« 'The USS Liberty': America's Most Shameful Secret | No regrets for a "choice of words" » |
By Andrew Glikson
AN ALLIANCE OF PRO-CARBON SCEPTICS AND FUNDAMENTALISTS IS RETARDING 11TH HOUR ATTEMPTS AT MITIGATION OF DANGEROUS CLIMATE CHANGE
ABSTRACT
Mammals have only been able to attain large dimensions on land once atmospheric CO2 concentrations declined toward c. 500 ppm during the Eocene (56-34 million years ago) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammal), with related cooling of c.5 degrees C, formation of the Antarctic ice sheet and decline of sea levels by c.70 meters. current atmospheric carbon gas levels (CO2 - 387 ppm; CO2+CH4 >450 ppm equivalent) threaten fast-tracking toward the top of ice age conditions.
(http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2007/2007_Hansen_etal_2.pdf) ; (http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TargetCO2_20080407.pdf) ; (https://wesfiles.wesleyan.edu/home/droyer/web/publications.htm) ;
(DOI:10.1126/science.1059412) ;
(doi:10.1038/nature06588) ; (http://earth.geology.yale.edu/~berner/#Publications) ; (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;292/5517/686) ; (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7176/full/nature06588.html).
In the wake of current global warming to temperatures as high as 4 – 6 degrees C, humans, having endured the sharp climate upheavals of the Pleistocene glacial-interglacial cycles (+5 degrees Celsius; 120 meter sea level rise), are likely to survive in sheltered environments, including clouded tropical mountain valleys, high elevation islands and sub-Arctic latitudes.
Under global warming on the scale of several degrees Celsius, the future of civilization, hinging on extensive agriculture in temperate climate zones prone to severe droughts, on cultivation in low river deltas prone to sea level rise, and on irrigation of mountain snow-fed rivers, is less clear.
A. A CLIMATE UPDATE
The progression of global warming through warm/cold pulsations (http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009GL037810.shtml) (Fig. 2A) and related climate projections (Fig. 2B), in part associated with the ENSO cycle and the sun spot cycle, allows sceptics to advance false hopes of “global cooling”, which affect the pressure for deep cuts in carbon emissions and development of alternative clean power utilities. Few scientists endeavor to communicate the realities of accelerating climate change, and those who do discover governments hardly listen, proceeding with policies guided by anything but the latest evidence. Unfortunately:
Figure 2A. Irregular progression of global warming correlated with the
ENSO (El Nino – La Nina) cycle and sun spot cycle. (Easterling and
Wehner, 2009, Is the climate warming or cooling, Geophysical Research
Letters, v. 36, L08706, doi:10.1029/2009GL037810, 2009)
(http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009GL037810.shtml)
Figure 2B. One realization of the globally averaged surface air
temperature from the ECHAM5 coupled climate model forced with the
SRES A2greenhouse gas increase scenario for the 21st century. (Easterling
and Wehner, 2009, Is the climate warming or cooling, Geophysical
Research Letters, VOL. 36, L08706, doi:10.1029/2009GL037810, 2009)
(http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009GL037810.shtml)
B. CLIMATE FICTIONS WITH REFERENCE TO PLIMER’S “HEAVEN AND EARTH”
Nothing could result in a greater collective sigh of relief had it been shown current global warming is a transient anomaly or, in the very least, not caused by humans. Such a discovery, once verified, would have resulted in more than one Nobel Prize.
The difference between ambit claims and science being a meticulous review and verification system, by choosing non-scientific media platforms, repeating the same long-discarded arguments ad-infinitum, and not facing to direct debates, the sceptics’ approach amounts to a rejection of the scientific method. The latest example is Plimer’s the book “Heaven and Earth” (http://www.connorcourt.com/
catalog1/index.php?main_page=
product_info&cPath=7&products_id=103) and related media articles.
A long road leads from Galileo, persecuted by the Church for unearthing a new truth, to sceptics obtaining backing from a Cardinal (“Climate Change pauses” by Cardinal George Pell. (http://www.sydney.catholic.org.au/
people/archbishop/stc/2009/2009524
_ 1018.shtml). It is a wonder how a scientist who fought creationism tooth and nail (http://creation.com/plimer-case-main-points), and a cardinal reported to be “comfortable with intelligent design” (http://www.cardinalrating.com/
cardinal_75__article_2092.htm) find themselves in the same camp denying human-driven global warming.
Having spent years trying to refute an alleged discovery of relics of Noah’s Ark relics on Mount Ararat (http://creation.com/plimer-case-main-points) (Figure 3), a story echoing sea level rise associated with increased temperatures (c.1 degrees Celsius) in the early Holocene (c.10,000–6000 years-ago) (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter6.pdf), Plimer questions the post-19th century acceleration of sea level (from 0.11 to 0.35 cm/year) which is consistent with global temperature rise of more than 0.8 degrees C (http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/). Once account is taken of (A) the masking effect of industrial short-lived aerosols, and (B) albedo reduction of the Arctic Sea ice and other parts of the cryosphere, radiative forcings since 1750 approach the equivalent of near-1.5 degrees C (http://webdiary.com.au/cms/?q=node/2843).
In an attempt to negate the critical role of over 305 billion tons of emitted carbon during the 19th - 21st centuries, Plimer questions the established relations between the carbon gases and climate through time, demonstrated by multi-proxy studies (https://wesfiles.wesleyan.edu/home/droyer/web/publications.htm) ;
(DOI: 10.1126/science.1059412 ; doi:10.1038/nature06588) ; (http://earth.geology.yale.edu/~berner/#Publications), and further suggests a supposedly beneficial nature of current rise of CO2 and temperature (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25552775-7583,00.html) ; (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25429080-7583,00.html).
Many of the questions raised by Plimer are answered in the comprehensive synthesis of peer-reviewed geological and paleo-climate literature of the IPCC AR4 2007 report, which states (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter6.pdf):
“Climate has changed on all time scales throughout Earth’s history. Some aspects of the current climate change are not unusual, but others are. The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has reached a record high relative to more than the past half-million years, and has done so at an exceptionally fast rate. Current global temperatures are warmer than they have ever been during at least the past five centuries, probably even for more than a millennium. If warming continue unabated, the resulting climate change within this century would be extremely unusual in geological terms. Another unusual aspect of recent climate change is its cause: past climate changes were natural in origin (see FAQ 6.1), whereas most of the warming of the past 50 years is attributable to human activities.”
Plimer rejects the IPCC (“The IPCC process is related to environmental activism, politics and opportunism. It is unrelated to science” (http://www.connorcourt.com/catalog1/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=7&products_id=103 , p. 20). He further dismisses climate scientists despite hundreds of their peer-reviewed papers, for example where he states: “No evidence is provided for this statement and no signatory to this letter has published anything to support this claim” (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25552775-7583,00.html) ; (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25429080-7583,00.html) (http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/05/01/scientists-speak-out-coal-fired-power-stations-are-responsible-for-global-warming/). Plimer claims “No critic has argued science with me. I have just enjoyed a fortnight of being thrashed with a feather” but has not to date responded in any detail to critiques of his book, i.e. by Enting, Brook, Vernon, Ashley, Sandiford (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25552775-7583,00.html) ; (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25429080-7583,00.html)
To bring examples of only a few points in the debate (Plimer is cited in inverted comas):
“Carbon dioxide is an odourless, colourless, harmless natural gas. It is plant food. Without carbon, there would be no life on Earth”. Here Plimer makes two cardinal mistakes:
(A) Once the balance of atmospheric composition changes, as it has through geological times, plants and organism adapt, but only over extended time periods. Sharp changes, as induced by volcanic, impact or greenhouse crises, lead to mass extinction of species (http://www.harpercollins.com/books/9780061631634/Under_a_Green_Sky/index.aspx) ; (http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/04/fossil-climate.html) ; (http://www.gsa.org.au/ajes/ajes2005.html#4-5) ; (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V61-4GCX1MR-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=8aae6e7978f2eeaaaaaf7212b44f140c).
(B) The current rise in CO2 of c.2 ppm/year and of temperature (c.0.017C/year) by about an order of magnitude faster than the mean rise during the last glacial termination (c.0.002C/year) and faster than the 55 Ma greenhouse extinction event (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7176/full/nature06588.html) threatens similar consequences as the latter event.
In praising the “merit” of global warming, Plimer overlooks the causes of past mass extinction of species, triggered by environmental changes at a pace with which organisms could not cope. These included large-scale volcanic eruptions, asteroid impacts and runaway methane release, such as occurred at 55 million years ago (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7176/full/nature06588.html?message=remove ; doi:10.1038/nature06588).
C. A MEDIEVAL CLIMATE
the On the 15th June, 2009, Senator Steve Fielding, leader of “Family First” will cast a vote deciding whether the Australian government is allowed to take a first tentative step, be it woefully inadequate, to honor its election commitment of “the highest moral issue of our times (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,25037352-7583,00.html?from=public_rss).
Fielding is undertaking his own “open mind” “exploration” of climate science. (http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2588715.htm) ; (http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2588747.htm). Never mind that top climate research institutions world-wide (Hadley-Met, Tyndale, GISS-NASA, Potsdam, CSIRO, BOM, NSIDC) have already concluded dangerous human-driven climate change is tracking toward mean temperatures of +2, +4 and even +6 degrees C (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter6.pdf). (Figure 2B).
Straight out of meetings at the Heartland Institute, supported by the American Enterprise Institute, which received $1,625,000 from Exxon-Mobil between and 1998 and 2005 (http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=heartland_institute_1), Fielding states "So far I don't think there's been a real debate about the science" and "Let's actually explore that". Can it be that Senator Fielding’s “exploration” may in anyway be affected by his view of the Greens, expressed as "The Greens are in the extreme camp and like any fanatical group, they're locked into ideology" (http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25585267-661,00.html).
Following in the footsteps of Cardinal George Pell who, for several years, has been referring to environmentalists as “Scaremongering” and “zealots” (http://globalwarming-factorfiction.com/2007/02/19/scaremongers/), with “hysteric and extreme claims about global warming are also a symptom of pagan emptiness“ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Pell), stating: “The science is more complicated than the propaganda”.
Setting themselves as arbiters of science, assuming the role ancient Egyptian priests in predicting the flow of the Nile, the rains, solar and lunar eclipses, with one exception: The Egyptian priests conducted their own astronomical and water level measurements.
Fielding states “They (the “skeptics”) have actually got models that show that the solar energy, in other words, the energy from the sun has a higher direct link with global temperatures than carbon emissions. And this is going back, not only over the last 10 years, but hundreds of years” (http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2588747.htm).
In his climate “exploration” Fielding may not be aware that since the mid-20th century the role of the sun was limited to the 11 years sunspot cycle, oscillating at +/- 0.1 degrees Celsius. (http://cc.oulu.fi/~usoskin/personal/nature02995.pdf), compared to mean temperature rise due to greenhouse warming of about +0.6 degrees Celsius (http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/) ; (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter6.pdf). Stateing “And they were putting forward some science and some evidence and some facts that were questioning whether CO2 is actually driving global warming.” (http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2588715.htm), nor does he appear to be aware of the basic physics and chemistry of the infrared greenhouse effect (http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm).
D. Conclusions
Having endured the sharp climate upheavals of the Pleistocene glacial-interglacial cycles, humans are likely to survive in suitable environments, including clouded tropical mountain regions, high elevation islands and cool high latitudes regions. Hinging on extensive agriculture in temperate climate zones, prone to severe droughts, on cultivation in low river deltas, prone to sea level rise, and on irrigation of mountain snow-fed rivers, the future of civilization under global warming on the scale of several degrees Celsius is less clear.
-###-
By Andrew Glikson Earth and paleoclimate scientist Australian National University