Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

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

Settings

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

Settings

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...



Username
Password
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

Recent Comments

Prev  1402  1403  1404  1405  1406  1407  1408  1409  1410  1411  1412  1413  1414  1415  1416  1417  Next

Comments 70451 to 70500:

  1. New tool clears the air on cloud simulations
    Tom @ 8 thanks for not deleting. Sphaerica @7 Radio wave is short for radiated electromagnetic waves and really covers the whole magnetic spectrem and includes gamma rays though people may not understand this it is still true (-Snip-)
    Response:

    [DB] Unless you can point to peer-reviewed science that can substantiate what you hypothesize, you are essentially engaging in "What if _______?" conjecture. 

    Of course, what you neglect is the need for subsequent explanations as to why what amounts to established fact only applies in certain situations...and not others.

    OT snipped.

  2. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    muoncounter @23, the top row of graphs is Jun-Jul-Aug, but the second row is Dec-Jan-Feb. Consequently my point @21 stands.
  3. New tool clears the air on cloud simulations
    jmorpuss @6, as Sphaerica has already pointed out, cosmic rays are not "radio waves that carry nano particles". Radio waves are the least energetic form of electromagnetic radiation. Cosmic rays are gamma rays, the most energetic form of electromagnetic radiation (even more energetic than X-rays) along with showers of high energy sub-atomic particles, and while the latter could be loosely described as "nano-particles) they are not "carried by radio-waves" in any meaningful sense. To clarrify Spaerica's further comment, by "cosmic ray theory" he means the theory that cosmic rays increase cloud cover by creating cloud nuclei, not the theory as to how cosmic rays are generated.
  4. New tool clears the air on cloud simulations
    6, jmorpuss, Um, no. Cosmic rays are in no way "radio waves that carry nano particals [sic]." That falls under the category of "making stuff up." Beyond this -- cosmic ray theory itself is an unproven theory with no support at the moment whatsoever. Taking this a step further to discuss radio waves is insanity. Beyond this -- the fact the you can use the word "cloud" in your topic as well as the original post does not make your comment on-topic on this thread. Your comment is off topic and as such should be deleted. You've attempted to post these links before, but without context. Now you're conjuring context out of thin air. And honestly, I have a very, very hard time seeing the point. Please stop. This site is about science, not Dog Astrology or whatever your own personal interest may be. [Mods -- feel free to delete the original comment and all subsequent comments.]
    Moderator Response:

    [DB] Actually, since jmorpuss has persistently been pushing this agenda regardless of thread, it's a good teaching moment to nail this one down so subsequently we can point back to this as needed (lest it amount to PRATT, of course).

  5. Glaciers are growing
    Some grist for the mill: I’ve come across an interesting easy to read general paper on AGW by the glaciologist Lonnie Thompson titled Climate Change: The Evidence and Our Options. “Glaciers serve as early indicators of climate change. Over the last 35 years, our research team has recovered ice-core records of climatic and environmental variations from the Polar Regions and from low-latitude high-elevation ice fields from 16 countries. The ongoing widespread melting of high-elevation glaciers and ice caps, particularly in low to middle latitudes, provides some of the strongest evidence to date that a large-scale, pervasive, and, in some cases, rapid change in Earth’s climate system is underway. This paper highlights observations of 20th and 21st century glacier shrinkage in the Andes, the Himalayas, and on Mount Kilimanjaro. Ice cores retrieved from shrinking glaciers around the world confirm their continuous existence for periods ranging from hundreds of years to multiple millennia, suggesting that climatological conditions that dominate those regions today are different from those under which these ice fields originally accumulated and have been sustained. The current warming is therefore unusual when viewed from the millennial perspective provided by multiple lines of proxy evidence and the 160-year record of direct temperature measurements. Despite all this evidence, plus the well-documented continual increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, societies have taken little action to address this global-scale problem. Hence, the rate of global carbon dioxide emissions continues to accelerate. As a result of our inaction, we have three options: mitigation, adaptation, and suffering.”
  6. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    Muoncounter, I am sure we are on the same page. Hansen's paper is shocking. Skept, It sounds to me like we generally agree. I think the data already exists to show the warming is much more downside than any lessening of cold is upside. I think Hansen's paper is the final nail in the coffin of the deniers. If we both keep reading we will come to agreement soon. There are a lot of people on this website who call themselves "skeptics" who are really deniers so your handle looks funny.
  7. New tool clears the air on cloud simulations
    5, Sphaerica All you have to do is rap this type of info around cosmic ray theory But see that cosmic rays are only radio waves that carry nano particals And then apply this info on radio propagation from our com's and detecting Link provided http://www.ips.gov.au/Educational/5/1
  8. New tool clears the air on cloud simulations
    4, jmorpuss, Your provided link says nothing whatsoever about weather or climate. How is it of any interest on this site, or in any discussion of climate?
  9. New tool clears the air on cloud simulations
    One thing I don't see disgust much is th conection between sporadic E clouds and weather events Why? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sporadic_E This link gives some insight to what I mean I have other links I would like to share if you are interested
  10. New tool clears the air on cloud simulations
    WheelsOC, This isn't about better resolution cloud modelling. COSP simulates, within a GCM, the mechanisms by which real satellite observational data is collected. The challenge is in obtaining meaningful comparisons between satellite retrieval data and outputs from GCMs in order to produce realistic parameterisations of cloud processes. This approach allows genuine apples to apples comparisons between models and satellite data. Thanks for posting this, John, very interesting. Just yesterday I was pondering the possibility of exactly this approach for assessing UAH & RSS TLT data against models. Maybe it's already been done?
  11. Global Surface Temperature: Going Down the Up Escalator, Part 1
    Hansen has singled out ocean heat content measurements as the most important indicator of a "warming world" for many years. Now that precise measurements look like they are becoming available, he is emphatically calling attention to them. Since 2005 he has been describing calculations primarily based on measured ocean heat content in his public statements as a “smoking gun”. Now the term, i.e. “smoking gun”, is in his latest paper in press. He is becoming increasingly confident in analyses of data coming from the recently deployed Argo floats: “The strong positive energy imbalance during the solar minimum, and the consistency of the planet’s energy imbalance with expectations based on estimated human-made climate forcing, together constitute a smoking gun, a fundamental verification that human-made climate forcing is the dominant forcing driving global climate change.” This is the data he is using: (From von Shuckmann and Le Traon 2011, “How well can we derive Global Ocean Indicators from Argo data?”) To illustrate how “noisy” the previously available ocean heat storage data is compared to this new Argo data, Hansen provided this chart. The solid red line is his calculation based on the data from the von Schuckmann chart above, and the dotted red line is calculation based on data from a previous von Shuckmann et. al. effort. Both are Argo analyses: The ocean is where the heat is. Mere sloshing around of a tiny bit of the heat in the ocean, i.e. ENSO, can show up as a cooling trend in the global average surface temperature chart. Debate about whether the planetary system could possibly be cooling should be done using terms that make it clear that the global average surface temperature chart isn't a measure of whether the planet is cooling or not, or whether global warming is occurring or not.
  12. Sober up: world running out of time to keep planet from over-heating
    John Hartz, thank you, will look it up.
  13. Sober up: world running out of time to keep planet from over-heating
    Re philippe 117 . Electrical energy import into the UK is via a single route : across the channel from France. Oil imports are from many diverse routes and suppliers. Governments will rightly consider such facts, that is the reality. I cannot personally see the UK relying on 70% import of energy from a single supply route. Maybe 20% max. That leaves at least 50% fossil fuels or local nuclear. (Unless you can suggest another answer). You might want to check out Sustainable Energy without the Hot Air by David McKay, for a good survey of UK energy needs and scenarios, it is also downloadable online.
  14. Sober up: world running out of time to keep planet from over-heating
    @ Lancelot #115 The journal references that you asked for are: Mark Z. Jacobson, Mark A. Delucchi. Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part I: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials. Energy Policy, 2010; DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.040 To access a PDF of Part I, click here. Mark A. Delucchi, Mark Z. Jacobson. Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part II: Reliability, system and transmission costs, and policies. Energy Policy, 2010; DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.045 To access a PDF of Part II, click here.
  15. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    Interesting paper here, which directly connects fire with temperature in a more indirect way, so to speak : Forecasting Fire Season Severity in South America Using Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies
  16. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    michael sweet#24: Please excuse my northern hemispherocentrism. It is interesting to note that the new Hansen et al paper finds verification of the much-discussed (and criticized) 1988 models: Hansen et al. (1988) projected how the odds would change due to global warming for alternative greenhouse gas scenarios. Their scenario B, ... led to four of the six dice sides being red early in the 21st century based on global climate model simulations. Figure 5 confirms that the actual occurrence of summers in the "hot" category (seasonal mean temperature anomaly exceeding +0.43 σ) has approximately reached the level of 67% required to make four sides of the dice red. ... However, note that the odds of an unusually cool Jun-Jul-Aug (by the standards of 1951-1980) have fallen more than the odds of having an unusually cold Dec-Jan-Feb. Comparable loading of the dice has occurred in winter, where "hot", i.e., mild, winters now occur almost two-thirds of the time. --emphasis added The new paper's Figure 7 is extremely relevant: It depicts the inexorable trend of JJA for an increasing percentage of the globe into 'hot,' 'very hot,' and 'extremely hot.' This graph could make even the 'pausers' take notice, as there is no evidence of warming having paused.
  17. Philippe Chantreau at 05:43 AM on 14 November 2011
    Sober up: world running out of time to keep planet from over-heating
    Will strategic and political considerations constrain the relaiance on imported electricity more than they constrain reliance on imported oil and coal? I don't see that the situation will be much different. The truth is that, as long as tepid attitudes and reluctance to change like that displayed here by lancelot are widespread, no change can happen. There is also the option of waiting until FF are so scarce that change, and its modalities, is no longer a matter of choice.
  18. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    Michael : I consider the Tom’s argument, and in #20 I finally conclude in the same way when looking at Figure 2 (an overall increase of combined event). I’m please to read Hansen paper. Tom : my initial point was not that hot events are limited to heat waves (nor extreme events to temperature break-records), just that the shift of the mean to the right you describe logically implies a lesser probability for extreme cold events – a quite consensual conclusion from IPPC AR4. But you get the point for the overall increase. Again, my ultimate concern is to correctly estimate the present and future carbon cost for society : I hope we all have the same agenda.
  19. New tool clears the air on cloud simulations
    Alright! More realistic physics and better resolution for cloud modelling! This should make Dr. Spencer happy, right? ... right? Hmmm, this news has been out for almost three weeks and he's been pretty quiet about it. Wasn't his major beef with climate models the idea that they had unrealistic and backwards cloud simulations?
  20. Sober up: world running out of time to keep planet from over-heating
    I should add: the other 70% will still have to come from fossil or nuclear, or be imported, as it is done already from France. However, strategic and political considerations will constrain the reliance on imported electricity. That is just a fact of life.
  21. Sober up: world running out of time to keep planet from over-heating
    John Hartz, (author of this topic): in the intro: "a recent study in Energy Policy found that fossil fuels could be wholly abandoned by 2050 with the world's energy needs met by electricity produced 90 percent from wind and solar sources alone" That would be wonderful if true, but is very hard to believe. Firstly. Do you have a link to that study? Secondly, even if theoretically possible globally, in a country such as the UK it is not likely to be possible locally. The often quoted limit for renewables is about 30%. So it would seem that the other 70% will have to still have to come from fossil or nuclear. This must surely apply to many other countries. Thirdly, some calculation should be done of the amount of carbon likely to be produced in the transition period, for building such a massive energy infrastructure, using energy which comes from current sources. I am not saying that the quoted target is not desirable, just questioning the practical side.
    Moderator Response: [John Hartz] The article was written by Jeremy Hance and was originally posted on Mongabay.com. See Jeremy Hance #73 for links to the Energy Policy paper.
  22. The BEST Summary
    Tristan, it figures that Jo Nova rants about percentages: deniers hate percentages and love numbers. See, the Oregon Petition has over 30.000 signers who earn a BS degree or equivalent, so we -the public- are supposed to think: "Gee that's a lot of knowledgeable people, they must be right". Now, we can discuss endlessly if the Spice Girls have BS degrees or not, or that there really exists someone called Donald Duck, but of the people with a BS degree (or equivalent) alive, much less then 3% signed the petition! Hmm, now it doesn't sound that impressive anymore, does it? Another example is that famous list of 900 papers skeptical of AGW. Now, we can discuss endlessly if these papers are really sceptical about AGW or not (many of them aren't), or that some of these papers are not to be taken serious (many of them aren't, e.g. the paper in the Dog Astrology Journal). But when we take a look at the number of papers published each year on AGW, it turns in the order of 2000+ papers are published year after year of which less then 5% is sceptical about AGW. Hmm, 900 papers doesn't sound so impressive anymore, right? Deniers hate percentages but love numbers. Note: Figures are not exact, it's just to make the point
  23. Sober up: world running out of time to keep planet from over-heating
    Typo: "r. The other study predicts that pats of Europe,"
    Moderator Response: [John Hartz]Typo fixed. Thanks.
  24. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    Muoncounter, Since this an Australian web site I am surprised you said JJA is a summer only time;). In the paper Hansen also shows DJF data and it looks very similar. The primary difference is in winter the standard deviation of temperature is greater. This means a stronger conclusion can be drawn from the JJA data.
  25. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    Tom C#21: "the information in the inline graphs @13. The distribution of temperatures shown in those graphs not only shifts the mean to the right, but broadens the distribution." Of course, those are summer (JJA) graphs, so they do not deal with cold extremes in any way. But in dealing primarily with heat, this post does not explicitly exclude its broader effects. No such exclusion is in any way logical. Anyone who lived through this summer in the southwestern US saw little separation between heatwave-drought-fire; the latter two are symptoms of prolonged extreme heat. All are connected: in fact, it was the passage of Hurricane Irene to the east of Texas that brought winds turning local fires into wildfires. There is also ample evidence, at least on a local scale, that a bad fire season leads to a higher probability of flooding in the following wet season: Water quickly saturates the thin layer of permeable soil above the hydrophobic zone not being slowed by a vegetative canopy. Slower infiltration rates result in an increased intensity of surface runoff and erosion. But we've already seen a 'trifecta' of extreme behavior: National Weather Service forecast offices and River Forecast Centers have been gearing up for the third leg of a triple crown of disasters consisting of continuing drought and wildfires in the west, a record-breaking tornado outbreak in the South and record flooding along the Lower Mississippi River. And if tropical cyclones (TCs) are more frequent or more intense due to warming, you can add in the associated heavy Predecessor Rain Events (PREs) described by Galarneau and Bosart 2010: PREs are high-impact weather events that can often result in significant inland flooding, either from the PRE itself or from the subsequent arrival of the main rain shield associated with the TC that falls onto soils already saturated by the PRE. Further along the scale, consider what may be a changing winter pattern towards more frequent extreme snowfall totals: There will still be colder than average winters in a world that is experiencing warming, with plenty of opportunities for snow. The more difficult ingredient for producing a record snowstorm is the requirement of near-record levels of moisture. Global warming theory predicts that global precipitation will increase, and that heavy precipitation events--the ones most likely to cause flash flooding--will also increase. Our prior extreme weather threads (and here) addressed these connections.
  26. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    Hansen's most recent paper shows 2009 with 7% Extreme heating over land, 2010 as 17% Extreme heating and 2011 as 10% Extreme heating (See figure 6 in linked study). All these years had 0% Extereme cold and in fact 0% Very cold, the next warmer bin (Very hot was 20, 20, and 17%). From 1950-1980 less than 0.5% of land area was either Extremely hot or Extremely cold. I do not think that there is a problem with minimizing the side effects of cold weather, compared to current issues with extraordinary heat, drought and flooding. Perhaps you could site an example of a scientist "minmimizing the deleterious effects of a cold event"? We are all aware of the deleterious effects of cold following extreme volcanic erruptions, those are beyond human control. Consider Toms argument also. We want to be honest but not minimize the danger.
  27. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    skept.fr @20, while I admire a commitment to truth in any person, your reduction of the issue to heatwaves only obscures truth rather than reveals it. As already noted by other commentators, by that formula you exclude from consideration the drought and fires that accompany the heatwaves. Indeed, you also exclude the droughts (such as those in the Amazon, and in the South West corner of Australia) which are largely independent of heat waves. You also exclude from consideration the many floods in recent years several of which have a high probability of having been caused, or made worse by global warming. You also draw attention away from the information in the inline graphs @13. The distribution of temperatures shown in those graphs not only shifts the mean to the right, but broadens the distribution. That means the reduction in cold wave events is nowhere near as large as the increase in heatwave events. So, contrary to your 16, this is not a case of an equal number of extreme events, with increase in hot events compensated for by a decrease in cold events. There is an overall increase in the combined total of hot and cold events, even though cold events are becoming rarer.
  28. New tool clears the air on cloud simulations
    "Additionally, COSP has shown that climate change leads to an increase in optical thickness and increases the altitude of high clouds and decreases the amount of low and mid-level clouds."
    This is very interesting. Cloud albedo is a function of optical thickness, but the greenhouse effect is a function of cloud altitude. Specifically, the higher the altitude of the top of the cloud, the greater the greenhouse effect from that cloud. That means that an increase in the altitude of high clouds, and a decrease in the amount of low and mid-level clouds translates out as a positive cloud feedback, ie, that the effects of increased warmth on clouds tend to further increase the warmth, rather than reduce it.
  29. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    Michael : « you want to minimize the deleterious effects of these type of events » I would like the negative effects of AGW (including unique extreme events) to be precisely detected, attributed, evaluated. As a true skeptic (or I hope so), I’v no sympathy for those who try to distort the results of science (in a maximizing or minimizing sense) in order to influence public opinion and promote an ideological or economic agenda. And as a citizen, I’d like to know the true externalities of carbon-based energy systems. But ‘true’ means simply… true : we need to assess costs of climate-related hazards with and without AGW in order to make the optimal choices, at least if we favour an evidence-based policy. You are right for the other side-effects of hot temperatures (fires, drought), but do you mean that there is no side-effects of extreme cold temperatures too, in Russia or elsewhere ? If so, hem, I would conclude that ‘you try to minimize the deleterious effects of these type of events’ ☺ But after all, if hot extreme events in a warming climate are more numerous than cold extreme events in a stable climate (as it seems to be according to Figure 2), the choice for the title is justified.
  30. The BEST Summary
    '...the 0.95 amplification "upscaling" factor has been incorporated into the satellite trends to estimate the surface trend.' I think this Climate Audit thread demonstrates that Gavin got his calculation wrong on that figure. However, it turns out that the multi-model ensemble mean for land amplification is ~1.0, with a long-term spread of 0.9-1.1 so conclusions aren't radically altered. The thing I pointed out was that the discrepancy in UAH & RSS over land (Using GISS model output, TLT:Surface expected = 1.1:1; TLT:Surface observed = 0.7:1; Difference = 1.1/0.7 = 1.57) is almost exactly the same as the discrepancy over oceans (TLT:Surface expected = 1.6:1; TLT:Surface observed = 1.0:1; Difference = 1.6/1.0 = 1.6) so inferring an urbanisation component from the comparison doesn't work. In fact the comparison provides further evidence for a negligible influence of urbanisation on surface temperature records.
  31. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    Skept, While the lead post deals primarily with heat records, in Moscow this summer they also suffered record fires and drought. These were caused by the heat. Should we leave out any reference to these related effects? It seems to me that you want to minimize the deleterious effects of these type of events. I do not think we should minimize the event.
  32. The BEST Summary
    Ahh, excellent, thanks JM.
  33. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    michael sweet: As far as I understand it, Rahmstorf and Comou 2011 deal with temperature series and distribution of extreme temperatures. So, technically, their conclusion cannot be extended to precipitation – even if we know that intensity of precipitation events is projected to increase in IPCC models.
  34. How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
    Barry's presentation is so invaluable, because it talks to those people who don't necessarily have time to learn the scientific details (as most of us visiting SkS do) but still want to understand the issue of the denial we are facing. The couple of proofs given here, perfectly complements the presentation by Richard Milne, recently posted by John here. These two presentation are now my handy resources of arguments while talking to my 'skeptic' friends. I feel like the world of denial is opening now. Thanks again, Barry. Good luck with your book.
  35. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    Skept: Since many of the extreme events in the USA (and Australia) this year were floods, it would be illogical to restrict the title to heatwaves.
  36. The BEST Summary
    Tristan, it is 75 out of 77, or 97-98% - the latter with a larger sample. (By the way, for admin information, the "97% of Scientists is a small sample" link I found while doing the following search, doesn't go anywhere.)
  37. The BEST Summary
    Jo Nova had a ranty post about klein's article. It seemed to stem from the fact that Klein purported to be right about climate change without addressing 'skeptic' claims. Nova went on to say that Klein has a problem with numbers because the 97% statistic is illogical. 'It's not 97%, it's 75 scientists'. I agree that the way 97% is thrown around is a bit misleading. 75/77 makes 'over 90%' a more defensible statement.
  38. Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
    Shouldn't your title be : "Heatwaves Increase With Global Warming"? I suppose that the probability of some "extreme events" like cold waves are decreasing, for the same reason their warm counterpart is increasing.
  39. The BEST Summary
    A brief, off topic, note on behalf of my wife, who has a particular (professionally motivated) concern about these things: The use of the term "schizophrenic" to describe sceptics who appear to hold contradictory positions is questionable in two ways. FIrstly, although the etymology of 'schizophrenic' is 'split-mind' the condition itself does not involve this - dissociative identity disorder would be a closer match. (Actually, looking at the first paragraph on schizophrenia at Wikipedia the real manifestations of schizophrenia seem to be an even better description of much sceptic thought, but now I'm undermining my second point....) Secondly, the use of any medically recognised condition to describe the behaviour of people who choose to act in these ways is disrepectful to those with genuine mental disorders who cannot control their patterns of thinking.
  40. Luxembourgish translation of The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism
    Generally speaking, the acceptance to protect the environment in Lxembourg is very high. But when it comes to realize actions against climate change, such as installing wind turbines, discussions arise, including the way to put climate science into doubt. The mentality is reserved. So there's a hidden discussion including a rather unimportant skeptic lobby. I see the promotion of the document in two ways: to prevent arise of wrong and faulty arguments of the skeptic on climate change and to give people information on hand telling them about the many different ways climate change is happening. This is a part of the puzzle to enhance the knowledge here in Luxembourg about climate change, my way to promote further action against climate change and take responsibility.
  41. The BEST Summary
    @Doug H I don't think it helps those seeking action on climate to label all capitalists as being in denial. While it's true that many multinational companies with a vested interest in the energy status quo are actively spinning propaganda to deny climate change, there are many multinationals -- particularly those in food -- who recognise the problems climate change will have on their supply chains in the future. If we are to win this argument we need capitalists to come in from the cold. If you look, for instance, at the insurance industry you'll see that denial is not really a function of being a capitalist. Here in the UK climate change is not so much a left/right thing and in my experience those in denial -- leaving aside the just plain uninformed -- are just as likely to be on the extreme left as the extreme right. Your mainstream Conservative is generally as concerned about this issue as the mainstream Labour supporter.
  42. Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
    Patrick Kelly @ 56 In a post that discusses how nations are acting to mitigate climate change, making reference to the views of decision-makers would seem to be unavoidable. The SkS comments policy does not prohibit discussion of politics per se, but rather "political rants". I committed myself to a nonpartisan presentation, commending both sides of politics when they acknowledge the consensus science. If you are offended by my little aside about a party in denial, I hope that my above acknowledgement @ 57 of real differences on climate change between the Republican candidates, which we have previously examined on SkS, is helpful.
  43. Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
    … someone who acknowledges climate change will be elected President in 2012 I sure hope so, Eric. I must admit that I have shed no tears for Perry and Cain as they have faltered in their campaigns. Both seem to have a predisposition to deny global warming, whereas Romney does not. While he shifted his position for the Republican primaries, I don’t think he has closed his mind to the science. Still, if you can judge by his books, Obama is passionate about doing something about climate change, with or without the help of congress. He would still get my vote, except that mine doesn’t count! In any event, whoever wins the next presidential election is likely to be faced with undeniable evidence of AGW within their first term if the trend for Arctic ice loss continues. I have used graphs like this one with Australian politicians and believe them to be effective. I think it surprises politicians to learn that the current loss of 286 billion tonnes per year from Greenland alone is more than enough to fill Sydney’s massive harbour 500 times over!
  44. Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
    For a site that pleads a policy of "Poitical comments.... will be deleted," there are an awful lot of political comments posted!
  45. The BEST Summary
    John Hartz #6, I think Klein does see the antipathy towards environmentalists. And she does see the cornucopian wishful thinking about resources. But she does not see how the denialism is mostly rooted in things that are far stronger in the US than elsewhere. I think unlike most other Western countries, secular conservatism is weak in the US. You mostly have either religious conservatives or you have libertarians. The secular conservatism of most other Western countries has comparatively little difficulty making the compromises and adjustments that are necessary to mitigate climate change. But the religious conservatism of the US seems obsessed with its opponents. It seems to be unwilling to allow itself to see any good in the other side. I wonder whether they really support free enterprise so much as they want to use it a club to beat the secular with. The libertarians are scared of any form of compromise. I think it is because they want a system that is the logical consequence of a few principles. They do not like the idea of a system based of balancing conflicting goals none of which get completely accomplished.. They believe such systems will always collapse so that they are based on only a few principles. They think that a mixed economy must tend towards socialism. Klein is just as self righteous as her opponents and with her aims and sanctimoniousness she fuels the denialists. She is telling them that their fears are correct. She needs marginalizing just as much as they do.
  46. Sorting out Settled Science from Remaining Uncertainties
    A significant additional factor to the ones you mention which is almost as large as the effect of declining solar irradiance is described by Hansen in his Earth’s Energy Imbalance and Implications paper. Hansen calls this the Pinatubo “rebound”. His discussion is in section 12-4, i.e. page 26. “Volcanoes cause a negative planetary energy imbalance during the 1-2 years that the aerosols are present in the stratosphere, followed by a rebound to a positive energy imbalance. This rebound is most clearly defined after the Pinatubo eruption, being noticeable for more than a decade, because of the absence of other volcanoes in that period” I hacked a portion of his Figure 18(f) chart from page 27, and added a red arrow over the decade he’s talking about. This is a second negative impact on the planetary energy imbalance that can be attributed to the eruption of Pinatubo, in addition to the initial -2 W/m2 spike that goes away after a few years. Pinatubo’s “rebound” effect The blue line shows the eruption immediately imposing a bit more than -2 W/m2 forcing on the planetary system which rapidly heads back towards zero as the PInatubo aerosols settle out of the stratosphere. But because -2 W/m2 even over that short period is enough to cause the global ocean to cool slightly, after the Pinatubo aerosols are gone the Earth is left radiating less heat than it otherwise would be radiating to space for a period afterward. This amounts to a slight positive forcing, that as it declines toward zero reduces the planetary energy imbalance. Hansen calls this the “rebound”. He doesn’t supply a number for the peak. My estimate from his chart is that the peak was about 0.16 W/m2. Compare that 0.16 W/m2 to the number Hansen puts on the effect of the cyclical declining solar irradiance during almost the same period , i.e. about 0.14 W/m2. This factor is almost as large.
  47. How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
    Thank you people. that's what I call rapid response :)
  48. How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
    Susanne, Double-click the video to load the full youtube page. Copy the youtube link. Go to Keep Vid. Download the video and watch it uninterrupted.
  49. How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
    Susanne, Barry's more likely to see this on his blog (linked up top). Inquire there, he's very accommodating and could probably email you his PowerPoint slides or something...
  50. How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
    I don't suppose there's any chance of a transcript or a podcast? This sounds bang on topic for a group I'm working with, but my crummy wireless broadband choked at about the 3rd minute and wouldn't get through this even at 3am. I usually just sigh and pass videos by, but this time... ???
    Response:

    [DB] Over at Barry's blog Anna Haynes has posted her notes from the presentation, if that helps.  Look at the November 11, 8:46 pm mark.

Prev  1402  1403  1404  1405  1406  1407  1408  1409  1410  1411  1412  1413  1414  1415  1416  1417  Next


The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


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