Requiem For A Glacier: Time To Say Goodbye To Lyell Glacier In Yosemite National Park?

To follow up on Lee Dalton's suggestion above: The problem with the IGNORE button is you have to be logged in in order to screen comments out. Plus the links to reader comments on the first page even when logged in can be dominated by one string of back and forth, like this thread right now. When I see such an overwhelming thread my instinct is to avoid clicking through to the comments. It's easy to see how thoughtful discussion on the rich and diverse content on this Web site could be squelched. I still would like to see something on the front page that refers to a new reader's comment being posted on a story. But instead of listing each comment for the same story by user name, I'd prefer seeing a consolidated listing where perhaps just a running tally of how many comments have been made per story is listed. So instead of there being a list of 7 comments by different users under reader's comments all for this one article like right now, pushing off the front page any other comments on a different article, how about something like "30 comments posted on Requiem for a Glacier...." while still keeping the time element below the link. And if another reader posts a comment on another article it won't be drowned out by 30 separate listings for Requiem and it can have its turn at the top of the page 1 comments section. This is off the topic of the article I know. But there are other comments off topic here as well.

And the amount of AGW deniers that deny global warming.  A great group to be in, obviously!  Especially if you're not smart enough to pass a basic collegiate level 101  science class.

• Eric Buck - Realtor Extrodinaire from Colorado
• Rush Limbaugh
• Beachdumb - idiot extrodinaire from the OB
• Glenn Beck
• Bill O'Reilly
• Ted Nugent - the old one hit wonder
• Christian Extremists
• ISIS
  
  

Gary you left these folks out:

As well as the answer to why global temperatures have been flat for the last 18 years depsite massive increases in global warming. 

Scientists questioning the accuracy of IPCC climate projections

These scientists have said that it is not possible to project global climate accurately enough to justify the ranges projected for temperature and sea-level rise over the next century. They may not conclude specifically that the current IPCC projections are either too high or too low, but that the projections are likely to be inaccurate due to inadequacies of current global climate modeling.

• Judith Curry, Professor and former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. ^{[16] [17] [18] [19]}
• Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study; Fellow of the Royal Society ^[20]
• Steven E. Koonin, theoretical physicist and Director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University^[21]
• Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences^[22][23][24]

• Nils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University, former chairman of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution (1999–2003)^[25]
• Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre, visiting fellow Australian National University^[26]
• Denis Rancourt, former professor of physics at University of Ottawa, research scientist in condensed matter physics, and in environmental and soil science^[27][28][29]
• Peter Stilbs, professor of physical chemistry at Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm^[30]
• Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London^[31]
• Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute ^[32]
• Anastasios Tsonis, distinguished professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee^[33]
• Fritz Vahrenholt, German politician and energy executive with a doctorate in chemistry^[34]

Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes

Graph showing the ability with which a global climate model is able to reconstruct the historical temperature record, and the degree to which those temperature changes can be decomposed into various forcing factors. It shows the effects of five forcing factors: greenhouse gases, man-made sulfate emissions, solar variability, ozone changes, and volcanic emissions.^[35]

These scientists have said that the observed warming is more likely to be attributable to natural causes than to human activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.

• Khabibullo Abdusamatov, astrophysicist at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences^[36]
• Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics^[37][38]
• Timothy Ball, professor emeritus of geography at the University of Winnipeg^[39]
• Robert M. Carter, former head of the school of earth sciences at James Cook University^[40]
• Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa^[41]
• Chris de Freitas, associate professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland^[42]
• David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester^[43]
• Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University^[44]
• William M. Gray, professor emeritus and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University^[45]
• William Happer, physicist specializing in optics and spectroscopy, Princeton University^[46]
• Ole Humlum, professor of geology at the University of Oslo^[47]
• Wibjörn Karlén, professor emeritus of geography and geology at the University of Stockholm.^[48]
• William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology^[49]
• David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware^[50]
• Anthony Lupo, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Missouri^[51]
• Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa^[52]
• Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and professor of geology at Carleton University in Canada.^[53][54]
• Ian Plimer, professor emeritus of Mining Geology, the University of Adelaide.^[55]
• Arthur B. Robinson, American politician, biochemist and former faculty member at the University of California, San Diego^[56]
• Murry Salby, atmospheric scientist, former professor at Macquarie University^[57]
• Nicola Scafetta, research scientist in the physics department at Duke University^[58][59]
• Tom Segalstad, geologist; associate professor at University of Oslo^[60]
• Nir Shaviv, professor of physics focusing on astrophysics and climate science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem^[61]
• Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia^[62][63][64]
• Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics^[65]
• Roy Spencer, meteorologist; principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville^[66]
• Henrik Svensmark, physicist, Danish National Space Center^[67]
• George H. Taylor, retired director of the Oregon Climate Service at Oregon State University^[68]
• Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, professor emeritus from University of Ottawa^[69]

Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown

These scientists have said that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural.

• Syun-Ichi Akasofu, retired professor of geophysics and founding director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.^[70]
• Claude Allègre, French politician; geochemist, emeritus professor at Institute of Geophysics (Paris).^[71]
• Robert Balling, a professor of geography at Arizona State University.^[72]
• John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, contributor to several IPCC reports.^[73][74]
• Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory.^[75]
• David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma.^[76]
• Ivar Giaever, professor emeritus of physics at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.^[77]
• Vincent R. Gray, New Zealander physical chemist with expertise in coal ashes^[78]
• Keith Idso, botanist, former adjunct professor of biology at Maricopa County Community College District and the vice president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change^[79]
• Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists.^[80]

Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences

These scientists have said that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for society or the environment.

• Craig D. Idso, faculty researcher, Office of Climatology, Arizona State University and founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change ^[81]
• Sherwood Idso, former research physicist, USDA Water Conservation Laboratory, and adjunct professor, Arizona State University^[82]
• Patrick Michaels, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and retired research professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia^[83]

Justin - How many scientific organizations aren't on that list?

And just as NASA's "97% of scientists" agree has been shown to be total BS, I suspect many of the "endorsements" of the listed organizations are as well.  Perhaps you can show us where the esteemed Pakistan Academy of Sciences declared their position.  It certainly isn't prominent on their website. 

Observations on the above:

Nowhere in the original story was there any speculation about the cause of the shrinking glacier; the story merely asked how much longer the glacier might be around. Even so, the discussion quickly melted into another debate about whether or not climate change is "real."  Here's what we can learn from most of the above comments:

(1) Those on either side of this argument can always trot out lists of scientists to support their position;

(2) Minds are already made up on this issue by a small group of regular posters on this topic;

(3) The rest of us are unlikely to be swayed by either of the above.

(4) The level of the discussion could be greatly improved by avoiding childish name-calling;

5) Those who actually stay on topic and contribute something new to this discussion are as refreshing as a gentle breeze over a snowfield on a warm summer day :-)

Jim,

Agree with you on 4 out of 5.  I hope you are wrong on point 3.