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

Twitter Facebook YouTube Pinterest MeWe

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


2022 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #46

Posted on 19 November 2022 by John Hartz

A chronological listing of news articles posted on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week: Sun, Nov 13, 2022  thru Sat, Nov 19, 2022.

Story of the Week

Is COP27 the End of Hopes for Limiting Global Warming to 1.5 Degrees Celsius?

The climate talks are going into overtime with little progress toward the emissions cuts required to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement.

The COP27 climate conference in Egypt may be remembered as the moment when the world gave up on limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, the most ambitious goal set by the 2015 Paris Agreement.

Late Friday, the last scheduled day of the climate talks in Sharm el-Sheikh, the heads of the national delegations were still meeting to discuss whether the final documents should include a reference to that temperature target, which scientists call a limit that, if breached, would push some Earth systems past dangerous and irreversible tipping points.

This year’s annual meeting was billed as the “implementation COP,” but so far “nothing has been implemented, and it has thus failed to achieve what it set out to do,” said Stephanie Hirmer, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford’s energy and power group. “While everyone knows the 1.5-degree target is off the table, it is not openly discussed in official sessions,” she said.

The only way to stay under that limit, a recent United Nations Environment Programme report concluded, would be for industrialized nations to rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions—cutting them by about half in the next eight years and to zero by 2050—but nothing that happened at this year’s two-week conference has increased the likelihood that will happen.

Click here to access the entire article as originally posted on Inside Climate News.

Is COP27 the End of Hopes for Limiting Global Warming to 1.5 Degrees Celsius? by Bob Berwyn, Science, Inside Climate News, Nov 19, 2022 

Links posted on Facebook

Sun, Nov 13, 2022

Mon, Nov 14, 2022

Tue, Nov 15, 2022

Wed, Nov 16, 2022

Thu, Nov 17, 2022

Fri, Nov 18, 2022

Sat, Nov 19, 2022

0 0

Printable Version  |  Link to this page


Comments 1 to 6:

  1. I am sad to say that the observation that the COP system for addressing climate change is broken is incorrect simply because it is an understatement.

    To break, it has to be working, which it has NEVER managed to do in terms of rising to the levels of action required. Seeing the oil producers end COP 27 by nixing even considering cutting back on fossil fuel production should make that clear to even the most hopeful.

    The current war in the Ukraine only reinforces how destructive a force our dependence on fossil fuels has become, and to what extent the controllers of energy will go in order to retain their power. I'm not saying this as a political statement at all, as the countries who control the fossil fuel production cut across the entire political spectrum. We don't have much of a track record for successfully breaking up such a stranglehold, but I believe that despite such sobering evidence, we must continue to try, ever more clear-eyed about calling a spade a spade. COP was probably co-opted in its inception: what next?

    0 0
  2. I could not agree more; we should have started a planetwide GHG reduction program similar to the US Manhatten program around 1980. 

    Your comment is too accurate to see lost to one website, so, I shared the only way I know. Thanks!

    0 0
    Moderator Response:

    [BL] Link activated

  3. wilddouglascounty,

    What next?

    That depends on what admissions about the reality of what has been going on become the 'common sense'.

    My comments on the SkS reposting of the Yale Climate Connections item "New reports spell out climate urgency, shortfalls, needed actions" provide an indication of the type of 'common sense understanding' that would be helpful.

    As you have identified, essentially the problem is the power and influence of the most harmful portion of the global population allowing the most harmful to evade losing undeserved developed perceptions of prosperity and superiority.

    That is historically a tough problem that has rarely, perhaps never, been sustainably solved in any region, and it has certainly never been globally solved.

    How does 'leadership by the wealthy and powerful' get corrected to bring a sustainable end to all of the harmful systemic developments of activity and beliefs that the undeserving among the wealthy and powerful have benefited from being able to develop, increase and 'conserve' popular support for?

    An increased common sense that that is the problem is a required starting point for pursuit of sustainable improvements, corrections and other solutions to the developed problem.

    0 0
  4. 2 Eddie,

    Apologies for the delay; I just checked back today to see what you have done here. Thanks so much for this--I see that there are 137 folks as part of your channel, so I'll check out the other posts you've made there. I think small circles are really a good way to spread the conversation and discussions to elevate the discussion toward taking on the many tasks that will be required to create real change.

    And 3/One Planet, I agree that acknowledging that climate change is a problem is the starting point for sustainable improvements. Different circles are at different points in this process, so fortunately we don't have to have all of humanity to agree to anything all at the same time in order to proceed.

    I think also that the participants in the COP process are well past this point and that the real questions that have emerged in my mind and many others are: since fossil fuel interests have positioned themselves to be able to neutralize and even stop needed reforms called on by the scientific community in the COP meetings, how to proceed?

    -Do we showcase their fossil fuel interests as sacrificing the ability to mitigate an increasingly hostile environment for short-term, selfish gain?

    -Do we show that delays and resistance only increase the severity of large scale suffering, mass migrations, warfare and authoritarian regimes?

    -Do we spend our time really showcasing successful transitions of large economies to drastically reducing emissions as well as showcasing economic development of the South in ways that are empowering and sustainable? 

    It's my sense that we need to be doing a mix of all of these and probably other initiatives if we are to have a chance. The important realization for me is that we cannot expect those changes to come through the COP process. There must be pressure applied in ways that the fossil fuels interests cannot so easily insert themselves into to stop.

    I'm really interested in hearing more about these types of things and hope that this website will showcase these types of things more and more.

    0 0
  5. The subcribers number on climate deception is inaccurate by far. I do not have any sexy-like content, and much of it is not strictly climate deception; had I kept my voice I would have done more original, less robot reading. 

    I am eclectic and pick and choose; so I have gone far afield from strictly climate deception material. I cannot produce enough to remain a ranking channel without highjacking kinda related content. For example, today, I will upload a fifteen-minute podcast highlighting the plutocrat control of information, which means more climate deception, denial, and delay.

    I choose all four of your questions and then some. There is no silver bullet. Besides, more people must notice that the Mississippi River is a stream, Lake Powel is a fish bowl, and California burns from time to time.

    For the record, I am looking for others to contribute and/or take over anyone or all of my channels: climate deception, climate damage, and global warming simplified. Note that NASA's climate effects page and NASA Climate Kids need more attention than any Youtube channel. 

    0 0
  6. wilddouglascounty @4,

    I agree that a diversity of actions are required to increase the number of people who change their mind to abandon harmful Beliefs by improving their Knowledge regarding how to be less harmful and more helpful. And that includes recognizing that not all people in a 'category of people' are harmfully selfish even if the majority in that category are.

    I think that the best thing would be for people to use their connections and methods of connecting with others to be more helpful including:

    • raise awareness and improve understanding about the harm of fossil fuels and the harmful actions of people trying to maximize their benefit from fossil fuels as harmfully as they can get away with.
    • correct harmful misunderstandings or misleading claims when they encounter them (don't be a by-stander)

    Unlike 'more on-line interactive' people like Eddie Evans who have the potential to reach a broader audience, I am not a Social Media participant. My interactions are more direct encounters with people in my many diverse groups of acquaintances. I do not bring up topics like climate change. But whenever a misunderstanding is raised I try to improve the understanding ... with mixed results. I live in Alberta. So I interact with many people who are powerfully motivated to misunderstand a topic like the harmful climate change impacts of fossil fuel use.

    I have made a more expansive comment about this regarding the added challenge of the 'recent changes by Twitter' on the 2022 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #48. The recent SkS post "Publishing a long overdue explainer about a scientific consensus" is also related to the problem.

    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 2022 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us