***********************************EXCERPT***************************************
Dan in California says:
From the article: “One of the most pressing near-term impacts that scientists can study are glacier lake outburst floods. Unlike the widespread deluges that some inaccurately fear could follow sudden glacial melting, these floods are due to slow melting and occur on a smaller scale. They typically happen when an advancing glacier dams a river or water builds up behind soil and rocks deposited by a glacier.”
So now “one of the most pressing near-term impacts” is from ADVANCING glaciers? Can’t they at least get the fear of warming/cooling consistent within this one paper?
********************************EXCERPT****************************************
BravoZulu says:
“Retreating glaciers would lessen the river’s overall flow, but that impact would likely be more dramatic as the region’s population growth increases the demand for water.”
When precipitation falls on glaciers and doesn’t melt, the glacier grows. That obviously isn’t going to end up in streams anytime soon. When glaciers retreat, more water is melted and it adds to the rivers. That seems pretty basic and obvious. How are retreating glaciers going to reduce the water in Rivers. That would be the case if it didn’t melt and it accumulated water. Do these people not think that the amount of precipitation plus the melt equals the amount in rivers. They seem to have it backwards. I would think they would be more worried about glaciers expanding and the water not making it to the rivers. I must be too dumb to see that 2+2=4.