ON THE MOVE: Organisms that make their homes in flat regions might have to relocate quickly to keep up with high velocity climate change. Those in the mountains might actually have it easier after all.
Image: ISTOCKPHOTO/DUNCAN1890
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
Reports of maples on the march northward and butterflies flitting far afield are already flooding in, and climate scientists predict that with escalating temperature changes more species will need to either get out of dodge, or hope for emissions reductions that will help the planet dodge the climate bullet.
Much of Earth's life forms are fine-tuned for specific ecosystems and their associated climates. Plunk a tree frog down in a harsh habitat it is not well adapted for, and it will fail to thrive—or even survive. Now, with regional climates shifting as a result of global warming, it is unclear just how far—and how fast—organisms will need to travel to keep up with moving climates. A new study, published online Wednesday in Nature, aims to paint a clearer picture by uncovering the variable velocity of climate shifts across the globe (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group).
"A lot of people talk about the rate of climate change—but how far do you have to go to reach a new climate?" asks study leader Scott Loarie, a post-doctoral fellow at the Carnegie Institution in Stanford, Calif.
On average, given annual average temperature change models, local climates will move about 0.42 kilometers (or a quarter of a mile) each year, the study found. And 28.8 percent of the world's biomes (or ecosystems, areas with similar climatic conditions) are facing rates of change more than 1 kilometer per year. "What we're bringing attention to is the speed with which these things happen," Loarie says about the study, which analyzed these climate change velocities across the globe at the resolution of a single kilometer.
Although these shifts might sound like small beans for mobile animals like birds, which can pick their environment with relative precision, for the very small, the very large and the very rooted, such a pace might be impossible. "Plants might be particularly vulnerable" in the case of rapid local climate changes, says Dov Sax, an assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at Brown University in Providence, R.I. And even species that can travel more easily, like butterflies, can be dependent on specific plants or other biome system members that are slower to follow temperature changes. If a species can move to more comfortable climes, "the right ecosystem needs to be there" for them to thrive, Sax explains.
Calculating climactic changes is a tricky business, and temperature is by no means the whole story. Loarie and his team chose temperature as a key marker, he says, because organisms are "bathed in temperature." His team also ran the models with predicted precipitation changes and arrived at similar conclusions, even though moisture levels can prompt more nuanced responses across species. Sax, who wasn't involved in the study, notes that predicting how species will respond to these changes can be even more difficult. "We're in a very early stage of figuring these things out," he says.
One of the more quantifiable aspects of this analysis, the Earth's topography, turned out to play an important role in determining the velocity of these changes. "Slight differences in topography can have a big effect," Loarie says, noting that a species' success might rest on the "difference between the north and the south slope."
There has been much hand wringing over mountainous plants and animals, which can only climb so high chasing cooler climes before they run out of real estate. In contrast, this study draws attention to the high velocity of change in flatland areas. Temperature and other climate changes in open expanses, such as the Amazon basin or Sahara Desert, will cover broader swaths of land than steep peaks, meaning that "large geographic displacements are required to change temperature appreciably," wrote the researchers. Thus, flatlandspecies will have to travel much farther than mountain-dwelling species to maintain their present-day temperature conditions—and with even less likelihood that the rest of their familiar biome will follow.
By contrast, with each kilometer up or down a mountain, climes can vary greatly. Thus, even some plant species may be able to keep pace with quick climate changes in the near future if they live in the right spot now. Loarie notes the importance of mountains to mitigate the effects of climate change, asserting that they "might provide real opportunities" for saving threatened species.
Certainly, even in areas with high velocities of climate change, each local organism has a particular range of conditions it can tolerate. "Some are going to be just fine where they are," says Sax. But others, he notes, "are going to need to track their climate" more closely, moving along with changes as they occur.
See what we're tweeting about
128 Comments
Add CommentIts all part of the conspiracy, even the butterflies are in on it!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI heard that Al Gore has hired a secret brigade of flying monkeys to melt the world's glaciers with blow torchs.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFly my pretties!
Ha ha - keep beating that drum SciAm - maybe your wish will come true.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"maybe your wish will come true."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou think this is a wish? This is a description of the reality of climate change. Did you read the article?
"I heard that Al Gore has hired a secret brigade of flying monkeys to melt the world's glaciers" - Trent
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYa, it's a Republican talking point promoted by Rush Limbaugh.
"Did you read the article?" - Trent
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White-House didn"t like about Bush"s former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House"s displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn"t fully comprehend – but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.
"The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That"s not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We"re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you"re studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we"ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that"s how things will sort out. We"re history"s actors. . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." - Suskind
Or as Sarah Palin says...
"Copenhgen=arrogance of man2think we can change nature's ways.MUST b good stewards of God's earth,but arrogant&naive2say man overpwers nature
Earth saw clmate chnge4 ions;will cont 2 c chnges.R duty2responsbly devlop resorces4humankind/not pollute&destroy;but cant alter naturl chng" - Sarah Palin posting to twitter. December 19, 2009
What A load. Scientific American is really straining their credibility with this crap.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"What A load."-anenephalic
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIllustratig Suskind's reporting quite nicely.
The article wouldn't be so bad if it actually looked at past climatic swings. By ignoring the reality of those swings, he is trying to make a strawman arguement.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt does not stand in the face of emperical evidence.
Interesting time for us all...is global warming forestalling the natural cycle of glaciation.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI for one do not want glaciers covering Michigan (grew up there) then again I don't want the ocean shores inundated with water in Florida( here since Mi )
Based on what I'm seeing, the warming has over shot the natural cooling....sea level continues to rise...
Maybe its time of figure all this out and make it what we want it to be...just a thought;-)
Actually, sea levels have not risen since 2002 and have fallen slightly.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe historic rise in sea levels over time seems to be 1.8mm.
As long as we are in the warm part of the Holocene, I would expect the sea level to keep rising as that is what has happened in the past.
Even during the Holocene, we have evidence of much wider temp swings in shorter time periods than experienced as of late.
They are called Bond events, seems a subset of D-O events.
Part of the scam of some is trying to attribute any weather change to AGW. The warming (or cooling) of the planet is not the same as AGW. And to continue to insinuate it is is a disservice that I am rapidly coming to expect from SciAm. They should drop the sci part and go with Propaga nda U,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am Roger Welsh. I used to buy this magazine in the 1960's and thought a great deal of it. Looking at this online output, the scientific output appears to have declined in favour of politics and not science. Sad. I will not be bothering to look again. What a waste.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI used to buy this magazine in the 1960's and marvel at the desciptive lucidity and the apolitical bias. All has changed. Damn you idiots who thin that we can be duped by weak manipulation of the intelligentia.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI will not bother to log on again.
Roger Welsh UK
"Interesting time for us all...is global warming forestalling the natural cycle of glaciation." - Wayne
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat would certainly be the case if the earth were experiencint the onset of the next glacial period. Since it isn't, it isn't interesting as much as it is a lie.
In several thousand years it will no longer be a lie of course. But by then all of the oil that is now producing the current warming will have been long used, and it's CO2 removed from the atmosphere.
"Certainly, even in areas with high velocities of climate change, each local organism has a particular range of conditions it can tolerate."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this-------------
This mirrors a recent study of the Cape Cod fishery, where local fishermen are going much further east into deeper and colder waters to catch the area's namesake fish, while fish from much further south like N.C. are being caught for the first time near Cape Cod.
Warming drives off Cape Cod's namesake, other fish - Boston.comNov 12, 2009 ... Small-boat fishermen on Cape Cod caught most of their haddock and flounder, ... a NOAA fisheries biologist and a co-author of the study. ...
www.boston.com/.../warming_drives_off_cape_cods_namesake_other_fish?...
"Damn you idiots who thin that we can be duped by weak manipulation of the intelligentia." - Walsh
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have noticed that the targeted grade level for Scientific American has been lowered by at least three grade levele to reflect the decline in intelligence of the American target audience.
AGW denial is a reflection of the growing war against science that is being conducted by Fundamentalist Conservatives - particularly those from the collapsing American State.
American scientists should have their escape route planned by now, and in fact should already be acting upon it.
The Failed American State is entering a new dark era where fundmentalist Consrvative Dogma replaces fact based reasoning. Witness the re-election of a war criminal as U.S. president because he was a "Good Christian".
Escape while you still have time.
When will someone present a single verifiable fact that proves global warming? Not a model, just a fact.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisChessie:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNot necessary. In SCIAM world, innuendo, circular arguments, pictures of polar bears and peer-reviewed incest have replaced facts. This is the new world order; get over it.
Until I read this article, I was shocked to find that all that I previously learned about species habitat's expanding and contracting spatially in response to natural changes in the environment was wrong.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI now understand that species move purely in response to politico-theological dogma and anyone who says that climate changes naturally or believes that the Medieval Warm Period was real should be shot.
Glory to Wikipdeia in the highest!!!
And 10 Hail Greedpieces full of grace for blessed is the fruit of thy coffers!
What is wrong with you people (warming deniers) is that you get your talking points to regurgitate from vile, cynical demagogues who know how to manipulate you for a few people's short term wealth and power.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat is sad is that you actually don't care to see how viciously the hand that feeds you that drivel doesn't care what happens to you. You are being sacrificed for their wealth and that is all there is to say about it.
Brian_Hanley
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's a good thing that you clarified your position by putting (warming deniers) in brackets. I thought for a moment that you were referring to True Believers, because your statements can easily apply to them.
The problem with commenters like you is that you have bought into the propaganda that assumes that because the climate changes, man is responsible. What piteous and utter trash.
And to add further silliness, you also bought into the religion that CO2 from human activities is the agent of change.
The problem with being a skeptic, is that skeptics refuse to believe in any particular argument for the sake of "feel-good" or "Ma and apple pie" reasons or because the "consensus" says it to be. Skeptics demand explanations that are scietifically sound and verifiable, and will settle for nothing else, as anything else is mere religion.
I live on an island on Canada's east coast - you remember Canada; we're that northern country where all the polar ice is "melting". I keep reading about rises in sea levels around the world that range from small to large, due, I'm told, to this polar melting.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have a question: How come the sea level around Prince Edward Island has NOT risen lately? How does all that "extra water" get by us?
Oh, and does it have anything to do with the FACT that the area of snow covered territory in our northlands has been increasing steadily the last few years?
Sea level Rise:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Recent_Sea_Level_Rise.png
Glacier Mass Balance Index:
http://www.geo.unizh.ch/wgms/mbb/mbb10/sum07.html
Now investigate the concept of: Isostatic Rebound:
http://www.physicalgeography.net/physgeoglos/i.html
Glad I could clear that bit of ignorance up for you.
I do wish you had......
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo Vendicar, skeptics want to see real science, not some psuedo religist doctrine. That means clear definitions of what it is that is being done (you know the old scientific method of observation, hypothesis, testing, theory, proof and fact). At this point we have observation, hypothesis, and no successful testing yet. That does not make AGW a fact, just an hypothesis under testing.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnyone claiming more for AGW is not a scientist, but a high priest in a new religion, and should not be posting here, or for that matter, writing for a publication with science in the name.
I hear Mary Knoll is hiring,
@Sez Me,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"I do wish you had......"
So do I. I always find it sad to run into the unteachable.
" Vendicar, skeptics want to see real science, not some psuedo religist doctrine"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne day, I hope, PhilJordan will learn the difference between religion and the empirical process of science.
"That means clear definitions of what it is that is being done (you know the old scientific method of observation, hypothesis, testing, theory, proof and fact)"
It has been and is being done. The problem is that you do not like the result. That is your personal problem not science's.
" At this point we have observation, hypothesis, and no successful testing yet."
That you utterly ignorant of the mountains of evidence is telling. Tell me, how do you explain the cooling of the stratosphere and the warming of the troposphere?
Little magic commies with wings and fans?
"Anyone claiming more for AGW is not a scientist..."
Who died and left you the authority on what is science? Rush Limbaugh and friends?
Trent1492 quotes Wikipedia for a sources? Wikipedia is a joke, almost as big as SCIAM.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat's next, will he say he saw something written on the men's room wall and therefore it must be true?
Geophysical Research Letters
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisChurch, J. A., and N. J. White (2006), A 20th century acceleration in global sea-level rise, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L01602, doi:10.1029/2005GL024826.
Abstract:
"A 20th Century Acceleration in Global Sea-Level Rulti-century sea-level records and climate models indicate an acceleration of sea-level rise, but no 20th century acceleration has previously been detected. A reconstruction of global sea level using tide-gauge data from 1950 to 2000 indicates a larger rate of rise after 1993 and other periods of rapid sea-level rise but no significant acceleration over this period. Here, we extend the reconstruction of global mean sea level back to 1870 and find a sea-level rise from January 1870 to December 2004 of 195 mm, a 20th century rate of sea-level rise of 1.7 ± 0.3 mm yr−1 and a significant acceleration of sea-level rise of 0.013 ± 0.006 mm yr−2. This acceleration is an important confirmation of climate change simulations which show an acceleration not previously observed. If this acceleration remained constant then the 1990 to 2100 rise would range from 280 to 340 mm, consistent with projections in the IPCC TAR."
Your too easy, Shoshin.
Ah yes, but when you include the current level of the seas, that paper becomes totally worthless as the sea level has fallen since 2002.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"When will someone present a single verifiable fact" - Chessie
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow about the observation that the surface temperature of the earth is increasing?
Poor Chessie. Ignorant to the bitter end.
"In SCIAM world, innuendo, circular arguments, pictures of polar bears and peer-reviewed incest have replaced facts." - Shoshin
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat is because the writers and editors are under the mind control of the invading moon men.
Only your tinfoil cap protects you from their deviant rays.
"I now understand that species move purely in response to politico-theological dogma" - Shoshin
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat is one potential conclusion. But since we know that insects aren't smart enough (or too smart) to follow Conservative American KookFart Politics it is more reasonable to conclude that they are moving for another reason.
The evidence points to migration prompted by climate change.
I am open to any evidence that you can provide that suggests that insects are following the Conservative Political news of the day. Have you found the salt shaker sized televisions or radio's that they must use to listen to Rush - where's my oxycotin - Limbaugh?
"The problem with commenters like you is that you have bought into the propaganda that assumes that because the climate changes, man is responsible. What piteous and utter trash. " - Shoshin
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this2010 is the 5th warmest year ever recorded, with 15 of the warnest 15 years occurring over the last 15 years.
Death is the only cure for Shoshin's form of self imposed ignorance.
"skeptics want to see real science, not some psuedo religist doctrine" - Phil
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut in fact you reject the science in the tens of thousands of journal articles written on the subject and instead argue based on your own conservative political liedeology that there is no scientific evidence.
"At this point we have observation, hypothesis, and no successful testing yet." - Phil
Since the observed rate of warming is tracking within the error bars of the IPCC's estimates, one wonders what you would consider a test.
Perhaps you denial is such that you need climatologists to construct another earth on the far side of the sun and run some real time simulations with it.
Or perhaps you just don't believe that there can be no science without constructing a physical model and seeing how it functions.
If that is the case, then you must also hold the contention that Astronomy, Cosmology and even nuclear physics are not science, since all of these sciences rely on the observations of systems that can not be constructed in a lab.
We have all seen your kind of nonsense before of course. The most laughable attempt by the professional denialist camp was the claim made by a gang of conservative economists that the earth wasn't warming because there was no such thing as temperature.
Ahahahahahahahah....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"the sea level has fallen since 2002." - Sigurdur
I got this graphic from a global warming denialist web site.
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/current/sl_noib_global_sm.jpg
It shows a clear increase in ocean levels since 2002.
From what clearning houes are you getting your lies from Sigurdur? Or are you just fabticating them yourself?
"Part of the scam of some is trying to attribute any weather change to AGW." - Phil
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI don't know of any legitimate climate scientist who has attributed any specific weather change to AGW.
But we do know that all of the warming denialists who are in the "earth is cooling" camp, have done so.
Weren't you insisting that sunspots were the cause of global warming Phil?
Ahahahahahahahah....
Death is the only cure for Conservative Ignorance.
"What's next, will he say he saw something written on the men's room wall and therefore it must be true?" - Shoshin
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBathroom wall, Conservative American Media, no difference.
I have never encountered a Conservative who wasn't a perpetual and congenital liar.
Witness Conservapedia and the project to rewrite the bible - the Conservative Bible Project.
Hohohohohohohohooho....
Vendicar - "2010 is the 5th warmest year ever recorded, with 15 of the warnest 15 years occurring over the last 15 years."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWOW! Now prescience is one of the gifts of the religion! Who would have thunk! When will they start speaking in tongues! (not forked ones).
"Death is the only cure for Shoshin's form of self imposed ignorance."
And of course the obligatory death threat to the heretics. And anyone (other than the blinded faithful) questions it is now a religion?
"you reject the science in the tens of thousands of journal articles "
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOk, High priest vendi - show me where I have rejected anything other than your death threats and prescience. Put up or shut up.
"Since the observed rate of warming is tracking within the error bars of the IPCC's estimates, one wonders what you would consider a test."
Since when is "observed" the same as test? The problem with you religious is that you are science ignorant.
And second, let's see what the IPCC reports look like minus the CRU data. As I have contended, until you clean up that rats nest of malfeasance and fraud, you cannot trust the data for anything outside of a sermon.
Vendi - "Death is the only cure for Conservative Ignorance."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisApparently all you seem to take pride in is your death threats for those not of your faith.
I am sure the pro-AGW faithful find you an excellent mouthpiece.
Shoshin:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Skeptics demand explanations that are scietifically sound and verifiable, and will settle for nothing else, as anything else is mere religion."
Trent1492 quotes Wikipedia for a sources? Wikipedia is a joke, almost as big as SCIAM.
----------------------
Seems that those that can only attack sources without themselves providing any verifiable facts, are the ones guilty of religion -- the religion of DENIALISM.
Current sea level rise has occurred at a mean rate of 1.8 mm per year for the past century, and more recently at rates estimated near 2.8 to 3.1 mm per year.
The longest running sea-level measurements are recorded at Amsterdam, in the Netherlands. Records from 1700 onwards can be found at: http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/longrecords/longrecords.html
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"that paper becomes totally worthless as the sea level has fallen since 2002."
-----------------
GEEZ....Is that what glenn beck told you DENIALISTS?
According to the longest running sea-level measurements with records since 1700, the Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory in the Netherlands, says "you LIE!"
http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/longrecords/longrecords.html
"From what clearing houes are you getting your lies from Sigurdur? Or are you just fabricating them yourself?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this--------------------
I'd have to believe the latter, especially when anyone can just state their OPINION without facts, it seems like fabrication.
It certainly appears that the graph you provided from U.C. shows a rise of 3.2 mm per year from 1993 to 2009.
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/
"Now prescience is one of the gifts of the religion!" - Phil
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisObviously the intent was to say that 2009 will be the 5th warmest year ever recorded. 2010 is looking to be the warmest year ever recorded.
"And of course the obligatory death threat to the heretics." - Phil
No threat was stated or implied. But that doesn't stop liars from claiming that one was issued.
Closed, ignorant minds like yours Phil, are diseased and immutable. Like Shoshin, death will be your only release from a life of self imposed ignorance, for you are uneducable, and can not be redeemed.
Vendi - "Closed, ignorant minds like yours Phil, are diseased and immutable. Like Shoshin, death will be your only release from a life of self imposed ignorance, for you are uneducable, and can not be redeemed."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisStill making death threats to the non-beleivers? If your case was so apparent, threats would not be necessary, nor would insults. But as we see, AGW is more religious than science. YOu know the former, but sadly are ignorant of the latter.
Keep threatening. YOu only make a fool of yourself to anyone reading your religious rants.
I will just give you one example of sea levels:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLiverpool:
1872 503.148
1996 503.201
Between that period the sea level was higher and lower than 503.
The sea level has shown no apprecible rise since 2002.
By the way, thanks for the links. They only validated what I stated.
I know you don't like to read, but just in case you actually do:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.geoportalen.no/planetenjorden/klima/sealevel/
"Ah yes, but when you include the current level of the seas, that paper becomes totally worthless as the sea level has fallen since 2002."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy is reading comprehension such a problem with you guys? The sea is rising. Do you at all understand what the phrase statistically :significant means" at all. Not only has the sea level not fallen but has risen over the past sixteen years.
Here is a graph from NASA showing the ACCELERATING sea level rise:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/index.cfm#SeaLevel
Unfortunately, this discussion has been polluted by the defecation of idealogical hacks whose only goal is to trash the work provided by the authors without providing any legitimate debate or discussion regarding the article content. It would be nice if we could actually discuss the biological impact of warming rather than engage in an infantile regurgitation of Limbaugh talking points.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPhilJourdan,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI see that the PhilJourdan religious road show performs at all the SciAm forums.
. . . But as we see, AGW is more religious than science. YOu know the former, but sadly are ignorant of the latter . . . YOu only make a fool of yourself to anyone reading your religious rants.
I couldnt agree with you more.
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.geoportalen.no/planetenjorden/klima/sealevel/
---------------------
Thanks for exposing another petroleum-funded institute like IRIS at Stavanger, since the author of that article, willy fjeldskaar, is the project manager for the Petromaks project Votec.
Willy Fjeldskaar, employee at International Research Institute of ...He is the project manager of the Petromaks project "Vøtec" www.votec.com, and principal investigator in the Petromaks projects "GlaciPet" and "PetroBar" ...
www.irisresearch.no/.../078b883dcad01ca3c125600b003d2c14!OpenDocument
SCIAM is well on it's way to becoming the laughingstock of the science community for it's slavish devotion to AGW.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://sppiblog.org/news/scientific-american’s-climate-lies
Anybody remember when Penthouse Magazine decided to publish their version of sci-porn called "OMNI"?
SCIAM is headed down that same road.
Sigurdur, from your own willy fjeldskaar link:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"There is no doubt that sea level is currently rising on a global scale. ......global mean sea level rose at an average rate of 1.8 mm per year from 1961 to 2003. The rate was faster from 1993 to 2003: about 3.1 mm per year."
This from a petroleum industry project manager in Norway!
Trent1492:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Why is reading comprehension such a problem with you guys? The sea is rising. Do you at all understand what the phrase statistically significant means at all. Not only has the sea level not fallen but has risen over the past sixteen years."
-----------------
Yep...simply amazing! Not only has sea level risen in the past 16 years, but it has almost doubled in speed, from 1.8 mm per year before 1993, and 3.2 mm annually from 1993 to 2009.
Why do these DENIALISTS continue to use 2002 as their static level, when the rise in sea level has continued unabated through the warmest decade in recent history?
Shoshin,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou made the mistake of including your source. The blog's attribution says it all; "From The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley"
Christopher Walter Monckton, 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley (born 14 February 1952) is a British politician, business consultant, policy adviser, writer, columnist, inventor and hereditary peer. Please note that he is neither a scientist nor a climatologist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Brenchley
Your "science" is based upon a long-winded rant by a politician.
Lakota,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAhem, Reliable source? Sure - From wikipedia (pulled 15 minutes later):
Rush Hudson Limbaugh III (pronounced /ˈlɪmbɔː/;born January 12, 1951, died December 30, 2009)
Yep! Now that is an unimpeachable source!
I just read all the comments and learned NOTHING!!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs a farmer who lives on the west slope of the Rocky Mountains, the hypothesis regarding species moving or adapting is very interesting to me. In the last 5 years my cantaloupe crop has gone from spectacular to dismal because of the drop in summer temperature of the soil. However, I tend to believe that humans are contributing to the general warming of the planet.
We still have a lot to learn and the denialists are impeding the gathering of information that will help us deal with the situation.
I'm glad that Rush got my Christmas present.
PhilJourdan:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Ahem, Reliable source?"
------------------
Typical DENIALIST tactic of changing the topic and attacking any source that doesn't conform to their ideology. YOU continue to spew the most idiotic propaganda here, and your rushbo comment proves that point beyond any doubt.
BTW, a simple Google search of "rush limbaugh dead at 58" brings-up 760,000 results, and your hated Wikipedia is not even in the top ten! Too bad it's not true, since he has an open invitation to Hell with all his lies, distortions and outright anger and hatred of average American citizens.
Try to stick with the topic, and post more than just attacks!
lakota2012,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"... Try to stick with the topic, and post more than just attacks!"
Consider the distinct possibility that attacks are all he has available.
notslic:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"As a farmer who lives on the west slope of the Rocky Mountains, the hypothesis regarding species moving or adapting is very interesting to me."
-----------------
Actually, it's not so much a hypothesis, but reality of a changing world on land as well as in the oceans. Even though you say your soil temperature has dropped, a friend of mine said his Palisade peach crop was flowering up to 3 weeks earlier last season.
Both Cape Cod fishermen and French vintners are seeing dramatic changes to regions dependent on fish and grapes.
Warming drives off Cape Cod's namesake, other fishNov 12, 2009 ... Small-boat fishermen on Cape Cod caught most of their haddock and flounder, as well as the peninsula's namesake fish, in waters close to ...
www.physorg.com/news177225403.html
French vintners see threat from climate change- The New Haven ...Nov 29, 2009 ... French vintners see threat from climate change ... PARIS — Global warming is giving French vintners a new potential headache: In a few years ...
www.nhregister.com/articles/2009/11/29/news/f2-frenchwine.txt
BTW, thanks for sending the blowhard rushbo a Christmas present, and it's just too bad the premature 760,000 hits on Google were wrong!
Shoshin:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScientific American’s Climate Lies
From The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley
------------------
Too funny! You try to pass along a blog by a British politician with absolutely no scientific training, on a website brought to us by robert ferguson, an American republiCON politician with absolutely no scientific training as well.
It's not so much the source of your DENIALISM that reeks of hypocrisy, but the total lack of scientists and scientific research that you're trying to use as anything close to credibility! Bringing in two politicians to attack scientists and Scientific American magazine is beyond ludicrous!
Shoshin, talk about laughing stock, this SPPI is just another Exxon/Mobil-funded corporate extension for DENIALISTS without any scientific training -- just partisan politicians!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFerguson was previously the initial Executive Director of the Center for Science and Public Policy (CSSP), a project of the corporate-funded Frontiers of Freedom Institute (FOF).[3] Exxon had provided $100,000 in 2002 specifically for the "Center for Sound Science and Public Policy" (sic) as well as a further $97,000 for "Global Climate Change Outreach Activities", and a further $35,000 for "Global Climate Change Science Projects";[4] In subsequent years Exxon continued it support for the project including $50,000 for "Project Support - Sound Science Center" in 2003[5], $70,000 for "Project Support- Science Center & Climate Change" in 2004;[6] $140,000 to the organization in 2005 but without a specific amount for CSPP identified, $90,000 for the "Science & Policy Center" in 2006[7] and $90,000 for "energy literacy" in 2007.[8]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Robert_Ferguson_(Science_and_Public_Policy_Institute)
"Since when is "observed" the same as test?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince the early days of deductive reasoning.
Isn't it the same on your home planet of Conservadopia?
" The problem with you religious is that you are science ignorant." - Phil Jordan
Says the scientifically illiterate chicken plucker.
Global Warming Denialism is a disease.
Death it's only cure.
"Apparently all you seem to take pride in is your death threats for those not of your faith." - Phil Jordan
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI see that your mental disorder also includes paranoia along with chronic lying.
Death is the only cure for your kind of ignorance.
"The sea level has shown no apprecible rise since 2002." - Sigurdur
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe following site proves you to be a liar, Sigurdur.
http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/
I have never encountered a Conservative who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar.
"I know you don't like to read, but just in case you actually do:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.geoportalen.no/planetenjorden/klima/sealevel/" - Sugurdur
From your own reference....
"There is no doubt that sea level is currently rising on a global scale. However, in 2001, IPCC concluded that "no significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected." In 2007, IPCC noted that "global mean sea level rose at an average rate of 1.8 mm per year from 1961 to 2003. The rate was faster from 1993 to 2003: about 3.1 mm per year." - reference
"SCIAM is well on it's way to becoming the laughingstock of the science community for it's slavish devotion to AGW." - Shsoshin
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPoor Shoshin... Your Source - a non-scientist clown that calls itself Monkton of Betchley and who used to refer to himself as a british "lord" until it became widely known that he had no such title.
Let us know when the dimwhit gets something peer reviewed and printed as science in the scientific press.
"Rush Hudson Limbaugh III (pronounced /ˈlɪmbɔː/;born January 12, 1951, died December 30, 2009) " - PhilJourdan
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn any self respecting country a chronic liar like Rush Limbaugh would have been dragged into the street and beaten to death for the crimes of treason against the state and treason against nature.
It is no coincidence that Scum like Limbaugh exist in the collapsing American state.
"Why do these DENIALISTS continue to use 2002 as their static level, when the rise in sea level has continued unabated through the warmest decade in recent history? " - lakota
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd then provide links to backup their statements that in fact claim the exact opposite of what they said.
There are only two possible answers of course. Either they are dumber than dirt, or they are knowingly corrupt and dishonest.
Either way their primary motivation is to argue that Global Warming can't be real because they believe their taxes are too high.
It is completely irrational of course. But then Conservatism has always been a mental disorder.
Death is the only known cure.
Yes, Lakota2012...The Palisade Peach crop was spectacular this year, and early, due to a very warm March and April. Daytime temps were about normal around here last summer but nights were cooler and rain was scarce. Thankfully, we have a sophisticated canal system and I have irrigation rights that date to 1904. I do, however, fear politicians. Farmers have been shut down in eastern Colorado and northern California so that the cities can have their green lawns. I can grow crops that can handle shifts in temperature, but nothing survives without water. Some models predict that the ski industry will not exist in Colorado in 50 years. If this happens, farming will die also.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI find it amusing that the religious are so weak in their faith that they accuse me of belonging to a different religion so that they can dehumanize me without guilt. Faith is weak...knowledge is strong. We need to know more!!!!
Lakota,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPlease reread my response before making a fool of yourself again. I clearly stated it was pulled after it was posted.
Here's the link for their shenanigans: http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/12/exclusive-oops-wikipedia-pronounced-rush-limbaugh-dead
I attacked nothing except the reliability of a clearly bad source. You just cant read.
Nice, Vendi. Lots of insults but no refutation. Please go to communion as your religion is calling. Take vendi with you. We do not need a bunch of religious zealots trying to disrupt discussions on AGW.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPhilJourdan,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"... We do not need a bunch of religious zealots trying to disrupt discussions on AGW ..."
This coming from the poster who introduces the religious angle in the last three SciAm forums I have browsed.
Yes, PhilJourdan, we do not need a bunch of religious zealots trying to disrupt discussions on AGW. We do not need even one. Let it be. Try to engage on a scientific basis.
notslic,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"... We need to know more!!!!"
Yes, we certainly do.
vendicar9,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"... There are only two possible answers of course. Either they are dumber than dirt, or they are knowingly corrupt and dishonest ..."
Respectfully, black and white situations are VERY rare.
vendicar9:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Either way their primary motivation is to argue that Global Warming can't be real because they believe their taxes are too high.
It is completely irrational of course. But then Conservatism has always been a mental disorder."
------------------------
Yep....exactly what happened during bushworld, when the ideological GOP congresscritters used Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, a mathematician and an economist, to try to discredit Michael E. Mann, Raymond S. Bradley and Malcolm K. Hughes, three world-renowned and peer-reviewed CLIMATOLOGISTS. This circus in D.C. was brought to us by rep. barton from texass, a consultant for Atlantic Richfield OIL and GAS; and chairman wegman, another mathematician, more interested in the ECONOMICS of global warming than the SCIENCE! Seems as if these ideological conservatoids are more interested in instant gratification, instead of the long-term environmental damage and a much more hostile planet in the future.
Gerald North, chairman of the National Research Council panel that studied the hockey-stick issue and produced the report Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years, stated the politicians at the hearing at which the Wegman report was presented "were twisting the scientific information for their own propaganda purposes. The hearing was not an information gathering operation, but rather a spin machine." Similarly, according to Roger A. Pielke, Jr., the National Research Council publication constituted a "near-complete vindication for the work of Mann et al."
PhilJourdan, beating a dead horse like you do on a daily basis with attack after attack, and absolutely no scientific proof substantiating any propaganda you try to spin, hardly qualifies you as a leader of reading comprehension.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think 'lord' monckton is calling you on the red phone now!
notslic:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Daytime temps were about normal around here last summer but nights were cooler and rain was scarce."
Faith is weak...knowledge is strong. We need to know more!!!!
---------------------
Yes, knowledge is strong, but sometimes trumped by spin from the propagandists tied to the fossil fuel industry! Looks like an inversion layer this morning, with 30 degrees in Telluride and a mere 6 degrees in Junction, and a fog bank all along the Uncompaghre Valley. Good view from up here on the Uncompaghre Plateau, covered in snow, but not deep!
Yes, the ski resorts have noticed a 3-week shorter ski season in just the past 3 decades, and hopefully they have invested in snow-making machines for the future, as the snowpack is getting less and less, and the spring runoff is getting earlier.
I'm with you on needing the irrigation water more for agricultural purposes than Vegas golf courses, and one only needs to look at the levels of both Lakes Powell and Mead. Last year it was recorded that the spring runoff was a good month early, but basically due to the southwestern duststorms turning the snow darker that melted quicker. Of course the lobbyists for the cattle industry, the OIL/GAS industry and the offroading enthusiasts claimed it couldn't be their faults as to the extreme duststorms, but I have a feeling it was a combination of all 3 exacerbating the problem.
I saw this from the GJ NWS yesterday:
Since weather record keeping began in Grand Junction back in 1893, December 2009 was the fourth coldest December on record. The average temperature for the month was 17.6 degrees.
Despite the cold December, the average temperature for 2009 of 52.0 degrees was 0.2 degrees warmer than the normal average of 51.8.
As Climategate has revealed, the reconstruction done by Mr. Mann is not valid. OH well, another one bites the dust.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLakota2012:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think you need to research who wanted the carbon cap and trade scheme. Also who funded the beginnings of it.
Enron was the co who saw the potential to make billions on this scheme. Goldman set up a trading desk, the CBT set up a trading mechanism.
Time to understand who benifits most from cap and trade. The oil co's do.
Lakota2012:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPlease read the whole study that I posted about sea levels.
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Please read the whole study that I posted about sea levels."
--------------------
Why? It was written by a highly-partisan British POLITICIAN on a website by an Exxon/Mobil-funded American POLITICIAN, for purely POLITICAL reasons by those without any scientific education whatsoever!
Why do the republiCONS continue to wage war on science?
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"As Climategate has revealed......
..............................................................absolutely nothing,
the DENIALISTS continue to spew their hatred and highly-partisan attacks on any scientist not associated with Exxon/Mobil and the rest of the fossil fuel industry!
Sigurdur,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCome now, even a thorough investigation of all leaked e-mails has thoroughly debunked any DENIALIST smoking gun, so that dog doesn't hunt, despite your religion!
The highly-partisan wegman report uncritically parroted claims by two Canadians (an economist and a mineral-exploration consultant) that have already been refuted by several papers in the peer-reviewed literature inexplicably neglected by Barton's 'panel'. These claims were specifically dismissed by the National Academy in their report.
The Republican War on Science by Chris Mooney:
A stinging indictment of how the Republican Party has not only ignored science, but has used bad science to justify its political agenda.
www.waronscience.com/
Lakota2012:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMann's temp proxy has been debunked by many more than Mr. M.
The dog doesn't wash in your implication on the article I posted:
Willy Fjeldskaar, Head of Research in Geomodelling at IRIS and Professor II (University of Stavanger), holds a Dr. Scient. (PhD) in modelling of sea level and crust in post-glacial time. Fjeldskaar has been actively engaged and has published numerous papers on modelling of geodynamic processes and sea level changes, especially related to the Fennoscandian glaciation and Plio-Pleistocene glacial erosion
One can always tell when someone posts something that proves a point that AGW is a religion/political agenda rather than science when the response is not addressed to the post, but rather oil co's/etc.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat duck doesn't quack with me sir.
"Nice, Vendi. Lots of insults but no refutation." -PhilJordan
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou are a tomato. Please provide a refutation.
You ate the fried brains of dismembered children for breakfast. Please provide a refutation.
Your lies have been documented. That is refutation enough.
"Respectfully, black and white situations are VERY rare. "
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre you suggesting that these denialist vermin are just a little bit stupid and largely corrupt?
Feel free to provide your estimate of the relative proportions.
"Similarly, according to Roger A. Pielke, Jr., the National Research Council publication constituted a "near-complete vindication for the work of Mann et al." - Lakota
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course. Mann's hockey stick was also vindicated by the National Academy of Science review of the work.
When you see any denilist claiming that Mann's work was discredited, you know they are liars.
I have never encountered a conservative who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar.
"As Climategate has revealed" - Sigurdur
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe only thing "Climategate" has revealed is how desperate and dishonest warming denialists are.
"Why do the republiCONS continue to wage war on science?" - lakota
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is strictly ideological. To a Conservative Belief = Reality.
They don't exist in a reality based community. They live on planet Conesrvadopia.
"In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White-House didn"t like about Bush"s former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House"s displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn"t fully comprehend – but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.
"The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That"s not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We"re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you"re studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we"ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that"s how things will sort out. We"re history"s actors. . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." - Suskind
Mann's work has been discredited so often now that his validity is about zero.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe MWP was/and has been verfied over and over and over. He attempted to get rid of it, and that duck doesn't swim.
The warmth of the pre-2002 period was a natural phenomina, just as the cooling since that time has been as well.
The temp data is shown to be within the norms expected from the Holocene period. We are not as warm as the Holocene Optimum yet, nor the Roman warm period. Seems we are about on par with the MWP.
The climate is not a stagnate structure, but rather a chaotic one. Anyone who believes otherwise is foolish and following the AGW God of disingenuousness.
AGW is not a partisan issue. I have friends who are Republicans who don't believe in the magnitude that AGW proponents shout, just as I have Democrat friends who feel the same way.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI will say that those who read the journals etc understand that the temp rise of the late 20th century is well within the error bars of the Holocene and see nothing to be alarmed about.
In fact, a good geo friend stated that more warmth is desireable as mankind has flourished during the warm periods and suffered greatly during the colder periods.
He would like to see it at least another 1.5-2.0C warmer so that we can enjoy the benifits our ancestors did during the Holocene Optimum.
I don't think he is going to see that but one can always hope.
Sigurdur,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"... He would like to see it at least another 1.5-2.0C warmer so that we can enjoy the benifits our ancestors did during the Holocene Optimum ..."
If that does happen, I hope you will have sold all your waterfront property.
vendicar9,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"... Are you suggesting that these denialist vermin are just a little bit stupid and largely corrupt? ...“
People who call other people vermin are extremists.
The normal thing that has happened during each interglacial in the past is that sea level rises. How much will it rise at the peak of this interglacial? No one knows.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGeologically, sea level has been 200m higher than present during past interglacials. Can man stop that normal rise and fall of sea level?
I don't think so, do you?
There is not a thing that, as humans, we can do to affect sea level. That will happen all on its own.
We know that Greenlands ice sheet was much smaller during the MWP. The retreating glacier is exposing Viking burial grounds and settlements.
That indicates that the Greenland Ice sheet waxes and wans.
Blow whale studies have shown that the Arctic Ice Cap was much smaller 900 years ago. During the MWP, from fossil evidence, it is easy to see that for part of the summer, it was ice free.
In fact, as recently as 1922 there was substantially less ice in the Arctic than present. Read the Weather Service from that era. There were no satellites, but there were physical measurements recorded.
The current religion that climate should be static is utterly false and without any merit. Past history , within this interglacial, shows a dynamic climate of warmth AND cold.
To deny that evidence is to deny science.
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The dog doesn't wash in your implication on the article I posted:
Willy Fjeldskaar......
-------------------
..................................Project Manager for Petromaks Votec Project, is just another BIG OIL and fossil fuel syccophant!
Aaaaaahhh....seems that dog hunts just fine, and only proves that every one of your BIG OIL-funded "scientists" has a real reason to believe in your religion of DENIAL -- and that's MONEY!
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"AGW is not a partisan issue."
----------------------
YOU LIE! Despite 67% of Americans believing that global warming is a fact, only a mere 20% of delusional republican'ts believe global warming is a fact! That means it is definitely a very partisan issue, and propagandists like glenn beck and the other FAUX NoNooz morons continue to beat the drum of conspiracy theories!
Washington (CNN) -- A rise in skepticism among Americans over global warming is mostly due to changes among Republicans, according to a new national poll.
The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey, released Monday, indicates that two-thirds of all Americans believe global warming is a proven fact. That's down 8 percentage points since June 2008, with views among Democrats holding steady and Republicans' belief in global warming dropping 11 points.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/07/global.warming.poll/index.html
Vendicar et al. :
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPlease post some data showing that AGW is real. Something, anything.
Ad hominem attacks don't count as evidence, staged photoshopped pictures of polar bears don't count, people walking around up their ankles in water doesn't count either. And the rings from 14 Yamalk trees don't count anymore either.
Evidence of climate change is not evidence of AGW.
Stop issuing reams of data about climate change and pretending that they are evidence of Anthropogenic Global Warming. They aren't, you know they aren't and you aren't fooling anyone by saying they are, you're just making yourself look pathetic.
What we are seeing in these threads is a massive full court press by the moneyed elite of the eco-climate complex to "Seal the Deal" as the IPCC promoted.
The problem that the IPCC faces is that people who understand science whether they are published or laymen, know the difference between science and politics.
The thousands of True Believers chanting the IPCC sanctioned and promoted mantra "Seal the Deal" not only fell on deaf ears, it made the hairs on scientist and laymen's neck's stand up alike. FRom that point on it became abundantly clear that the IPCC had dropped the mask of science and it's true visage of politics, money and control was clear to be seen by all.
Disgusting display of hypocrisy by the IPCC.
Shoshin, it is a travesty to science what the religious are trying to do. Anyone that does not buy their religion is called a denialist (a very religious term) even those that are seeking truth in the doctored data and supressed papers that have become evident from the CRU exposed data.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs they have already alterered their religion to fit the fact that the facts did not conform to their religion, I expect to see them do it again as the evidence again suggests that the AGW hypothesis is still missing some key elements that will never be discovered because of their insistence that all conform to their dogma.
A shame really. Those seeking the truth are being browbeaten by those wishing to supress it lest it interfere with the spread of their religion.
PhilJourdan,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"... Those seeking the truth are being browbeaten by those wishing to supress [sic] it lest it interfere with the spread of their religion."
You are correct. The science-free attacks which you, and people like you visit upon those who are striving to understand what human waste products are doing to the atmosphere we all breathe, and how that polluted environment is warming, has already cost time we can ill afford, but will further delay the day we will be free to act in our best interest.
Shame on you and your co-religionists.
Shoshin,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is a scientific theory, an analytic structure designed to explain a set of empirical observations. The empirical phenomena in this instance are the temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gasses) recordings. The theory of AGW asserts that the strong correlation in time of these increasing measurements are not coincidental.
"The defining characteristic of a scientific theory is that it makes falsifiable or testable predictions. The relevance and specificity of those predictions determine how potentially useful the theory is. A would-be theory that makes no predictions that can be observed is not a useful theory. Predictions not sufficiently specific to be tested are similarly not useful. In both cases, the term 'theory' is inapplicable."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory#Essential_criteria)
The AGW theory, the consensus choice of climatologists, predicts the Seuss effect (the change in the ratio of the atmospheric concentrations of heavy isotopes of carbon by the admixture of large amounts of fossil-fuel derived CO2). Not only does it predict the Suess effect, but when the measurements are made, the results are consistent with the predictions of the theory.
"People who call other people vermin are extremists. " - Chrysis
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisExtremism in the defense of truth is no vice.
vendicar9,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScience should be a reasonable process. Let us try to keep it that way.
Shoshin:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"moneyed elite of the eco-climate complex"
----------------
Nice labeling just to make you feel better......huh?
Sigurdur,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"... the Arctic Ice Cap was much smaller 900 years ago. During the MWP, from fossil evidence, it is easy to see that for part of the summer, it was ice free ..."
I was unaware of the existence of 900 year old fossils. Would you please provide a link?
"... The current religion that climate should be static is utterly false and without any merit ..."
I was unaware of that religion. Would you please provide a link?
AGW as religion. See UK court ruling.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBELUGA WHALES. Google scholar, I did a quick search and there are so many. There was a paper published several years ago using the fossil record to show the ice lince from the past.
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The warmth of the pre-2002 period was a natural phenomina<SIC>, just as the cooling since that time has been as well."
------------------
Thank you for showing us exactly why you religious DENIALISTS have such a need to use 2002 as a cutoff, for both global warming and sea level rise -- both of which continue unabated.
Maybe, without using your fossil fuel-funded economists and politicians, you can provide a link to scientific evidence proving that our Earth is indeed cooling and the sea level is constant or dropping. We're all anxiously awaiting.........
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"We are not as warm as the Holocene Optimum yet, nor the Roman warm period. Seems we are about on par with the MWP."
------------------
Why you continue to beat a dead horse is beyond belief, since the Holocene Climate Optimum warm event was generally a northern latitude event, where the Arctic experienced warming. The average temperature change appears to have declined rapidly with latitude so that essentially no change in mean temperature is reported at low and mid latitudes.
In terms of the global average, temperatures during the Holocene Climate Optimum were probably colder than present day (depending on estimates of latitude dependence and seasonality in response patterns). While temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere were warmer than average during the summers the tropics and areas of the Southern Hemisphere were colder than average which comprised an average global temperature still overall lower than present day temperatures.
Meteorological Research Institute, Tsukuba, Japan
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2002/2001PA000724.shtml
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"He would like to see it at least another 1.5-2.0C warmer so that we can enjoy the benifits<SIC> our ancestors did during the Holocene Optimum."
---------------------
"In summary, the mid-Holocene, roughly 6,000 years ago, was generally warmer than today, but only in summer and only in the northern hemisphere. More over, we clearly know the cause of this natural warming, and know without doubt that this proven 'astronomical' climate forcing mechanism cannot be responsible for the warming over the last 100 years."
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/holocene.html
Sigurdur,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs an aside, it's worth noting that even if the Holocene had been as warm as or warmer than today, it would do nothing to undermine the theories and data that indicate today's warming is rapid and anthropogenic.
I'd suggest that you religious DENIALISTS stick with much more credible scientific research, instead of the fossil fuel-funded propaganda and the highly-partisan political hacks hiding behind the names of conservative stink tanks only providing delusional economic reasons why we should not be embracing more and more clean and green renewable energy!
Shoshin et al:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDo yourself a favor for once, and leave your DENIALIST religion at the door, and learn something from National Geographic:
The Planet Is Heating Up—and Fast
Glaciers are melting, sea levels are rising, cloud forests are drying, and wildlife is scrambling to keep pace. It's becoming clear that humans have caused most of the past century's warming by releasing heat-trapping gases as we power our modern lives. Called greenhouse gases, their levels are higher now than in the last 650,000 years.
http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/gw-overview.html?source=sem_G2300c&kwid=ContentNetwork|3302875967&gclid=CPK978WZi58CFR8RagodTXZyuA
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The sea level has shown no apprecible rise since 2002."
-------------------
Scientists point out that sea levels have risen and fallen substantially over Earth's 4.6-billion-year history. But the recent rate of global sea level rise has departed from the average rate of the past two to three thousand years and is rising more rapidly—about one-tenth of an inch a year. A continuation or acceleration of that trend has the potential to cause striking changes in the world's coastlines.
Everywhere on Earth ice is changing. The famed snows of Kilimanjaro have melted more than 80 percent since 1912. Glaciers in the Garhwal Himalaya in India are retreating so fast that researchers believe that most central and eastern Himalayan glaciers could virtually disappear by 2035. Arctic sea ice has thinned significantly over the past half century, and its extent has declined by about 10 percent in the past 30 years. NASA's repeated laser altimeter readings show the edges of Greenland's ice sheet shrinking. Spring freshwater ice breakup in the Northern Hemisphere now occurs nine days earlier than it did 150 years ago, and autumn freeze-up ten days later. Thawing permafrost has caused the ground to subside more than 15 feet (4.6 meters) in parts of Alaska. From the Arctic to Peru, from Switzerland to the equatorial glaciers of Man Jaya in Indonesia, massive ice fields, monstrous glaciers, and sea ice are disappearing, fast.
http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/big-thaw.html
Sigurdur,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this“... AGW as religion. See UK court ruling ...”
I would, if you would provide a link, as I asked. That will, of course, be the AGW religion that climate should be static, won’t it?
"... BELUGA WHALES. Google scholar, I did a quick search and there are so many. There was a paper published several years ago using the fossil record to show the ice lince from the past ..."
What are you talking about? Does it have anything to do with 900 year old fossils?
First off Lakota2012:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere was a printing error. It isn't 2035, but 2350 that was meant. You can confirm that with a simple search.
Sea level rise has slown to the point that it is less than 1.8mm per year, which has been the standard for the past 100 years.
As far as Kilmajaro, please read the current paper on that. IT is not because of warmth...do a google scholar search and read it.
The facts you state do not bear scrutiny. I know you must believe the AGW religion, as you have not questioned the religions integrity.
Here is a link that is well done on climategate.....from Finland.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unKZhr3JMhA
Please read it and learn. Tiz quit interesting.
You may also want to read Polar Passion concering Arctic Ice.
Just a suggestion.
Lakota2012:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTodays warming is NOT rapid.
See
Alley etal 2000.
That is a paper by a NOAA scientist......after you have read it you will understand what rapid warming really is.
Every scientist, except for the team, understands that at most, a doubling of co2 might increase temps by .3C over 100 years.
That .3C is well within the error bars of the temp record of the Holocene.
We would have to increase over 2.0C for the temp to have exceeded the Holocene Optimum temps. IF co2 were required to fuel that increase, you would have to have over 3500 ppm co2 in the atmosphere as co2 is a logarithmic gas.
But don't let physics get in your way of thinking. Instead, study physics so that you understand.
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"There was a printing error. It isn't 2035, but 2350 that was meant. You can confirm that with a simple search."
-------------------
Just what in the hell are you babbling about now?
Printing errors?? Search what??
You religious DENIALISTS remind me of dogs chasing their tails in endless circles, while spewing the same fossil fuel industry propaganda, with stolen e-mail rhetoric thrown in!
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Sea level rise has slown<SIC> to the point that it is less than 1.8mm per year, which has been the standard for the past 100 years."
----------------
What? Even your Willy Fjeldskaar (project manager for the BIG OIL Petromaks Voltec project) link, says:
"global mean sea level rose at an average rate of 1.8 mm per year from 1961 to 2003. The rate was faster from 1993 to 2003: about 3.1 mm per year."
YOU seem to be living in the past with old data from your usual BIG OIL propagandists trying to sugarcoat sea level rise.
Even NOAA and C.U. have stated that sea level is rising much faster now(almost double) since 1993, which accounts for the extreme warming during the past decade and the huge amount of ice loss in the Arctic. As a matter of fact, during the Holocene Optimum, the North Pole was the only place that experienced the huge warming of 4 degrees C, and we've already seen a warming of 5-8 degrees F in the Arctic that is melting the permafrost and releasing huge quantities of methane!
You really need better sources of more accurate science, instead of the usual fossil fuel propagandists!
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"As far as Kilmajaro, please read the current paper on that. IT is not because of warmth...do a google scholar search and read it."
------------------------
Actually "the facts you state do not bear scrutiny," since YOU will always find a few pseudo-scientists willing to take money from BIG OIL and the rest of the fossil fuel industry, in order to promote the religious DENIALIST views.
Mt. Kilimanjaro Ice Cap Continues Rapid Retreat
The ice atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania has continued to retreat rapidly, declining 26 percent since 2000, scientists say in a new report.
Eighty-five percent of the ice cover that was present in 1912 has vanished, the scientists said.
The lead author of the study, Lonnie G. Thompson, a glaciologist at Ohio State University, has concluded that the melting of recent years is unique.
In 2000 he extracted deep cylinders of ice from Kilimanjaro’s glaciers and found that the higher layers were full of elongated bubbles — signs that melting and refreezing had occurred in recent years.
There was no presence of the bubbles in the deeper layers of the cores, Dr. Thompson said.
If his dating of the ice core layers is accurate, surface melting like that seen in recent years has not occurred over the last 11,700 years.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/10/30/0906029106.full.pdf+html
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"You may also want to read Polar Passion concering<SIC> Arctic Ice."
---------------------
Since you didn't mention the author, but if you're referring to the out of print and rare book by farley mowat selling for $72.35 from Yukon Books, I'll have to pass.
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"You may also want to read Polar Passion"
-----------------
Upon further Google searches, I see that "Polar Passion" written by Farley Mowat in 1967, and his other books point to him being a conservationist. There's not one religious DENIALIST that has a passion for conserving one lousy thing!
Seems as if the "ronnie the rat" raygun mis-administration also denied Farley Mowat entry into the U.S. in 1985:
Farley Mowat published a denunciation of "the destruction of animal life in the north Atlantic" entitled Sea of Slaughter in 1984. In 1985, as a part of the promotional tour for this book, Mowat accepted an invitation to speak at a university in Chico, California. However, U.S. customs officials at Lester B. Pearson International Airport in Toronto denied Mowat entry to the United States. They wouldn't tell him why specifically, but did tell him that it was because of a security file about him that indicated he should be denied entry "for violating any one of 33 statutes". The result was a media circus, which brought worldwide attention to Mowat. The negative publicity eventually forced the Reagan Administration to decide that Mowat was free to visit the U.S., but Mowat, peeved by being initially refused, declined. Mowat speculated on the reasons why he was refused entry to the U.S. in his 1985 book, My Discovery of America.
Seems very strange that you as a rabid DENIALIST would champion a book on the Arctic written by a conservationist!
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"That .3C is well within the error bars of the temp record of the Holocene."
---------------
Your obsession with trying to make the Holocene Optimum into something it was not, is truly beyond belief!
"In summary, the mid-Holocene, roughly 6,000 years ago, was generally warmer than today, but only in summer and only in the northern hemisphere. More over, we clearly know the cause of this natural warming, and know without doubt that this proven 'astronomical' climate forcing mechanism cannot be responsible for the warming over the last 100 years."
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/holocene.html
Sigurdur:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Todays warming is NOT rapid."
---------------
Actually, since about 1980, it has indeed been very rapid!
Even the southern hemisphere which has been lagging the northern hemisphere in warming due to more ocean content to absorb the CO2, but it appears that even Australia has been sweltering while you religious DENIALISTS continue to spew "cooling" rants!
Australia baked under hottest decade on record
SYDNEY (Reuters) - Australia experienced its hottest decade on record from 2000 to 2009 due to global warming, the nation's bureau of meteorology said on Tuesday, as annual summer bushfires again burn drought lands and destroy homes.
The average temperature in Australia over the past 10 years was 0.48 degrees Celsius above the 1961-1990 average, said the Bureau of Meteorology said in its annual climate statement.
And 2010 is forecast to be even hotter, with temperatures likely to be between 0.5 and 1 degrees above average.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=australia-baked-under-hot
Sigurdur,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this... AGW as religion. See UK court ruling ...
I would, if you would provide a link, as I asked. That will, of course, be the AGW religion that climate should be static, wont it?
"... BELUGA WHALES. Google scholar, I did a quick search and there are so many. There was a paper published several years ago using the fossil record to show the ice lince from the past ..."
What are you talking about? Does it have anything to do with 900 year old fossils?
An intersting article but surely most habitats are more than a few metres of latitude in extent. Their boundaries may shift but the whole population of organisms living there doesn't immediately have to break into a trot to keep up with the movement.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWetland and pond habitats are small and vulnerable but the possibility of migration doesn't exist for many of the local species and the prospects for those that cannot move or hitch a ride are gloomy.