I am getting tired of retyping my points so i will just quote what I said in response to what you said I didn't even need to get past the first paragraph to know that you didn't actually read my other posts. Here is what you said: Here is what I said: Wow, a response to your statement. i know I know, its crazy to actually want to refute being called a liar, but its in my nature I guess. You said I was a liar, I said no I wasn't and backed that up with proof of advancing glaciers in washington. So were you lying about me lying? Me thinks you might have been. Then this is what i said: Interesting... Actually only 70% of the glacier melted during the eruption. So it is still a glacier. Anyway i found it is interesting that it was still advancing despite being on the active rising dome and with global warming. And your right, the majority of glaciers are retreating, but do you really think it is because of the warming in the past 30 years? First off, lets get this out of the way, the vast majority of glacial melt occurred in the first half of the century. Ok, now lets talk about how glaciers respond to climate change. Glaciers are massive compressed ice sheets, yeah you know that already. The earth has been getting much warmer in the past 30 years, yeah you have mentioned that a few times. How fast do glaciers respond to climatic stimuli? Well this is what the glacier program at Rice University has to about glacial latency periods(hey, you know that word): ice sheet: 100,000 to 10,000 years large valley glacier: 10,000 to 1,000 years small valley glacier: 1,000 to 100 years So for example, for a small valley glacier it takes roughly 100 to 1,000 years after the change in climate for the glacier to be affected in a highly noticeable manner. So would the "human induced" climate change in the past thirty years have affected a glacier? Unlikely. Even if it had, the difference would be negligible. Could the larger glacial retreat in the early part of this century have been caused by humans? A profound No. I was talking about the member of this board with the username of crew634. He responded to this thread on the first page. I do not know him personally, and do not claim to say that what he says his fact. I just think that he has quite a bit of credibility by being down there. I definitely agree. We should try to reduce our consumption and reliance on fossil fuels. I just don't think that we need to do it in a "sky is falling" sort of way. Side note: I want to thank James Mello and others who have responded in a civilized manner. As for Wildlander, lets try and converse in a way that doesn't require calling the opposition a "liar" or "in denial."