cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Climate change

Community Veteran
Posts: 26,374
Thanks: 630
Fixes: 8
Registered: 10-04-2007

Climate change

Two articles worth reading:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/mar/05/climate-change-hockey-stick-michael-mann
The second gives details of the lengths the vested interests will go to to try to bury the facts: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/mar/03/michael-mann-climate-change-deniers
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£13/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)
43 REPLIES
Community Veteran
Posts: 38,246
Thanks: 934
Fixes: 56
Registered: 15-06-2007

Re: Climate change

What vested interests - and don't come back with the "Big Oil" where no evidence has been produced.
Have you actually read through the emails (both tranches) as they clearly show that the senders conspired to hide the data and facts and doing everything they could to avoid the Freedom of Information requirements and to keep dissenting information out of the Peer Reviewed Literature and the IPCC Reports
The reference to "out of context" is an old chestnut which has never been shown to be correct and in fact the second tranche actually shows things in a worse light
In terms of death threats and harassment - again there has been virtually no hard evidence produced to back up the statement.
I notice that the Guardian refers to the theft of the emails - this has not been proved - it might have been a hacker or indeed a whistleblower (even Michael Mann refer to a hacker). Note that the police investigation has got nowhere.
If you want to talk about threats the emails clearly show attempts to get editors of publications and scientists fired because they published papers which didn't agree with the consensus.
If we are talking about illegal action just Google Peter Gleick Fakegate who is a prominent climate scientist and activist or to save you the time look here http://fakegate.org/ for the full inglorious episode
If you want a more balanced discussion on the global warming debate I recommend this site http://judithcurry.com/ where there is normally a sensible and well mannered discussion on various topics
Take this quote from the article
Quote
Mann is generally optimistic that climate change deniers and their oil and coal industry backers have overstepped the mark and goaded scientists to take action.
No one has produced any evidence to back up this claim and in fact the prominent sceptics have stated on many occasions that they do not and have not received any such funding.
Re: Goaded scientists - see Peter Gleick above
To add - you might like to read this presentation by Richard Lindzen at the Houses of Parliament http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02148/RSL-HouseOfCommons_2148505a.pdf
Community Veteran
Posts: 26,374
Thanks: 630
Fixes: 8
Registered: 10-04-2007

Re: Climate change

I'm afraid your post illustrates just how successful the deniers lobby has been in suppressing the unpalatable truth in the minds of the public. The arguments about the veracity or emails are just a smokescreen which the lobby has found very convenient to confuse the public.
There is a very simple truth: in the last 150 years average global temperatures have risen; nobody has been able to give any explanation based on natural influences alone.
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£13/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)
Community Veteran
Posts: 38,246
Thanks: 934
Fixes: 56
Registered: 15-06-2007

Re: Climate change

The global temperature has been rising steadily since the little ice age and the effect of CO2 on its own will explain a part of this.
If you look here http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl you will see that the temperature has been rising since about 1900 and the rate of increase from 1910 to 1940 is indistinguishable from  from the rate of rise from 1970 to 1990.
It is accepted that part of the rise is down to increased CO2 emissions which have increased the atmospheric content from about 280ppm in 1900 to 380ppm today.
It is an accepted fact that the effect of CO2 concentration on the temperature is an increase of about 1.2 deg C per doubling (the effect is logarithmic)
The alarming forecasts from the IPCC and others are based upon an assumed amplification effect from water vapour. clouds etc. This effect has not been empirically verified but is taken from climate models.
If we look at the actual temperature increase compared to the model results from the latest IPCC Report as taken from a paper by Scafetta where he proposes an alternative theory
You are assuming that the "unpalatable truth" is fact. This is not the case.
If you look at the various alarmists predictions over the last 20 years or so you will find that none of them have come true
The problem that I, as a trained engineer/scientist, have with all this is the lack of any empirical validation of the models and the fact that they keep changing the goalposts.
How about this one http://www.ukcip.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/PDFs/RL_Essenv2.pdf
Quote
UK climate is changing
•  The UK will continue to get warmer
•  Summers will continue to get hotter and drier
•  Winters will continue to get milder and wetter
•  Some weather extremes will become more common, others less common
•  Sea-level will continue to rise
Obviously the cold winters we have had recently and the hosepipe bans are a figment of my imagination and the graph shown below is the Official Central England Temperature for Summer over the full period of the record from 1660 to the present day is bogus as it doesn't fit with the models

Community Veteran
Posts: 26,374
Thanks: 630
Fixes: 8
Registered: 10-04-2007

Re: Climate change

Quote from: Oldjim
Obviously the cold winters we have had recently and the hosepipe bans are a figment of my imagination and the graph shown below is the Official Central England Temperature for Summer over the full period of the record from 1660 to the present day is bogus as it doesn't fit with the models

Oh dear, another person who doesn't understand the difference between weather, localised long term trends and global climate!
The gulf stream is slowing. One distinct possibility is that melting of the Greenland icecap might turn it off altogether or force it south. If that happened we would see much lower temperatures in this country. You can't look at weather trends in this country alone and extrapolate that to the global climate. As the global average temperature rises the weather will become more chaotic which means that we see more extremes, hottest, coldest, wettest and driest. If anything the graph for the Central England temperature proves the effectiveness of the Gulf Stream in moderating our weather and keeping it pretty consistent.
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£13/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)
HighLordPhanty
Grafter
Posts: 54
Registered: 30-07-2007

Re: Climate change

Quote from: Oldjim
Obviously the cold winters we have had recently and the hosepipe bans are a figment of my imagination

And how does that contradict point 4 directly above?
Climate is what you expect, weather is what you get. You don't write for the  Daily Express do you?
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 17,250
Thanks: 904
Fixes: 104
Registered: 11-01-2008

Re: Climate change

[me=dvorak]yawns[/me]
Will Moderate For Thanks
Community Veteran
Posts: 38,246
Thanks: 934
Fixes: 56
Registered: 15-06-2007

Re: Climate change

That report I quoted was for the UK not global
What part of don't you understand
•  Summers will continue to get hotter and drier - they haven't to any real extent
•  Winters will continue to get milder and wetter - they haven't to any real extent
This graph is the actual CET data for winter
and it's no use referring to the Gulf Stream - the models are supposed to take that into account
198kHz
Seasoned Pro
Posts: 3,217
Thanks: 253
Fixes: 7
Registered: 30-07-2008

Re: Climate change

AFAIC there are alarmists on the one side and deniers on the other - both of whom display a worryingly 'religious' fervour.
The protagonists seem to be relying on computer modelling to forecast end-of-century conditions - seems somewhat dubious. On the other hand, the non-believers seem unable to distinguish between 'weather' and 'climate'.
So what is the man on the Clapham omnibus to make of it all? Personally I think 'climate change' should be viewed over centuries at least, not years or even decades. And since the Earth has been variously frozen and frazzled for 4½ billion years, isn't it a little arrogant for mankind to assume that he has had so much influence?
Of course, one can understand the government's keenness to support the pro lobby - what a fantastic excuse to raise taxes - pay up or be guilty of destroying the planet! 
Not young enough to know everything
kmilburn
Grafter
Posts: 902
Thanks: 2
Registered: 30-07-2007

Re: Climate change

Quote from: 4C
since the Earth has been variously frozen and frazzled for 4½ billion years, isn't it a little arrogant for mankind to assume that he has had so much influence?

In the grand scheme of things you're right,  what's happening at the moment is insignificant.
However,  to assume our presence has no influence on current changes could also be seen as arrogant.
Should we presume we are having an influence and try to mitigate it,  or wait until we have a enough evidence of our influence at which point it may be too late to do anything about it.
In either scenario,  weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels can only be a good thing,  but to assume Wind and Solar will fill the gap is somewhat absurd.
There's also one other side that most parties seem to forget in this debate,  whatever happens,  the earth will survive and life will continue.  Whether we do is another matter!
Community Veteran
Posts: 7,149
Thanks: 51
Fixes: 2
Registered: 30-08-2007

Re: Climate change

For a layman's simple, readable, non-technical and perhaps understandable view this is worth a read: http://www.grumpyoldsod.com/global%20warming%20bollox%2015.asp
As are some other heading tabs on the same subject.
Depends on your point of view of course.  
Jelv will no doubt dismiss it as hypothetical rubbish, others (er! me) will consider it biblical truth.
Experience; is something you gain, just after you needed it most.

When faced with two choices, simply toss a coin. It works not because it settles the question for you. But because in that brief moment while the coin is in the air. You suddenly know what you are hoping for.
Community Veteran
Posts: 2,283
Thanks: 219
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-08-2009

Re: Climate change

Nobody can forecast the future with much accuracy. However, the past, as analysis of thousands of ice cores drilled from many miles of deep ice in Greenland shows, when CO2 has risen before, as it has, the global temperature has also gone up dramatically. There is an undeniable correlation. Previous culprits include major causes like the creation of the Western Ghats in India, which was a major volcanic event, and also many less dramatic events. The global temperature can be determined by the isotopic proportion of water in the cores, which varies according to the temperature of the deposited water.
There has been a dramatic increase in global CO2 relatively recently. That's enough to convince me.
Edit: The problem isn't one of the climate become intolerable globally, but the fact that many parts of the world will become uninhabitable. This will mean migrations of people into areas where they are either not welcome or can't be sustained. Add to this that the world's population is increasing exponentially, that spells trouble.
Community Veteran
Posts: 38,246
Thanks: 934
Fixes: 56
Registered: 15-06-2007

Re: Climate change

Unfortunately for that argument the same ice core records show that the temperature rose before the CO2 levels
Community Veteran
Posts: 2,283
Thanks: 219
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-08-2009

Re: Climate change

On the scale that those graphs are plotted you would have extreme difficulty justifying that statement.
Even if the argument isn't 100% correct, but there is a risk that it might be, we have a moral duty to do something about it. Otherwise we are in extreme denial.
itsme
Grafter
Posts: 5,924
Thanks: 1
Registered: 07-04-2007

Re: Climate change

Looking at the graphs I would say it prove the correlation between CO2 and temperature even for now. What I find more interesting is the cyclic nature of the CO2 peaks, so have climate have an affect on CO2 and not CO2 on climate?