Hypography: Climate Change Evidence

[freeztar]

It seems appropriate for Hypography (hyperlink+bibliography) to have a running list of evidence supporting modern climate change. Feel free to posts links to new research, reports, professional organizations, or any other source supporting the thread title.

 

This thread is not intended for debate or even discussion. It's meant as an assimilation of pertinent data. It's intended as a resource for easy access of climate information. If you'd like to discuss one of the posts/ideas in this thread, please copy it and paste it into a new thread. I reserve the right to move or delete posts that are off-topic.

 

Hopefully everyone can experience a range of reactions from eye-opening to refreshing while adding links and perusing what's been added by others. Go! :singer:

 

(I'll be adding lots of links soon...)

[InfiniteNow]

NATURE Article: No solar hiding place for greenhouse sceptics

 

No solar hiding place for greenhouse sceptics

 

Sun not to blame for global warming.

 

A study has confirmed that there are no grounds to blame the Sun for recent global warming. The analysis shows that global warming since 1985 has been caused neither by an increase in solar radiation nor by a decrease in the flux of galactic cosmic rays.

 

 

 

 

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect - The History of our understanding of CO2 and its Impact on Climate

In the 19th century, scientists realized that gases in the atmosphere cause a "greenhouse effect" which affects the planet's temperature. These scientists were interested chiefly in the possibility that a lower level of carbon dioxide gas might explain the ice ages of the distant past. At the turn of the century, Svante Arrhenius calculated that emissions from human industry might someday bring a global warming.

[InfiniteNow]

YouTube - This Year's Model http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6Un69RMNSw

[Michaelangelica]

This article adresses most of the arguments against climate change

BP Climate FAQs

Responses to Questions & Objections

on Climate Change

 

BP Climate FAQs

 

 

Dr Brett Parris

 

Chief Economist, World Vision Australia

Research Fellow, Monash UniversityIntroduction

 

1. The IPCC is a political body and its reports are scientifically unreliable

 

2. Science is not about consensus – Galileo was ridiculed by the authorities and the scientific establishment

 

3. There’s no consensus - 31,000 scientists signed a petition denying the link between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change

 

4. We should wait until there is more evidence before reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

 

5. Climate change has been happening throughout geological and human history. What is happening now is not outside the bounds of natural climatic variability.

 

6. Because what is happening now is within the realms of natural variability, we can’t say that humans are contributing to climate change.

 

7. Because what is happening now is within the realms of natural variability, it is not something to worry about. Species have always adapted.

 

8. It was warmer during medieval times

 

9. Climate models are unreliable

 

10. There was a consensus among climate scientists in the 1970s that we would soon be heading into another ice age

 

11. Global warming ended around 1998 anyway – it’s been cooling since then.

 

12. Our best strategy is simply to adapt to climate change.

 

13. CO2 exists only in very low concentrations in the atmosphere, therefore it cannot have significant effects.

 

14. CO2 is a weak greenhouse gas. Doubling of CO2 from its pre-industrial levels of 280 ppm to 560 ppm would only bring warming of about 1ºC.

 

15. CO2 is not a pollutant – it is completely natural and essential for life.

 

16. Any warming is the Sun’s fault.

 

17. Climate change is due to the effects of cosmic rays.

 

18. Lack of warming in the tropical troposphere (lower atmosphere) proves anthropogenic global warming is a myth.

 

19. Coming out of the ice ages, the changes in CO2 happened after the warming began, so CO2 doesn’t affect atmospheric temperatures.

 

20. Antarctica is cooling, so that proves the global climate isn’t warming

 

21. Action on climate change would ruin our economies

 

General remarks

 

Acknowledgments

 

Author Note

 

Endnotes

 

References

 

Useful Resources

 

Download this file as a pdf here.

BP Climate FAQs

[TheBigDog]

Times do change, and so does our understanding.

 

In the above post's link there are details that debunk each of the arguments listed. It made me curious. I knew about the ice age scare in the 70's, and looked it up. Much of it probably came not from scientific journals which were researched in debunking that argument, but from new outlets such as Time. Here is a 1974 news article from Time magazine.

 

http://www.junkscience.com/mar06/Time_AnotherIceAge_June241974.pdf

 

I thought it would be interesting to take the scientists who are named in the article and see what their work indicated later in their careers.

 

George J Kukla wrote another article in 1981 where he talks about evidence of global warming instead of global cooling.

 

EVIDENCE IS FOUND OF WARMING TREND - New York Times

 

He has continue to work and write on the topic, but much of what you get when searching him is his work from the 70's when he thought the planet was cooling. I get the impression from some of the later articles that he still thinks we are entering another glacial period even though we are experiencing the anthropomorphic global warming, but I did not want to subscribe to the sources to read the full contents.

 

I went on to look up writings from the next scientist mentioned. Reid A Bryson blamed global cooling on dust in the atmosphere. While he does not doubt global warming, he does debunk several of the AGW arguments in this 2005 article.

1. The atmospheric warming of the last century is unprecedented and unique. Wrong. There are literally thousands of papers in the scientific literature with data that shows that the climate has been changing one way or the other for at least a million years.

2. It is a fact that the warming of the past century was anthropogenic in origin, i.e. man-made and due to carbon dioxide emission. Wrong. That is a theory for which there is no credible proof. There are a number of causes of climatic change, and until all causes other than carbon dioxide increase are ruled out, we cannot attribute the change to carbon dioxide alone.

3. The most important gas with a "greenhouse" effect is carbon dioxide. Wrong. Water vapor is at least 100 times as effective as carbon dioxide, so small variations in water vapor are more important than large changes in carbon dioxide.

4. One cannot argue with the computer models that predict the effect of a doubling of carbon dioxide or other "greenhouse gasses". Wrong. To show this we must show that the computer models can at least duplicate the present-day climate. This they cannot do with what could be called accuracy by any stretch of the imagination. There are studies that show that the average error in modeling present precipitation is on the order of 100%, and the error in modeling present temperature is about the same size as the predicted change due to a doubling of carbon dioxide. For many areas the precipitation error is 300-400 percent.

5. I am arguing that the carbon dioxide measurements are poorly done. Wrong. The measurements are well done, but the interpretation of them is often less than acceptably scientific.

6. It is the consensus of scientists in general that carbon dioxide induced warming of the climate is a fact. Probably wrong. I know of no vote having been taken, and know that if such a vote were taken of those who are most vocal about the matter, it would include a significant fraction of people who do not know enough about climate to have a significant opinion. Taking a vote is a risky way to discover scientific truth.

The Week That Was

 

A scientist named Donald Oilman (nice name) who was chief of the National Weather Service's long range prediction group was also quoted, but the only thing that I found on Google was references to the time article.

 

Kenneth Hare is also mentioned for his belief in Global Cooling. It is not clear from what I found online if that opinion changed, although I would gather that it did as he was later a strong advocate of eliminating fossil fuel consumption and replacing it with Nuclear energy.

 

Bill

[Topper]

It seems appropriate for Hypography (hyperlink+bibliography) to have a running list of evidence supporting modern climate change. Feel free to posts links to new research, reports, professional organizations, or any other source supporting the thread title...

 

Here's a collection of peer reviewed evidence you may not have seen...

 

Moderation note: this thread and a reply to it were moved to 22419, because this thread is intended to be a hypography of “evidence supporting modern climate change”, not evidence and/or commentary refuting it

[Michaelangelica]

It’s been a bit hot, just about everywhere at Larvatus Prodeo

[Buffy]

The current Quarterly Defense Review from the US Department of Defense devotes 5 pages (out of 100) to it's Climate Change and Energy strategy:

Climate change will affect DoD in two broad ways. First, climate change will shape the operating environment, roles, and missions that we undertake. The U.S. Global Change Research Program, composed of 13 federal agencies, reported in 2009 that climate-related changes are already being observed in every region of the world, including the United States and its coastal waters. Among these physical changes are increases in heavy downpours, rising temperature and sea level, rapidly retreating glaciers, thawing permafrost, lengthening growing seasons, lengthening ice-free seasons in the oceans and on lakes and rivers, earlier snowmelt, and alterations in river flows.

 

Assessments conducted by the intelligence community indicate that climate change could have significant geopolitical impacts around the world, contributing to poverty, environmental degradation, and the further weakening of fragile governments. Climate change will contribute to food and water scarcity, will increase the spread of disease, and may spur or exacerbate mass migration.

 

While climate change alone does not cause conflict, it may act as an accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on civilian institutions and militaries around the world. In addition, extreme weather events may lead to increased demands for defense support to civil authorities for humanitarian assistance or disaster response both within the United States and overseas. In some nations, the military is the only institution with the capacity to respond to a large-scale natural disaster. Proactive engagement with these countries can help build their capability to respond to such events. Working closely with relevant U.S. departments and agencies, DoD has undertaken environmental security cooperative initiatives with foreign militaries that represent a nonthreatening way of building trust, sharing best practices on installations management and operations, and developing response capacity.

 

Second, DoD will need to adjust to the impacts of climate change on our facilities and military capabilities. The Department already provides environmental stewardship at hundreds of DoD installations throughout the United States and around the world, working diligently to meet resource efficiency and sustainability goals as set by relevant laws and executive orders. Although the United States has significant capacity to adapt to climate change, it will pose challenges for civil society and DoD alike, particularly in light of the nation’s extensive coastal infrastructure.

 

In 2008, the National Intelligence Council judged that more than 30 U.S. military installations were already facing elevated levels of risk from rising sea levels. DoD’s operational readiness hinges on continued access to land, air, and sea training and test space. Consequently, the Department must complete a comprehensive assessment of all installations to assess the potential impacts of climate change on its missions and adapt as required.

(h/t

Daily Kos)

 

Sad to see that the delusional libtards have taken over the Pentagon....maybe now we will get bipartisan support to cut the defense budget! :rolleyes: :evil:

 

If man does find the solution for world peace it will be the most revolutionary reversal of his record we have ever known, :phones:

Buffy

[Michaelangelica]

15 March 2010

 

 

In a joint CSIRO/Bureau of Meteorology statement released today, Australia’s two lead climate science agencies have produced a snapshot of the state of the climate to update Australians about how their climate has changed and what it means.

 

Changes observed include:

 

* Highly variable rainfall across the country, with substantial increases in rainfall in northern and central parts of Australia, as well as significant decreases across much of southern and eastern Australia.

* Rapidly rising sea levels from 1993 to 2009, with levels around Australia rising, between 1.5cm and 3cm per decade in Australia’s south and east and between 7cm and 9cm in the country’s north

* About half of the observed reduction in winter rainfall in south-west Western Australia can be explained by higher greenhouse gas levels.

 

Bureau of Meteorology Director Dr Greg Ayers said the observed changes showed climate change was real.

 

“Australia holds one of the best national climate records in the world,” Dr Ayers said.

 

“The Bureau’s been responsible for keeping that record for more than a hundred years and it’s there for anyone and everyone to see, use and analyse.”

 

CSIRO Chief Executive Dr Megan Clark said the Bureau data underpinned a great deal of CSIRO research.

 

“Understanding options for mitigation and adaptation are important research priorities for us,” Dr Clark said.

 

“With this snapshot, Australians will be better prepared for the next step of planning for how to adapt to a changing climate and how to also take action to reduce the impacts of climate change. CSIRO has been working with industry and in sectors of the economy such as agriculture to prepare for and implement necessary changes.”

 

Dr Ayers said the snapshot presented the facts in an accessible format.

 

“There is a thirst for good quality climate science and our two organisations are proud to publish this,” he said.

 

The six page snapshot is available here or at

Bureau of Meteorology - Home Page

[external link].

[Michaelangelica]

How it is dealt with

 

It's Gettin' Hot in Here: The Big Battle Over Climate Science | Global Warming | DISCOVER Magazine

[C1ay]

 

Climate change is natural!

[Zythryn]

Climate change is natural!

 

So are forest fires.

Can man not be responsible for starting a forest fire?

[C1ay]

So are forest fires.

Can man not be responsible for starting a forest fire?

 

Sure he can. Do you want to blame man for all of the previous tropical eras this planet has been through too? Historically Earth is a much warmer place than it is now. Is that man's fault? How about the warming on Mars? Do you think we're responsible for that too?

 

Instead of trying to blame man for causing what happens naturally on this planet wouldn't it make more sense to just call a spade a spade and blame man for the pollution man creates? There's really nothing to debate in that vein, man is solely responsible for pollution. Whether or not it contributes to warming shouldn't matter. Pollution is pollution and man should do a better job at reducing it for the sake of keeping the environment clean.

[freeztar]

This thread was intended as a place where people could post *evidence* of climate change. Let's try to keep this thread from becoming like all the other past threads on climate change, please. :hihi: