SkS Highlights, Toon of the Week, Quote of the Week, He Said What?, SkS Spotlights, Poster of the Week, Coming Soon on SkS, and 97 Hours of Consensus
There’s long been a troubling disconnect in climate science communication where we discuss the temperature charts we see from all the surface station data sets and the importance of keeping global mean surface temperature below 2C. This creates a challenge for anyone who wants to understand where we currently are relative to a 2C rise in temperature over preindustrial times.
For the average person, who might just now becoming interested in the climate change issue, how are they to comprehend this? How can we make the communication of this critical data point more clear and concise? How do we make it more relevant to the issue of climate change?
Rob Honeycutt, The 1C Milestone
El Niño Could Rank Among Strongest on Record by Andrea Thompson, Climate Central, Aug 13, 2015
Hat tip to I Heart Climate Scientists
“In Canada I can’t tell where the oil industry ends and the government begins and in Australia the same is true when it comes to coal,” she (Naomi Klein) told Guardian Australia.
“The Abbott government is repeating the talking points of the coal industry, the same stuff I heard at the Heartland Institute, that ‘coal is good for humanity’ and ‘God bless coal’.
“We have elections in Canada in October and I hope we have a different government. If that happens, Australia will be isolated as a climate villain. At the moment we are giving you a run for your money.”
Tony Abbott is a climate change 'villain', says Canadian author Naomi Klein by Oliver Milman, The Guardian, Aug 16, 2015
“I (Matt Ridley) took a lot of personal attacks. People attacked my motives. And it’s true that I have got personal investments in coal mining near my home; in fact, my family has been in it one way or another for a couple of hundred years.”
“So, maybe I have a vested interest in carbon dioxide emissions. But I’ve always declared that. I’ve always made that very explicit.”
Matt 'King Coal' Ridley Admits Fossil Fuel Investments May Cloud Views on Climate Change by Brendan Montague, DeSmog UK, Aug 10, 2015
In her New York Times Op-ed, Why Misleading Americans About Climate Change Is Dangerous, Anna North states:
In fact the overwhelming majority of research supports the reality of climate change — a 2013 review of nearly 12,000 scientific articles published between 1991 and 2011 found that of those that took a position on the issue, 97.1 percent endorsed the idea that climate change was real and human-caused. The study concluded that papers disputing climate change were “a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.”
The link embedded in the above is to: Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature, Cook et al, Environmental Research Letters (ERL), 15 May 2013
Skeptical Science is designated as one of the top five in a Living Roots article on green iPhone apps
Quote derived with author's permission from:
"We have known since the 1800s that carbon dioxide traps heat in the atmosphere. The right amount keeps the climate conducive to human life. But add too much, as we are doing now, and temperatures will inevitably rise too high. This is not the result of natural variability, as some argue. The earth is currently in the part of its long-term orbit cycle where temperatures would normally be cooling. But they are rising — and it’s because we are forcing them higher with fossil fuel emissions."
Posted by John Hartz on Tuesday, 18 August, 2015
 |
The Skeptical Science website by Skeptical Science is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. |