Melting and sublimation on Mount Everest’s highest glacier due to human-induced climate change have reached the point that several decades of accumulation are being lost annually now that ice has been exposed, according to a University of Maine-led international research team that analyzed data from the world’s highest ice core and highest automatic weather stations.
The extreme sensitivity of the high-altitude Himalayan ice masses in rapid retreat forewarns of quickly emerging impacts that could range from increased incidence of avalanches and decreased capacity of the glacier stored water on which more than 1 billion people depend to provide melt for drinking water and irrigation.
At the rate at which the highest glaciers are disappearing, Mount Everest expeditions could be climbing over more exposed bedrock, potentially making it more challenging to climb as snow and ice cover continues to thin in the coming decades, according to UMaine climate scientists Mariusz Potocki and Paul Mayewski.
The team’s findings, published in the journal Nature Portfolio Journal Climate and Atmospheric Science, are the latest research results from the 2019 National Geographic and Rolex Perpetual Planet Everest Expedition. The expedition’s scientists, including six from UMaine’s Climate Change Institute, studied environmental changes to understand future impacts for life on Earth as global temperatures rise.
“It answers one of the big questions posed by our 2019 NGS/Rolex Mount Everest Expedition — whether the highest glaciers on the planet are impacted by human-source climate change. The answer is a resounding yes, and very significantly since the late 1990s,” Mayewski says.
“Climate predictions for the Himalaya suggest continued warming and continued glacier mass loss, and even the top of the Everest is impacted by anthropogenic source warming,” says Potocki, a glaciochemist and doctoral candidate in the Climate Change Institute who collected the highest ice core on the planet.
I'm just going to say it: Science is bullshit. Period.
You can literally present any scientific theory, and as long as it conforms to the system's current narrative, it's regarded as absolute truth.
Read the above article carefully, particularly the bold and underlined portions. Then process what you've read unbiasedly and see if you disagree.
It should go without saying that "scientists" from the "Climate Change Institute" are going to conclude that "human-induced climate change" is an observable phenomenon. It doesn't even matter if it is or not, because they believe it is. Therefore, all of their Science! will confirm that bias.
It should also go without saying that it's a conflict of interest to come to any other conclusion. They will make the Science! say what they want it to say or they're going to have to convert to another religion and find another career.
"But what about their data?"
Who is going to climb to the top of Mount Everest and prove their Science! wrong? Are you? Nobody else is even capable of offering an alternative theory. Are there any "institutes" funded by powerful donors who want to send a team of scientists to the top of Mount Everest to contradict the study? Of course not. So we have one theory, and that theory is going to be regarded as truth even though it's just an agenda-driven opinion that hasn't been subjected to the scientific method.
Plus, if their Science! doesn't conclude that humans are changing the weather, then they don't have a religion, a purpose, an institute or paid vacations assignments at the top of Mount Everest.
It's also important to note that it's not just proving that "climate change" is occurring (which it obviously is, because the weather isn't static and never has been), it's proving that it's humans that are changing it in a negative and catastophic way.
"Human-induced climate change" is the current propaganda crop that the powers-that-be are seeding. The reason they're seeding this idea is because they have an agenda.
"What's their agenda?"
In my piece Depopulationism for Dummies I present a theory using deductive reasoning, and then applied the Hegelian Dialectic to formulate a thesis on the subject. In the thesis I outlined the stages of depopulationism. We are currently in the beginning of the 2nd stage (technological escapism), with the 3rd stage being human emigration into space colonies. Historically, this will become known as the "sixth extinction," and will be blamed on human overpopulation overheating the planet and catastrophically changing the climate. Eventually, they will gentrify earth and turn it into a nature resort that they use as a vacation destination. The richest man in the world is on record saying that exact thing.
That's a summary of their agenda.
Science! will be used to verify that agenda.
In that process, Science! will become the next religion that persecutes non-believers. (The COVID pandemic has clearly set the stage for this.)
In conclusion, when they give their "climate predictions" think about your local weatherman and how often his predictions are right. I'm not talking about when it's in the middle of summer and he says it's going to be hot all week. I'm talking about when something out of the ordinary actually occurs.
What's the old saying, the weatherman is the only person who can be wrong 90% of the time and still keep his job?
These "scientists" are just glorified weathermen.
No comments:
Post a Comment