Dispatch from Copenhagen, Day One: Outlook Not So Good

I am afraid there is little we can do about climate change. It is history repeating it self. See Chart http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm

I hope your little greenie idiots can keep you profitable, because one more article like this and I am not coming back. I am tired of the propaganda. We don't have NEAR enough information to say that the globe will warm by 3.6 degrees. Period. Once you decide to quit pushing this crap let me know and I will come back and subscribe to your magazine again.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the debate:

"Scientists meet to dispute global warming theory"
www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=439146

Maybe we could get some equal coverage?

Copenhagen? The last time us taxpayers sent this special interest group (the IPCC) on vacation it was a 5-star resort in Bali. Must be nice being a fearmonger on the "research grant" gravy train.

The IPCC uses old junk science based on pre-2007 inputs like the de-bunked "hockey stick graph". LOL

Here is the latest hard science from NASA (no computer-models):

www.science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/23sep_solarwind.htm

Nasa says the sun is suddenly losing power and it is already "13% cooler". This explains all the record snowfalls and record low temps in 2008-2009.

Throw another log on the fire. It's record cold where I live.

Peace

Alarmism and sensasionalism. Journalism at its best, science at its worst. If I don't see an article on the climate conference going on in NY City I am done with this magazine. Science is about debate and there is clearly debate going on out there - Note to POPSCI: SHOW IT!

Observations are one thing. The causes are entirely conjectural. Future predictions are even more uncertain. I am a supporer of clean water, clean air and energy independence. I support new technologies. However, I believe using man-made global warming as a reason to push these ideas is destroying the reputation of science as an institution.

I think its great that Boston Harbor is cleaner than it has been in over 100 years. We can swim in Winthrop Beach again and see deeper into the water than we could 30 years ago. But the rock in the surf I used to stand on as a kid 40 years ago is still above water! I know this is anectodal but according the Gore and Hanson, this rock should be under water.

Only peer reviewed research and rigorous debate of the facts can reveal the scientific truth. Sensationalism is not scientific.

Please ignore the climate change denialists -- ideologues are not, by definition, amenable to evidence that might contradict their most cherished prejudices.

As for your piece: this is an excellent summary, and I'm glad to see PopSci has someone in Copenhagen to cover this very important conference.

I hope you'll give the solutions part of the conference more than just one post -- it's very important that people get the message that we already have the technology to solve this problem and that it's simply a matter of mustering the political will to get it done:

An introduction to the core climate solutions
http://climateprogress.org/2008/10/22/an-introduction-to-the-core-climate-solutions/

Well, I'm glad to see after five in a row of the usual clique, we finally had a sensible response. Man, I take a week off, and they just go to town. With responses like "greenie idiots," this so-called debate from the denialists can only aspire to the level of elementary school taunting. Right now it's about equivalent to the scatological hurlings of monkeys at the zoo.

The science supporting a global warming trend is pretty much ironclad by this point, such that citing the numerous articles from Popsci, Scientific American, Nature, Science, and more scholarly works is redundant. And since the best computer models have ruled out every other alternative but the oh-so-coincidental matching rise in carbon and methane emissions from human activity, I'd say the evidence for human causes of global warming is just about as certain. But if you just love being the contrarian in every crowd, may I suggest the Flat Earth Society? I hear that due to declining membership over the past couple of centuries, they've got a great recruitment program, and it might just be up your alley.

It's depressing when you come to terms with the fact that there is virtually nothing humans can reasonably do to stop global warming, but there is good news: You can spend more time worrying about other things now. If it helps, you can read through some of the studies and discover that the theory that humans caused global warming has little to support it so far.

Just for fun, I took NASA's GISS temperature graph from 1978 to 2008 and extrapolated it for another 100 years. GISS temperature graphs always show more warming than the generally accepted ones produced by the NOAA and other reliable sources. (I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that James Hansen, the Father of Global Warming, is the director.) The GISS graph shows roughly a 0.9 F warming for 30 years. If you extend that for 100 years to 2108, with no attempt to curb global warming, that comes out to 3 degrees Fahrenheit. How did you come up with 3.6 F even if every nation does all they can to slow warming?

It's always illuminating when you look at the data yourself and figure it out rather than trust others' inflated numbers or guesses.

laurena7 - the temperature increase is not linear, it is accelerating, that is how they get the 3.6 increase. Even if all nations reduced CO2 emmissions it would accelerate before it slows down.

jward23 - None of the temperature time series plots I saw of the last 30 years showed accelerating warming. It was linear.

Most of the reconstructed historical temperature time series--ranging over hundreds of years--also don't show accelerating warming, although a few of the ones based on tree ring measurements do.

The only place warming always accelerates is in computer models. Those models are still a long way from matching the observed temperature data.