• คาสิโนออนไลน์สล็อตในไทย

    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 pletely 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 ments The Consensus Project Translations About Donate


    There is no consensus
    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
    Keep me logged in
    New? Register here
    Forgot your password?

    Latest Posts

    Archives

    Climate Hustle

    Explaining climate change science & rebutting global warming misinformation

    Scientific skepticism is healthy. Scientists should always challenge themselves to improve their understanding. Yet this isn't what happens with climate change denial. Skeptics vigorously criticise any evidence that supports man-made global warming and yet embrace any argument, op-ed, blog or study that purports to refute global warming. This website gets skeptical about global warming skepticism. Do their arguments have any scientific basis? What does the peer reviewed scientific literature say?


    Skeptical Science New Research for Week #32, 2019

    Posted on 13 August 2019 by doug_bostrom

    Clinical speech

    From Barber and Burgiess' Scarcity and Safe Operating Spaces: The Example of Natural Forests

    Read more...

    3 ments


    State of the climate: 2019 set to be second or third warmest year

    Posted on 12 August 2019 by Zeke Hausfather

    This is a re-post from Carbon Brief

    With the data now in for the first half of the year, Carbon Brief estimates that 2019 is most likely to be either the second or third warmest year on record for the Earth’s surface, depending on the approach used to calculate global temperatures.

    Global surface temperatures have been quite warm over the first half of 2019, driven by increasing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations and assisted by a weak El Niño event in the tropical Pacific. June 2019 was the warmest June since records began in 1850, and July 2019 is likely to be both the warmest July on record and the single warmest month ever recorded.

    While there is still some uncertainty as to how the remaining six months will play out, it is extremely unlikely that 2019 will displace 2016 as the warmest year on record, and also very unlikely that this year will place lower than the fourth warmest on record.

    Arctic sea ice has been at a record or near-record low extent for the past four months, though it is still too early to tell if the summer minimum in September will see a new record low extent. Arctic sea ice volume is currently tied with 2012 and 2017 for the lowest value on record.

    Antarctic sea ice extent has generally been on the low-end of normal for the first half of 2019, and global sea ice has also been at record low levels over the past four months.

    Record summer warmth

    Summer 2019 has seen record-setting heatwaves in a number of regions, including the continental USEurope and Alaska. Record-breaking heat in France in late June, for example, was shown to have been made “at least five times more likely” by climate change. June 2019 was the warmest June on record for the world as a whole, adding to an already exceptionally warm start to the year.

    The map below shows the departure from normal temperatures during the month of June, based on data from Berkeley Earth, where normal conditions are defined as the average June during the period from 1951-1980.

    June 2019 average surface temperatures from Berkeley Earth. Anomalies plotted with respect to the 1951-1980 baseline used by Berkeley Earth. Chart by Carbon Brief.

    Read more...

    2 ments


    2019 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming Digest #32

    Posted on 11 August 2019 by John Hartz

    Story of the Week... Editorial of the Week... El Niño/La Niña Update... Toon of the Week... SkS in the News... ing Soon on SkS... Poster of the Week... SkS Week in Review...

    Story of the Week...

    Change food production and stop abusing land, major climate report warns

    Land degradation, including deforestation, produces almost a quarter of the world's greenhouse gas emissions. Pictured: An aerial view over a chemically deforested area of the Amazon jungle caused by illegal mining activities in the river basin of the Madre de Dios region in southeast Peru, on May 17, 2019. 

    Humans have damaged around a quarter of ice-free land on Earth, United Nations scientists warned in a major report* Thursday, stressing that further degradation must be stopped to prevent catastrophic global warming.

    The warning es almost a year after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)concluded in a landmark report that we only have until 2030 to drastically reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and prevent the planet from reaching the crucial threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

    The second IPCC report highlights the vicious cycle of climate change and land degradation.

    "We humans affect more than 70% of ice-free land, a quarter of this land is degraded. The way we produce food and what we eat contributes to the loss of natural ecosystems and declining biodiversity," said Valérie Masson-Delmotte, co-chair of the IPCC. 

    Change food production and stop abusing land, major climate report warns by Isabelle Gerretsen, World, CNN, Aug 8, 2019

    *Climate Change and Land: An IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems

    Read more...

    1 ments


    2019 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #32

    Posted on 10 August 2019 by John Hartz

    A chronological listing of news articles posted on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week, i.e., Sun, Aug 4 through Sat, Aug 10, 2019

    Editor's Pick

    This Land Is the Only Land There Is

    Here are seven ways of understanding the IPCC’s newest climate warning.

    Climate change could make water even more scarce in naturally dry areas, the report warns. Australia’s ranchers have struggled under a drought for years. BROOK MITCHELL / GETTY

    1. There is no shortage of scary facts in the major new report on climate change and land, a summary of which was released today by a United Nations–led scientific panel. Chief among them: For everyone who lives on land, the planet’s dangerously warmed future is already here. Earth’s land has already warmed more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.6 degrees Fahrenheit) since the industrial revolution, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. That’s the same amount of warming that climate activists are hoping to prevent on a global scale.

    This spike makes sense, scientifically: Land warms twice as fast as the planet overall. Earth as a whole has warmed by only 0.87 degrees Celsius (1.5 degrees Fahrenheit) during the same period. But this increase makes the stakes of climate change clear: When scientists discuss preventing “1.5 degrees Celsius of global warming,” they are really talking about forestalling 3 degrees Celsius—or 5.1 degrees Fahrenheit—of higher land temperatures.

    And land temperatures are what humanity usually cares about. Land, really, is what humanity cares about. That’s the point. 

    This Land Is the Only Land There Is by Robinson Meyer, Science, The Atlantic, Aug 8, 2019

    Read more...

    8 ments


    Can Land cause Climate Change? (new IPCC report)

    Posted on 9 August 2019 by Guest Author

    A brand new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change shows just how much global warming affects our use of land, and how land use affects the planet. From farming to forests, we have to learn to protect our land from ourselves.  ClimateAdam explains:

    Read more...

    7 ments


    The consensus on consensus messaging

    Posted on 7 August 2019 by John Cook

    A scientist would never tolerate statements about climate change that weren't based on scientific research and empirical evidence. However, the same evidentiary standards don't always seem to apply to statements about how to municate about climate change. For example, on the topic of municating the scientific consensus on human-caused global warming, there are lots of opinions on whether municating the scientific consensus is effective or not. Many of these opinions are not based on the body of empirical research into consensus messaging. 

    So this post is a summary of the empirical research into consensus messaging and how people think about consensus. In psychological research, public perception of scientific consensus has been found to be so important that researchers now describe this dynamic as the Gateway Belief Model. This model finds that municating the scientific consensus on climate change increased beliefs about climate change, which subsequently increases public support for climate policy. The vast majority of research in this field either confirms the Gateway Belief Model or confirms the efficacy of consensus messaging.

    The following table lists any papers that test either consensus messaging or the Gateway Belief Model. Studies are either correlational (surveys that explore whether there's an association between perceived consensus and other climate beliefs) or experimental (randomized tests that measure the impact of consensus messaging). The Country column lists which countries the participants e from. The Support column indicates whether the study supports the Gateway Belief Model or the positive effect of consensus messaging.

    Table: Studies into the Gateway Belief Model or Consensus Messaging

      Author (year) Study type Country Finding Support
    1 Malka et al. (2009) Correlational USA Perceived consensus mediates association of knowledge with climate concern among Democrats and Independents who trust scientists. Y
    2 Ding et al. (2011) Correlational USA Low perceived consensus is associated with lower climate beliefs and lower policy support. Y
    3 Lewandowsky et al. (2013) Experimental Australia Consensus messaging increases acceptance of AGW. Y
    4 Rolfe-Redding et al. (2011) Correlational USA Perceived consensus predicts climate beliefs and attitudes among Republicans. Y
    5 McCright et al. (2013) Correlational USA Perceived consensus affects policy support, mediated by global warming beliefs. Y
    6 Aklin & Urpelainen (2014) Experimental USA Modest amounts of scientific dissent undermine public support for environmental policy. Y
    7 Bolsen et al. (2014) Experimental USA Consensus messaging reduces partisan differences on behavioral intent and belief in AGW. Y
    8 van der Linden et al. (2014) Experimental USA Consensus messaging (in pie-chart form) reduces partisan difference in perceived consensus. Y
    9 Myers et al. (2015) Experimental USA Consensus messaging is equally effective among liberals and conservatives. Y
    10 van der Linden et al. (2015) Experimental USA Increasing perceived consensus is significantly and causally associated with climate beliefs, which predicts increased policy support. Y
    11 Cook & Lewandowsky (2016) Experimental Australia, USA Consensus messaging reduces partisan differences on belief in AGW for Australians. It increases partisan differences for Americans but still have an overall positive effect on belief in AGW. Y
    12 Deryugina & Shurchkov (2016) Experimental USA Consensus messaging increases acceptance of climate change and human causation. Y
    13 Hamilton (2016) Correlational USA Acceptance of AGW correlates with perceived consensus. Y
    14 Hornsey et al. (2016) Correlational USA, UK, Australia, 30 European countries Perceived consensus is a strong predictor of belief in climate change (stronger than cultural cognition). Y
    15 Schuldt & Pearson (2016) Correlational USA Perceived consensus is associated with mitigation support for both whites and non-whites. Y
    16 Brewer & McKnight (2017) Experimental USA edy segment about consensus has strongest effect on belief in climate change among participants with low interest in the environment. Y
    17 Cook et al. (2017) Experimental USA Consensus messaging neutralizes polarizing influence of misinformation. Y
    18 Dixon et al. (2017) Experimental USA Consensus messaging does not produce significant effects (including no backfire effect among conservatives). Neutral
    19 van der Linden et al. (2017a) Experimental USA Consensus messaging reduces partisan differences on perceived consensus. Y
    20 Bolsen & Druckman (2018a) Experimental USA Consensus messaging backfires with conspiracy theorists, but consensus messaging coupled with belief validation increases acceptance of AGW among conspiracy theorists. Neutral
    21 Bolsen & Druckman (2018b) Experimental USA Consensus message increases perceived consensus with indirect effect on belief in AGW and policy support. Y
    22 Harris et al. (2018) Experimental UK Consensus messaging increases perceived consensus and climate beliefs. Y
    23 Kerr & Wilson (2018a) Correlational New Zealand Perceived consensus does not predict later personal climate beliefs. N
    24 Kerr & Wilson (2018b) Experimental New Zealand Consensus messaging increases perceived consensus with indirect effect on belief in AGW. Y
    25 Kobayashi (2018b)

    Correlational, Experimental

    Japan Perceived consensus predicts climate beliefs. Consensus messaging increases climate beliefs through perceived consensus.   Y
    26  Tom (2018) Correlational USA  Misconception about consensus is one of the most important factors in predicting scientifically deviant beliefs.  Y
    27 van der Linden et al. (2018b) Correlational USA Perceived consensus did predict later personal climate beliefs.  Y
    28 Zhang et al. (2018) Experimental USA Consensus messaging is most effective in conservative parts of the USA.  Y
    29 Bertoldo et al. (2019) Correlational  UK, France, Germany, & Norway Perceived consensus predicts belief in anthropogenic climate change with the relationship moderated by whether people’s model of science is “truth” vs “debate.”  Y
    30 Goldberg et al. (2019) Experimental USA Consensus messaging reduces partisan differences on perceived consensus. Y
    31 Ma et al. (2019) Experimental   Consensus messaging produces reactance among conservative dismissives. N
    32 van der Linden et al. (2019a) Experimental USA Consensus messaging increased climate beliefs and attitudes, which were associated with increases in support for action. Conservatives showed greater belief updates. Y
    33 van der Linden et al. (2019b) Experimental USA No evidence of psychological reactance in response to consensus messaging among Republicans, conservatives, or those with dismissive prior views. Y

    Read more...

    12 ments


    Skeptical Science New Research for Week #31, 2019

    Posted on 6 August 2019 by doug_bostrom

    56 articles this week.

    What articles are open access?

    When Ari was running this page open access articles were flagged as such. That feature is now restored. Note that identification of open access articles is largely mechanized under the new regime and so it's possible there will be omissions. Performance should improve over time.

    Open access article titles are appended with "(open access)" in our list.  

    What's "open access?" This denotes a scientific article free to read by any member of the public, without them needing to pay money or be affiliated to library privileges at an institution. Open access is closer approximation to ideal means for propagation and transfer of scientific information, refinement made possible by fundamental changes in the mechanics and logistics of scientific publishing. The open access publisher PLOS articulately explains the philosophical underpinnings. of open access.

    The drive to open access in the verb sense has been profound and swift. 67% of this week's collection of publications are published as free to read. This begs a question: is the inability of a researcher or research team to pay fees for open access to their work a feature of a true meritocracy?

    The Earth as systems engineering task

    The International Space Station (ISS) functions as required— as a semi-closed system— because it's the subject of fanatical measurement and analysis. Everything that can possibly be accounted for, is. Rational planning coupled with regulation makes the operation of the ISS feasible. In a similar vein, today's largest cruise ships can support total human occupancy of nearly 9,000 persons for a few days at a time thanks to accounting, planning and boundaries on behavior. Passengers and crew of space stations and ships are not expected to figure out how they'll eat and breath without any plan or engineering support, and they're not free to behave exactly as they choose at all times.

    Read more...

    0 ments


    Climate change made Europe’s 2019 record heatwave up to ‘100 times more likely’

    Posted on 5 August 2019 by Guest Author

    This is a re-post from Carbon Brief by Daisy Dunne

    The run of unprecedented temperatures in July – which sent records tumbling in the UK, the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany – would have been “extremely unlikely” without climate change, according to a new quick-fire analysis.

    The hot weather seen in the Netherlands and France was made up to “100 times more likely” by climate change, the study finds.

    And the heat in Cambridge in the UK – which saw a new country-wide record of 38.7C in July – was made around “20 times more likely” by human-caused warming.

    The findings e from the latest analysis from the World Weather Attribution network. “Attribution” refers to a fast-growing field of science that aims to quantify the “fingerprint” of climate change on extreme-weather events.

    Across Europe, the July heatwave was “much more extreme than any other heatwave we’ve looked at over the last few years”, a scientist from the network tells Carbon Brief.

    Read more...

    4 ments


    2019 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming Digest #31

    Posted on 4 August 2019 by John Hartz

    Story of the Week... Toon of the Week... ing Soon on SkS... Poster of the Week... SkS Week in Review... 

    Story of the Week...

    China’s emissions ‘could peak 10 years earlier than Paris climate pledge’

    Shutterstock

    CO2 emissions in China may peak up to a decade earlier than the nation has pledged under the Paris Agreement, according to a new study.

    With its enormous population and heavy reliance on coal, China is by far the world’s biggest polluter, responsible for more emissions than the US and EU bined.

    One of the drivers behind Chinese emissions is the intense urbanisation that has taken place across the country in recent years, as millions of people flock from rural areas to rapidly expanding cities.

    However, in new analysis published in Nature Sustainability, a team of researchers has shown that as China’s burgeoning cities bee wealthier, their per capita emissions begin to drop.

    According to their analysis, this trend could in turn trigger an overall dip in CO2 levels across the nation, and mean that despite the current target for emissions peaking by 2030, they may in fact level out at some point between 2021 and 2025.

    It is not the first time a study has suggested a premature dip in China’s emissions, but its timing is significant given an imminent UN summit where world leaders will under pressure to step up their Paris targets.

    China’s emissions ‘could peak 10 years earlier than Paris climate pledge’ by Josh Gabbatiss, Rest of World Emissions, Carbon Brief, July 29, 2019 

    Read more...

    0 ments


    2019 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #31

    Posted on 3 August 2019 by John Hartz

    A chronological listing of news articles posted on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week, i.e., Sun, July 28 through Sat, Aug 3, 2019

    Editor's Pick

    Pretend Underdogs: Inside a Climate Denier Conference at Trump Hotel

    Photo by Joe McCarthy

    I entered Trump International Hotel in Washington last Thursday with a three-person team to cover the Heartland Institute’s 13th International Conference on Climate Change. I left with two.

    Despite the overwhelming scientific consensus that humans are causing climate change by burning fossil fuels, this free-market think tank, which has received large sums of fossil fuel money, continues to hawk various strains of climate change denial. And they weren’t happy that The Weather Channel had brought along George Mason University researcher John Cook, who tracks disinformation and climate change denialism professionally. About two hours into the conference, interim Heartland President and Director of munications Jim Lakely pulled us aside. “You have two choices,” the stocky, spikey-haired man told us in a small conference room filled with empty cardboard boxes. “Either John leaves, or you all leave.”

    (Cook was not on the press list, but was an official correspondent with The Weather Channel for the occasion. After the Heartland Institute failed to respond to multiple emails, Cook joined our reporting team, assuming there was no problem.)

    This gesture — “He’s not wele on principle,” Lakely said — set the tone for the next several hours, during which former NASA climate munications specialist Laura Faye Tenenbaum, sound recordist Rachel Falcone and I would listen to a cabal of policy wonks, contrarian scientists and municators sounding a little too certain in their denial to deserve the title, “skeptics.”

    (The visit to the conference was part of the reporting for a new investigative podcast series on climate denial and disinformation ing from The Weather Channel this fall.) 

    Pretend Underdogs: Inside a Climate Denier Conference at Trump Hotel by Joseph McCarthy, The Weather Channel, Aug 2, 2019

    Read more...

    7 ments


    Posted on 2 August 2019 by Guest Author

    This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Karin Kirk

    Is environmental extremism causing the decline of the American coal industry? A look at the economics shows that coal has been beaten fair and square in the marketplace by cheaper and cleaner alternatives. The best way to support coal munities is to confront these economic realities, rather than creating a divisive and false narrative about the reasons behind the industry’s challenges.


    Talen Energy in June announced the early closure of part of its Montana Colstrip power plant, the sixth-largest source of greenhouse emissions in the U.S. Two of the plant’s four coal-burning units are to be shuttered at the end of this year. The plant, and now its closing, are emblematic of the struggle between the fight to save coal munities and the inevitable economic forces plucking away at coal’s one-time dominance of American energy.

    The Colstrip plant has four units, each its own power plant. The two oldest units, Units 1 and 2, are closing in light of insurmountable headwinds. They emit so much pollution that under federal law they are not permitted to operate unless the relatively cleaner units are also running and the net pollution then can be averaged-out. These 43-year-old units are also expensive to run pared to the amount of power they generate, so they are seldom used.

    Rising costs are ‘an unfortunate pas de deux, with both parties locked into a downward spiral.’

    The power plant is fed by the nearby open-pit Rosebud mine, owned by Westmoreland Coal pany. Westmoreland recently emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy and needs to raise prices in order to keep the Rosebud mine solvent. But increasing the cost of coal tips the economic balance of the power plant still further into the red. It’s an unfortunate pas de deux, with both parties locked into a downward spiral.

    Read more...

    2 ments


    What role will climate change play in the 2020 presidential election?

    Posted on 31 July 2019 by dana1981

    This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections

    Journalists and political wonks have spilled lots of ink, and more recently lots of gigabytes, in presidential election runups speculating that the environment and global warming could bee significant issues in voters’ minds. Seldom have their expectations been realized.

    Are there reasons to think things might turn out differently in the 2020 presidential elections? Again, we’re hearing the familiar drumbeat – this time will be different.

    Supporting that view is an early July Washington Post-ABC News poll that asked Americans whether they approve or disapprove of the Trump administration’s handling of nine important issues – the economy, immigration, taxes, health care, gun violence, foreign policy, abortion, climate change, and what the poll called issues of “special concern to women.”

    Climate change received the most critical response, with 62% of Americans disapproving of the administration’s actions pared to just 29% approving.

    mentary

    That approval rate of “the way Trump is handling” climate change matches the 62 percent of Americans worried about the issue in a recent Yale-George Mason survey.*

    The Trump administration has done nothing to address the carbon pollution causing the problem, and instead has exacerbated it. The administration began its campaign against Obama-era climate initiatives by announcing, soon after taking office, its intention to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. Since then, the administration has moved to scrub mentions of climate change from government science press releases, has blocked climate-related congressional testimony from its intelligence agencies, has repealed the EPA Clean Power Planfrozen vehicle fuel efficiency standards, and undone dozens more regulations aimed at curbing pollutants.

    Trump campaign staffers are reportedly concerned that the administration’s anti-environment agenda could hurt his re-election prospects among key constituencies, especially considering his “persistent unpopularity among female and suburban voters.” pounding those concerns may be that the president’s approval rating hasn’t reached 50 percent during his time in office, making him the only president in the modern era never to have reached that milestone. Add in the “blue wave” midterm elections of 2018 in which Democrats regained a majority in the House of Representatives, and consider also Trump campaigners’ concerns over a mid-June Fox News poll that showed Trump trailing top Democratic presidential contenders.

    Read more...

    6 ments


    Skeptical Science New Research for Week #30, 2019

    Posted on 30 July 2019 by doug_bostrom

    56 articles this week. 

    Dual Use Technology

    There's a move in the United States to muzzle and curtail research into climate change, particularly climate change caused by humans. The interests driving this regression are primarily concerned with maintaining the present vectors of money but manage to attract a large and supportive rabble of ideologically fixated folks who have a hard time with what they view as coercive pressure to behave responsibly, avoid creating messes that other people have to clean up etc.

    The trouble is that voluntary or simulated ignorance bears opportunity costs. It's impossible to anticipate the the full benefit of scientific research; asking one question may answer others even as other avenues of inquiry open in the process of exploring the first query. Research truncated for mercial or ideological reasons denies us an unimaginable range of benefits. 

    As a case in point, just as  methods such as "2+2=4" might be employed to calculate dimensions of wood for a project even as the same tools can add up money, so does climate research produce insight quite other than assessing how much doom our fossil fuel habits are depositing in our worry accounts. This week's collection includes a new evaluation (let's not say "projection") of how a plausibly scaled nuclear exchange between the United States and the Russian Federation would affect the world's climate, employing the latest climate modeling techniques— resources unavailable when the term "nuclear winter" first entered our vernacular. The results are quite chilling. Now— thanks to research primarily intended to model another problem— we can better understand a different avoidable scenario, hopefully helping us to make wiser choices.

    The issue with wearing blinkers is that when you're blind, you can't predict what might stub your toe or how much it may hurt. This is such a simple and obvious concept that it's astounding we need to be reminded but for what it's worth: Don't choose to be blind.

    No substitute for boots on the ground (or dipping instruments in water) 

    Long time reader Philippe C. pointed us to an article in the most recent AAAS Science conveying startling findings about melt rates of tidewater glaciers via direct observations, measurements that should help models perform better as discrepancies between observation and prediction are resolved. The format and acuity of the data gathered in this project seems well suited as fodder for mathematical derivations. 

    Suggestions wele

    This week's harvest of research includes other items (the first three in "Physical sciences") that came to us by suggestion (thank you, GEUS and BaerbelW). By "new research" we don't imply that what's published in this weekly synopsis must still be reeking of wet ink. And we certainly are not omniscient! Omissions are inevitable not least because we must employ the help of machines for providing much of our input. If you think we've missed something important, please let us know in ments below or via emailing contact(at).

    Physical sciences: 

    Update of annual calving front lines for 47 marine terminating outlet glaciers in Greenland (1999–2018)

    Sea-level rise in Denmark: Bridging local reconstructions and global projections

    Modeling the Influence of the Weddell Polynya on the Filchner–Ronne Ice Shelf Cavity

    Direct observations of submarine melt and subsurface geometry at a tidewater glacier

    Permafrost-carbon mobilization in Beringia caused by deglacial meltwater runoff, sea-level rise and warming

    Energetically Consistent Scale Adaptive Stochastic and Deterministic Energy Backscatter Schemes for an Atmospheric Model

    The glass half-empty: climate change drives lower freshwater input in the coastal system of the Chilean Northern Patagonia

    Read more...

    0 ments


    Posted on 29 July 2019 by Guest Author

    This is a re-post from The Guardian by Jonathan Watts

    The scientific consensus that humans are causing global warming is likely to have passed 99%, according to the lead author of the most authoritative study on the subject, and could rise further after separate research that clears up some of the remaining doubts.

    Three studies published in Nature and Nature Geoscience use extensive historical data to show there has never been a period in the last 2,000 years when temperature changes have been as fast and extensive as in recent decades.

    It had previously been thought that similarly dramatic peaks and troughs might have occurred in the past, including in periods dubbed the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Climate Anomaly. But the three studies use reconstructions based on 700 proxy records of temperature change, such as trees, ice and sediment, from all continents that indicate none of these shifts took place in more than half the globe at any one time.

    The Little Ice Age, for example, reached its extreme point in the 15th century in the Pacific Ocean, the 17th century in Europe and the 19th century elsewhere, says one of the studies. This localisation is markedly different from the trend since the late 20th century when records are being broken year after year over almost the entire globe, including this summer’s European heatwave.

    Major temperature shifts in the distant past are also likely to have been primarily caused by volcanic eruptions, according to another of the studies, which helps to explain the strong global fluctuations in the first half of the 18th century as the world started to move from a volcanically cooled era to a climate warmed by human emissions. This has bee particularly pronounced since the late 20th century, when temperature rises over two decades or longer have been the most rapid in the past two millennia, notes the third.

    The authors say this highlights how unusual warming has bee in recent years as a result of industrial emissions.

    Read more...

    21 ments


    2019 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming Digest #30

    Posted on 28 July 2019 by John Hartz

    Story of the Week... Toon of the Week... ing Soon on SkS... Climate Feedback Reviews... SkS Week in Review... Poster of the Week...

    Story of the Week...

    Global Footprint Network promotes real-world solutions that #MoveTheDate, accelerating the transition to one-planet prosperity

    On July 29, humanity will have used nature’s resource budget for the entire year, according to Global Footprint Network, an international sustainability organization that has pioneered the Ecological Footprint. It is Earth Overshoot Day. Its date has moved up two months over the past 20 years to the 29th of July this year, the earliest date ever.

     

     

    Earth Overshoot Day falling on July 29th means that humanity is currently using nature 1.75 times faster than our planet’s ecosystems can regenerate. This is akin to using 1.75 Earths. Overshoot is possible because we are depleting our natural capital – which promises humanity’s future resource security. The costs of this global ecological overspending are being increasingly evident in the form of deforestation, soil erosion, biodiversity loss, or the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The latter leads to climate change and more frequent extreme weather events.

    “We have only got one Earth – this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can’t use 1.75 without destructive consequences,” said Mathis Wackernagel, co-inventor of Ecological Footprint accounting and founder of Global Footprint Network.

    His just released book, Ecological Footprint: Managing Our Biocapacity Budgetdemonstrates that overshoot can only be temporary. Humanity will eventually have to operate within the means of Earth’s ecological resources, whether that balance is restored by disaster or by design. “panies and countries that understand and manage the reality of operating in a one-planet context are in a far better position to navigate the challenges of the 21st century,” Wackernagel writes. 

    Global Footprint Network promotes real-world solutions that #MoveTheDate, accelerating the transition to one-planet prosperity. Press Release, Global Footprint Network, July 23, 2019

    Read more...

    23 ments


    2019 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #30

    Posted on 27 July 2019 by John Hartz

    A chronological listing of news articles posted on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week, i.e., Sun, July 21 through Sat, July 27, 2019

    Editor's Pick

    Europe's record heatwave threatens Greenland ice sheet

    The hot air moving up from North Africa has not merely broken European temperature records but surpassed them by 2, 3 or 4 degrees Celsius

    Shutterstock

    The hot air that smashed European weather records this week looks set to move towards Greenland and could cause record melting of the world's second largest ice sheet, the United Nations said on Friday.

    Clare Nullis, spokeswoman for the U.N. World Meteorological Organization, said the hot air moving up from North Africa had not merely broken European temperature records on Thursday but surpassed them by 2, 3 or 4 degrees Celsius, which she described as "absolutely incredible".

    "According to forecasts, and this is of concern, the atmospheric flow is now going to transport that heat towards Greenland," she told a regular U.N. briefing in Geneva.

    "This will result in high temperatures and consequently enhanced melting of the Greenland ice sheet," she said. "We don't know yet whether it will beat the 2012 level, but it's close."

    Nullis cited data from Denmark's Polar Portal, which measures the daily gains and losses in surface mass of the Greenland Ice Sheet.

    "In July alone, it lost 160 billion tonnes of ice through surface melting. That's roughly the equivalent of 64 million Olympic-sized swimming pools. Just in July. Just surface melt - it's not including ocean melt as well."

     by Tom Miles, Reuters, July 26, 2019

    Read more...

    2 ments


    Analysis: How Trump’s rollback of vehicle fuel standards would increase US emissions

    Posted on 25 July 2019 by Zeke Hausfather

    This is a re-post from Carbon Brief

    The Trump administration’s plans to rollback vehicle fuel-economy standards could increase emissions from the light vehicles sector by 13%, a Carbon Brief analysis shows.

    The increase could reach 85m tonnes of CO2 (MtCO2) in 2035, pared to a scenario where rising Obama-era standards remain in force.

    The Trump administration plans are due to be finalised this summer and would freeze fuel standards at 2020 levels.

    This move is sure to be challenged in court action led by the state of California, which has historically had the power to set its own vehicle standards and has a large number of other states following its lead. It is currently unclear if California could maintain its ability to independently regulate CO2 emissions from vehicles in the face of federal opposition.

    If the standards are successfully rolled back, however, the impact could be sizeable, Carbon Brief analysis shows. The 85MtCO2 increase in annual CO2 emissions by 2035 would be equivalent to the current yearly emissions of Bangladesh.

    Looming legal battle

    When the Clean Air Act was passed into law in the US in 1970, California already hadmore stringent clean air regulations than the newly enacted national standard, the result of years of battling smog in the Los Angeles region.

    To prevent the new federal rules from overriding California’s existing regulations, the state was given the authority to issue its own air pollution rules as long as they exceed federal standards. Other states can also choose to adopt California’s stricter rules – and 12 other states along with the District of Columbia currently do this.

    The Trump administration is currently seeking to rollback the Obama vehicle fuel standards, freezing the minimum miles-per-gallon standard for newly sold light cars at 2020 levels of 37 miles per gallon for cars, down from a target of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. (Light trucks and sports utility vehicles – SUVs – have somewhat lower fuel-economy targets that would also be frozen). California has opposed this change, mitting to maintain high fuel-economy standards as a way of reducing CO2 pollution.

    This has set up a major legal showdown between the Trump administration and California, with the federal government threatening to deny California’s authority to set its own standards, a move that would inevitably end up in the courts. If California prevails, it would create a situation where the vehicle market was bifurcated, with about half the US population living in states with very different vehicle standards than the other half. Canada also recently agreed to follow California’s lead.

    Read more...

    6 ments


    Skeptical Science New Research for Week #29, 2019

    Posted on 23 July 2019 by SkS-Team

    A relatively small haul of 42 articles. 

    The usual proportion of climate-related research domain output is notably reversed this week. Knock-on effects of climate change and how to deal with them dominated the raw feed of articles.

    The physical science of climate change remains fascinating in itself as a matter of pure abstract curiosity. We could wish we only were witnessing a scientific phenomenon as a matter of pure science but with stakes at risk rising in scope and urgency, research focused on mitigation, adaptation and cultural impacts of climate change is burgeoning.

    Unlike the study of cosmology or mantle convection, in this broad arena of science we're the central player and can write our script. And— let's not forget— we've previously successfully or at least forthrightly negotiated unintended outes of our prowess. For instance after a brief period of unalloyed delight the emergence of automobiles focused attention on outes of relatively simple physics producing plicated, painful and expensive effects.  Momentum, inertia, 1/2MV2, human skulls, hard unforgiving objects and nasty, sad permutations of these things inexorably led to research on improvements. It's just so with the climate change we know we're causing— we've identified problems and now we figure out how to fix those problems. We get to shape our future for the better. 

    It's not plicated, not in principle. When with our clever brains we unleash forces unaddressed by our anatomy— or the normal functioning of the planet— we survive and thrive by further extension of our intelligence, not by pretending to be stupid and ignorant despite evidence to the contrary.

    In short, research "ancillary" to the physical science of climate change is the smartest and arguably best side of our behavior on display, enlightened self-interest at work. 

    Another lesson to be drawn from our weekly research synopsis is more centrally germane to the mission of Skeptical Science. As inquiry extends from physical principles of climate change and workers in other domains inevitably assess conditions in the light of new information we find ever more confirmation of what the physical science of climate change tells us is to be expected. This week's biology section is rife with examples. The intellectual bankruptcy of denial of anthropogenic climate change is being ever more obvious as the acuity and breadth of our accountancy improves. 

    Physical science of anthropogenic climate change
    Freshwater requirements of large-scale bioenergy plantations for limiting global warming to 1.5 °C

    Contrasting responses in dissolved organic carbon to extreme climate events from adjacent boreal landscapes in Northern Sweden

    Estimating power plant CO 2 emission using OCO-2 XCO 2 and high resolution WRF-Chem simulations

    A 40-y record reveals gradual Antarctic sea ice increases followed by decreases at rates far exceeding the rates seen in the Arctic 

    Enhanced flood risk with 1.5 °C global warming in the Ganges–Brahmaputra–Meghna basin

    Changes in the thickness and circulation of multiyear ice in the Beaufort Gyre determined from pseudo‐Lagrangian methods from 2003‐2015

    Turbulence Observations beneath Larsen C Ice Shelf, Antarctica

    Extratropical Cyclone Clouds in the GFDL climate model: diagnosing biases and the associated causes

    The relevance of mid-Holocene Arctic warming to the future

    Towards monitoring localized CO2 emissions from space: co-located regional CO2 and NO2 enhancements observed by the OCO-2 and S5P satellites

    Read more...

    5 ments


    CCC: UK has just 18 months to avoid ’embarrassment’ over climate inaction

    Posted on 22 July 2019 by Guest Author

    This is a re-post from Carbon Brief by Simon Evans

    The UK government only has 12-18 months left to raise its game on climate policy, or risk “embarrassment” as the likely host of the COP26 UN summit late next year.

    That’s the message from the latest annual mittee on Climate Change (CCC) progress report, submitted to parliament and government, which says the time to strengthen policy is “now”.

    The UK remains off track against its legally binding carbon budgets and gets failing report cards on a series of indicators developed by the CCC. These cover government policy and progress on the ground in cutting emissions, as well as plans to protect the country from growing climate risks.

    The report follows CCC advice published in May remending that the UK adopt a target of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050. This was recently accepted by government and became law in June.

    But CCC chief executive Chris Stark told a press briefing launching today’s report: “We are not on track…having a net-zero target will not magically fix this problem.” He added:

    “The government must show it is serious about its legal obligations…[its] credibility really is at stake here…There is a window over the next 12-18 months to do something about this. If we don’t see that, I fear the government will be embarrassed at COP26.”

    In a leaked letter sent ahead of the net-zero goal’s adoption, chancellor Philip Hammond also said the target alone would lack credibility without “an ambitious policy response in this parliament”.

    Today’s CCC report reviews progress to date and suggests what that ambitious response should look like. It also includes a biannual review of adaptation plans for England.

    Read more...

    0 ments


    2019 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming Digest #29

    Posted on 21 July 2019 by John Hartz

    Article of the Week... Toon of the Week... ing Soon on SkS... Climate Feedback Claim Review... SkS Week in Review...Poster of the Week...

    Article of the Week...

    June 2019: Earth's Hottest June on Record

     

    In this picture taken on June 6, 2019, Hindu priests sit inside large vessels filled with water as they perform the 'Parjanya Japa' and offer prayers to appease the rain god for timely monsoons at the Huligamma Devi Temple in Koppal District, some 300 km from Bangalore, India. A 33-year-old man died after a fight over water in southern India, police said on June 7, as huge parts of the country gasped from drought and a brutal summer heatwave. The heat wave was blamed for 210 deaths in June, making it Earth’s deadliest weather-related disaster of the month. Image credit: STR/AFP/Getty Images.

    June 2019 was the planet's warmest June since record keeping began in 1880, said NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) on Tuesday. NASA also rated June 2019 as the warmest June on record, well of ahead of the previous record set in 2015.

    The global heat in June is especially impressive and significant given that only a weak (and weakening) El Niño event was in place. As human-produced greenhouse gases continue to heat up our planet, most global heat records are set during El Niño periods, because the warm waters that spread upward and eastward across the surface of the tropical Pacific during El Niño transfer heat from the ocean to the atmosphere.

    Global ocean temperatures during June 2019 were tied with 2016 for warmest on record, according to NOAA, and global land temperatures were the warmest on record. Global satellite-measured temperatures in June 2019 for the lowest 8 km of the atmosphere were the warmest or second warmest in the 41-year record, according to RSS and the University of Alabama Huntsville (UAH), respectively.

    As of July 15, July 2019 was on track to be the warmest month in Earth’s history (in absolute terms, not in terms of temperature departure from average)--just ahead of the record set in July 2017. 

    June 2019: Earth's Hottest June on Record by Jeff Masters, Category 6, Weather Underground, June 18, 2019 

    Read more...

    1 ments



    The Consensus Project Website

    THE ESCALATOR

    (free to republish)


    © Copyright 2019 John Cook
    คาสิโนออนไลน์สล็อตในไทย | Links | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us