Evidence for Man-Made Climate Change Getting Even Stronger

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Trakar, Dec 21, 2012.

  1. Trakar
    Offline

    Trakar VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,699
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +73
    [​IMG]
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=evidence-for-man-made-climate-change
    By Environment Correspondent Alister Doyle

    DOHA (Reuters) - Evidence that global warming is man-made is getting stronger, the head of a U.N. panel of climate scientists said, in a further blow to skeptics who argue rising temperatures can be explained by natural variations.

    Rajendra Pachauri spoke on the sidelines of a conference in Qatar where 200 nations are trying to reach a deal to cut emissions of greenhouse gases to avert floods, droughts, heat waves and mounting sea levels.
    The influential U.N. climate panel said the probability human activity was the main cause of climate change was "at least 90 percent" in its last report in 2007.

    Pachauri told Reuters late on Wednesday he expected the panel would raise the level of that likelihood even higher in its next report, due in 2013...
    (Read rest of article at above link.)
     
  2. CrusaderFrank
    Online

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,148
    Thanks Received:
    14,897
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,851
    LOLZ.


    Oh wait, that was a serious article?

    LOLZ ^2
     
  3. TakeAStepBack
    Offline

    TakeAStepBack Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    13,935
    Thanks Received:
    1,723
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,012
    I thought the concensus already established it as fact? Now the evidence gets stronger? :lmao:

    These are deranged and desperate people.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. CrusaderFrank
    Online

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,148
    Thanks Received:
    14,897
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,851
    It's New n' Improved Consensus!
     
  5. TakeAStepBack
    Offline

    TakeAStepBack Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    13,935
    Thanks Received:
    1,723
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,012
    A 90% probability. WTF is that even suppose to mean? It's like a fucking weatherman "50% chance of rain today."

    Gee, thanks, Cork.
     
  6. CrusaderFrank
    Online

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,148
    Thanks Received:
    14,897
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,851
    Double Secret Consensus!
     
  7. Trakar
    Offline

    Trakar VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,699
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +73
    Concensus does not establish fact, merely that most of the active and leading figures in the field agree upon an established and compellingly supported understanding. Additional supporting evidence enhances and adds support to that understanding, in the same way that it does for every other area of science.
     
  8. Trakar
    Offline

    Trakar VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,699
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +73
    When a weather man cites a 90% chance of rain for a given set of conditions, what he is saying is that in the past, when this same set of conditions have occurred, it has rained 90 times out of 100.

    Science uses statistical terms when talking about probabilities in reference to confidence intervals. The IPCC uses a varient of this statistical terminology as explained in thier reports:

    Chapter 2 of this report uses a related term ‘level of scientific understanding’ when describing uncertainties in different contributions to radiative forcing. This terminology is used for consistency with the Third Assessment Report, and the basis on which the authors have determined particular levels of scientific understanding uses a combination of approaches consistent with the uncertainty guidance note as explained in detail in Section 2.9.2 and Table 2.11.

    The standard terms used in this report to define the likelihood of an outcome or result where this can be estimated probabilistically are:

    Likelihood Terminology Likelihood of the occurrence/ outcome
    Virtually certain > 99% probability
    Extremely likely > 95% probability
    Very likely > 90% probability
    Likely > 66% probability
    More likely than not > 50% probability
    About as likely as not 33 to 66% probability
    Unlikely < 33% probability
    Very unlikely < 10% probability
    Extremely unlikely < 5% probability
    Exceptionally unlikely < 1% probability


    The terms ‘extremely likely’, ‘extremely unlikely’ and ‘more likely than not’ as defined above have been added to those given in the IPCC Uncertainty Guidance Note in order to provide a more specific assessment of aspects including attribution and radiative forcing.

    Unless noted otherwise, values given in this report are assessed best estimates and their uncertainty ranges are 90% confidence intervals (i.e., there is an estimated 5% likelihood of the value being below the lower end of the range or above the upper end of the range).
    Note that in some cases the nature of the constraints on a value, or other information available, may indicate an asymmetric distribution of the uncertainty range around a best estimate.


    (excerpted from 1.6 The IPCC Assessments of Climate Change and Uncertainties - AR4 WGI Chapter 1: Historical Overview of Climate Change Science )
     
  9. westwall
    Offline

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    40,948
    Thanks Received:
    7,964
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +19,681




    So, when the UK Met Office says there has been no warming for the last 16 years....what global warming are you talking about man causing...specifically?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. Trakar
    Offline

    Trakar VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,699
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +73
    Please link to the specific Met Office release, on a Met Office site that supports your assertion.

    As for a Met office link that confirms and supports AGW there are many. Examples of these comments:

    "...The scientific consensus states that it is very likely that most of the warming over the last 50 years is a result of greenhouse gas emissions caused by human activity.
    The exchange of 'man-made' carbon dioxide between man-made emissions, atmosphere, ocean and land, is about 7 GtC/year (billion tons of carbon, in the form of carbon dioxide, per year), which also shows much larger natural exchanges between atmosphere and ocean (about 90 GtC/yr) and atmosphere and land (about 60 GtC/yr). However, these natural exchanges have been in balance for many thousands of years, leading to the pre-industrial concentration of CO2 remaining steady at about 280 ppm.
    CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere are rising. They have increased by about 38% since industrialisation began, from 280 ppm (parts per million) to 387 ppm. Two-thirds of that increase has occurred in the last 50 years. CO2 levels are now 30% higher than at any time over at least the last 800,000 years..."
    Climate change &#8212; frequently asked questions - Met Office

    "...It has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that the climate is changing due to man-made greenhouse gases. We are already committed to future substantial change over the next 30 years and change is likely to accelerate over the rest of the 21st century..."
    http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/b/1/informing.pdf

    "
    We, members of the UK science community, have the utmost confidence in the observational evidence for global warming and the scientific basis for concluding that it is due primarily to human activities. The evidence and the science are deep and extensive. They come from decades of painstaking and meticulous research, by many thousands of scientists across the world who adhere to the highest levels of professional integrity. That research has been subject to peer review and publication, providing traceability of the evidence and support for the scientific method.
    The science of climate change draws on fundamental research from an increasing number of disciplines, many of which are represented here. As professional scientists, from students to senior professors, we uphold the findings of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, which concludes that 'Warming of the climate system is unequivocal' and that 'Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations'..."
    Statement from the UK science community - Met Office

    or more directly in response to Mr. Rose's disingenuous confabulations:

    Met Office in the Media: 14 October 2012 « Met Office News Blog

    Met Office in the Media: 29 January 2012 « Met Office News Blog
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

observations that provide evidence that our climate is changing repidly