Let's talk glaciers

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by sawyer, Feb 15, 2017.

  1. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The AGW crowd loves to talk about melting glaciers and how that proves their hypothesis. OK let's take a close look at the recent history of glaciers.

    "We know that sea levels have risen since the late 19thC, and that much of this is due to melting of glaciers and ice sheets. However, we also know that the same glaciers were growing rapidly during the Little Ice Age, so can we say that 20thC sea level rise is anything other than a natural process?

    Let’s remind ourselves of just how great and widespread this glacial advance was.

    The history of glacial advance in the European Alps is well documented. Historian, Brian Fagan, offers us this horrifying account:"


    "In the 16th Century the occasional traveller would remark on the poverty and suffering of those who lived on the marginal lands in the glacier’s shadow. At that time Chamonix was an obscure poverty stricken parish in “a poor country of barren mountains never free of glaciers and frosts…half the year there is no sun…the corn is gathered in the snow…and is so mouldy it has to be heated in the oven”. Even animals were said to refuse bread made from Chamonix wheat. Avalanches caused by low temperatures and deep snowfall were a constant hazard. In 1575 a visitor described the village as “a place covered with glaciers…often the fields are entirely swept away and the wheat blown into the woods and onto the glaciers”.

    In 1589 the Allalin glacier in Switzerland descended so low that it blocked the Saas valley, forming a lake. The moraine broke a few months later, sending floods downstream. Seven years later 70 people died when similar floods from the Gietroz glacier submerged the town of Martigny.

    As the glaciers relentlessly pushed downslope thousands of acres of farm land were ruined and many villages were left uninhabitable such as La Bois where a government official noted “where there are still six houses. all uninhabited save two, in which live some wretched women and children…Above and adjoining the village there is a great and horrible glacier of great and incalculable volume which can promise nothing but the destruction of the houses and lands which still remain”. Eventually the village was completely abandoned.

    The same official visited the hamlet of La Rosiere in 1616 and found" “The great glacier of La Rosiere every now and then goes bounding and thrashing or descending…There have been destroyed 43 journaux of land with nothing but stones and 8 houses, 7 barns and 5 little granges have been entirely ruined and destroyed”.

    Alpine glaciers, which had already advanced steadily between 1546 and 1590, moved aggressively forward again between 1600 and 1616. Villages that had flourished since medieval times were in danger or already destroyed. During the long period of glacial retreat and relative quiet in earlier times, opportunistic farmers had cleared land within a kilometer of what seemed to them to be stationary ice sheets. Now their descendants paid the price with their villages and livelihoods threatened.

    Between 1627 and 1633 Chamonix lost a third if its land through avalanches, snow, glaciers and flooding, and the remaining hectares were under constant threat. In 1642 the Des Bois glacier advanced “over a musket shot every day, even in August”.

    By this time people near the ice front were planting only oats and a little barley in fields that were under snow for most of the year. Their forefathers had paid their tithes in wheat. Now they obtained but one harvest in three and even the grain rotted after harvesting. “The people here are so badly fed they are dark and wretched and seem only half alive”.

    In 1715 the village of Le Pre-du-Bar vanished under a glacier caused landslide. The glacial high tide in the Alps came around 1750 and gradually the glaciers began their retreat, much to the relief of the people who lived there"

    Now can we move on from this AGW melting glaciers hysteria?

    And on a follow up to the argument that the little ice age was regional and thus irrelevant let's look at that while we're at it.



    ";Studies of glaciers in South America come to similar conclusions.
    Thompson on the Quelccaya glacier in Peru:
    The fact that the Little Ice Age (about A.D. 1500 to 1900) stands out as a significant climatic event in the oxygen isotope and electrical conductivity records confirms the worldwide character of this event.

    Areneda, on the Cipreses Glacier in Chile:
    These data allow us to infer that the last maximum advance of Cipreses glacier, in Chile, attributable to the ‘Little Ice Age’ occurred around AD 1842. The first historical retreat was recorded in 1858 and, since then, the glacier has shown a clear retreating trend with no new advances.
    And Areneda again, this time on the San Rafael glacier in Chile:
    Past ice lobe behaviour at Laguna San Rafael is described in documents provided by Spanish and then Chilean explorers from the late seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. These records begin in AD 1675, when temperate conditions, probably similar to those at present, prevailed. At that point, the glacier was confined within its valley, not penetrating the Laguna. The glacier advanced noticeably during the nineteenth century and probably reached a maximum position for the `Little Ice Age’ around AD 1875


    Finally, even glaciers in New Zealand underwent massive expansion, as Brian Fagan relates:
    In New Zealand the Franz Joseph glacier was “a mere pocket of ice on a frozen snowfield nine centuries ago”…. Then Little Ice Age cooling began and the glacier thrust downslope into the valley below smashing into the great rain forests that flourished there, felling giant trees like matchsticks. By the early 18th Century, Franz Joseph’s face was within 3 km of the Pacific Ocean .
    The high tide of glacial advance at Franz Joseph came between the late 17th Century and early 19th Century, just as it did in the European Alps.







    It is evident that sea levels must have fallen during the Little Ice Age, not only because of glacial advance but also because of colder temperatures. Were sea levels higher than now during the MWP? Certainly HH Lamb believes so – see here.
    But even if they were not, it is clear that much of the 20thC rise in sea levels that we have seen is no more than a return to the conditions that existed 1000 years ago, before glaciers worldwide began to expand.
    We do know that much of the glacial retreat since the 19thC actually took place before the middle of the 20thC, as the photo at the top illustrates.

    There is no written law of nature that says glaciers should be the size they were in Victorian times. Indeed, there is no reason why they should not return to their state 4000 years ago.
    As HH Lamb writes in “Climate, History and The Modern World” (pp 146).
    “Most – and perhaps all – of the glaciers present today in the United States Rockies south of the Canadian border are believed to have formed since 1500 BC.”

    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/01/25/glacial-advance-during-the-little-ice-age/
     
  2. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I will take several days of silence on this issue from the AGW crowd as an admission that glacier comparison of ice age levels and now are off the table. I feel I'm making progress here.:smile:
     
  3. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    LOLOLOLOLOLOL.....so...when you post some utterly clueless, very ignorant, highly fraudulent, anti-science blather and everybody ignores your nonsense...you actually imagine that you've 'won'? LOLOLOLOLOLOL....

    That is hilariously insane! And so typical of denier cultists.
     
  4. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Feel free to tell me how pictures of glaciers during or shortly after an ice age compared to now prove the AGW hypothesis.
     
  5. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Another interesting question. If C02 levels didn't start rising until the 1950s why did glaciers and arctic ice start melting in the 1860s well before mass industrialization and why did climate cool slightly for 30 years just as industrialization was really gearing up? Any and all attempts to use melting glaciers and Arctic ice packs that formed during an ice age as evidence of AGW are dishonest and expose the cult as fraudulent.

    "Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide have been steadily
    rising, from approximately 315 ppm (parts per million) in 1959 to a current atmospheric average of approximately 385 ppm (Keeling et al.,2009)."

    http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warmin...y-warning-signs-of-global-5.html#.WKjWezyIaf0

    "The Little Ice Age was a period from about 1550 to 1850 when the world experienced relatively cooler temperatures compared to the present. Subsequently, until about 1940, glaciers around the world retreated as the climate warmed substantially. Glacial retreat slowed and even reversed temporarily, in many cases, between 1950 and 1980 as global temperatures cooled slightly."

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850
     
  6. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There was no actual "ice age" a few centuries ago, just some disconnected periods of regional cooling with known causes.....that name - 'the little ice age' - was made up by some guy almost 80 years ago when their scientific understanding of what happened then was very minimal.

    Absolutely nobody is now, or ever has, tried to "prove the AGW hypothesis" by comparing pictures of glaciers "during an ice age" with current pictures. For one thing, there was no actual Ice Age with heavy glaciation almost to the equator in places and miles thick ice sheets covering continents and taking thousands of years to come to end, as the last actual Ice Age did. For another, the so-called LIA had ended by about 1850, before photography was very widespread.

    But most importantly, geologists have been able to study variations in glacial extents going back many thousands of years through various methods, as well as comparing pictures of glaciers around the world taken in the twentieth century to pictures of the currently very fast receding and melting glaciers, and the evidence shows conclusively that most of the world's glaciers have melted away far below their somewhat naturally variable extents that have been present for at least the last seven thousand years....so it has nothing to do with the LIA. This current very rapid melting is also conclusively linked to the current human caused, CO2-driven global warming.

    The Little Ice Age (LIA) was a period of cooling that occurred after the Medieval Warm Period.[1] While it was not a true ice age, its term was introduced into scientific literature by François E. Matthes in 1939.[2] It has been conventionally defined as a period extending from the 16th to the 19th centuries,[3][4][5] or from about 1300[6] to about 1850,[7][8][9] but climatologists and historians working with local records no longer expect to agree on either the start or end dates of the period, which varied according to local conditions.

    The NASA Earth Observatory notes three particularly cold intervals: one beginning about 1650, another about 1770, and the last in 1850, all separated by intervals of slight warming.[5] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Third Assessment Report considered the timing and areas affected by the Little Ice Age suggested largely-independent regional climate changes rather than a globally-synchronous increased glaciation. At most, there was modest cooling of the Northern Hemisphere during the period.[10]

    Several causes have been proposed: cyclical lows in solar radiation, heightened volcanic activity, changes in the ocean circulation, an inherent variability in global climate, or decreases in the human population.

    (Wikipedia)
     
  7. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes that's why it's called a little ice age not an ice age. Glaciers that were already there grew dramatically and glaciers that didn't exist appeared and the Arctic ice pack thickened and spread south but the entire world or most of it was not engulfed in ice as in a full fledged ice age. If you read the OP though the little ice age did indeed effect the entire world with glacier growth in the southern hemisphere. The main point is all this talk about glaciers melting along with the arctic ice pack is to be expected after a several hundred year cooling event where they grew exponentially except in a brief warming period in the 1500s. Hopefully we are not currently in another brief warming period, history shows us the little ice age could resume virtually overnight and I'm getting old, I like warm!
    On the glacier pictures thing, we are constantly inundated with pictures of glaciers from 1900 compared to now but what's lost here is that 1900 was only forty years after the little ice age ended so of course another hundred plus years will have additional melting. Glaciers that formed in the little ice age are melting now and will continue to melt until we start going the other direction which I hope I don't live to see.
     
  8. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Nope! What is happening now with the world's glaciers is NOT something that "is to be expected" to happen 167 years after the end of a cold period. Based on the scientific literature, 90% of the Earth's glaciers are losing ice at a rapid and accelerating rate. Because global warming can also increase rainfall (and snowfall) levels, there are still a few glaciers in different locations that are gaining ice, but the long term trends are all the same, and about 90% of glaciers are shrinking worldwide. Global glacial volume did shrink slowly after the period known as the Little Ice Age, but the scientific evidence clearly demonstrates that the long term global reduction in glacier volume has accelerated rapidly since the 1970s, and this rapid and accelerating reduction in glacial mass balance has been conclusively linked to the rapidly increasing global temperatures produced by human caused global warming.

    [​IMG]
    Figure 1: Long-term changes in glacier volume adapted from Cogley 2009.




    Most comparison photos are much more recent and have nothing to do with the LIA.

    [​IMG]
    The Upsala Glacier, a large valley glacier in Argentina's Los Glaciares National Park, in 1928 and 2004.

    [​IMG]
    This photo comparison of Grinnell Glacier shows the extensive loss of glacial ice from 1940 to 2006. - USGS

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    All of the Antarctic ice core data show cooler temperatures during that period.
     
  10. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Little Ice Age was a term coined for the cooler than normal period when rivers froze over and many glaciers advanced.

    The fact is that we are currently in a 2.5 million year ice age interspersed with short milder periods like the one we are in now.
     
  11. waltky

    waltky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    30,071
    Likes Received:
    1,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Granny says, "Dat's right...
    :grandma:
    ... global warmin' gonna make all glaciers melt...

    ... den the earth gonna be like dat movie Waterworld.
    :omg:
     
  12. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    30,989
    Likes Received:
    28,444
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which simply ignores the topic. If we assume regional cooling, regional cooling then has to have an offset. Can you produce the offset data? Was it, for example, hotter in equatorial Africa? Would there have been evidence from places like New Zealand? S American glaciers expanded during the period as well.

    What is evident is that the narrative is fragmented at best in denial of the empirical evidence provided for AGW proselytizers. If this was unique regional cooling, why does it seem to have propagated itself generally around the globe? I know, you won't have an answer, but if we aren't at least somewhat interested in having an honest conversation, it only points at the fragility of the AGW message and it's data.
     
  13. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you read the OP out would see that farm lands and lakes that were ice free before the little ice age were engulfed in glaciers during the little ice age so the fact that these areas are now once again ice free prove nothing except that the little ice age has ended. That was a rough period for humanity and I'm thankful I live post little ice age. Enjoy this warm spell because history shows us it can turn around virtually overnight.
     
  14. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I myself have always bought into the rhetoric that the little ice age was a regional event but the deeper I look into it I find it was a worldwide event. The northern hemisphere definitely bore the brunt but the southern hemisphere was definitely effected. The whole climate study field is fascinating and we have a lot to learn.
     
  15. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    30,989
    Likes Received:
    28,444
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Certainly. The problem we continue to face is the unwillingness of the dogmatic faithful to actually investigate past the hyperventilating headlines.
     
  16. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Nope. You have no idea what you are talking about. You're just spewing denialist drivel lacking in any scientific validity.
     
    Colonel K likes this.
  17. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,777
    Likes Received:
    8,613
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And once again we see the benefits of global warming - more farm land and lakes.
     
  18. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A few hundred years ago as farmland, lakes and even towns were swallowed up by rapidly advancing glaciers, I'll bet there was a general consensus that God was angry and somehow man was causing this. They probably thought they had done something to deserve it and needed to pray harder and repent their sins. There may have even been glacier cults that developed around this natural phenomenon that thought they needed to sacrifice a few virgins to make the glaciers go back where they were. Now as the glaciers rapidly recede, a new cult has developed that wants the glaciers to come back instead of go back and they too think man must have caused this and they too want to make human sacrafices in terms of jobs, industries, countries and even third world lives, those who desperately need fossil fuel to lift them from abject poverty. "The more things change the more they stay the same".
     
  19. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,777
    Likes Received:
    8,613
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And possibly one of Michael Mann's ancestors came up with a cave drawing hockey stick showing that humans were responsible for the unprecedented spike in global average ice volume caused by the expanding population of humans and their breathing which removed a necessary component from the atmosphere replacing it with something which caused this great ice build up.
     
  20. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    More ignorant anti-science nonsense! The current glacial retreat due to global warming has not only uncovered some relatively small areas that got covered in ice during the so-called LIA, the glaciers have melted off of enormous amounts of land surface that has been ice covered for the at least the last 5000 years.

    Glaciers and climate change
    National Snow and Ice Data Center
    Glacial ice can range in age from several hundred to several hundreds of thousands years, making it valuable for climate research. To see a long-term climate record, scientists can drill and extract ice cores from glaciers and ice sheets. Ice cores have been taken from around the world, including Peru, Canada, Greenland, Antarctica, Europe, and Asia. These cores are continuous records providing scientists with year-by-year information about past climate. Scientists analyze various components of cores, particularly trapped air bubbles, which reveal past atmospheric composition, temperature variations, and types of vegetation. Glaciers preserve bits of atmosphere from thousands of years ago in these tiny air bubbles, or, deeper within the core, trapped within the ice itself. This is one way scientists know that there have been several Ice Ages. Past eras can be reconstructed, showing how and why climate changed, and how it might change in the future.

    [​IMG]

    These glaciers in the Himalaya Mountains of Bhutan have been receding over the past few decades, and lakes have formed on the surfaces and near the termini of many of the glaciers. -- Credit: Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) instrument aboard NASA’s Terra satellite. Image provided by Jeffrey Kargel, USGS/NASA JPL/AGU, through the NASA Earth Observatory.

    Scientists are also finding that glaciers reveal clues about global warming. How much does our atmosphere naturally warm up between Ice Ages? How does human activity affect climate? Because glaciers are so sensitive to temperature fluctuations accompanying climate change, direct glacier observation may help answer these questions. Since the early twentieth century, with few exceptions, glaciers around the world have been retreating at unprecedented rates. Some scientists attribute this massive glacial retreat to the Industrial Revolution, which began around 1760. In fact, several ice caps, glaciers and ice shelves have disappeared altogether in this century. Many more are retreating so rapidly that they may vanish within a matter of decades.

    Scientists are discovering that production of electricity using coal and petroleum, and other uses of fossil fuels in transportation and industry, affects our environment in ways we did not understand before. Within the past 200 years or so, human activity has increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by 40 percent, and other gases, such as methane (natural gas) by a factor of 2 to 3 or more. These gases absorb heat being radiated from the surface of the earth, and by absorbing this heat the atmosphere slowly warms up. Heat-trapping gases, sometimes called “greenhouse gases,” are the cause of most of the climate warming and glacier retreat in the past 50 years. However, related causes, such as increased dust and soot from grazing, farming, and burning of fossil fuels and forests, are also causing glacier retreat. In fact, it is likely that the earliest parts of the recent glacier retreats in Europe were caused by soot from coal burning in the late 1800s.

    [​IMG]

    This false-color satellite image shows the Gangotri Glacier, situated in the Uttarkashi District of Garhwal Himalaya. Currently 30.2 kilometers (19 miles) long and between 0.5 and 2.5 kilometers (0.31 to 1.5 miles) wide, Gangotri glacier is one of the largest in the Himalaya. Gangotri has been receding since 1780, although studies show its retreat quickened after 1971. Note that the blue contour lines drawn here to show the recession of the glacier's terminus over time are approximate. Over the last 25 years, Gangotri glacier has retreated more than 850 meters (930 yards), with a recession of 76 meters (83 yards) from 1996 to 1999 alone. -- Credit: NASA image by Jesse Allen, NASA Earth Observatory; based on data provided by the ASTER Science Team. Glacier retreat boundaries courtesy the Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center.

    The 1991 discovery of the 5,000 year-old "ice man," preserved in a glacier in the European Alps, fascinated the world (see National Geographic, June 1 1993, volume 183, number 6, for an article titled "Ice Man" by David Roberts). Tragically, this also means that this glacier is retreating farther now than it has in 5,000 years, and other glaciers are as well.
     
  21. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your standard book long multi colored baffle them with bull(*)(*)(*)(*) charts graphs and pictures AGW rant. The fact is before the little ice age valleys were farmed, lakes were navigated and towns were built. Then almost overnight all that stuff disappeared under ice. Now almost as fast its being uncovered and the AGW bunch says it's a man made catastrophe. I have a NG issue that has a story in it about how glaciers are supposed to move at "a glacial pace" and the author wrings his hands over rapidly receding glaciers and says man must be the cause. Apparently he's unaware of how fast they grew in the little ice age.
     
  22. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    .....report on the actual science that you can't understand....or accept for political reasons that have nothing to do with the scientific facts of the matter.




    So what? you are still ignoring the other fact.

    the glaciers have melted off of enormous amounts of land surface that has been ice covered for the at least the last 5000 years.



    Mankind's activities are indeed "the cause" of the current shrinkage, retreat and disappearance of the Earth's glaciers, many of which have existed for between thousands and hundreds of thousands of years.

    Glaciers grew only relatively slightly during the centuries of the LIA, and not all that fast. Glaciers are now retreating much faster than they retreated immediately after the LIA, and have melted much, much more than they grew during the LIA period, uncovering land surfaces that have not seen the light of day in over 5000 years.

    Your demented denier cult drivel and lies about this matter are as fallacious and crackpot as ever.
     
  23. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lol, always fun to see you hear after one of your prolonged absences for whatever reason they occur. I shudder to think.
     
  24. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I'm glad to hear that you can enjoy getting your denier cult myths and delusions debunked by the scientific facts.

    Some reality deniers get upset.
     
  25. sawyer

    sawyer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    11,892
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I do enjoy your tantrums as your AGW hoax gets exposed for the fraud it is. On the glacier topic though it's fine if you want to stick exclusively to glaciers that in some part of the world you claim existed five thousand years ago and are gone now. First we could discuss how accurate those claims are and then what exactly their decline means. As far as all these pictures and charts of glaciers that grew exponentially during the little ice age and have now retreated to pre ice age levels though, give it up, you lost that battle.
     

Share This Page