Kilimanjaro’s snow – it’s about land use change, tree cutting

Kilimanjaro’s snow – it’s about land use change, tree cutting. Anthony Watts thinks that denialists are the only ones who know that the decline in snow on Kilimanjaro is not because of AGW. It’s because of “changes in local land-use”! Wait, wouldn’t that mean it’s “anthropogenic”?

I don’t think a scientific case was ever been made that the retreating ice on Kilimanjaro is due to rising global temperatures, but Anthony keeps trying to pin it on. It’s also a chance to release some Al Gore venom, which must have accumulated painfully for Anthony. Looks like Al Gore was wrong, the warming that is melting Kilimanjaro’s snow cap is regional, not global.

This particular endlessly repeated complaint aside, An Inconvenient Truth has withstood legal challenge. The attempted one-sided rebuttal, The Great Global Warming Swindle, didn’t fare so well.

2 thoughts on “Kilimanjaro’s snow – it’s about land use change, tree cutting

  1. You don’t think a scientific case has ever been made that AGW caused the retreating Kilimanjaro glaciers?

    Ever watched An Inconvenient Truth?

    Oh, wait, so you are saying that AIT was not scientific?

    [An Inconvenient Truth was not a scientific paper. It was a summary for public enlightenment, which it did quite well. Perhaps you’re confused because you think Anthony’s contributions are scientific? – Ben]

  2. Kilimanjaro’s snow – its about land use change, tree cutting (WUWT,Sep28,2010)

    AIT……….Kilimanjaro was a dramatic, but unfortunate choice for An Inconvenient Truth. The changed-monsoon/deforestation explanations hadn’t been resolved. But note that this paper’s abstract refers to the deforestation effect as being ‘supplementary’:

    “This means that upslope flow from the forest zone is an important supplementary source of moisture for the upper slopes of the mountain and that free-air variability, although important, alone cannot account for the variability in the summit moisture regime. Long term ice retreat at the summit of Kilimanjaro therefore is most likely to be influenced by changes in local land use as well as more regional free-air changes.”

    “COULD BE PARTLY TO BLAME”……….is New Scientist’s characterization. Anthony raises this to a “MOSTLY” to give it a WUWTian spin into significance.

    GLOBAL GLACIER CUMULATIVE VOLUME CHANGE……….For techies, a plunging graph can be as tragic as a Hemingway story. After increasing since 1950, turning downward in 1975, and becoming precipitous after 2000.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/himalayan-glaciers-growing-basic.htm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s