases for which we have something useful to say, I would classify them approximately:
2 with fairly strong evidence of unusually high temperature: Altels 1895, Marmolada 2022.
1 with a substantial short-term warm anomaly but uncertain causation: Chamoli 2021.
2–3 where ordinary meltwater/summer conditions mattered but extraordinary heat has not been demonstrated: Allalin and perhaps Kolka.
Several where exceptional heat is absent, unsupported, or clearly not the trigger: Aru 2016, Huascarán 1970, and probably others.
And Aru is particularly valuable as a control case: two enormous glacier detachments occurred in the same summer, yet measured temperatures were not exceptional.
That leads me to revise the weight I'd put on the current 2026 heat observation. The fact that the collapse occurred during warm August weather is not particularly probative, because glacier failures are already disproportionately summer/melt-season phenomena. And saying the nearby ground temperature was the highest in a two-year record sounds impressive, but two years is far too short to establish that the weather was historically exceptional.
‘The blast of earth, water and ice that rushed through a region of Nepal knocked out more than a tenth of the country’s hydropower capacity within minutes, striking at an industry Nepal has made central to its economic future.
The floods in the Bhotekoshi and Trishuli valleys damaged or destroyed 14 hydroelectric projects, including six under construction. After the deluge on Wednesday, 431 megawatts of generating capacity had gone dark, according to the Nepal Electricity Authority — more than 12 percent of the country’s total capacity.
The toll was far greater when including projects under construction. Counting those plants, now halted or in some cases swept away, would roughly double the capacity lost.’
………
Just another example of how natural energy sources like wind, solar and in this case hydro are subject to the forces of nature. The world needs oil, it’s what created an 8 billion person planet. Without oil we would have massive food shortages….with a real attempt to significantly limit oil, we will have serious food shortages. Fortunately all we have had so far is political showmanship.
Rather than trying to link Trump to a disaster he couldn’t have affected in any way the woke set should feel for the lives lost and the 2500 missing people.
How many examples do you need of oil disruptions caused by geopolitical instability. Suez Crisis, 6 Day War, Arab Oil Embargo, Iranian Revolution, Iran-Iraq War, Iran invading Kuwait, Venezuelan oil strike, Iraq War, Hurricane Kartina and Rita, Libyan Civil War, Russian invasion of Ukraine, USA war on Iran.
As for your argument about food shortages you know that's another strawman because your leaving out the ever so vital context that climate policies are not trying to eliminate fossil fuels overnight or before we have alternate means to replace them in food production. Is it possible to replace fossil-fuel consumption while maintaining modern living standards and food production, it will be a challenge but yes it's possible. Yes it will be costly, but the cost of inaction will likely be far higher.
As for Trump. Yes even if he had taken the most pro climate challenge policies and went hell for leather on them since returning to office it would almost certainly have made no difference to this disaster. On the other hand him and people like him have set back and delayed climate change action for years.
Fair point on the political instability around oil. But, however severe it has been, countries can work around it. If you have a Fukushima or a Nepal glacier event it can’t be negotiated away.
Secondly the world has been trying to trend away from oil since the mid 1990s. But fossil fuel consumption has gone up 70% since 1990 and the derivative of the consumption curve is not declining….ie fossil fuel consumption is not showing any signs of even plateauing. That’s the result of billions of practical decisions made by human beings every year. Hard to change.
And efforts to make the change have been hindered by the desire to eliminate oil where possible….so EVs vs Hybrids. If we had gone the Hybrid route 10 years ago gas consumption would be way lower. Once you have the Hybrid using the battery will be dominant, except for long trips. Practicality vs idealism, the missing element.
Regardless of what we believe about the severity of climate change, finding new energy technologies that work is a good thing if done sensibly. So far the results of what we have been doing are a failure
It's just a claim without evidence.
