Climate Change Debate: Pope VS Trump Supporters?

[Ender]

Scientists have warned that the earth is heading for its sixth mass extinction event, mainly caused by human activity.… Denial of climate change is really just sticking your head in the sand…

I know this is an older post, but I just came across a comment from an actual scientist regarding the question of whether we are heading for Earth’s sixth mass extinction event. (Correspondence between Peter Brannen and Smithsonian paleontologist Doug Erwin).Erwin:* “People who claim we’re in the sixth mass extinction don’t understand enough about mass extinctions to understand the logical flaw in their argument,” he said. “To a certain extent they’re claiming it as a way of frightening people into action, when in fact, if it’s actually true we’re in a sixth mass extinction, then there’s no point in conservation biology.” …*This is because by the time a mass extinction starts, the world would already be over.

Brannen:* “So if we really are in the middle of a mass extinction,” I started, “it wouldn’t be a matter of saving tigers and elephants—”*

Erwin:* “Right, you probably have to worry about saving coyotes and rats.*
So, while it is alleged that the mascot of climate skeptics is the ostrich it is clear the mascot of the true believers is Chicken Little.

Ender

 

[Theo520]

Lynn, You showed a divergence between actual and projected starting in the 70’s but Hansen didn’t even publish in projections till the late 80’s, your chart is home made and doesn’t reflect the the temp record. My chart is an accurate comparison between what Hansen predicted and what has occurred.

Please stop throwing ad hominems as an argument. wattsupwiththat.com is just a website that aggregates and publishes the research of other scientists. Also, Anthony Watts doesn’t claim to be a scientist. By all accounts he’s an environmentalist who just wants to get the facts out there.

Speaking truth about CAGW alarmism isn’t slander, but definition - truth is truth.

He did overstate the problem of CC I think in 2008 (but not in a peer-reviewed study), but he then retracted it. He is a great scientist, a wonderful person, and a hero to me – despite all the slander from the CC denialist community.

You really shouldn’t be going to denialist sites by weathermen (who are NOT climate scientists) like wattsupwiththat.

It is the charts you get from sources like that that are bogus and rigged.

 

[frobert]

I think all the scientists would agree with me, that your paper PROPOSES changes to the temp record, changes that have not yet been adopted.

I was unable to confirm one way or the other. I did notice though that the evidence keeps piling up.

New Study Confirms There Was No Global Warming Hiatus
An independent evaluation of NOAA’s disputed data further supports the steady upward march of temperatures
But a new independent study published in the journal Science Advances evaluated NOAA’s 2015 temperature recalibration, concluding that their corrections were accurate. “Our results mean that essentially NOAA got it right, that they were not cooking the books,” lead author Zeke Hausfather of the University of California Berkeley’s Energy and Resources Group says in a press release.

The researchers examined ocean temperatures not only collected from ocean buoys, but also satellites and autonomous instruments called Argo floats. The results of this analysis fall in line with NOAA’s recalibrated data from the 2015 paper—all pointing toward no hiatus in climate warming.

The number of citations confirms interest in the topic (hot naturally) but does not equal agreement with the paper. I expect there is mixed agreement.

I agree.

I personally am suspect of all these efforts to adjust the climate record, but I am confident it will resolve itself over time, as we continue to collect more raw data on global temperatures.

Science is self-correcting.

Our risk is in making rash emotional decisions on unsubstantiated computer models before we have a preponderance of evidence showing they are reliable.

Do the computer model really matter? The global warming “pause” debate has, itself, paused somewhat in light of the temperatures of 2014, 2015, and now 2016.

Both NASA and NOAA declare that our planet is experiencing record-breaking warming for the third year in a row.

The CERN research I provided is an example of how science is slowly replacing conjecture with hard science. It doesn’t refute MMGW in any way but it does indicate the more alarmist projections are not backed by actual science.

There needs to be a balance, unfortunately, a balance in the US is not likely,

If the CERN research had supported the alarmist projections for CO2 feedbacks, I would be advocating for a much more rapid shift to nuclear.

It can take 10-20 years for a new plant to be approved and built.

 

[lynnvinc]

I was unable to confirm one way or the other. I did notice though that the evidence keeps piling up.

New Study Confirms There Was No Global Warming Hiatus
An independent evaluation of NOAA’s disputed data further supports the steady upward march of temperatures
But a new independent study published in the journal Science Advances evaluated NOAA’s 2015 temperature recalibration, concluding that their corrections were accurate. “Our results mean that essentially NOAA got it right, that they were not cooking the books,” lead author Zeke Hausfather of the University of California Berkeley’s Energy and Resources Group says in a press release.

The researchers examined ocean temperatures not only collected from ocean buoys, but also satellites and autonomous instruments called Argo floats. The results of this analysis fall in line with NOAA’s recalibrated data from the 2015 paper—all pointing toward no hiatus in climate warming.

…I agree with you, Frobert. That’s what I’ve read. But even if there were a hiatus, that a red herring argument meant to distract from the main issue that GW is happening, it is mainly human caused, and serious harms and risks are projected from it and its knock-on effects.

We’ve got to keep our eyes on the ball, not on side distractions.

Re the hiatus, it is very much expected that GW will not follow a strictly increasing curve year to year or even decade to decade, since there are other factors that impact climate short-term.

Only if and when there is a 30 year period of no warming (or cooling) then we can breathe easy and say GW has ended.

I’ve bee suggesting for a long time now that the GW skeptics and denialist do all they can to mitigate CC (and get others to do likewise) so they can eventually show we are wrong and they are right about GW not happening.

I’ll be the first in line to congratulate them for being right and me being wrong.

 

[KingAlfred]

I definitely believe global warming is real, and poses a severe threat to the future of all life on Earth. That said, there isn’t much anyone can do about it, given the realities of human nature and industrialization. Most people want to be industrialized, and societies on the brink of achieving heavy industry have little to no regard for the environment. As the number of industrialized countries increases, the more we contaminate each others’ environments. Sadly, we’re trapped in a “death-spiral”.

 

[lynnvinc]

…New Study Confirms There Was No Global Warming Hiatus

An independent evaluation of NOAA’s disputed data further supports the steady upward march of temperatures
But a new independent study published in the journal Science Advances evaluated NOAA’s 2015 temperature recalibration, concluding that their corrections were accurate. “Our results mean that essentially NOAA got it right, that they were not cooking the books,” lead author Zeke Hausfather of the University of California Berkeley’s Energy and Resources Group says in a press release.

The researchers examined ocean temperatures not only collected from ocean buoys, but also satellites and autonomous instruments called Argo floats. The results of this analysis fall in line with NOAA’s recalibrated data from the 2015 paper—all pointing toward no hiatus in climate warming.
…
There is even a newer study in 2017 than that which disputes a pause:

“Assessing recent warming using instrumentally homogeneous sea surface temperature records,” Zeke Hausfather1,2,, Kevin Cowtan3, David C. Clarke4, Peter Jacobs5, Mark Richardson6 and Robert Rohde2, Science Advances 04 Jan 2017:Vol. 3, no. 1, e1601207, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1601207, advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/1/e1601207

Abstract:
Sea surface temperature (SST) records are subject to potential biases due to changing instrumentation and measurement practices. Significant differences exist between commonly used composite SST reconstructions from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Extended Reconstruction Sea Surface Temperature (ERSST), the Hadley Centre SST data set (HadSST3), and the Japanese Meteorological Agency’s Centennial Observation-Based Estimates of SSTs (COBE-SST) from 2003 to the present. The update from ERSST version 3b to version 4 resulted in an increase in the operational SST trend estimate during the last 19 years from 0.07° to 0.12°C per decade, indicating a higher rate of warming in recent years. We show that ERSST version 4 trends generally agree with largely independent, near-global, and instrumentally homogeneous SST measurements from floating buoys, Argo floats, and radiometer-based satellite measurements that have been developed and deployed during the past two decades. We find a large cooling bias in ERSST version 3b and smaller but significant cooling biases in HadSST3 and COBE-SST from 2003 to the present, with respect to most series examined. These results suggest that reported rates of SST warming in recent years have been underestimated in these three data sets.

---

But as stated before the pause business is a red herring meant to detract from the main focus, which is that global warming is happening (even if it slows down or reverses a few years or even for a decade); it entails threats and harms to humanity well into the future, esp to the poor and those living on the margin; and all 3 of our recent Holy Fathers, since 1990, have admonished us to mitigate it, saying it is everyone’s responsibility.

So let’s hop to it…

 

[Theo520]

The pause business is hardly a red herring, it is a simple way to highlight that the actual climate is not following the alarmist model projections (none, zero, nada, predicted a pause or slowdown)

Since in my observation, most CAGW alarmists don’t have a clue about the actual science, you need something simple like the hiatus to get their attention.

But as stated before the pause business is a red herring meant to detract from the main focus, which is that global warming is happening (even if it slows down or reverses a few years or even for a decade); it entails threats and harms to humanity well into the future, esp to the poor and those living on the margin; and all 3 of our recent Holy Fathers, since 1990, have admonished us to mitigate it, saying it is everyone’s responsibility.

So let’s hop to it…

 

[lynnvinc]

The pause business is hardly a red herring, it is a simple way to highlight that the actual climate is not following the alarmist model projections (none, zero, nada, predicted a pause or slowdown)

Since in my observation, most CAGW alarmists don’t have a clue about the actual science, you need something simple like the hiatus to get their attention.

You keep talking about “the alarmist model.” Since I don’t look at Al Gore’s models (if he has any), but only at the scientists models, and have found them to be fairly accurate I don’t really understand your claim.

I do know the media tend to exaggerate everything to increase ratings/readership. And they frequently misunderstand what the scientists are saying or that one study does not science make.

And there are many in the environmental movement who pick up the more exaggerated claims from the media.

All that would fit IFF the media were actually covering env issues as they should…which they have not been doing, except for a tiny bit now, and only when they can make a very sensational claim…which is difficult with GW, since it happens so slowly…at glacial creep

I also follow the media, but I look at the studies on which they base with claims and the studies are always more reticent, as science is reticent, needing some 95% confidence (.05 p on the null) to make a claim.

Which brings me to a very important point. Should we as Christians be looking at the low end of the margin of error, the actual findings, or the high end of the margin of error?

Personally out of prudence I look at the high end or worse case scenario – expect the worst, hope for the best, and do what I can to mitigate.

 

[Darryl_B]

We as Catholics need to get this debate over with.

What do we believe about Climate Change?

The Pope and the Vatican, as well as many Priests, Deacons and Bishops throughout the world have called Catholics to take a stand against Climate Change. It is clear that they believe it is 100% Real, and needs to be fought.

Sources: washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/06/01/vatican-leaders-dismayed-by-reports-that-united-states-will-leave-paris-climate-accord/?utm_term=.7486d4229a23

mediaite.com/trump/slap-in-the-face-vatican-slams-trumps-decision-to-pull-out-of-paris-climate-accord/

While on the other end of the coin, many Christians and Catholics who voted for Donald Trump, can be safely assumed to believe some variant of “Climate change is fake, a hoax” etc. Some people may have done it purely on a pro-life standpoint, but what is more important?

I have these questions for the Catholic Community:

1. Is Climate Change Real?
2. Who do we trust more, the Leader of the Catholic Church or Donald Trump who attacked the Pope several times during the 2016 Campaign?
3. How should we fight Climate Change?
4. What is more important: Climate Change or Pro-Life issues?
   
   -Sidenote on 4)-
   It is clear that electing Republicans have done little to actually combat Abortion, as
   they have appointed 12 of the last 16 Supreme Court Justices and Under Obama,
   Abortion rates fell every year.

Discuss below?

I am entering this thread late, but I do have an opinion. Climate change exists, we have small bursts of climate change whenever there is a significant volcano. Which lately is 1 a decade. The question though is whether climate change is produced by man, and whether climate change can be regulated by man. I believe both to be untrue. This planet has been designed with mechanisms in place to correct itself. If there become unbalances they will be auto-corrected by the very planet itself. Only because that is what God has put in place. Currently the planet is auto-correcting itself.

If the earth could speak, it would accuse man of arrogance that we can do the planets work, and it would accuse us of having a short-term memory, which we do because we cannot measure the past. Whereas the earth older than us all our parents and our great great grandparents will out-survive us, and laugh at our patronage.

 

[lynnvinc]

…This is opinion, not fact. Here’s one small example: each google search produces the same amount of CO2 as a pot of boiling water, multiply that by the billions of people with internet access who conduct searches multiple times per day, then multiply each day by 365. Consider also the yearly rate of deforestation, which takes away plants whose oxygen offset the CO2 which, by the way warms up the atmosphere. A lot of human activities, such as farming, have changed within the last century in order to be more profitable, while simultaneously producing more greenhouse gases.There are many other examples of activities which accelerate climate change, but you can’t tell me that the hole in the ozone layer isn’t a blatant warning sign to us humans. Scientists have warned that the earth is heading for its sixth mass extinction event, mainly caused by human activity. Climate change also directly endangers humans, as it endangers our food sources, increases our susceptibility to and mortality from various diseases, in addition to directly spreading other diseases. Denial of climate change is really just sticking your head in the sand, and it will endanger you, your children, and your children’s children.

Re the 6th mass extinction, there are several (some interrelated causes), with GW being the biggest factor, along with others.

Here are 9 planetary boundaries when crossed spell serious harms to humanity and others of God’s creatures:

stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-boundaries/planetary-boundaries/about-the-research/the-nine-planetary-boundaries.html



In an update acc to a 2015 study they say that 4 of the nine planetary boundaries have now been crossed (see stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2015-01-15-planetary-boundaries—an-update.html):

1. 
   *]climate change
   *]loss of biosphere integrity
   *]land-system change
   *]altered biogeochemical cycles (phosphorus and nitrogen).
   

   …2. You know that human activities and practices have actually altered the environment for the better as well, right? For example that hole in the ozone layer began to close up after CFCs from hairsprays and appliances were banned. Additionally, science has made fantastic strides in new sources of clean energy (hello, jobs!) and reducing waste.
   3. I highly suggest watching some documentaries and reading scientific literature on the subject with an open mind. Some of these facts I’m spouting I learned from a college class.
   4. If God gave us this earth, should we not take care of it?

   All the Popes over the past 30 years have said so re GW and other env issues, and even some earlier popes spoke about our need to address env issues.

 

[Clevus]

I don’t think any sincere leader or US backed panel can effect a change in attitude in regards to global warming to other nations. This is because of 5 decades of warmongering. There is not a generation on those panels of those nations that has not had a member die due directly or indirectly to a US foreign policy. Three and four car garages are not a help either.

So I think we are all in for the long haul. Time to start a BOB and line up a good GPS isolated place, preferably a cave, to wait out the next ice age. Bring lotsa chips and munchies.

Ironically, if every nation cooperated, and stopped air pollution for 2 years, the sky would come clear as no one alive as ever experienced, and a few years later the seas would return normal along with trade wind storms and disturbances. But there is a point of no return and I think we passed it. Calls for no more air flights, finding something better than coal, and huge transport vehicles and home oil/gas burning to stop.

:twocents:

1/real 2/Pope 3/as mentioned 4/both can be addressed at same time, the second with more vigor .

 

[lynnvinc]

I don’t think any sincere leader or US backed panel can effect a change in attitude in regards to global warming to other nations. This is because of 5 decades of warmongering. There is not a generation on those panels of those nations that has not had a member die due directly or indirectly to a US foreign policy. Three and four car garages are not a help either.

So I think we are all in for the long haul. Time to start a BOB and line up a good GPS isolated place, preferably a cave, to wait out the next ice age. Bring lotsa chips and munchies.

Ironically, if every nation cooperated, and stopped air pollution for 2 years, the sky would come clear as no one alive as ever experienced, and a few years later the seas would return normal along with trade wind storms and disturbances. But there is a point of no return and I think we passed it. Calls for no more air flights, finding something better than coal, and huge transport vehicles and home oil/gas burning to stop.

:twocents:

1/real 2/Pope 3/as mentioned 4/both can be addressed at same time, the second with more vigor .

I think other nations are coming to realize Americans on the whole, esp our gov, are not going to mitigate CC, esp since per capita we emit the most GHGs. It goes against our anti-Christian ideology of profligacy to tighten our belts, and become energy/resource efficient/conservative. It goes against our anti-Christian ideology of rights to even think about responsibilities and duties to others (we don’t even do a decent job re these to our family members).

So it is fairly hopeless.

 

[lynnvinc]

I think other nations are coming to realize Americans on the whole, esp our gov, are not going to mitigate CC, esp since per capita we emit the most GHGs. It goes against our anti-Christian ideology of profligacy to tighten our belts, and become energy/resource efficient/conservative. It goes against our anti-Christian ideology of rights to even think about responsibilities and duties to others (we don’t even do a decent job re these to our family members).

So it is fairly hopeless.

…(continued)

So other peoples of the world are taking it upon themselves to mitigate CC, tho it is still pretty hopeless since the biggest per capita emitter is refusing to even acknowledge there is a problem, much less turn off lights not in use and the many other things we could be doing to mitigate CC.

 

[TeenCatholicGuy]

…(continued)

So other peoples of the world are taking it upon themselves to mitigate CC, tho it is still pretty hopeless since the biggest per capita emitter is refusing to even acknowledge there is a problem, much less turn off lights not in use and the many other things we could be doing to mitigate CC.

We have to try.

 

[lynnvinc]

We have to try.

Against all odds we must persist in doing what we can. What gets me is that many Americans won’t even do those CC mitigation things that save them money or don’t cost – too much trouble.

Where’s Ben Franklin (“A penny saved is a penny earned”) when you need him? Or Jesus Christ, for that matter – why aren’t Christians at least doing the right things???

 

[lynnvinc]

”Major correction to satellite data shows 140% faster warming since 1998,”
Zeke Hausfather, GLOBAL TEMPERATURE, 30 June 2017, at carbonbrief.org/major-correction-to-satellite-data-shows-140-faster-warming-since-1998

QUOTE:
A new paper published in the Journal of Climate reveals that the lower part of the Earth’s atmosphere has warmed much faster since 1979 than scientists relying on satellite data had previously thought.

Researchers from Remote Sensing Systems (RSS), based in California, have released a substantially revised version of their lower tropospheric temperature record.
After correcting for problems caused by the decaying orbit of satellites, as well as other factors, they have produced a new record showing 36% faster warming since 1979 and nearly 140% faster (i.e. 2.4 times larger) warming since 1998. This is in comparison to the previous version 3 of the lower tropospheric temperature (TLT) data published in 2009.

Climate sceptics have long claimed that satellite data shows global warming to be less pronounced than observational data collected on the Earth’s surface. This new correction to the RSS data substantially undermines that argument. The new data actually shows more warming than has been observed on the surface, though still slightly less than projected in most climate models.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Both the old record, version 3 in grey, and new record, version 4 in red, are shown in the figure above, along with the difference between the two, in black. The trends since 1998 for both are shown by dashed lines.

Most of the difference between the old and new record occurs after the year 2000. While the old record showed relatively little warming during the oft-debated post-1998 “hiatus” period, the new record shows warming continuing unabated through to present. Similarly, while the old RSS v3 record showed 2016 only barely edging out 1998 as the warmest year in the satellite record, the new v4 record shows 2016 as exceeding 1998 by a large margin.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

The figure above shows a comparison between the new RSS record and the global surface temperature record produced by NASA. RSS v4 shows about 5% more warming than the NASA record since 1979, when satellite observations began….
END QUOTE

---

And for the study on which this article is based see: journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0768.1

Now all that fuss about models being totally wrong, about no warming based on satellite data, or there being a “pause” after 1998 can be thrown in the wastebasket (toxic, do not recycle), and at long last we can hop to mitigating global warming in earnest!

 

[TeenCatholicGuy]

Against all odds we must persist in doing what we can. What gets me is that many Americans won’t even do those CC mitigation things that save them money or don’t cost – too much trouble.

Where’s Ben Franklin (“A penny saved is a penny earned”) when you need him? Or Jesus Christ, for that matter – why aren’t Christians at least doing the right things???

 

[Theo520]

This is bogus research. They compared an update released over a year ago (RSS V4.0) with a datset retired in 2008 (RSS V3.0) and pretended this was something new.

They ignored several interm updates (RSS V3.2 & V3.3) that had already adjusted up the the RSS temperature record.

I assume they compared it with a long retired dataset because it made a better headline,
this research has zero impact on the scientific discussion of climate change.

”Major correction to satellite data shows 140% faster warming since 1998,”
Zeke Hausfather, GLOBAL TEMPERATURE, 30 June 2017, at carbonbrief.org/major-correction-to-satellite-data-shows-140-faster-warming-since-1998

QUOTE:
A new paper published in the Journal of Climate reveals that the lower part of the Earth’s atmosphere has warmed much faster since 1979 than scientists relying on satellite data had previously thought.

Researchers from Remote Sensing Systems (RSS), based in California, have released a substantially revised version of their lower tropospheric temperature record.
After correcting for problems caused by the decaying orbit of satellites, as well as other factors, they have produced a new record showing 36% faster warming since 1979 and nearly 140% faster (i.e. 2.4 times larger) warming since 1998. This is in comparison to the previous version 3 of the lower tropospheric temperature (TLT) data published in 2009.

Climate sceptics have long claimed that satellite data shows global warming to be less pronounced than observational data collected on the Earth’s surface. This new correction to the RSS data substantially undermines that argument. The new data actually shows more warming than has been observed on the surface, though still slightly less than projected in most climate models.

Both the old record, version 3 in grey, and new record, version 4 in red, are shown in the figure above, along with the difference between the two, in black. The trends since 1998 for both are shown by dashed lines.

Most of the difference between the old and new record occurs after the year 2000. While the old record showed relatively little warming during the oft-debated post-1998 “hiatus” period, the new record shows warming continuing unabated through to present. Similarly, while the old RSS v3 record showed 2016 only barely edging out 1998 as the warmest year in the satellite record, the new v4 record shows 2016 as exceeding 1998 by a large margin.

The figure above shows a comparison between the new RSS record and the global surface temperature record produced by NASA. RSS v4 shows about 5% more warming than the NASA record since 1979, when satellite observations began….
END QUOTE

---

And for the study on which this article is based see: journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0768.1

Now all that fuss about models being totally wrong, about no warming based on satellite data, or there being a “pause” after 1998 can be thrown in the wastebasket (toxic, do not recycle), and at long last we can hop to mitigating global warming in earnest!

 

[robertmidwest]

thesurvivalgardener.com/synthetic-nitrogen-fertilizer-destroy-soil-carbon/

I don’t worry at all over the spectre of man-made climate change,…

Yeah, I don’t either.

but the loss of soil potentially caused by synthetic nitrogen directly impacts farmers and gardeners.

What!!! You mean you don’t have to sit around wringing your hands and fretting about man made global warming to be an environmentalist? No way!!!

Check out my sunflower:
https://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=2666&pictureid=19096
No synthetic fertilizer here!! Compost and Milorganite.

Its a little prettier to look at than hockey stick graphs.

 

[robertmidwest]

profmondo.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/green-scrupulosity/

And ultimately, that’s what so much of this green scrupulosity boils down to. These are people who, in the larger view, have it pretty easy — the people of Burkina Faso probably aren’t concerned about volatile organic compounds. Consequently, these elites feel guilty and fall prey to scupulosity. That, of course is their problem, but it becomes our problem when they begin to project their own hang-ups on me. Fanatics are unpleasant, meddling neighbors, whether they’re religious or green.