#1 By: Maggie Koerth-Baker, December 20th, 2013 17:44
#2 By: newliminted, December 20th, 2013 17:50
#3 By: nonfer, December 20th, 2013 17:58
not sure also, maybe other?
#4 By: Dud Account, December 20th, 2013 18:06
*168 some odd feet, measured 4' from the ground.
#5 By: Mujokan, December 20th, 2013 18:08
If it had been four feet, he would really have been betting on a retreat!
#6 By: Raybert, December 20th, 2013 18:11
Old school low tech science, nice.
#7 By: Maggie Koerth-Baker, December 20th, 2013 18:12
Ugh. Sorry. Misread. It's fixed now.
#8 By: Mellivora Capensis, December 20th, 2013 18:24
Heh, just finished reading this from the news feed at Weather Underground.
#9 By: Mujokan, December 20th, 2013 18:42
Also now there is 401 feet between them for retreat of 233 feet (from the Wunderground link)
#10 By: Fabian F., December 21st, 2013 03:44
Ask the international scientific community for help - use feet as unit. There has to be a "typical Usian"-meme somewhere...
#11 By: Gloster, December 21st, 2013 07:00
That the glacier will retreat as a result of climate change is not really an automatic assumption to make. Climate change increases average temperatures (shrinking glaciers through extra summer melting), but it also increases average precipitation (growing glaciers through extra snowfall). So while the overall tendency is for total ice volume to decline over time, local conditions might change the relative expression of both effects and produce different results.
#12 By: Mujokan, December 21st, 2013 11:59
It's not automatic, but it is accurate.
#13 By: Maggie Koerth-Baker, December 25th, 2013 17:44
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.