Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.


Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Mastodon MeWe

Twitter YouTube RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe

Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...

New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts


2019 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #21

Posted on 25 May 2019 by John Hartz

A chronological listing of news articles posted on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week, i.e., Sun, May 19 through Sat, May 25, 2019

Editor's Pick 

Why school strikers are guest editing Climate Home News 

School Strike for Climate

(Photo: Pixabay)

Over the coming weeks (or months – let’s see how it goes) Climate Home News will host reporting, personal reflections and commentary written by a group of young people who have inspired the world.

It’s normal for us to host commentary from activists. But this is something different. Something we would never normally do. It’s an open offer to a group to use our site as a platform to express their ideas.

We aren’t doing it because we endorse everything the school strikes or Fridays for Future movement says, does or calls for. We are doing it because it’s our job to bring you the full picture.

Climate change is the archetypal issue of intergenerational justice. As the population ages in many countries around the world, the balance of power between young and old is becoming increasingly skewed. Given the complexion of the media, it is fair to question whether their voices and interests are being represented here.

These young people have shown they are masters of disruptive forms of social media and protest. In March, just a few months after forming, they held a global strike that surpassed every organised climate rally held before it. They achieved this with no pre-existing organisational apparatus, real funding or control of traditional media platforms. They are worth listening to. 

Why school strikers are guest editing Climate Home News by Karl Mathiesen, Climate Home News, May 23, 2019

Links posted on Facebook

Sun May 19, 2019

Mon May 20, 2019

Tue May 21, 2019

Wed May 22, 2019

Thu May 23, 2019

Fri May 24, 2019

Sat May 25, 2019

0 0

Printable Version  |  Link to this page


Comments 1 to 3:

  1. Regarding the excellent article "The UN calls for enlightened self interest...."

    Seems to be in very short supply.

    "the UN chief stressed that “climate change cannot be stopped by the small island countries alone, it has to be stopped by the rest of the world” and that this requires the political will for “transformational policies in energy, mobility, industry and agriculture”.

    So much has to be done in parallel. Who is supposed to lead the way?An uprising of school children seems to be the only thing happening. They are seeing the problem clearly, probably due to being taught the science and not brainwashed with the denialism like their parents. But its going to take more than kids protesting.

    "Mr. Guterres echoed the “three urgent messages” to world leaders that he had “consistently conveyed” throughout his visit to the Pacific, beginning with shifting taxes from salaries to carbon. “We need to tax pollution, not people,” he reiterated. "

    Yes taxing pollution is the economically sensible option, and may be viable in Europe, but carbon taxes are not proving popular in America even with a dividend scheme. All talk, no consensus, no action. It's due to taxes being regarded as a dirty word and the associated political tribalism that has developed.  And emissions trading schemes seem to be just as hard to get through congress.

    In America it might have to come back to something closer to the Green New Deal, where the government finances or subsidises climate related mitigation projects like the electricity generation and industry with deficit financing or money creation (Modern Monetary Theory is becoming a talking point lately). These things might be perceived to be less ideologically divisive and impactful on the public.

    We have seeen money creation with quantitative easing and it hasn't lead to problems. Given the GOP is happy to run high deficits, it's going to be hard for them to take the idea off the table. Some evidence is emerging that deficits and government debt are not as problematic as once thought (refer to the Not saying I personally love this thinking, but its what this respected website is saying.

    "Second, he flagged that countries must stop subsidizing fossil fuels."
    Yes to that. Pure commonsense. But people like Donald Trump have done a great job of convincing (brainwashing) his core voters that such subsidies are good for them.

    0 0
  2. The relevant article from the "Economists are rethinking fiscal policy". 

    You can get five free articles a month by registering.

    0 0
  3. Here is an article from March this year that relates to the Editor's Pick this week. It is from the BBC Future section, dated March 19, 2019. "Why we need to reinvent democracy for the long-term"

    The problem of a lack of leadership interest in correcting harmful developments and developing sustainable improvements for the benefit of the future of humanity requires socioeconomic-political system change.

    Ethically and Morally, every future human deserves consideration (and future humans massively out-number any current day population). Based on 'proportional consideration (equality and fairness)' there would be no justification for any unsustainable or harmful pursuits of personal interest, especially pursuits that are detrimental to the future of humanity in ways than are worse than just reducing future access to non-renewable resources (burning buried ancient hydrocarbons reduces future access to that resource).

    Financial evaluations that discount future harm done then compare that reduced value (probably significantly low-balled before discounting), to evaluations of current day lost opportunities if the harm is not done (probably significantly over-estimated), is an example of improper consideration of impacts on the future.

    Sustainable activity being improved by the development of better sustainable activity is the required objective (achieving and improving on the Sustainable Development Goals). That means that Negative future consequences are simply unacceptable.

    Until that system correction is any developed perceptions of progress, including technological advances and supposed 'fixes' to developed problems, will continue to be fatally incorrect, just making the future worse.

    The recent surge of populist United Political Right groups is likely connected to an attempt by the greedier and less tolerant (more selfish) leadership (wealthy influential people) to impede the development of the required socioeconomic-political corrections. They want a Status-Quo that undoes much of the progress of humanity that has been occurring, and that resists any other Progressive improvements. Tragically, they are able to mobilize support from less fortunate desperate people who can collectively have influence.

    0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.

The Consensus Project Website


(free to republish)

© Copyright 2024 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us