Global Climate Change Science News

[Brian Peacock]

Climate-heating greenhouse gases hit new high, UN reports

The concentration of climate-heating greenhouse gases has hit a record high, according to a report from the UN’s World Meteorological Organization.

The jumps in the key gases measured in 2018 were all above the average for the last decade, showing action on the climate emergency to date is having no effect in the atmosphere. The WMO said the gap between targets and reality were both “glaring and growing”.

The rise in concentration of greenhouses gases follows inevitably from the continued surge in global emissions, which was described as “brutal news” for 2018. The world’s scientists calculate that emissions must fall by half by 2030 to give a good chance of limiting global heating to 1.5C, beyond which hundreds of millions of people will suffer more heatwaves, droughts, floods and poverty.

But Petteri Taalas, the WMO secretary-general, said: “There is no sign of a slowdown, let alone a decline, despite all the commitments under the Paris agreement on climate change. We need to increase the level of ambition for the sake of the future welfare of mankind.

“It is worth recalling that the last time the Earth experienced a comparable concentration of carbon dioxide was 3-5m years ago. Back then, the temperature was 2-3C warmer and sea level was 10-20 metres higher than now.”

Three-quarters of the emissions cuts pledged by countries under the Paris agreement of 2015 are “totally inadequate”, according to a comprehensive expert analysis published earlier in November, putting the world on a path to climate disaster. Another report has found that nations are on track to produce more than double the fossil fuels in 2030 than could be burned while keeping heating under 1.5C.

“The [CO2 concentration] number is the closest thing to a real-world Doomsday Clock, and it’s pushing us ever closer to midnight,” said John Sauven, head of Greenpeace UK. “Our ability to preserve civilisation as we know it, avert the mass extinction of species, and leave a healthy planet to our children depend on us urgently stopping the clock.”...

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... un-reports

[pErvinalia]

You've gone down the rabbit hole, Brian. You may never escape it!

[Galaxian]

Climate-heating greenhouse gases hit new high, UN reports

The concentration of climate-heating greenhouse gases has hit a record high, according to a report from the UN’s World Meteorological Organization.

The jumps in the key gases measured in 2018 were all above the average for the last decade, showing action on the climate emergency to date is having no effect in the atmosphere. The WMO said the gap between targets and reality were both “glaring and growing”.

And? So what? CO2, Methane, and Dihydrogen Monoxide have all been much higher in the past... Try the Paleozoic Age for example, where there was a superabundance of fauna & flora.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/04/ ... de-levels/
Here's the ice ages:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... Change.png
Now overlay that with the CO2 level:
http://www.biocab.org/Geological_Timescale.jpg

https://jgs.lyellcollection.org/content/152/1/1
"We show that the Maastrichtian atmosphere is unlikely to have contained more than about 1300 ppm by volume of CO2.This value agrees with an independently modeled value of CO2 in the Late Cretaceous atmosphere."
Infact, I answered all your queries of this post: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=9036&start=2070#p1846683
But you could not understand it. So you were right when you said: "BTW: This isn't an honest discourse - this is merely point scoring."
Was that a Fraudian {sic] slip? Did the lack of honesty refer to yourself?
Notice that Earth has had ice ages during high CO2 periods, such as the Cretacious (4 times now!). Oh dear; doesn't fit the agenda, eh?

Fancifully embroidered shit-posting using YouTube as a reference source, how novel.

When Galaxian posts links & references, it is churlish to expect that the details are painstakingly explained. It is as if an expression for integral calculus is written, and you say, "prove it!" It is for YOU to prove it to yourself. Not for me to throw good hours after bad, blowing your nose & wiping your bum, because you can't even grasp well presented videos.
Then, how the hell do you expect to understand a scientific thesis in a journal? So your bravado in trying to scorn Galaxian's work in simplifying things for you has backfired. Here is a science publication from Valentina Zharkova about just part of that YouTube topic. Read & be confused...Confusion would fit you well:
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep15689
"....We derive two principal components (PCs) of temporal magnetic field variations over the solar cycles 21–24 from full disk magnetograms covering about 39% of data variance, with σ = 0.67. These PCs are attributed to two main magnetic waves travelling from the opposite hemispheres with close frequencies and increasing phase shift. Using symbolic regeression analysis we also derive mathematical formulae for these waves and calculate their summary curve which we show is linked to solar activity index. Extrapolation of the PCs backward for 800 years reveals the two 350-year grand cycles superimposed on 22 year-cycles with the features showing a remarkable resemblance to sunspot activity reported in the past including the Maunder and Dalton minimum...."

[Galaxian]

I hope that the alarmists here are cozily ensconced in their delusions, cause here it comes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xK7a___HyiY


Watch & weep!

[L'Emmerdeur]

So you're going with 'it's the Sun, stupid'? If only it were that simple. It appears that the pre-industrial Maunder Minimum did affect global average temperatures, but nowhere near to the level that would allow us to discount the effect of greenhouse gases. The average global temperature has already risen by approximately 0.8 degrees Celsius since the late nineteenth century.

According to a continuous study conducted by the NASA’s Goddard institute, the Earth’s average global temperature has risen by 0.8 degrees Celsius or 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1880. Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the thermometer readings have risen continuously.

[source]

The average global temperature fell by about 0.3° to 0.4°C during the Maunder Minimum.

We examine the climate response to solar irradiance changes between the late 17th-century Maunder Minimum and the late 18th century. Global average temperature changes are small (about 0.3° to 0.4°C) in both a climate model and empirical reconstructions. However, regional temperature changes are quite large.

[source --free AAAS account required for access]

Moreover, analysis of sunspot records has shown that there has been no significant increase in solar activity which might account for the observed rise in average global temperature.

The Sunspot Number, the longest scientific experiment still ongoing, is a crucial tool used to study the solar dynamo, space weather and climate change. It has now been recalibrated and shows a consistent history of solar activity over the past few centuries.

The new record has no significant long-term upward trend in solar activity since 1700, as was previously indicated. This suggests that rising global temperatures since the industrial revolution cannot be attributed to increased solar activity.

[source]

In addition, the Maunder Minimum occurred during a period known as the Little Ice Age which began before the onset of the Maunder Minimum. There is evidence that the Little Ice Age was the result of atmospheric effects of volcanic activity.

What caused the Little Ice Age, a period of cooling that’s generally agreed to have ended in the 19th century[?] One idea is that decreased radiation from the sun caused this period of widespread cooling on Earth. In early 2012, scientists at University of Colorado Boulder with co-authors at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and other organizations announced evidence suggesting that volcanoes caused the Little Ice Age. They used radiocarbon-dating of samples of dead plant material, collected from high northern latitudes, in combination with a computer model, to show that four massive volcanoes could have triggered the widespread cooling. Their study was being published in Geophysical Research Letters in January 2012.

[source]

If you're so well informed on this issue, Galaxian, you know all this already.

[Brian Peacock]

You've gone down the rabbit hole, Brian. You may never escape it!

[Brian Peacock]

Climate-heating greenhouse gases hit new high, UN reports

The concentration of climate-heating greenhouse gases has hit a record high, according to a report from the UN’s World Meteorological Organization.

The jumps in the key gases measured in 2018 were all above the average for the last decade, showing action on the climate emergency to date is having no effect in the atmosphere. The WMO said the gap between targets and reality were both “glaring and growing”.

And? So what? CO2, Methane, and Dihydrogen Monoxide have all been much higher in the past... Try the Paleozoic Age for example, where there was a superabundance of fauna & flora.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/04/ ... de-levels/
Here's the ice ages:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... Change.png
Now overlay that with the CO2 level:
http://www.biocab.org/Geological_Timescale.jpg

https://jgs.lyellcollection.org/content/152/1/1
"We show that the Maastrichtian atmosphere is unlikely to have contained more than about 1300 ppm by volume of CO2.This value agrees with an independently modeled value of CO2 in the Late Cretaceous atmosphere."
Infact, I answered all your queries of this post: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=9036&start=2070#p1846683
But you could not understand it. So you were right when you said: "BTW: This isn't an honest discourse - this is merely point scoring."

Shifting the goalposts along with the burden of responsibility is but another example of fallacious reasoning. I'll note here that you've again avoided honest discourse in favour of hand-waving and grandstanding. I addressed your points specifically and alerted you to what I saw as the errors in reasoning which undermined their justification. On the matter quoted above: your points are totally irrelevant and fail on contextual grounds as mentioned earlier, as well you know. Typical of climate science deniers you immediately jump ship as soon as your argument is sunk. If you were capable of arguing in good faith you would now turn to supporting your earlier assertions. Pony up or get off the pot.

On a personal point I would again ask why you, Galaxian the Great Skeptic, choose to unquestioningly parrot corporatists arguments for inaction that put profit before the well-being of every living thing on the planet - including the shills of the corporate hegemony to which you now appear fully aligned? At this point, to argue against climate science is essentially no different to arguing against those who said that smoking and asbestos dust had a deleterious effect on human health.

[pErvinalia]

Galaxian has become a useful idiot for corporate greed.

[Brian Peacock]

I predict another of those long and deafening silences.

[Tyrannical]

I predict another of those long and deafening silences.

Over in Australia, I hear people are asking their local surf clubs to sell their current land and move further inland before it's too late.

[Brian Peacock]

[JimC]

That sucks, Brian...

[Galaxian]

So you're going with 'it's the Sun, stupid'? If only it were that simple. It appears that the pre-industrial Maunder Minimum did affect global average temperatures, but nowhere near to the level that would allow us to discount the effect of greenhouse gases. The average global temperature has already risen by approximately 0.8 degrees Celsius since the late nineteenth century.

According to a continuous study conducted by the NASA’s Goddard institute, the Earth’s average global temperature has risen by 0.8 degrees Celsius or 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1880. Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the thermometer readings have risen continuously.

[source]

.......
In addition, the Maunder Minimum occurred .....before the onset of the Maunder Minimum.

No. I'm not going with "It's the Sun, stupid". There are several climate influencers. CO2 is a minor one.
The videos I post are for YOUR benefit. Watch them all, to the end. If you're sentient expand your factual knowledge & wisdom.
This isn't one-upmanship or point-scoring, Galaxian has no need of that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ELGhUPC2tA

[L'Emmerdeur]

In addition, the Maunder Minimum occurred .....before the onset of the Maunder Minimum.

This isn't one-upmanship or point-scoring, Galaxian has no need of that.

Edits a post to distort its meaning, then claims to not be engaging in 'one-upmanship or point-scoring.' OK then, bad faith it is.

[Brian Peacock]

We know who'll find this interesting, eh? And who won't!

Gifford is currently tenured at the University of Victoria...

This is why they're deniers:
The science that goes deep into the anti-climate-change brain

Over the past two decades, the phenomenon of climate denial has come into focus almost as much as climate change itself. We've now reached the point where the Republican Party is virtually the only conservative party in the world that's still playing ostrich when it comes to climate change. But is denialism alone enough to explain the psychological resistance to saving the planet?

Canadian psychologist Robert Gifford, of the University of Victoria, doesn't think so. In fact, he's identified so many psychological barriers to action—what he calls “dragons of inaction”—that he's organized them into seven main categories, or, if each dragon represents a “species,” seven “genera” encompassing more than thirty separate “species” of dragons. In the current election cycle, even GOP presidential candidates seem to be drifting away from outright denialism, though still refusing to endorse doing anything. So the time may really be ripe for gaining a better understanding of the broader range of barriers out there (some of which may be getting more attention in the months and years to come) and what we can do about them.

Salon spoke with Gifford to explore this broader landscape. The transcript has been edited for clarity and space....

[ interview ]

https://www.salon.com/2015/10/07/this_i ... nge_brain/

Original paper: Gifford: Dragons of Inaction: Psychological Barriers That Limit Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation