Paper short abstract:

Disagreement over the health of Himalayan glaciers persists with a subset of scholars contending that the region's ice masses are fine, and may even be surging. This paper ponders over these debates while examining the materiality, emotions, and imaginings of Himalayan glacial melt.

Paper long abstract:

This paper focuses on an anthropologist's confusion with a section of the glacial science coming out of South Asia. In particular, it ponders over counterintuitive presentations at three environmental conferences over seven years (2009-2015) as well as the publications opposing the 2007 IPCC predictions of the loss of Himalayan glaciers by 2035. At issue is the materiality of glacial terminus points, known as "snouts", and their validity as a predictor for the health of glacial systems. Several Indian glaciologists provide select examples of glaciers that have recently surged, and others that have barely moved, to suggest that the wellbeing of the Himalayan glaciers is far better than projected. These statements are a point of consternation given that the same presentations often discuss the thinning of these ice masses and the growing degree of cracks and contaminants that are breaking down the integrity of their structures. I use the confusion as a point of engagement to examine the materiality of these glaciers, the emotions and imaginings to which they are tied, and the sensorial nature of the images that are used to comfort those fearful of Himalayan climate change impacts. I contrast this with the ways that some scholars use similar images to create a picture of alarm. Rather than determining who is correct, the point is to highlight the materialist imaginations of ice as a predictor of climate futures. These imaginings are important to engage because they can be influential to the policy responses taken up by government.