I happened upon an article today in The New Republic called "The Right-Wing Press' New Climate Change Lie". Since I am quite interested in the debate over global warming, I decided to read the article, particularly since I wanted to see the "lie".
The big point of the article is that the fact that atmospheric temperatures has not risen for 17 years ignores the big rise in ocean temperatures. To illustrate that rise in ocean temperatures, the author includes a graphic that shows the difference in surface ocean temperatures from 1901 to 2012. During that 111 year period, the surface temperature of the ocean has risen for the most part, although the North Atlantic is actually cooler. The temperature increase is not specified but from the graphic, it looks like about a rise of 0.6 or 0.7 degrees. The author then goes on to lambaste the right for focusing on land based temperatures which have been steady over the last 17 years.
I don't pretend to be an expert on climate, but there are two important points that need to be made here. Both of these are basic truths, they are not arguments or interpretations. These are facts.
1. The scientific community agrees that to the extent that increased carbon dioxide cause warming of the earth, that effect did not begin until roughly 1945. Prior to that time, the levels of cabon dioxide in the atmosphere were too low to affect the Earth's temperature. That means that looking at the difference between 1901 and 2012 tells us nothing. We need to know the difference between 1945 and 2012 to see what happened. We also need to know what the change was between 1901 and 1945 to see if the increase in supposed greenhouse gases actually caused the temperature to rise more than it already was.
2. The temperatures that show no rise in temperature over the last 17 years are not "land" readings. The figure is based upon the atmospheric readings taken by NASA from thousands of places located all around the globe. If the ocean is warmer, then the air above the ocean will be warmed as well. It is not enough to just talk about ocean temperatures; someone has to explain the global air temperature. After all, if the greenhouse gases are actually keeping heat from escaping into space, that heat is first located in the atmosphere (which ought to be warmer as a result.)
Neither of these facts is particularly surprising. I am sure that both are known to the author of the article. Any rational discussion of climate change requires a full consideration of both. Of course, it is difficult to have a rational discussion with irrational people.
The big point of the article is that the fact that atmospheric temperatures has not risen for 17 years ignores the big rise in ocean temperatures. To illustrate that rise in ocean temperatures, the author includes a graphic that shows the difference in surface ocean temperatures from 1901 to 2012. During that 111 year period, the surface temperature of the ocean has risen for the most part, although the North Atlantic is actually cooler. The temperature increase is not specified but from the graphic, it looks like about a rise of 0.6 or 0.7 degrees. The author then goes on to lambaste the right for focusing on land based temperatures which have been steady over the last 17 years.
I don't pretend to be an expert on climate, but there are two important points that need to be made here. Both of these are basic truths, they are not arguments or interpretations. These are facts.
1. The scientific community agrees that to the extent that increased carbon dioxide cause warming of the earth, that effect did not begin until roughly 1945. Prior to that time, the levels of cabon dioxide in the atmosphere were too low to affect the Earth's temperature. That means that looking at the difference between 1901 and 2012 tells us nothing. We need to know the difference between 1945 and 2012 to see what happened. We also need to know what the change was between 1901 and 1945 to see if the increase in supposed greenhouse gases actually caused the temperature to rise more than it already was.
2. The temperatures that show no rise in temperature over the last 17 years are not "land" readings. The figure is based upon the atmospheric readings taken by NASA from thousands of places located all around the globe. If the ocean is warmer, then the air above the ocean will be warmed as well. It is not enough to just talk about ocean temperatures; someone has to explain the global air temperature. After all, if the greenhouse gases are actually keeping heat from escaping into space, that heat is first located in the atmosphere (which ought to be warmer as a result.)
Neither of these facts is particularly surprising. I am sure that both are known to the author of the article. Any rational discussion of climate change requires a full consideration of both. Of course, it is difficult to have a rational discussion with irrational people.
No comments:
Post a Comment