It's Coming......another page in the Blakemore Prophecy!

Politics and religion
1

I saw this news story at CNN.com and I couldn’t help but think of my old buddy, confidant, and workout partner, Cleve Blakemore. I also thought of you environmentalist junkies who chew at the same bit.

The Alpine glaciers, source of some of Europe’s biggest rivers, have been in retreat for more than a century, but the loss of ice has speeded this year as temperatures have soared.

“The rate of ice melt is some three or four times the usual amount,” said Charly Wuilloud, head of the department of natural dangers at the Valais state forestry department.

There’s a good scientific measurement for ya: “…uh…3 or 4 times the usual amount…”

Here are some better percentage figures If someone can figure them out, I’d be very appreciative:

Back in the 1970s, even before this year’s blistering summer, geologists at the Zurich-based World Glacier Monitoring Service (GAMS) forecast that the glaciers would shrink to just 10 percent of their 1850 size by the end of the 1st century.

By 1970, they had already declined to around half and were seen losing a further 50 percent by 2025, according to geography professor Vilified Chamberlain of the University of Zurich.

The latest estimates are that 25-30 percent has already gone. “It looks like our prediction was a little bit optimistic. It is going faster than we thought,” he told Reuters.

If in 1970 they were 50% of their 1850 size, and expected to be 50% less again by 2025, then they would be 25% of the 1890 size. If in 2003, the size had decreased by 25-30 percent in 33 years, then it’s actually going about the expected rate isn’t it?

2

That last figure is jacked. The reporter either needs english classes, or remedial statistics. He makes no sense.

He says that they expected a 10% decrease over 150 years. Instead, they observed a whopping 50% decrease by 1970, and that they expected another 50% decrease by 2025.

That would put the current size at about 66% of the original. 2/3rds of the glacier is GONE. The original 10% estimate was off by 6.6 times.

That doesn’t jive what with the reporter says later, that 25%-30% is gone.

Maybe he meant that 25%-30% of the 1870 glacier remains.

3

[quote=“Roger_Wong”]

That last figure is jacked. The reporter either needs english classes, or remedial statistics. He makes no sense.[/quote]

I would say both. Professor Vilified would be a lot more upset than to use a qualifier like “little” if those numbers in any way pointed to what the poor grammatical structure indicates.

Fits in well with the overall program for environmental reporting though…incompetence + news creation gives us a wonderful crisis of the moment.

Actual headline should read “Scientists from more than a century ago off on estimates for the present. CNN feigns shock.”

4

the glaciers would shrink to just 10 percent of their 1850 size by the end of the 1st century.

That’s a 90% decrease. It means this makes sense to me:

If in 1970 they were 50% of their 1850 size, and expected to be 50% less again by 2025, then they would be 25% of the 1890 size. If in 2003, the size had decreased by 25-30 percent in 33 years, then it’s actually going about the expected rate isn’t it?