Global Warming

Update – Please do look at this 5min video from a co-founder of Greenpeace: http://prageruniversity.com/Environmental-Science/What-They-Havent-Told-You-about-Climate-Change.html#.Vc4sj_lViko

Happy New Year to you all!

I realise global Warming is not a Tendring Specific issue. However, it is a special interest of mine and I was recently challenged to show where it get my information from. Having done this piece of work, I thought I would share it more widely.

Atmospheric CO2 comes from http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/. This comes from an observatory on Mauna Loa and does suffer from the problem that there is significant human intervention. I gather 85% of the data points recorded are manually rejected. Nonetheless, I am not aware that anyone is challenging rise from c1950 to the current day from about 0.3% to about 0.4% (ie about 33%). This dataset is seasonal. Though presumably a global figure would not be. The trend is pretty much a straight line – slight upward curve. Whether it is man-made or not is another question, though presumably the burning of fossil fuels and cutting down of rain forest must have some effect.

Polar ice extent comes from http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/ – One tab for the Arctic and another for the Antarctic. The Antarctic graph shows steady growth of about 0.5-1.0% per decade. The Arctic graph shows a decline of 4-5% per decade. However, that is to take a trend through two inflections. Arctic ice is actually fairly stable up to the mid-1990’s, then it falls through to the early/mid 2000’s and is flat since then. 2006 is the low point and the 2015 minimum was the 6th lowest on record. The fall from pre-1990 levels to post-2010 levels was about 1m Km2 in a total of around 11m Km2 (ie about 10%). There is more polar ice now than there was a decade ago, but 10% less than there was 30 years ago.

Note:- Polar ice extent is from satellite data, with minimal human intervention.

Global temperatures come from http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/. The one to look for is Global TLT. TLT is Temperature Lower Troposphere, the troposphere is the 15-20 Km above the surface of the earth. So the lower troposphere is the bit in touch with the earth. This shows stable temperatures through to the early 1990’s, then it rises through to 1998 and is flat since then. The rise from pre-1990 levels to post 2000 levels is around 0.4oC. The fall in arctic ice lags the rise in temperature by about five years.

Note:- This global temperature info is from satellite data with minimal human intervention. I have previously used http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut3/diagnostics/comparison.html but that requires significant intervention by people who are paid by the global warming lobby.

I have no source for sea level rises – because sea levels are not rising! I know of no credible source for any evidence of sea level rises. There are sporadic reports of islands in the Ganges delta being lost or Pacific islands inundated. However, if these are not from fanciful researchers, they will be down to erosion or changes in land level. If there is a global rise in sea levels, then it will be happening worldwide – that is the nature of water (and indeed worldwide).

Will the world succeed in keeping temperatures to less than 2oC above pre-industrial levels? Of course – our glorious leaders would not be able to push temperatures above that level even if they tried!

It is such a shame that the environmental debate focuses on CO2 emissions rather than habitat conservation and species/genetic diversity.

 

3 thoughts on “Global Warming”

  1. Ashley,
    I feel that I have moved on from trying to argue the case for human-induced climate change. What interests me more now, is the psychology of why people believe what they believe, and why they become entrenched in their views. (Incidentally, there are lots of papers on sea level rise, e.g here… http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n6/full/nclimate2635.html and if you think the CO2 graph is more or less a straight line, put your eyes close to the graph surface looking from the 1960 points towards the 2014 point and tell me it is not a substantial curve!). I continue, though with less hope, to try to imagine scenarios where pumping CO2 into the atmosphere won’t result in drastic climate change. Perhaps the best chance might be some change in oceans absorbing more CO2 because of changed currents, or some unknown behaviour of cloud formation, but I don’t know of any good evidence for either. But back to psychology: why are you so sure that humans are not having a significant effect on our climate?

    1. John,
      I find it impossible to answer your question! You talk of “climate” and “climate change”. Yet it is not at all clear what these terms mean. Global warming is a globe (the earth) warming (getting hotter), but climate change?
      As for man affecting global temperature – the evidence of the last sixteen years is that global temperature is stable.
      As for man affecting the environment – of course. I am profoundly concerned by the lack of activity to preserve the genetic diversity of the natural environment. That can only be addressed through massive habitat preservation. Any moves in that direction are completely swamped by the specious arguments to reduce CO2 emissions.

      1. Ashley, I worked in ecology, pollution and population genetics science for 25 years, so I am in absolute agreement with you on the importance of preserving habitats. Locally, we need to preserve at least some of Burcart’s Meadow (the best wildflower meadow for 20 miles before being damaged for car boot sales, but can be restored) at Centenary Way, Little Clacton, which has a planning proposal for housing. We also need a clear structure of responsibility in Tendring District Council for maintaining and enhancing biodiversity on its own land (as legally required).
        With regard to your comment, let’s not get bogged down in semantics. We are both talking about whether humans putting CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing droughts, storms, glacial melt, etc. I didn’t want to argue the case, but I don’t want you to think I accept the statement that the global temperature has been stable over the last sixteen years. The question has to be asked: why has the temperature stayed above the mean of any other period of trusted temperature measurements? Extra CO2 in the atmosphere may not be the reason, but there are no other decent theories. Have you read research by Naomi Oreskes about the origin of lots of arguments against human effects on climate? It’s very interesting and she has some lectures on Youtube. This 3-minute film gives you a taste… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZQNiDIBxO4

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *