• 

Physics pioneers plotted climate change in 1800s

Only current online subscribers may access this article and/or our N-R e-editions.

One-day subscriptions available for just $3.

For all subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please .<0/p>

Comments

Tom Hammer

in the 1970's the U.N.'s International Panel on Climate Change funded 102 computer models that predicted rising levels of CO2 would result in rising GAST, Global Average Steady Temperature. CO2 rose from 270 parts per million to 420 parts per million. (Volcanoes were the main source).
The GAST barely moved. The computer models intended to validate the premise that rising CO2 levels will cause rising GAST did just the opposite. They showed that there is no correlation between CO2 levels and GAST. The IPCC tried to cover up the failure of their computer models by manipulating temperature readings from stations world wide. They were caught in the coverup. That was Climategate in 2009. They fired the head of the IPCC but continue to insist That their premise is correct, the very premise they accidently disproved. Penn State gets the most money to continue the false premise. It would seem that Rice University is also being paid to continue the false premise. In 2009 the IPCC stopped calling it global warming and rebranded it climate change. Follow the money.

Don Dix

The 2nd paragraph makes a glaring mistake -- by all accounts, water vapor is the most potent, dominate, and influential atmospheric gas.

And as Mr. Hammer points out, changing the name of the cause (GW to CC) to avoid another multitude of gone-wrong-predictions is just plain dishonest. The only reliable constant of the Earth's climate is change -- always has been -- always will be. All of these statements and pleas are designed to deceive the public -- and of most importance, keep the flow of money coming.

Rotwang

In 1865, the earth was still in a "little ice age" that officially ended in 1900. Yet, I see no reference to it in this fear-laden article. "Jingle Bells" was originally a seasonal tune for Thanksgiving.

sbagwell

Don:

The second paragraph refers to absorbing heat as the driver of climate change. The author does not limit that absorption to carbon dioxide, as she makes clear a couple of paragraphs later when she says: "The atmosphere stays hotter than expected mainly due to greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and water vapor, which capture and absorb outgoing heat."

That's my no means a "glaring error." At most, it might be classified as a failure to achieve sufficient clarity in a single reference converting the precise language of scientific research into plainspoken lay English. And if that's a failure, it is quickly rectified just below.

You are reaching.

This is the work of someone who has devoted her life to academic research in the field, not a local armchair commententator like you and me. Give her a little credit.

Steve

Don Dix

Steve,

The claim is clear - that CO2 is 'the driving force of global warming'. Credentials have nothing to do with any claim being valid, it's the facts. I'll stick with with water vapor all day.

sbagwell

Don:
That is absolutely, categorically untrue, and you very well know it. You are letting your climate change zeal overcome all reason.

What she said is, to absorb heat is the driving force of global warming. She goes on to say that three greenhouse gases are primarily responsible for this heat absorption: carbon dioxide, methane and water vapor.

She mentions carbon dioxide first for one simple reason: It was the greenhouse gas first identified as displaying this property. Her entire column is about the history of this discovery, which began with experiments conducted not with water vapor or methane, but with carbon dioxide.

To suggest that an eminent climatologist is guilty of misidentifying the largest contributor to global warming in a report on her cutting edge research on the subject is utterly preposterous. If she is guilty of anything, it is an awkward construction that she cleans up with utter clarity two paragraphs later -- a fact that you completely ignore.

Get a grip, Don. Don't let your passion lead you down the path of deception and distortion. Please.

Steve

sbagwell

Don:

I decided to explore this issue further, and found that you are not only wrong in your analysis of her syntax, but also wrong on the underlying issue. According to the American Chemical Society, a reputable academic association:

"ACS Climate Science Toolkit | Narratives

"Remark: 'The Earth has certainly been warming since we have added so much CO2 to the atmosphere from fossil fuel burning.'
Reply: 'Forget the CO2. Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It controls the Earth’s temperature.'

"It’s true that water vapor is the largest contributor to the Earth’s greenhouse effect. On average, it probably accounts for about 60% of the warming effect.

"However, water vapor does not control the Earth’s temperature, but is instead controlled by the temperature. This is because the temperature of the surrounding atmosphere limits the maximum amount of water vapor the atmosphere can contain.

"If a volume of air contains its maximum amount of water vapor and the temperature is decreased, some of the water vapor will condense to form liquid water. This is why clouds form as warm air containing water vapor rises and cools at higher altitudes where the water condenses to the tiny droplets that make up clouds.

"The greenhouse effect that has maintained the Earth’s temperature at a level warm enough for human civilization to develop over the past several millennia is controlled by non-condensable gases, mainly carbon dioxide, CO2..."

It's the carbon dioxide that's driving the increase in water vapor, making carbon dioxide the main driver in the climate change that is increasingly heating our world to potentially catastrophic effect.

Steve

Tom Hammer

Earth has been in the Holocene Warm Period for about 10k years. There have been six peaks during that time, the warmest, Minoan Peak being 3000 years ago. (near 2.5 degrees Centigrade higher than today). We are in a cooler part of the Holocene Warm Period currently, experiencing fluctuations consistent with historical experience, plus and minus .5 degree Centigrade changes per century. Food production and population increases indicate this is a good time for humans to thrive.

Don Dix

Steve,

You wrote -- 'Get a grip, Don. Don't let your passion lead you down the path of deception and distortion. Please.

'Deception and distortion' -- since you are so interested in such -- my response --
Are you so sure you are not the one being zoomed? A multitude of failed predictions, readjusting historical temps downward, 'estimated' temps at recording stations, failure to recognize FOI requests for raw data and tests used, and wishing to tax a vital component of all life on Earth -- CO2. Yep, NASA (and their cohorts at the UN - IPCC) are responsible for all and much more 'inconsistencies'. That's a track record that is hard to throw any support behind, IMO.

Here's a site that might shed a brighter light on what's really going on.

https://realclimatescience.com/2018/09/noaa-attempting-to-rewrite-us-history/

  • Most viewed
  • Most commented
Web Design and Web Development by Buildable