Yes, Eclipse Now, glaciers are melting. No dispute about that. The question is, is it worth working oneself into a fit of the vapours about?

For starters, glaciers advance and retreat; most glaciers reached a maximum early this century or late in the last century as a result of the Little Ice Age. It's inevitable that they would retreat eventually. The exposure of archaeological remains shows that these glaciers have advanced and retreated as one would expect.

Secondly, the fact that glaciers are melting doesn't necessarily mean that the precipitation that feeds them is likewise vanishing and therefore there is less water in the system.

With regard to the second "myth", I merely point out that, if we look to what we know (within reason) HAS happened in the past, rather than what we can SPECULATE on, based on computer modelling, the historical record, and prehistory, show that warming times have invariably been times of abundance.

Oh, and that CO2 rises have historically lagged temperature rises is not a myth. Nor does it disprove the greenhouse effect. What it does show is that climate change is a lot more complex than "OMG!! Carbon dioxide!!" What I was referring to specifically was cases, most famously the late Ordovician glaciation, where atmospheric carbon dioxide levels during climate minima have been higher, indeed far higher, than atmospheric carbon dioxide levels today.

The glaciers melt during the summer feeding the rivers that would otherwise run dry. The winter snows are the stores of water that feed the summer rivers. Without the glaciers there IS less water in the system as that winter water will rush down in one horrible episode, rather than being stored up for a calmer distribution all year round.
http://earth-policy.org/Updates/2008/Update71.htm

Warming times were times of abundance? Look, in case this is a semantic game you are playing I'll cast it this way.

"Colder" than now = "bad" (for us, less crops etc).

"Warm" like it is now = "good" (for us, just right for a population of nearly 7 billion).

"HOT" = OK for a few dinosaurs running around*, but is going to be very bad for us.

Too fast for many life support ecosystems to adapt. Previous changes were much slower than this, occurring over 800 year swings of the Milankovitch cycles.
Too hot for our agriculture in many areas, and the change will be too fast for us to adapt!
Isolated ecosystems will collapse. Unlike previous slower climate changes, there is no space for ecosystems to migrate now. We've locked them all into tiny little 'islands' or pockets of nature in between our vast sprawling suburbs or farmlands. Systems that once migrated over hundreds, or even thousands, of years up mountains or down towards the poles are now going to be stranded by our activities in the landscape.

Also consider that there is far LESS wildlife and 'nature' to being with. We've chopped it down or ploughed it up, so there’s less to survive.

* There's even evidence that the "HOT" climates also caused stress on the dinosaur systems! See part 3 of "Crude", the incredible story of oil, for another real shocker we could be in for if we let the climate get out of hand.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/crude/