Posted by Snow Addicted Friday, June 13, 2014

Muir Glacier & Inlet in (1895) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.Photographing Alaska's stunning landscapes has been a passion of Bruce Molnia's since the first time he visited the 49th state, as a Cornell University graduate student in the late 1960s. It was these photos – taken by everyone from John Muir in 1879 to later explorers like William Field and National Geographic's Bradford Washburn – that Molnia would use when he was asked in 1999 by then-Interior Secretary Bruce Babbit to find "unequivocal, unambiguous" proof that climate change was real.

Muir Glacier & Inlet in (1895)
In the photo above, the west shoreline of Muir Inlet in Alaska's Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve is shown as it appeared in 1895. Notice the lack of vegetation on the slopes of the mountains, and the glacier that stands more than 300 feet high.
Muir Glacier & Inlet in (1895) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Glacier & Inlet in (2005)
In the photo above, the west shoreline of Muir Inlet in Alaska's Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve is shown as it appeared in 2005. Over the century since the first photo was taken, Muir Glacier ceased to have a tidewater terminus. Note the lack of floating ice and the abundant vegetation on many slopes.
Muir Glacier & Inlet in (2005) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Plateu Glacier (1961)
Taken on Wachusett Inlet in the Saint Elias Mountains of Alaska, this photo from September 1961 shows the lower reaches of Plateau Glacier, then a tidewater calving valley glacier with parts of its terminus being land based on either side of the fjord. Including submarine ice, the total ice thickness here is greater than 650 feet.
Plateu Glacier (1961) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Plateu Glacier (2003)
The 2003 repeat photograph documents the dramatic changes that occurred over 42 years. Plateau Glacier retreated out of the field of view and has all but melted away, after leaving a small remnant, Plateau Remnant, on the flanks of the Bruce Hills. The tributary glacier that formerly supported the medial moraine has retreated nearly 2 miles.
Plateu Glacier (2003) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Bear Glacier (1920s)
Both photos in this pair were taken from the same location on a ridge in Bulldog Cove, near Bear Glacier Point, Kenai Mountains, Alaska, show the changes to Bear Glacier between the early 1920s and 2005. The older photograph is from a postcard labeled Harding Glaciers, Resurrection Bay, Alaska.
Bear Glacier (1920s) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Bear Glacier (2005)
In the approximately 80 years between these photos, Bear Glacier's piedmont lobe has retreated completely out of the field of view. Large icebergs, floating in the ice-marginal lake that fills the basin formerly occupied by Bear Glacier's piedmont lobe, represent the only glacier ice that is visible.
Bear Glacier (2005) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Northwestern Glacier (1920s - 1940s)
A pair of photos taken from the same location on the west shoreline of Harris Bay in Alaska's Kenai Fjords National Park. The first is an undated winter to early summer view, probably from the mid-1920s to the 1940s. The rocky shoreline in the foreground is covered by numerous small icebergs calved by the retreating Northwestern Glacier.
Northwestern Glacier (1920s - 1940s) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Northwestern Glacier (2005)
The second photo dates from August 12, 2005. In the roughly 60 to 80 years between photos, Northwestern Glacier has retreated out of the field of view. In fact, the 2005 terminus is located more than 6 miles to the northwest. Ice-free Harris Bay makes up the foreground of the image.
Northwestern Glacier (2005) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Northwestern Glacier (1909)
Taken from a cobble beach on the west shoreline of Harris Bay in Alaska's Kenai Fjords National Park, this 1909 photo shows the retreating terminus of the Northwestern Glacier, which then stood just over 160 feet high. No vegetation is visible in the photograph.
Northwestern Glacier (1909) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Northwestern Glacier (2004)
By August 2004, the Northwestern Glacier has retreated out of the field of view. In fact, the 2004 terminus is located more than 6 miles to the northwest. Ice-free Harris Bay makes up the foreground of the image.
Northwestern Glacier (2004) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Pedersen Glacier (1920s- 1940s)
When photographed here sometime between the 1920s and the 1940s, Pedersen Glacier was calving icebergs into the lake from a seracs-capped terminus that ranged from about 66 to 131 feet high. No vegetation is visible. (Kenai Fjords National Park)
Pedersen Glacier (1920s- 1940s) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Pedersen Glacier (2005)
The second photo dates was taken Aug. 10, 2005. Since the first photo, most of the lake has filed with sediment and now supports grasses, shrubs and aquatic plants. The glacier's terminus has retreated by more than a mile and no icebergs are visible. Isolated patches of snow are present at a few higher elevation locations.
Pedersen Glacier (2005) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Pedersen Glacier (1909)
The first photo was taken by U.S. Grant from the west shoreline of Aialik Bay on July 23, 1909, a view of the then-retreating northern part of the Pedersen Glacier terminus. The water in the foreground is part of an ice-marginal lake/lagoon located next to Aialik Bay.
Pedersen Glacier (1909) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Pedersen Glacier (2005)
In the 94 years between the photos, most of the lake/lagoon has filled with sediment and now supports several varieties of grasses, shrubs, and aquatic plants. Only a few small icebergs are visible. Note that vegetation has developed on nearly every exposed land surface.
Pedersen Glacier (2005) - This is Alaska's Muir Glacier & Inlet in 1895. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Reid Glacier (1899)
This 1899 photo shows the approximately 197-ft.-high tidewater terminus of the then-retreating Reid Glacier in Glacier Bay National Park. The hillside in the foreground is covered by a few inches of snow. No trees are present on the hillside or on any other surface in the field of view.
Reid Glacier (1899) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Reid Glacier (2003)
In the 104 years between photographs, Reid Glacier has retreated nearly 2 miles. The hillside in the foreground is covered with dense vegetation, including both conifers and deciduous trees. Vegetation covers much of the lower slopes on the opposite side of the inlet.
Reid Glacier (2003) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Glacier and Inlet (1890)
The first photo was taken in 1890, in Muir Inlet in Alaska's Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve.
Muir Glacier and Inlet (1890) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Glacier and Inlet (2005)
The second photo was taken in 2005, in Muir Inlet in Alaska's Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve.
Muir Glacier and Inlet (2005) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Glacier and Inlet (1896)
The first photo was taken in 1896, in Muir Inlet in Alaska's Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve.
Muir Glacier and Inlet (1896) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Glacier and Inlet (2005)
The second photo was taken in 2005, in Muir Inlet in Alaska's Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve.
Muir Glacier and Inlet (2005) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Yale Glacier and Inlet (1937)
The first photo, taken in June 1937, shows the tidewater terminus of the Yale Glacier in Prince William Sound, Alaska. Except for the moraine-covered ice on both margins of the glacier, snow still covers most of the lower reaches of the glacier.
Yale Glacier and Inlet (1937) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Yale Glacier and Inlet (2006)
During the 69 years between photos, Yale Glacier has retreated by nearly 4 miles, with most of the retreat occurring after 1957. The width of the tidewater part of the terminus of the glacier is much less than half of what it was in 1937. The glacier also has thinned substantially, in places by more than 800 feet.
Yale Glacier and Inlet (2006) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Glacier and Inlet (1880s- 1890s)
A photographer and several tourists explore the icebergs in Muir Inlet sometime in the 1880s or 1890s, while in the background the glacier rises more than 300 feet above the water. Numerous icebergs, some more than 6 1/2 feet in diameter, are grounded on the tidal flat.
Muir Glacier and Inlet (1880s- 1890s) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Glacier and Inlet (2005)
By the time this 2005 photo was taken, Muir Glacier had retreated more than 30 miles and is completely out of the field of view. The beach in the foreground is covered by a cobble and pebble lag deposit, which was winnowed from sediment deposited by Muir Glacier and by melting grounded icebergs.
Muir Glacier and Inlet (2005) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Glacier and Inlet (1950)
This photo from August 1950 is the first of two repeat photos to document the significant changes in the 9 years since the 1941 shot. Muir Glacier has retreated nearly 2 miles, exposing Muir Inlet, and thinned by more than 300 feet. However, it still is connected with tributary Riggs Glacier.
Muir Glacier and Inlet (1950) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Glacier and Inlet (2004)
This Aug. 31, 2004, photo shows dramatic changes since the first photo was taken more than 60 years earlier. Muir Glacier has retreated out of the field of view and is now located more than 4 miles to the northwest. Note the dense vegetation that has developed on the till cover of White Thunder Ridge.
Muir Glacier and Inlet (2004) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Carrol Glacier (1906)
This photo, taken in August 1906 by Charles Will Wright, shows the calving terminus of Carroll Glacier sitting at the head of Queen Inlet in Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve. No vegetation is visible.
Carrol Glacier (1906) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Carrol Glacier (2004)
The second photo, taken in June 2004, shows that the terminus of Carroll Glacier has changed to a stagnant, debris-covered glacier that has significantly thinned and retreated from its 1906 position. The head of Queen Inlet has been filled by sediment, which reaches over 400 feet in places.
Carrol Glacier (2004) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Inlet (1976)
This 1976 photo shows the calving terminus of Muir Glacier extending the width of the fjord in upper Muir Inlet, in Glacier Bay National Park. Aside from algae growing on a lighter colored dike, there is no vegetation visible in the photo.
Muir Inlet (1976) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Inlet (2003)
The 2003 photo above documents the disappearance of Muir Glacier from the field of view. The two small cirque glaciers at the upper left have probably not been connected to Muir Glacier, which has retreated more than 6 miles to the north. Note that vegetation is beginning to develop.
Muir Inlet (2003) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Mc Carty Glacier (1909)
The photo above, taken in July 1909, shows a scene about 5 miles north of the mouth of the McCarty Fjord in Alaska's Kenai Fjords National Park. The east side of the terminus of the then-retreating McCarty Glacier is shown, and little, if any, vegetation is present on the upper slopes.
Mc Carty Glacier (1909) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Mc Carty Glacier (2004)
The second photo, taken in August 2004, shows part of McCarty Glacier now retreated more than 9 miles up the bay. Dense, diverse vegetation, featuring alder, willow, and spruce, has become established on the hill slopes and back beach areas.
Mc Carty Glacier (2004) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Mc Carty Glacier (1909)
Another early photo of the McCarty Glacier, taken on July 31, 1909.
Mc Carty Glacier (1909) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Mc Carty Glacier (2004)
Nearly a century later, the same McCarty Glacier, photographed on August 10, 2004.
Mc Carty Glacier (2004) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir and Adams Glaciers (1899)
Taken from the shoreline near Muir Point in Alaska's Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve, Alaska, this 1899 photo by Grove Karl Gilbert shows the calving terminus of Muir Glacier near its confluence with Adams Glacier. No vegetation is visible.
Muir and Adams Glaciers (1899) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir and Adams Glaciers (2003)
The 2003 photo documents the disappearance of Muir and Adams Glaciers from the field of view. Muir Glacier has retreated more than 25 miles to the north. Note the extensive vegetation that has developed.
Muir and Adams Glaciers (2003) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Yalik Glacier (1909)
Taken on Nuka Passage in Kenai Fjords National Park, this 1909 photo shows the retreating northern part of the terminus of Yalik Glacier. When photographed, Yalik Glacier had a gently sloping terminus with little elevation at its margin.
Yalik Glacier (1909) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Yalik Glacier (2004)
The second photo, taken in August 2004, shows a Yalik Glacier that has thinned by more than 320 feet and retreated by nearly a mile. It is now fronted by an ice-marginal lake. The shoreline south of the glacier supports several varieties of grasses, shrubs, and trees.
Yalik Glacier (2004) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Denali National Park (1919)
This June 1919 photo was taken near a retreating valley glacier along the East Fork of the Teklanika River in Alaska's Denali National Park. Small tundra plants are the only identifiable vegetation.
Denali National Park (1919) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Denali National Park (2004)
This August 2004 photograph documents the continued thinning and retreat of East Fork Teklanika Glacier, which retreats at an average rate of about 13 feet per year.
Denali National Park (2004) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Northwestern Glacier (1920s - 1940s)
Taken along the west shoreline of Harris Bay in Kenai Fjords National Park, this winter-to-early-spring view probably dates from the mid-1920s to the 1940s. The shallow water next to the shoreline is covered by sea ice, which contains a number of pieces of brash ice.
Northwestern Glacier (1920s - 1940s) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Northwestern Glacier (2005)
The second photo was taken in August 2005, and shows the Northwestern Glacier has retreated out of the field of view. Sedimentation and uplift have expanded the shore area and produced a marshy wetland covered by a diverse array of vegetation.
Northwestern Glacier (2005) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Toboggan Glacier (1905)
Taken near the Tobaggan Glacier in Alaska's Chugach National Forest, this August 1905 photo shows the glacier thinning and retreating, surrounded by a large bedrock barren zone. Minimal vegetation existed on the fjord-facing hill slopes.
Toboggan Glacier (1905) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Toboggan Glacier (2008)
By the time this photo was taken in August 2008, the thin tongue of ice that was visible on the glacier's terminus years earlier is gone. Both hanging glacier tributaries continue to retreat.
Toboggan Glacier (2008) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Inlet (1895)
This photo, taken in the winter of 1895, shows a massive glacier on Muir Inlet.
Muir Inlet (1895) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Muir Inlet (2005)
A hundred and ten years later, Bruce Molnia photographed the same location on Muir Inlet, showing the glacier retreated completely from view.
Muir Inlet (2005) - Photos of Alaska Then And Now. This is A Get Ready to Be Shocked When You See What it Looks Like Now.

Source: The Weather Channel
Related Posts:

{ 69 comments... read them below or Comment }

  1. Or maybe it's just that the old pictures are taken in broad winter while the others were taken during spring or summer

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am sure the dead of winter was prime tourist time at the turn of the century.

      Delete
    2. Glaciers don't disappear in the summer.

      Delete
    3. ...Not sure if herping or just really derp.

      Delete
    4. No, if these pictures were taken in the winter, there would be no open water and no bare ground.

      I watched Childs glacier and Sheridan Glacier in steady retreat over ten years, living in Cordova AK. Childs shriveled to half its height between 1998 and 2008, and Sheridan retreated so far upriver in the same time period that where once you could see it just by standing on the bridge, you needed binoculars to see it in 2008.

      I can't imagine either have grown at all in the last six years.

      Delete
    5. "maybe it's just that the old pictures are taken in broad winter while the others were taken during spring or summer"

      Jesus Christ but that is one of the dumbest fucking things I have ever heard. Do you even know what a glacier is?

      Delete
    6. "Broad Winter"? Maybe you should just stick to looking at the pretty pictures and leave the discussion about climate change to those of us that passed geology class.

      Delete
    7. hey he could be talking about the lack of vegitation the photos keep pointing out

      Delete
    8. The lack of vegetation are things like trees. Pretty sure you can still see trees in the winter. ><

      Delete
    9. Are you seriously trying to claim that glaciers, hundreds of feet thick, retreated several miles in summer and returned in winter?

      Delete
  2. Glaciers aren't a result of one season's snowfall.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What are you all talking about, are you kidding? This is a direct result of climate change, whether man made or not, are you blind, or just dense?

    ReplyDelete
  4. More room for fishing!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I am waiting for the world to tilt on it axis so we can see where the new ones will form! It's just life happening...geezzz people. It will continue after your dead to the same as it happened before you came.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. To think that what we have witnessed in our miniscule time here is "normal" and should never change is awfully conceited of us. And exactly how is increased vegetation a bad thing, especially considering the need to feed an ever increasing global population?

      Delete
    2. The updated pics are not taken at the same time of year and some are not the same area or point of view as originals. Yes glacial ice melts, yes with more or less snowfall it affects the glaciers. Up north where these glaciers are, they are totally different than the tide water glaciers in Southeast Ak. The glaciers around Petersburg are closely watched and have actually grown in the past decade. Stop whining about them and instead go and actually see for yourselves. Get the facts yourself and 2nd or 3rd person opinions.

      Delete
    3. Yeah, cause glaciers recede during the summer. My god, how fucking stupid can someone be?

      Delete
    4. All photographs taken from the same point with meticulous care. If you can't see that then you have extraordinarily poor observation skills. Yes they can be taken in different seasons, but you know of course that glaciers were there winter and summer back in the 20s. Like hell you're from AK.

      Delete
  6. Btw, I was born and raised 37yrs in S.E. AK.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. how can you not see they're from the same point of view???...for an alaskan, you're an embarassment!...

      Delete
    2. They are taken from nearly the exact same location. Most of the old photos have time of year attributed to them, most in summer.

      Delete
  7. Apparently Gaia is replacing all the rainforest losses with her own vegetation. Despite all the global warming caused by the sun, she is replenishing herself quite well thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'd like to see before and after pictures of Portage Glacier on Turnagain Arm.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thank you Andreas! .The results of the rising sea levels are already being seen in Miami, especially South Beach.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The hoax is that man caused it and that man can stop it. Some people are just easily fooled as is evidenced by the above.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Global warming is precisely a phenomenon caused by human activity--there's no way to wiggle out of our responsibility for this. Whether we can slow down, stop or even reverse the event is another question.

      Delete
    2. Your an idiot if you think man can alter the planet like this.

      Delete
    3. Clearly your the idiot here. Why do you think it's so hard? Want a faster example? Drop a couple Megaton nukes on Yellowstone park and then try to tell us you can't change the planet halfwit.

      Delete
    4. considering algae alone has been able to alter earth's climate and atmospheric composition on multiple occasions in the past (ie: great oxidation event responsible for mass extinctions of nearly all life on the planet), yes, humans certainly can

      Delete
  11. Is it just me or water look higher in the older pics. And for the geology type, uplift, is that the land springing back after the weight is gone.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is a certain amount of isostatic rebound after the glacial load is removed. The Scandinavian area is still rebounding after the last ice sheet retreat.

      Delete
  12. The first country who doesnt care about climate change is usa, but im happy that florida, new york and california will be the first places under water.

    ReplyDelete
  13. These pictures are compelling. Clearly, the glaciers in North America are shrinking and have been for some time. Likewise, much of the USA used to have glaciers that have melted. It's reall no debate: there is climate change. The debate is whether it is human caused. My perspective is the climate of Earth is not static. It shows signs of change over it's history prior to the use of fossil fuels and factories. We need to be responsible but not think more highly of ourselves than we ought. We really aren't sovereign over our planet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, and the fact that the current pace of climate change is MANY times faster than anything the planet has -ever- seen is totally irrelevant, even though the dates and rates of change line up pretty damn close with the pace and scale of human industrial advancement.

      If you understand the scale of our planet's history compared with that of our species, and then look at the rate and timing of these changes. there is no possible way you can claim, with a straight face, that it's a coincidence. Even ignoring almost all the data and just focusing on the broad strokes, it would be by far the most unlikely coincidence in the history of our planet.

      Delete
    2. This is over the course of a century. The earth has been around for 45,000,000 centuries. Has -ever- there been a climate change so dramatic in any of those 45,000,000 centuries compared to what we're seeing today? The only time it ever has been is if there was something extraordinary causing such change.

      And that change quite simply is us. There is no other explanation.

      Delete
    3. Hmmm, That is 4,500,000,000 years, as in 4.5 billion years before present. And, as to major climatic changes, there have been great ones in the geologic past, but geologists rarely count in decades, or a few hundred years. Major climatic changes in geologic history usually took a very long time. But, there were the impact phenomena, and the arrival of man.

      Delete
    4. The most logical and well stated post on here.

      Delete
  14. listen, the govt knows ,and they will tell you,,,that if you walk too heavy and too many people on edge of an island it will tip and dump you into the water.

    ReplyDelete
  15. As soon as you talk to a religious person about climate change, the conversation becomes insane. Dogma blinds people to the reality before their very eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The entire US was covered in ice at one point. Thats why we now have the great lakes. This stuff has been melting for eons and will continue to do so until we get slapped upside the head with another comet or yellowstone blows creating another iceage. It's not rocket science for crying out loud.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, not even all of Canada was covered. And the ice stopped at about halfway through Ohio because there were mountains in the way. Glacial ice has never covered all of the US.

      Delete
    2. Correct, It did not cover all of the US but it wasn't stopped my any mountains-there haven't been any in Ohio is millions of years since before any ice ages. The ice just finally reached a point where the temperature had warmed up sufficiently that it ran out of steam. West of the Mississippi the Missouri River marks the southern terminus of the ice sheets and East of the Mississippi the ice stopped about 100 or so north of the Ohio River. Even north of the terminus though there were "driftless areas" where ice went around hilly spots and didn't cover everything.

      But to the point of this website, humans are quickly changing the environment and warming the planet to the point that we will have great difficulty surviving as a species and it's insane to pretend otherwise.

      Delete
    3. There are definitely mountains in Ohio. There is a 1600 ft above sea level peak in the middle of Lancaster for Pete's sake. It's right on the edge of the Appalachian Mountains.

      Delete
  17. I was shocked to see how..much the New Zealand glaciers
    Had receded. Do you have any old pics of Frans Joseph and the othet one on the south island. Thanks for this great article

    ReplyDelete
  18. climate change happens ,the earth is constantly morphing.and yes this type of rapid change over the centuries has probably happened before.but people were not around to see it so we do not know for sure.saying that people do effect climate with all our pollution. can we reverse it ? no. the only real way for people to reverse it is for the human population to die off.sounds stupid does it not,but is a fact the earth is overpopulated.another thing is have you ever melted an icecube?it first starts melting slowly but the more mass it losses the faster it appears to melt.the same with the glaciers they reach a tipping point and appear to melt faster .I highly doubt that man in all his brilliance can reverse that.a 1000 years from now who can say it might go back the other way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Locally, man's (meaning mankind) activities MAY affect weather, in example, stronger storms, drought in a local area, but, I am VERY skeptical that it can AFFECT or EFFECT the CLIMATE as it is currently "sold" by the likes of those in power. THAT is a political ploy and sales job to get the Federal Representatives elected so they can make TAX SLAVES out of all of us. Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it. The Atmosphere, earthquakes and even large storms are more controlled/affected by Sun Spots and Solar Flares.

      Delete
  19. Pictures and perspectives aside: We need to take better care of our planet, period.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe you should realize that not all "facts" are truly FACTS. Out solar system, atmosphere all the way down to the way our bodies work to take in nutrition and excrete waste is based on + and - ions. Even lightening and thunder is based on this and it is an attempt to "balance". NO ONE ever talks about our use of ELECTRICITY as a possible cause......Why do solar discharges AFFECT (as in FRY) out electric grid? What attracts these to the Power centers of our GRID? Research how the climate and strength of storms have changed since the massive use of ELECTRICITY and the Electromagnetic field of the EARTH changes since as well as the WEATHER, Climate, etc. Who decided to blame this on CO2 use? Why not our massive, worldwide use of Electricity? What happens when you put thousands of satellites over our atmosphere and beam electric signals back to earth through our atmosphere? The earth is a gigantic Electromagnet......what impact does the slowing of the molten iron core of earth have? What causes the "slowing of the currents in the core of earth"? Why is it slowing? Come on folks, study your science. NEVER trust your politicians who want your vote and use blame and fear to get it.

      Delete
  20. As the late George Carlin said..........."The planet will be fine, Saying we need to save the planet is ridiculous. We just arent going to be here."

    ReplyDelete
  21. We should all be dead from the Bird Flu Pandemic by now.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The real debate shouldn't be whether humans are causing global climate change. It should be how our quality of life is going to change once the local glaciers are totally melted. Where does your water come from? Add in pollution from any number of industrial sectors and the current population levels and die off numbers have the potential to destabilize the economy more than the bankers.

    ReplyDelete
  23. 100 years from now when your grandchildren stop hearing about "climate change" because it has become "land change", and our country begins to experience underwater coastlines, you would believe it. If you weren't already dead. If it can't hurt the future to take a chance on saving it, why wouldn't you try, whether you believe or not?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would you buy insurance for your house, if the annual premium was more than the value of your house???
      That is why, the risk is so tiny, and the insurance costs are ridiculously high

      Sea rising at 7 inches a century, for the last 200+ years, and temps have been flat for 18+ years, me not worried.

      Delete
  24. Je to krásné! Tolik nové zeleně místo špinavého ledu.....

    ReplyDelete
  25. Climate science or no climate science, we desperately need to clean up the planet and stop burning fossil fuels which are causing massive pollution and huge health problems throughout the world. Apart from anything else, these are non-renewable resources that once burnt are gone forever. And soon we will have wars between nations fighting to get these resources from the Arctic and Antarctic. Just so we can keep on polluting?How crazy is that? We need to get our act together to stop massive consumption and make a concerted effort to clean up the earth's air and oceans, regardless of whether climate change is caused by humans or not.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Just think, in another hundred years it could look just like it did 100 years ago. AGAIN! AND AGAIN, AND AGAIN. WE can't do anything about any of it, nor have WE caused any of it. How on earth did these same things happen time and time again before humans even walked the planet!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Reading some of the comments here made me realize 2 things:

    1) We are doomed

    2) It's a good thing

    ReplyDelete
  28. Alot of the pictures look like you are comparing a summer picture to the same area in winter time in the next picture. Very deceiving to say the least. Also black and white photos compared to a color photo will look vastly different even if taken of the same subject at the same time. These prove nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Take a gander at Revelation 16:8-9. It's going to get MUCH hotter, and soon, guys...
    Every living thing in the sea dies too...(Rev. 16:3) It's already starting.
    Numbers are down on a massive scale worldwide. Habitat is dying.
    We are rapidly approaching the terminus of this age.
    There's only one answer and only one way out...or UP, as the case may be...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. really, there are more people on the earth today, than ever before, Ive heard and heard your story for hundreds (maybe thousands) of years, frankly it will take a lot more than a little bit of heat to get rid of many people. they thrive in the heat, not the cold, just look at where everyone lives, near the equator, because its warm there...

      Delete
  30. Holy cow Bat man...who has time for all of this? Not I replies the Batman! So,on with life I go!

    ReplyDelete
  31. If you look at the maps of Glacier Bay, you will see the vast majority of the retreat was from about 1780 (when Capt Cooke) to the early 1900's, hundreds of KM, in recent times, the retreat is much slower and some glaciers are actually increasing in size. I was there less than a year ago, ask the park rangers for a map, and ask them if some glaciers are growing...

    ReplyDelete
  32. Yet the Hubbard Glacier continues to grow at astronomical rates. And the Bering Glacier. And the Juneau Ice Field. And McGinnis and Taku.... Yep, according to the National Parks Service, there are 616 "officially named" glaciers in Alaska - and the Alaskan Almanac estimates that the state probably has has 100,000 glaciers. So, if you only list the glaciers that are retreating, are you really reporting the facts? More important, isn't retreating and expanding what glaciers are suppose to do?

    ReplyDelete
  33. killing myself right now. no really im going to to do it? nobody cares? I thought we were talking about things nobody cared about or could change? ohh

    ReplyDelete
  34. Not a denialist, but this really does have a touch of alarmism. Especially when several of the photos admit that the glaciers were already retreating even in the early 1900s. Haven't you people ever heard of the Ice Age? The Earth's been warming for over 10,000 years now. I sincerely hope your concern over man-made climate change isn't resting on "Oh noes, Alaskan glaciers have all gonez away!!"

    ReplyDelete
  35. Perhaps I'm talking through my hat ... I'm aware of climate chanes around the world. And the poles retreating or melting glaciers. I wonder if this had any effect. If I'm not mistaken a few or several years ago there was a tetonic shift of the Earth's crust causing the poles to shift or causing the Earth's axis to change a bit. How much? I do not recall. I wonder though if it be enough to contribute to the melting off of the glaciers? If it shift, it might be exposing more of the glaciers to warmer areas a little bit, no?

    ReplyDelete

Follow by Email

Translate

Must-See Stories

Don't show again. Close

More Snow? Like Us!