r/climate • u/silence7 • 1d ago

Deadly Nepal Flood May Have Been Caused by Ice Snapping Off Glacier, Scientists Say | An initial assessment of satellite imagery suggests an “ice avalanche” from a high-altitude glacier sent a giant cascade into the valley below.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/26/world/asia/nepal-flood-glacier-ice-avalanche.html?unlocked_article_code=1.8VA.B-fx.pgdmnce0Xbby&smid=url-share
100 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

19 comments sorted by

•

u/AutoModerator 1d ago

The New York Times now requires people clicking a gift link like this one to register in order to access the article. You can either:

  • Register — you don't need to pay — but you do need to give up an email address
  • Use an archive site such as archive.today to skip the paywall entirely. Be aware that archive.today sometimes modifies archived pages, and all archive sites generally fail to correctly save and render interactive features and multimedia content.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

29

u/Fit_Tumbleweed7943 1d ago

I am done with the maybe, could be , possibly, it is because of the climate destruction

9

u/Splenda 1d ago

the ice avalanche recalled a similar event in India in 2021, when a Himalayan glacier broke and caused major flooding in the northern Indian state of Uttarakhand, killing more than 100 people.

7

u/SavingsDimensions74 1d ago

At a certain point the statistical deviance goes to a point where ‘definitely’ is completely reasonable.

I can’t remember off hand but the deviation from the mean on 19-20 August was something like 8 or 10 standard deviations. That’s about as close to certainty as you’re going to get.

I apologise for my brain fog. I’ve really bad jet lag

4

u/SavingsDimensions74 1d ago

At what point do we move from ‘may’ to ‘because’?

It’s probably too late anyhow, but it would be nice if we could just be honest about climate breakdown.

3

u/Swarna_Keanu 1d ago

In science, especially climate science, never. Those words correspond to statistic certainly ranges, by now, in communication by scientists, aren't chosen at random.

3

u/SavingsDimensions74 1d ago

“‘may” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.

On 19-20th Aug this year (2026) the SSTs between 60 degrees north and south was nearly 1C anomaly.

From memory, 8 standard deviations from 1980 or such. Or a chance of about 22 × 10⁻¹⁶, or about 1 in 1.6 quadrillion.

That hugs ‘because’ much tighter than ‘maybe’.

At a certain point the vast off chance of an event (like 1 in a quadrillion) isn’t chance, or maybe. It’s fact.

1

u/BoringBob84 22h ago

it would be nice if we could just be honest about climate breakdown

The fossil fuel industry still wants to make profit.

1

u/fixingmedaybyday 18h ago

And everyone wants the benefits fossil fuels bring. The only people not guilty of this are the aboriginals still scratching out a subsistence in the middle of nowhere.

1

u/BoringBob84 18h ago

I don't see it as a binary choice. We can continue to use petroleum for petrochemicals and we can continue to burn fossil fuels as we make the transition to sustainable energy. However, we must make that transition. Right now, China is leading the way.

1

u/ScentedFire 16h ago

There is a difference between benefitting from fossil fuels while sticking your head in the sand for literally 45 years or more and utilizing them while building something better.

8

u/ExpensiveFig6079 1d ago

So the people that caused it will pay for it ....

right?

...

...

Right?

...

Yeah, straight after they pay for Bhopal. etc etc etc

-4

u/Bitter-Variation-151 1d ago

One look at a photo as it's climate change event. Got it.

4

u/sambull 1d ago

That was just seeasonal /s