PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet CLIMATE SCARES & CLIMATE CHANGE, 25 April 2001
----------------------------------------------------
"A British spring should not present a challenge to a
penguin chicks
familiar with the sub- zero conditions of Antarctica. But the
newborns
Walnut, Chestnut, Stan and Ollie are Peruvian penguins that are
more used
to tropical sunny beaches than the rain, sleet and snow of an
unusually
cold British April. They have been forced to resort to woolly
blankets and
heated mattresses to survive the present unseasonal freezing
temperatures at
Flamingoland Zoo, near Pickering, north Yorkshire."
--Sally Pook, The Daily Telegraph, 21 April 2001
"A Canadian scientist is pouring cold, unfrozen water on the
notion
that global warming is melting arctic sea ice like a Popsicle at
the beach.
Greg Holloway galvanized an international meeting of arctic
scientists
Tuesday by saying there is little evidence of a rapid decline of
the
volume of ice in the northern oceans. Despite breathless media
reports and
speculation of an ice-free Northwest Passage, he suggests that
it's far more
likely that the ice has just been moved around in the cycles of
Arctic
winds. "It's more complicated than we thought," said
Holloway, a
scientist with the Institute of Ocean Science in Victoria."
--Bob Weber, CNews Science, 24 April 2001
"The global warming fad has all the traits of a religious
movement:
hysteria, cries of doom, demands that people sacrifice for a
divine
entity ("the Earth"), and attacks on those who
disagree. As an ancient
historian, I recognise that changes in sea level, the evolution
and
passing away of species, the rise and fall in global
temperatures, and even
the movement of whole continents are normal when viewed over
centuries.
I also recognise that only science, industry and mass production
can allow
us to live as we do."
--Dr John Lewis, Cambridge, The Sunday Times, 22 April 2001
"[Professor Richard S.] Lindzen has questioned whether a
scientific
consensus has really coalesced around the notion that the planet
is
becoming dangerously warmer. He has likened the greenhouse issue
to the
eugenics movement of the 1920s, which held that certain mental
defects
could be explained by a gene disorder. Lindzen has argued that
the eugenics
movement, which led to a restrictive immigration law, was fed by
a false
perception of scientific consensus and that a similarly false
perception
of consensus is helping shape the public attitude toward
greenhouse
warming. Lindzen notes that the future rate of temperature rise
is very
much in doubt. For that matter, the temperature record is not
absolutely
clear. Surface readings have shown significant warming,
especially in the
last 10 years, but satellite data provide a somewhat different
picture.
Using microwave profiles of the bottom five miles of the
atmosphere,
Christy and NASA's Roy Spencer have compiled a record showing
only a tiny
increase in global temperature since 1979. Warming in the
Northern
Hemisphere has been counterbalanced by cooling in the Southern
Hemisphere."
--Anthony R. Wood, Philadelphia Inquirer, 23 April 2001
(1) ARCTIC SEA ICE NOT MELTING: NEW RESEARCH
CNews Science, 24 April 2001
(2) SEA TURTLES STUNNED BY COLD
CO2 Science Magazine, 25 April 2001
(3) PERMAFROST DEGRADATION IN CENTRAL ALASKA
CO2 Science Magazine, 25 April 2001
(4) IS THE GREENLAND ICE SHEET SHRINKING? OR IS IT GROWING?
CO2 Science Magazine, 25 April 2001
(5) RECENT UNPRECEDENTED GLACIAL RETREAT IN THE SWISS ALPS? NOT
DURING THIS
INTERGLACIAL!
CO2 Science Magazine, 25 April 2001
(6) BAFFLING BAFFIN BAY: COLD WATER ON WARMING MODELS
Greening Earth Society, 20 April 2001
(7) TURKISH DELIGHT
Greening Earth Society, 20 April 2001
(8) CLIMATE MODELS: "UNCHANGING WITH TIME"
Cooler Heads Coalition, 20 April 2001
(9) HUMANS TO BLAME FOR GLOBAL COOLING BETWEEN 1000-1900 AD
Eurekalert, 23 April 2001
(10) COMPUTER MODEL: GREENHOUSE GASES MAIN REASON FOR QUICKER
NORTHERN
WINTER WARMING
Mark Hess <mhess@pop100.gsfc.nasa.gov>
(11) IN THE MEANTIME, IT'S APRIL AND IT'S TOO COLD FOR PENGUINS
The Daily Telegraph, 21 April 2001
(12) GLOBAL WARNING: GLOBAL COOLING
Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>
(13) RE: BACK FROM THE JAWS OF EXTINCTION
Jonathan Shanklin <jdsh@bas.ac.uk>
(14) CARBON SINKS, GLOBAL WARMING, BABIES AND BATHWATER
Alasdair Beal <a.beal@btinternet.com
>
(15) ARE THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT AND GLOBAL WARMING A SCIENTIFIC
REALITY OR A
CONSPIRACY THEORY?
THE ROLE OF CCNet.
Andrew Glikson <geospec@webone.com.au>
(16) SCIENTIFIC SCEPTICISM, GLOBAL WARMING ALARM, AND THE ROLE OF
CCNet
Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>
(17) GLOBAL WARMING: UNFINISHED BUSINESS
S. Fred Singer
(18) AND FINALLY: EUROPE FLIPS AND PLANS TRADE WAR AGAINST U.S.
OVER GLOBAL
WARMING
Ananova, 24 April 2001
============
(1) ARCTIC SEA ICE NOT MELTING: NEW RESEARCH
From CNews Science, 24 April 2001
http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSScience0104/24_artic-cp.html
By BOB WEBER-- The Canadian Press
IQALUIT, Nunavut (CP) -- A Canadian scientist is pouring cold,
unfrozen
water on the notion that global warming is melting arctic sea ice
like a
Popsicle at the beach.
Greg Holloway galvanized an international meeting of arctic
scientists
Tuesday by saying there is little evidence of a rapid decline of
the volume
of ice in the northern oceans.
Despite breathless media reports and speculation of an ice-free
Northwest
Passage, he suggests that it's far more likely that the ice has
just been
moved around in the cycles of Arctic winds.
"It's more complicated than we thought," said Holloway,
a scientist with the
Institute of Ocean Science in Victoria.
The original theory was based on declassified records from the
trips of U.S.
submarines under the ice.
Satellite pictures have clearly shown that the surface area of
the ice has
decreased about three per cent a year for the last 20 years.
But the question was, How thick was it?
The submarine data generated headlines and cover stories from the
New York
Times to Time Magazine when it seemed to indicate that ice volume
had
decreased by 43 per cent between 1958 and 1997.
The evidence seemed good. There were only eight different
voyages, but they
had generated 29 different locations across the central Arctic
where there
were enough readings to make comparisons.
Holloway, however, couldn't make that conclusion jibe with any of
his
computer models.
"We couldn't understand how the reduction could be so
rapid," he said.
"My first thought was, What is it we don't understand?"
Holloway knew that there was a regular pattern of sea ice being
blown into
the North Atlantic. He decided to examine if the wind patterns
across the
circumpolar North could have had something to do with the missing
ice.
Wind patterns blow across the Arctic in a 50-year cycle.
At different points in the cycle, ice tends to cluster in the
centre of the
Arctic. At other points, the ice is blown out to the margins
along the
Canadian shorelines, where the subs were not allowed to go
because of
sovereignty concerns.
When Holloway lined up the submarine visits with what he knew
about the wind
cycles, the explanation for the missing ice became clear:
"The submarine
sampled ice during a time of oscillation of ice toward the centre
of the
Arctic. They went back during a time when ice was oscillating to
the
Canadian side."
Holloway had found the missing ice.
"I believe it is most probably explained with the shifting
ice within the
Arctic locations," he said to applause from scientific
delegates from Norway
to China.
If the submarines had made their first visit one year earlier and
their
return one year later, Holloway says they would have found no
change in the
thickness of the sea ice at all.
Holloway cautions that his research doesn't force a total
re-evaluation of
the theory of global warming. Temperatures on average are rising
around the
world, he says.
It does, however, deflate excitement about the possibility of an
ice-free
Northwest Passage.
The chance of a year-round northern shipping route has thrilled
commercial
shippers, worried environmentalists, and concerned those worried
about
Canada's ability to enforce sovereignty in those waters.
"At this time, we do not have the basis to predict an open
Northwest
Passage," said Holloway.
It also calls into question some of the findings and
recommendations of the
International Panel on Climate Change, which accepted the 43 per
cent
hypothesis in its report to various governments.
More data is coming in as further reports from American and
British
submarines are released. But the furore over the first results
contains a
lesson for both scientists and the public, Holloway says.
"It's a very small amount of time and a very limited number
of places those
submarines could go," he said.
"The cautionary tale to all this is the undersimplifying of
a big and
complex system."
"Who know what's going on out there?"
Copyright 2001, CNews,
============
(2) SEA TURTLES STUNNED BY COLD
From CO2 Science Magazine, 25 April 2001
http://www.co2science.org/edit/v4_edit/v4n17bedit.htm
The Nightly News of 20 April 2001 carried a revealing report from
NBC's
Kerry Saunders entitled "A Chilling Crisis for Sea
Turtles." Reporting from
Florida, USA, Saunders discussed a phenomenon called
"cold-stunning,"
wherein turtles exposed to unusually cold water temperatures
suffer a number
of maladies that can be deadly. As marine biologist Glenn Harmon
explained
during an interview, the abnormally cold temperatures put the
turtles into a
comatose state where their immune systems shut down, making them
vulnerable
to all kinds of viruses and bacterial infections, including
pneumonia.
The most recent bout of cold-stunning, the report explained, was
caused when
an outbreak of cold Arctic air severely chilled the waters of the
Gulf of
Mexico this past winter. "Never before have marine
biologists had so many
sick turtles to deal with," reported Saunders. And it wasn't
just in
Florida, nor were the problems confined to sea turtles.
An Assoicated Press report of 10 January 2001 described scattered
fish kills
in southern Louisiana and in the Perdido River on the
Alabama-Florida
border. So great was the danger, in fact, that many of Florida's
tropical
fish farmers moved their fish indoors or covered their ponds to
protect
them. Manatees and pelicans were also hit by frostbite and needed
rescuing;
and in South Carolina water temperatures dropped so low that they
decimated
most of the roe that would have produced the state's yearly crop
of white
shrimp, reducing the estimated catch by a whopping 99%.
Farther west, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department reported
people along
the Gulf coast of that state finding "an unusual
increase" in cold-stunned
turtles in one of the area's most extensive and devastating such
episodes.
Even in advance of the coldest November-December period ever
recorded in the
United states, there were cold-stunned turtles washing ashore;
and the
phenomenon continued throughout the winter.
So why do we call these facts to your attention? Simply because
they once
again put the lie to the claim that global temperatures are the
highest they
have ever been during the past millennium. How could it possibly
be so
uniquely and dangerously hot, when, in the words of Cheryl
Joyner, as seen
on the NBC Nightly News report, "there has never been a
cold-stunning this
large in the United States"? It just doesn't add up.
And since fish,
shrimp, manatees, pelicans and turtles don't lie, the fib must
reside in the
temperature data, or at least in the manipulation and
interpretation of the
data as they pass through the hands of IPCC functionaries.
Dr. Craig D. Idso, President
Dr. Keith E. Idso, Vice President
Copyright © 2001. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
==========
(3) PERMAFROST DEGRADATION IN CENTRAL ALASKA
From CO2 Science Magazine, 25 April 2001
http://www.co2science.org/journal/2001/v4n17c2.htm
Reference
Jorgenson, M.T., Racine, C.H., Walters, J.C. and Osterkamp, T.E.
2001.
Permafrost degradation and ecological changes associated with a
warming
climate in central Alaska. Climatic Change 48: 551-579.
What was done
The authors examined the extent, history and rates of permafrost
degradation
in the Tanana River valley lowlands of central Alaska over the
past 300
years using a combination of methods, including repeat aerial
photography
(1949, 1978 and 1998), radiocarbon dating of organic material,
and tree ring
analyses.
What was learned
According to the authors, the "evidence indicates that
nearly all the
permafrost degradation has occurred since 1750 and that 83% of
the
degradation occurred before 1949." They also
determined that 53% of the
degradation occurred since 1850.
What it means
These results highlight another occasion where model projections
do not
match up with reality; for according to the climate alarmists,
permafrost
degradation in the planet's polar regions should be accelerating
as a result
of CO2-induced global warming. Yet, as the data show, half of the
melting
took place prior to 1850, and no scientist in their right mind
would
attribute this degradation to CO2-induced global warming, as
atmospheric
carbon dioxide concentrations varied little during this 100-year
period
(1750-1850).
A similar argument can be made with respect to the authors'
finding that 83%
of the permafrost degradation took place prior to 1949, for it is
the second
half of the 20th century that has seen the majority rise in
anthropogenic
CO2 emissions since pre-industrial times. Thus, little, if any,
of the
permafrost degradation that has occurred in this central Alaska
region can
be the result of CO2-induced global warming. Instead it must be a
consequence of a combination of other important factors.
Copyright © 2001. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and
Global Change
========
(4) IS THE GREENLAND ICE SHEET SHRINKING? OR IS IT GROWING?
From CO2 Science Magazine, 25 April 2001
http://www.co2science.org/subject/g/summaries/greenland.htm
Greenland - Summary
Studies of the growth and decay of polar ice sheets are of great
importance
to global climate change, because of the potential for changes in
the volume
of earth's ice fields to influence the rate and magnitude of sea
level
change. Many such studies have focused on the mass balance
of the Greenland
ice sheet, because temperatures are much higher there than over
the
Antarctic ice sheet. In fact, many general circulation
models (GCMs) have
predicted that an initial warming of the Greenland ice sheet may
set in
motion a positive feedback cycle leading to further melting, as
more and
more of the island's surface becomes ice-free and able to absorb
an
increasingly greater amount of solar radiation. This
increased absorption
of solar radiation, the models suggest, will raise temperatures
over the ice
sheet, causing it to lose mass at its surface. However,
like many other
horror stories connected with the global warming hypothesis,
fears of
widespread and catastrophic melting of the Greenland ice sheet,
especially
as a result of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 concentration,
are likely
unwarranted.
At the present time, there is a dearth of mass balance data for
the entire
Greenland ice sheet. This lack of data severely limits the
ability of
scientists to provide accurate estimates of the ice sheet's
future
contribution to sea level rise (or fall), or to even characterize
its
present state of balance (or imbalance). In fact, because
of a lack of
data, it cannot now be determined whether or not this great ice
sheet has
thickened, thinned or remained constant over the course of the
past several
decades; and it appears that it will be quite some time before
such an
answer can be provided.
In a review of this subject, Reeh (1999) concluded that "we
do not know
whether the ice sheets are currently in balance, neither do we
know if their
volume or mass has increased or decreased during the last 100
years." A
similar conclusion was reached by Braithwaite and Zhang (2000),
who stated
that the Greenland ice sheet might "have to be monitored
over many decades
to detect unambiguous evidence of either thinning, due to
increased melting,
or thickening, due to increased accumulation," primarily
because "the ice
sheet can thicken or thin by several meters over 20-30 years
without giving
statistically significant evidence of non-zero balance under
present
climate." Furthermore, McConnell et al. (2000) have
indicated that
"accurate detection of any long-term mass imbalance of the
[Greenland ice
sheet] and assessment of likely causes will require multi-decadal
time
series of surface measurements collected over the time period of
interest."
In examining the data that do exist, it appears there is some
evidence to
suggest that the ice sheet has remained constant or slightly
thickened at
higher elevations while possibly thinning at lower ones. A
comparison of
estimates of ice discharge from the higher elevations of the
Greenland ice
sheet with estimates of total snow accumulation, for example,
suggests that
the higher elevations of the ice sheet may have been "almost
exactly in
balance" over the past few decades (Thomas et al., 2000). In
addition, Davis
et al. (1998) used satellite radar altimeter data to examine
changes in the
ice sheet at elevations greater than 2000 meters, reporting it to
have
thickened at a rate of 2.0 ± 0.5 cm per year for the period
1978-1988.
In analyzing aircraft laser-altimeter measurements over southern
Greenland
collected in 1993 and again in 1998, Krabill et al. (1999)
reported a
thickening of the ice sheet above 2000 meters where the data were
considered
"most reliable," but a thinning at the lower
elevations. These data, along
with additional data covering both northern and southern
Greenland were used
in a study one year later where, once again, the authors reported
an
essential balance at the higher elevations and a thinning at
lower altitudes
(Krabill et al., 2000).
What might be responsible for these reported short-term trends?
And what
effect, if any, are they having on sea level? Temperature is
likely not to
blame, for the observational history of Greenland reveals that
the highest
summer temperatures existed in the 1930s and "the 1980s and
early 1990s were
about half a degree cooler than the 96-year mean" (Krabill
et al., 2000).
Furthermore, proxy temperature measurements from two Greenland
boreholes
have also revealed that recent "temperatures reached a
maximum around 1930
A.D." and that "temperatures have decreased during the
last decades"
(Dahl-Jenses et al., 1998).
Determining the Greenland ice sheet's contribution to sea level
rise (or
fall) is just as difficult as determining its mass balance, for
the simple
reason that estimates of sea level change are derived in large
part from
estimates of ice sheet mass balance change, which, as discussed
above, are
unreliable at the present time for Greenland. Nevertheless,
it should be
comforting for those in low-lying coastal regions to note that
some newer
GCMs are projecting a sea level decline instead of a rise with a
doubling of
atmospheric CO2 (Wild and Ohmura, 2000). Still, such
comfort may be short
lived, for Cuffey and Marshall (2000) have estimated that the
Greenland ice
sheet's contribution to sea level rise during the past
interglacial was
significantly higher than it is at present. And if sea level rose
significantly above its current level in the past, independent of
rising
atmospheric CO2 concentrations, it can certainly happen again.
Where do all these observations leave us with respect to global
warming and
the Greenland ice sheet? Pretty much in limbo. So the next time
you hear
someone getting excited about the Greenland ice sheet shrinking
(or, to be
fair, swelling), tell them to check back in a decade or two; for
there's a
lot more data that need to be collected before a definitive
answer about the
state of the Greenland ice sheet can be provided.
References
Braithwaite, R.J. and Zhang, Y. 2000. Relationships
between interannual
variability of glacier mass balance and climate. Journal of
Glaciology 45:
456-46.
Cuffey, K.M. and Marshall, S.J. 2000. Substantial
contribution to
sea-level rise during the last interglacial from the Greenland
ice sheet.
Nature 404: 591-594.
Dahl-Jensen, D., Mosegaard, K., Gundestrup, N., Clow, G.D.,
Johnsen, S.J.,
Hansen, A.W. and Balling, N. 1998. Past temperatures
directly from the
Greenland Ice Sheet. Science 282: 268-271.
Davis, C.H., Kluever, C.A. and Haines, B.J. 1998.
Elevation Change of the
Southern Greenland Ice Sheet. Science 279: 2086-2088.
Krabill, W., Frederick, E., Manizade, S., Martin, C., Sonntag,
J., Swift,
R., Thomas, R., Wright, W. and Yungel, J. 1999. Rapid
thinning of parts of
the southern Greenland ice sheet. Science 283: 1522-1524.
Krabill, W., Abdalati, W., Frederick, E., Manizade, S., Martin,
C., Sonntag,
J., Swift, R., Thomas, R., Wright, W. and Yungel, J.
2000. Greenland ice
sheet: High-elevation balance and peripheral thinning.
Science 289:
428-430.
McConnell, J.R., Arthern, R.J., Mosley-Thompson, E., Davis, C.H.,
Bales,
R.C., Thomas, R., Burkhart, J.F. and Kyne, J.D. 2000.
Changes in Greenland
ice sheet elevation attributed primarily to snow accumulation
variability.
Nature 406: 877-879.
Reeh, N. 1999. Mass balance of the Greenland ice
sheet: Can modern
observation methods reduce the uncertainty? Geografiska
Annaler 81A:
735-742.
Thomas, R., Akins, T., Csatho, B., Fahnestock, M., Gogineni, P.,
Kim, C. and
Sonntag, J. 2000. Mass balance of the Greenland ice
sheet at high
elevations. Science 289: 426-428.
Wild, M. and Ohmura, A. 2000. Change in mass balance
of polar ice sheets
and sea level from high-resolution GCM simulations of greenhouse
warming.
Annals of Glaciology 30: 197-203.
Copyright © 2001. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
============
(5) RECENT UNPRECEDENTED GLACIAL RETREAT IN THE SWISS ALPS? NOT
DURING THIS
INTERGLACIAL!
From CO2 Science Magazine, 25 April 2001
http://www.co2science.org/journal/2001/v4n17c1.htm
Reference
Hormes, A., Müller, B.U. and Schlüchter, C. 2001. The Alps with
little ice:
evidence for eight Holocene phases of reduced glacier extent in
the Central
Swiss Alps. The Holocene 11: 255-265.
What was done
The authors determined the age of subfossil wood and peat samples
from six
glacier forelands in the Central Swiss Alps in an attempt to
identify and
quantify glacier recessions that occurred over the past 10,000
years.
What was learned
Observational records indicate that since the 19th century, the
glaciers
under study have retreated with two readvance periods around 1920
and 1980.
Radiocarbon dating of the wood and peat samples revealed several
periods of
glacier recession during the Holocene beyond present glacier
locations: from
9910-9550, 9010-7980, 7250-6500, 6170-5950, 5290-3870, 3640-3360,
2740-2620
and 1530-1170 years before present.
What it means
It is important to note that shorter-term glacial fluctuations on
the order
of decades are not likely to be resolved by the methods used in
this study,
as it can take decades for trees and peat to become fully
established in
areas vacated by receding glacial ice. Thus, the periods of
glacial
recession noted in this study are more indicative of prolonged
and/or large
magnitude climatic fluctuations. That said, it is obvious
that the current
terminus positions of the Central Swiss Alps glaciers examined in
this study
fall well within their range of natural Holocene
variability. It therefore
follows that current values of the climatic factors influencing
these
glaciers' mass balances, including temperature and precipitation,
are also
likely to be well within their range of natural Holocene
variability. Thus,
there is nothing unprecedented about the current glacial
recession that has
occurred in this region since 1991, other than perhaps its lack
of duration
and magnitude when compared with previous Holocene glacial
recessions.
Copyright © 2001. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
===========
(6) BAFFLING BAFFIN BAY: COLD WATER ON WARMING MODELS
From Greening Earth Society, 20 April 2001
http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/Articles/2001/baffin.htm
By Robert C. Balling Jr., Ph.D.
Greening Earth Society Science Advisor
American and Canadian scientists using an ice core glaciochemical
time
series from the Penny Ice Cap on Baffin Island (in northern
Canada)
determined the bay's sea-ice extent over the last thousand years,
they
report in a recent edition of Climatic Change. The team
concludes, "Our
sea-salt record suggests that, while the turn of the century was
characterized by generally milder sea-ice conditions in Baffin
Bay, the last
few decades of sea-ice extent lie within Little Ice Age
variability and
correspond to instrumental records of lower temperatures in the
Eastern
Canadian Arctic over the past three decades." What makes
this an amazing
finding is that Baffin Bay is within the Canadian Arctic - the
very place on
the planet climate models "predict" greenhouse
gas-induced warming should be
loud and clear by now.
Given what Grumet et al. found, we downloaded temperature data
for the
region from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), which
are provided as monthly temperature anomalies (departures from
normal) for
the twelve 5° latitude by 5° longitude grid boxes covering the
Baffin
Bay/Baffin Island area. The data span 1922 through 2000. The
data, displayed
as Figure 1
[http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/Articles/2001/baffin.htm],
depict a highly variable near-surface air temperature record for
Baffin Bay.
It nonetheless reveals a cooling of 0.56°C (1.01°F).
If one is in agreement with what Grumet et al. ascertained from
their
research and agrees with the IPCC data, then what to make of the
numerical
climate models that simulate warming for the same area during a
time of
tremendous increases in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration?
Reference
Grumet, N.S., C.P. Wake, P.A. Mayewski, G.A. Zielinski, S.I.
Whitlow, R.M.
Koerner, D.A. Fisher, and J.M. Woollett, 2001: Variability of
sea-ice extent
in Baffin Bay over the last millennium. Climatic Change,
49:129-145
=============
(7) TURKISH DELIGHT
From Greening Earth Society, 20 April 2001
http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/Articles/2001/turkish.htm
By Robert C. Balling Jr., Ph.D.
Greening Earth Society Science Advisor
To our delight, a recent edition of Climatic Change features
research about
trends in heating degree-days and cooling degree-days across
Turkey.
Kadioglu et al. assert that heating and cooling degree-days -
which are
based on daily low and high temperatures, respectively -
"are among the most
significant meteorological variables related to residential
energy
consumption." If Turkey is adversely affected by
"global warming" and
warming is occurring, the heating degree- days (related to home
heating
demand) should decrease. Conversely, cooling degree-days (related
to air
conditioning demand) should be on the rise. What these Turkish
meteorologists concluded as a result of their painstaking
analysis is, "In
general, the sign of the trends is inconsistent with General
Circulation
Models (GCM) predictions."
We downloaded the temperature data for Turkey that is available
from the
UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The data
are provided
as monthly temperature anomalies (departures from normal) within
the eight
5° latitude by 5° longitude grid boxes that encompass Turkey.
We examined
data for the half-century during which greenhouse gases rapidly
increased in
their atmospheric concentration.
As seen by Figure 1, Turkish mean monthly temperatures show
absolutely no
trend. Despite claims about a discernible human influence on
climate that
are assumed to imply warming, the IPCC's own data show no
warming, while
local climatologists report trends in heating and degree days
that are
(using their word) inconsistent with predictions of the climate
models the
IPCC uses to create its storylines. The General Circulation
Models predict
winters will warm more quickly than summers. As a result, heating
degree-days should decrease. Turkish winters have cooled, so the
opposite is
happening. Heating degree-days are on the rise. We were able to
refine our
analysis and determine that Turkish summers have actually warmed
slightly
while the winters have cooled slightly. And in either case, the
trend is
statistically insignificant.
Give such evidence, one can only conclude (as have Kadioglu et
al.) that
trends they observe in Turkey are "inconsistent" with
the General
Circulation Models.
Reference
Kadioglu, M., Z. Sen, and L. Gültekin, 2001: Variations and
trends in
Turkish seasonal heating and cooling degree-days. Climatic
Change,
49:209-223.
===========
(8) CLIMATE MODELS: "UNCHANGING WITH TIME"
From Cooler Heads Coalition, 20 April 2001
http://www.globalwarming.org/sciup/sci4-20-01.htm
Recent media accounts of the latest report from the
Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change give the distinct impression that climate
models, the
primary source of global warming concerns, are getting more
accurate all the
time. A news article in Science (April 13, 2001), however, sets
the record
straight.
According to the author, Richard A. Kerr, "But while new
knowledge gathered
since the IPCC's last report in 1995 has increased many
researchers'
confidence in the models, in some vital areas, uncertainties have
actually
grown." Gerald North of Texas A&M University in College
Station said that,
"It's extremely hard to tell whether the models have
improved" since the
last IPCC report. "The uncertainties are large."
Peter Stone, an MIT climate modeler, said, "The major
[climate prediction]
uncertainties have not been reduced at all." And cloud
physicist Robert
Charlson, professor emeritus at the University of Washington,
Seattle, said,
"To make it sound like we understand climate is not
right."
The three main areas of uncertainty are detection of global
warming,
attribution of warming to greenhouse gases, and projecting future
warming,
Kerr writes. Detection is probably the closest to being resolved
of the
three. The IPCC puts warming at 0.6 degrees ±0.2 degrees
centigrade with a
95 percent confidence level.
Attribution of global warming to anthropogenic emissions of
greenhouse gases
is much more difficult, however. The IPCC claims, "most of
the observed
warming over the last 50 years is likely [66 percent to 90
percent chance]
to have been due to the increase of greenhouse gas
concentrations."
Some modelers, such as Jerry Mahlman with NOAA and John Mitchell
at the UK's
Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, think the
models are
getting better. The models are "getting quite a remarkable
agreement," with
reality, said Mitchell.
"That's stretching it a bit," said John Christy of the
University of Alabama
at Huntsville. Stone argues that human attribution "may be
right," but, "I
just know of no objective scientific basis for that." Tim
Barnett of Scripps
Institution of Oceanography and Jeffrey Kiehl of the National
Center for
Atmospheric Research concur.
One of the primary means by which modelers have tweaked the
models for
better results is the inclusion of aerosols. But according to
Kiehl, "The
more we learn [about aerosols], the less we know." Indeed,
according to the
IPCC report, "The uncertainties are so large that a best
estimate with error
bars of the indirect cloud effect of aerosols is still
impossible." Possible
aerosol cloud effects now range from no effect to a near total
masking of
the alleged manmade greenhouse effect.
North argues that the "huge range of climate uncertainty
among the models"
is a serious problem. "There are so many adjustables in the
models and there
is a limited amount of observational data, so we can always bring
the models
into agreement with the data."
According to Science, North explained that, "Models with
sensitivities to
CO2 inputs at either extreme of the range can still simulate the
warming of
the 20th century."
Many of these scientists still think something should be done to
slow down
the emission of greenhouse gases. This, however, seems to be a
reaction to
change as much as a concern over whether there will be any
ensuing harm.
"The evidence for chemical change of the atmosphere is so
overwhelming, we
should do something about it," said Charlson.
Quantifying the Uncertainties
Although most scientists are willing to admit that there are
still large
uncertainties in the predictions about rising global
temperatures, there has
been little effort to quantify those uncertainties. Uncertainties
are
important, however.
According to a new study by researchers at the Joint Program on
the Science
and Policy of Global Change at MIT, "Communicating
uncertainty in climate
projections provides essential information to decision makers,
allowing them
to evaluate how policies might reduce the risk of climate
impacts."
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change does not provide
these
numbers, however. "The Third Assessment Report of the [IPCC]
reports a range
for global mean surface temperature rise by 2100 of 1.4 to 5.8
degrees
centigrade but does not provide likelihood estimates for this key
finding
although it does for others," says the study.
The researchers perform this calculation and conclude, "that
there is far
less than a 1 in 100 chance of a global mean surface temperature
increase by
2100 as large as 5.8 degrees centigrade." They also
conclude, "there is a 17
percent chance that the temperature change of 2100 would be less
than the
IPCC lower estimate" (web.mit.edu/globalchange/www/).
Even though it is much more likely that the amount of warming
over the next
100 years will be less than 1.4 degrees centigrade than 5.8
degrees
centigrade or more, it is the higher number that is emphasized in
news
coverage of the issue. This is highly misleading if the MIT
calculations are
correct.
======
(9) HUMANS TO BLAME FOR GLOBAL COOLING BETWEEN 1000-1900 AD
From Eurekalert, 23 April 2001
http://www.eurekalert.org/releases/llnl-rpp042301.html
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 23 APRIL 2001
Contact: Anne Stark
stark8@llnl.gov
925-422-9799
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Researchers prove past cooling trend caused by move from forests
to
agriculture
Livermore, Calif.-Researchers in Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory's
Atmospheric Science Division have demonstrated a cooling of up to
2-degree
Fahrenheit over land between 1000 and 1900 AD as a result of
changes from
natural vegetation, such as forests, to agriculture.
Through climate model simulations, the LLNL research team made up
of Bala
Govindasamy, Ken Caldeira and Philip Duffy, determined that a
previously
recognized cooling trend up to the last century could, in part,
be
attributed to the land-use change.
Previous studies had attributed cooling to natural climate
variations. The
Livermore research, however, suggests that much of this cooling
could have
been the result of human activity.
Forests tend to look dark from the sky, but agricultural lands,
with their
amber waves of grain, tend to look much lighter. Dark colors tend
to absorb
sunlight, and light colors tend to reflect sunlight back out to
space.
Changing from forests to crops results in more sunlight reflected
back to
space. This reflection of solar energy to space tends to cool the
Earth,
especially in regions such as the eastern and mid-western United
States,
where huge tracts of land have been converted to crops. In the
20th century,
some of this cropland has been reverting back to forest,
especially in the
eastern United States.
Greenhouse gas emissions in the 20th century likely overcame any
cooling
trends that took place up to that time. Growing more trees has
been
suggested as a way to soak up carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas,
from the
atmosphere. However, earlier studies demonstrate that growing
dark forests
could actually heat the earth's surface more because dark colors
tend to
absorb more sunlight, despite the uptake of carbon dioxide.
"The Earth land surface has cooled by about 0.41 K (= by
about 3/4 of a
degree Fahrenheit) due to the replacement of dark forests by
lighter farms
growing wheat, corn, etc.," said Caldeira, a climate model
researcher who
also is co-director for the Department of Energy's Center for
Research on
ocean carbon sequestration. "This is an example of
inadvertent
geoengineering -- we changed the reflectivity of the Earth and
have probably
caused a global cooling in the past. This is now probably being
overwhelmed
by our greenhouse gas emissions."
The research, published in the Geophysical Research Letters, also
shows a
slight increase in the annual means of global and Northern
Hemisphere sea
ice volumes in association with the cooling. The simulated annual
average
cooling due to land-use change during this period is almost a
half a degree
Fahrenheit globally, 0.66 °F for the Northern Hemisphere and .74
°F over
land.
In the simulations, land use data for 1000 AD uses potential
natural
vegetation, made up mainly of forests, while data for the 1900 AD
period
uses standard current vegetation data, which is a mix of forest
and
croplands, taken from the Community Climate Model developed at
the National
Center for Atmospheric Research. The greenhouse gas levels in
both
simulations are in concentrations taken at pre-industrial levels.
"The estimated temperature change in the continental United
States as a
result of change from forests to agriculture is up to a 2-degree
Fahrenheit
cooling," Caldeira said. "So, when we talk about global
warming, we can no
longer take for granted that this global warming is starting from
some
natural climate state, undisturbed by human activities."
###
Founded in 1952, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is a
national
nuclear security laboratory, with a mission to ensure national
security and
apply science and technology to the important issues of our time.
The
National Nuclear Security Administration's Lawrence Livermore
National
Laboratory is managed by the University of California.
===========
(10) COMPUTER MODEL: GREENHOUSE GASES MAIN REASON FOR QUICKER
NORTHERN
WINTER WARMING
From Mark Hess <mhess@pop100.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Cynthia M. O'Carroll
Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt,
Md April
23, 2001
(Phone: 301/614-5563)
RELEASE:
01-38
GREENHOUSE GASES MAIN REASON FOR QUICKER NORTHERN WINTER WARMING
Greenhouse gases are the main reason why the northern hemisphere
is warming
quicker during winter-time months than the rest of the world,
according to
new computer climate model results by NASA scientists.
Climatologists consider volcanic aerosols, polar ozone depletion,
solar
radiation, and greenhouse gases to be important factors in
climate warming.
NASA scientists input all of these factors in a climate model and
concluded
that greenhouse gases are the primary factor driving warmer
winter climates
in North America, Europe and Asia over the last 30 years. They
found that
greenhouse gases, more than any of the other factors, increase
the strength
of the polar winds that regulate northern hemisphere climate in
winter.
Using a computer model that simulates climate through
interactions of ocean
and atmosphere, scientists input current and past levels of
greenhouse gases
such as carbon dioxide, methane, water vapor and nitrous oxide.
They found
that greenhouse gases such as those increase the strength of
polar wind
circulation around the North Pole.
The polar winds play a large role in the wintertime climate of
the northern
hemisphere. The winds blow from high up in the stratosphere down
to the
troposphere and eventually the Earth's surface. When they
strengthen, as
they do from increases in greenhouse gases, they blow stronger
over the
warm, moist oceans picking up and transporting warmer air to the
continents.
Thus, warm air from the Pacific Ocean warms western North
America, and the
Atlantic Ocean warmth is shared with Eurasia. When winds are
stronger,
winters are warmer because air picks up heat as the winds blow
over the
oceans. When winds become weak winters become colder.
The findings by Drew Shindell, Gavin Schmidt, and other
atmospheric
scientists from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and
Columbia
University, NY, appeared in the April 16th issue of the Journal
of
Geophysical Research - Atmospheres.
Shindell noted that increases in greenhouse gases make the
stronger polar
winds last longer into the springtime and contribute to a warmer
early
spring climate in the northern hemisphere.
The stronger wind circulation around the North Pole creates a
large
temperature difference between the pole and the mid-latitudes.
Shindell
noted that the Southern Hemisphere isn't affected by increasing
greenhouse
gases the same way, because it's colder and the polar wind
circulation over
the Antarctic is already very strong.
"Surface temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere have warmed
during winter
months up to 9 degrees Fahrenheit over the last three decades,
over 10 times
more than the global annual average 0.7 degree Fahrenheit,"
says Shindell.
"Warmer winters will also include more wet weather in Europe
and western
North America, with parts of western Europe the worst hit by
storms coming
off the Atlantic."
Year-to-year changes in the polar winds are quite large,
according to
Shindell. But over the past 30 years, we have tended to see
stronger winds
and warming, indicative of continually increasing greenhouse
gases.
Shindell looked at volcanic activity from 1959 to 2000 and
identified
volcanically active and non-active years. The researchers
concluded that
because volcanic forcing is intermittent and decays rapidly, it
seems
unlikely to have contributed greatly to the long-term observed
warming
trend. Large volcanic eruptions such as Mount Pinatubo in 1991
inject
aerosols into the atmosphere and have a global cooling effect
during the
years following an eruption.
Also included in the model were the 11-year solar cycle and the
effects of
solar radiation on stratospheric ozone. Schmidt noted that
long-term changes
in solar irradiance have influenced the upper atmosphere.
"However, it is
unlikely that solar variability has been responsible for much of
the
observed trend in increasing the polar winds," Schmidt said.
Because the upper polar atmosphere becomes colder when ozone is
depleted,
the winds circling the pole are slightly enhanced.
"However," Shindell
noted, "greenhouse gases have the biggest impact on the
strengthening of the
polar winds, and in turn, the warming of the northern hemisphere
during
winter months."
Shindell said that the warming trend would likely continue over
the next 30
years as greenhouse gases continue to increase in the atmosphere.
For the abstract go to:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/gpol/abstracts/ip/ShindellSchmidtM.html
=============
(11) IN THE MEANTIME, IT'S APRIL AND IT'S TOO COLD FOR PENGUINS
From The Daily Telegraph, 21 April 2001
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=004837239518191&rtmo=QwazHxwR&atmo=rrrrrrrq&pg=/et/01/4/21/npeng21.html
By Sally Pook
A BRITISH spring should not present a challenge to a penguin
chicks familiar
with the sub-zero conditions of Antarctica.
But the newborns Walnut, Chestnut, Stan and Ollie are Peruvian
penguins that
are more used to tropical sunny beaches than the rain, sleet and
snow of an
unusually cold British April. They have been forced to resort to
woolly
blankets and heated mattresses to survive the present unseasonal
freezing
temperatures at Flamingoland Zoo, near Pickering, north
Yorkshire.
They are among a group of 12 Peruvian penguins born at the zoo.
Andrew
Melton, the manager, said: "In South America the weather is
perfect for
chicks at this time of the year. Our cold spring is bad enough
for humans,
but they can't stand it.
"So we are doing everything possible to keep them snug and
warm and alive.
At the same time we are hoping we get some sunshine so they can
come out and
show themselves to our visitors. Everyone loves a baby
penguin."
Temperatures plummeted to minus 5C (23F) in Perthshire and minus
1C (28F) in
Devon yesterday because of freezing winds blowing in from the
Arctic Circle.
The Meteorological Office said it would get slightly warmer next
week, but
not much.
A spokesman said: "We cannot expect it to get significantly
warmer. Average
temperatures will be up to 13C (55F). Everyone is still going to
need hats,
gloves and scarves."
Copyright 2001, The Daily Telegraph
============
(12) GLOBAL WARNING: GLOBAL COOLING
From The Daily Telegraph, 25 April 2001 (letter section)
http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/dt?ac=004854109718192&rtmo=VkGuwx4x&atmo=rrrrrrrq&pg=/01/4/25/dt01.html
SIR - The unseasonal freezing temperatures in Yorkshire (report
21/4/01) are
not limited to the north of the country. Across the world, many
countries
are reportedly suffering extreme winters and freezing spring
temperatures
this year.
Two weeks ago, north California was hit by the worst frost in 30
years,
causing millions of dollars worth of damage to the wine industry.
A week
earlier, snow was reported falling on cherry blossoms in Tokyo
for the first
time in 25 years. In March, news reports from Russia gave details
about an
extreme cold that had blasted Russia into "the coldest
winter in a century".
From Siberia to the Far East, extreme chills have been reported
with
temperatures 30 degrees below normal. According to the Red Cross,
many
people died in Mongolia this winter as a result of a bitter cold
front
sweeping across northern India, which brought "the coldest
temperatures to
hit the region in several years".
The same cold front also swept into Pakistan, killing many Afghan
refugees
and threatening the lives of hundreds of thousands others. In
China, the Red
Cross reported the worst winter conditions in decades, while
blizzards
paralysed South Korea in what weather experts there described as
"the worst
snowstorm in 20 years".
Kazakhstan was subjected to its coldest winter weather in 40
years, at the
same time as the United States recorded its lowest two-month
average
temperature (for last November and December) ever measured.
At a time when we are told that the past 10 years have been the
hottest
decade during the past 1,000 years, it would appear that recent
temperatures
around the globe are colder than they have been for much of the
past
century.
It will be interesting to monitor if this conspicuous climatic
downturn
conceivably marks the end of a slender warming trend that is
largely
responsible for much of the current greenhouse warming alarm.
Dr Benny Peiser
Liverpool John Moores University
Liverpool
============================
* LETTERS TO THE MODERATOR *
============================
(13) RE: BACK FROM THE JAWS OF EXTINCTION
From Jonathan Shanklin <jdsh@bas.ac.uk>
Drs Idso should meet some fur seals before pronouncing that their
increasing
numbers is entirely due to global warming and is a good thing.
The increase
in numbers of fur seals has nothing whatsover to do with climate
change. It
is a consequence of a) Sealers hunting fur seals to near
extinction in the
19th century and b) Whalers hunting whales to near extinction in
the 20th
century. With no hunting and plentiful food the fur seal numbers
have
boomed.
Jonathan Shanklin
j.shanklin@bas.ac.uk
British Antarctic Survey, Cambridge, England
http://www.nerc-bas.ac.uk/public/icd/jds
============
(14) CARBON SINKS, GLOBAL WARMING, BABIES AND BATHWATER
From Alasdair Beal <a.beal@btinternet.com
>
Dear Benny,
I am all for open-minded investigation of the rights and wrongs
of theories
of climate change and some of the material on CCNet is
interesting and
useful. However some items seem to be more to do with the
hostility of US
industry to any efforts to reduce pollution and clean up the
environment
than bona fide scientific discussion. Take, for example, Iain
Murray's
article (CCNET Climate Scares, 20/4/01) arguing that 'It should
be incumbent
on the Europeans to find some way of cleaning up their own mess,
rather than
continuing on as they are, as the planet's worst net polluters'.
Murray bases this claim on the argument that although US
industry, transport
and homes are responsible for almost half of the developed
world's CO2
emissions, this is balanced by the fact that the wilderness areas
of North
America (thank you, Canada) act as a CO2 sink. However earlier in
the same
article he claimed that 'carbon dioxide is not really a
pollutant, as the
Environmental Protection Agency has labeled it. It is a vitally
important
contributor to plant life ...'. Murray cannot have it both ways -
if CO2 is
not a pollutant, then his arguments about carbon sinks become
irrelevant,
Europeans are not 'the planet's worst net polluters' and the USA
remains
'king' of the world's polluters. However if CO2 is a pollutant,
then the
idea that nothing should be done to clean up industry in the
country
responsible for almost half of the world's CO2 emissions is
ridiculous.
Either way, his argument does not make sense and looks more like
an attempt
at cheap point-scoring than a serious contribution to the debate.
Murray also conveniently ignores the fact that the industry which
emits all
this CO2 also consumes enormous amounts of natural resources and
generates
all sorts of other pollutants. There are well-funded lobby groups
which are
not really interested in the rights and wrongs of the scientific
arguments
about global warming - they just want to use the debate as a
smokescreen to
try to stop environmental restrictions being imposed on US
industry.
However, regardless of the ultimate conclusion of the argument
about CO2
emissions and global warming, it is surely obvious that measures
need to be
taken to reduce the consumption of natural resources and emission
of
pollution worldwide. As it is (per head) the biggest consumer of
resources
and biggest emitter of pollution worldwide, the USA has a major
responsibility and it is going to have to play its part, whether
the big
corporations like it or not. Oil consumption will have to be
reduced,
pollution control will have to be improved, logging restricted
(watch out
for those carbon sinks!) and many other measures will be needed
to help the
environment.
Even if the theory of global warming is suspect, the measures in
the Kyoto
Agreement would actually be quite helpful in achieving these
goals. Don't
throw out the baby with the bathwater!
Yours sincerely,
Alasdair Beal
=========
(15) ARE THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT AND GLOBAL WARMING A SCIENTIFIC
REALITY OR A
CONSPIRACY THEORY?
THE ROLE OF CCNet.
From Andrew Glikson <geospec@webone.com.au>
Dear Benny,
Before any CCNet reader obtains an impression as if greenhouse
warming is a
mere conspiracy theory invented by sinister forces to frighten
innocent
citizens, as alleged by some (CCNet 20-04-01), consider that:
1. The American Geophysical Union, the world's peak geophysical
body,
concluded: "...Present understanding of the Earth climate
system provides a
compelling basis for legitimate public concern over future global
and
regional scale changes resulting from increased concentrations of
greenhouse
gases..." (Eos, 1999, 80:454), based on accelerated rise in
greenhouse gases
(CO2, CH4, N2O, CFC) and accelerated warming from 1919 (increased
mean
temperature of 1.06 degrees C), following the onset of the
industrial age.
Evidence includes data on tree rings, coral and ice core records,
drastic
thinning of polar ice shelves in both the Antarctic and the
Arctic, mean sea
temperature measurements and numerous other observations.
2. Recently the CSIRO (Australia) predicted an alarming degree of
global
warming up to 6 degrees C this century, stating "This recent
research also
strengthens the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
statement that
"the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human
influence on global
climate" (http://www.dar.csiro.au/res/cm/impact.htm).
3. There is a singular lack of scientific arguments in many of
the
articles/statements critical of scientists studying the
greenhouse warming.
On the other hand conspiracy theories abound, including alleged
manufactured
facts by scientists and government, reminiscent of UFO cover-up
conspiracy
theories. This calls for a detailed response from the
climate researchers
on whose observations the realization of the unfolding tragedy of
global
greenhouse warming is based.
4. As a website which aims to be a "scholarly electronic
network" CCNet
should very careful to avoid giving an impression as if, for
ideological
reason, it favor or highlights one point of view over another -
for example
by selective citation of the views of one school of thought in
the headlines
of CCNet bulletins, or by rephrasing of titles of contributions.
In order to
redress the balance, where fundamental controversies such as
greenhouse
warming arise, CCNet should invite views by proponents of
opposite points of
view, as it has in fact done in other instances, for example in
the context
of the P-T boundary extinction debate. A perception of
systematic
ideological bias in favor of one point of view may seriously
undermine the
very basis on which free and open scientific discussion can
survive.
Dr Andrew Glikson
Australian National University,
Canberra, ACT 0200
andrew.glikson@anu.edu.au
============
(16) SCIENTIFIC SCEPTICISM, GLOBAL WARMING ALARM, AND THE ROLE OF
CCNet
From Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>
In the context of a scientific debate, accusations of political
or
ideological bias are always intimidating. I very much regret such
attacks
and inuendo (which occur on both side of the global warming
devide) and
would rather keep the discussion squarely focues on evidencial
matters. As a
scholarly network that focuses on all topical issues of
neo-catastrophism,
CCNet has been (and will be) treating greenhouse warming
catastrophism as a
scientific controversy - full stop. I am only too aware that the
whole issue
has become increasingly politicised and hijacked for party
political
pruposes. An independent and sceptical approach is therefore
often difficult
to sustain. This is because scepticism, which is normally
considered a key
feature of the scientific method, is frequently equated with
right-wing
politics when applied to the greenhouse warming alarm. May I
reassure
readers that I will not allow a serious scientific problem to be
diluted by
political or ideological shenanigans.
Equally intimidating are accusations that CCNet has given the
"impression as
if greenhouse warming is a mere conspiracy theory (reminiscent of
UFO
cover-up conspiracy theories) invented by sinister forces to
frighten
innocent citizens." To the best of my knowledge, I cannot
recall that I have
ever posted any conspiracy theories on CCNet. The controversial
claim that
enhanced greenhouse gas emissions will lead to catastrophic
devastation
around the world with millions of human fatalities is made by
many
scientists and politicians very openly. Despite all attacks and
initimidation, the claim should be treated as any other
scientific
hypothesis: in a dispassionate and matter-of-fact method of
scientific
scrutiny.
I have invited climate researchers on numerous occasions to
respond to the
criticism by their sceptical colleagues. I am more than happy to
repeat this
invitation publicly. Regrettably, very few climatologists have
been willing
to discuss their methods and dire predictions with their
scpetical
counterparts. Some 500 researchers and academics from around the
globe are
currently subscribed to CCNet, including a number of leading
climatologists
and palaeo-climatologists. CCNet is an open forum in which all
sound
arguments regarding the greenhouse warming scare will get a fair
hearing.
Fred Singer, an eminent researcher and CCNet contributor, has
listed twelve
of the most important issues for which no scientific consensus
exists as
yet. I fully share Fred's conclusion that "we need a more
targeted program
of climate research to settle major scientific problems" and
have attached
his list of "unfinished business" below.
Benny J Peiser
-------
(17) GLOBAL WARMING: UNFINISHED BUSINESS
http://www.sepp.org/books/gwunfbus.html
by S. Fred Singer
Summary: Climate science is not "settled;" it is both
uncertain and
incomplete. The available observations do not support the
mathematical
models that predict a substantial global warming and form the
basis for a
control policy on greenhouse (GH) gas emissions. We need a more
targeted
program of climate research to settle major scientific problems.
1) The fate of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere is uncertain:
its uptake
into the ocean; the biological pump; the missing carbon sink. The
future
growth of atmospheric CO2 depends crucially on estimates of
residence time
and the amount of fossil fuels likely to be used for energy
production. Some
researchers suggest an 8x pre-industrial value, while others
doubt whether
CO2 will even double.
2) The temperature record of the last hundred years is of poor
quality and
shows many discrepancies. Surface temperatures disagree with
recent
measurements from satellites and balloons. The urban heat island
effect may
skew the record.
3) General Circulation Models (GCMs) vary by 300% in their
temperature
forecasts, require arbitrary adjustments, and cannot handle
crucial
mesoscale and microscale cloud processes. Their forecasts of
substantial
warming depend on a positive feedback from atmospheric water
vapor (WV).
4) GCMs cannot account for past observations: the temperature
rise between
1920 to 1940, the cooling to 1975, and the absence of warming in
the
satellite record since 1979. Various explanations need to be
explored:
reduced positive feedback from WV; increase in cloudiness;
anthropogenic
aerosols; man-made land changes; increasing air traffic; solar
variations
influencing climate.
5) Prehistoric climate fluctuations, on timescales as rapid as a
decade, are
prevalent - as judged from the data from tree rings, sediments,
and ice
cores. Such climate events are not explained by existing models,
nor can
current GCMs account for El-Nino events, the North Atlantic
Oscillation, and
other contemporary rapid changes in climate.
6) Sea level (SL) rise is a major feared impact of a future
warming. It
seems likely, however, that increased evaporation from the ocean
may lead to
more rapid accumulation of polar ice and a lowering of sea level.
This
possibility is supported by an observed inverse correlation
between SL rate
of rise and tropical sea surface temperature (SST).
7) Severe storms and hurricanes have diminished in the past 50
years. A
global warming trend is calculated to reduce the latitudinal
temperature
gradient and therefore the driving force for storms and severe
weather.
8) Global agriculture will likely benefit from climate warming
and increased
precipitation; increased CO2 leads to more rapid plant growth;
increased
nocturnal and winter warming leads to a longer growing season.
Farmers can
and will adjust to climate changes.
9) The spread of disease vectors, like malaria-carrying
mosquitos, is likely
to be unimportant in comparison to human vectors. In addition,
medical
science and insect control technology are sure to progress.
10) Historical evidence supports the idea that warmer climate
intervals are
beneficial for human activities, food production, and health.
Cold periods
have had the opposite effect.
11) Mitigation techniques are available that can slow down the
rise of
atmospheric GH gases and a possible climate change: energy
conservation and
increased efficiency often make economic sense; hydro and nuclear
power are
available now; solar energy may be around the corner; tree
planting and
ocean fertilization may be low-cost methods of sequestering
atmospheric CO2.
12) Policy measures should be applied with great caution and only
when
justified by scientific data, lest they create more harm than
good. In
particular, mandatory controls on energy use by whatever method
can create
great economic losses, impacting especially on poor people and
poor nations.
The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) states that
"...policies and measures to deal with climate change should
be
cost-effective so as to insure global benefits at the lowest
cost" (Article
3.3). The FCCC calls for an "economic system that would lead
to sustainable
economic growth and development" (Article 3.5). The
convention also calls
for periodic review as scientific knowledge and information grow.
Article 2 states the FCCC objective, namely the
"stabilization of GH gas
concentrations ... that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic
interference
with the climate system." We should note that science cannot
as yet define
what that level is -- whether the present level, or some future
level, or
the pre-industrial level. Defining "dangerous" levels
is a daunting task for
climate science, and should be tackled before far-reaching
policies are put
in place.
=====
(18) AND FINALLY: EUROPE FLIPS AND PLANS TRADE WAR AGAINST U.S.
OVER GLOBAL
WARMING
From Ananova, 24 April 2001
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_269395.html?menu=
EU June summit to discuss anti-US sanctions - Prodi
The European Union is to discuss imposing sanctions against the
US for
refusing to implement the Kyoto climate change treaty.
European Commission chairman Romano Prodi says sanctions will be
on the
agenda at the next summit in Sweden in June, but he doesn't want
to harm
relations between the US and the EU.
In an interview with the Italian daily Il Corriere della Sera, Mr
Prodi says
the treaty is the fruit of years of reflection and the EU will
insist on its
application.
However, Mr Prodi says he will not allow the US's decision to be
dramatised
to the point of damaging relations between the two blocks. The
decision by
President George W Bush to reject Kyoto has been condemned by
environmentalists.
Mr Prodi is ready to listen to US proposals to introduce more
efficent
measures than those decided at Kyoto. He says that, so far, the
US's
behaviour has diminished the possibility of finding a global
solution to the
problem of pollution management.
He adds: "America's stance certainly does not bring us
closer to the
introduction of an active environment protection policy."
Mr Prodi describes the situation as extremely fluid and the EU
has to try to
salvage the Kyoto treaty without the US.
He also says the EU has to accelerate the establishment of an
"economic and
commercial strategy" towards Latin America in view of the
Spanish presidency
of the EU next year.
Copyright 2001, Press Association
--------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CAMBRIDGE-CONFERENCE NETWORK (CCNet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe,
please contact the moderator Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>.
Information circulated on this network is for scholarly and
educational
use only. The attached information may not be copied or
reproduced for
any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright
holders.
The fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from February 1997 on,
can be
found at http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html
DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the
articles and texts and in other CCNet contributions do not
necessarily
reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the moderator of
this
network.