The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration's Earth System Research Laboratory has issued a report today verifying that 2006 was one of the warmest years on record and that last year's El Niño event was unlikely to have been the cause for the increase in temperature. As such, this report contradicts the assertion that the increase in temperature is primarily due to natural phenomena and states in writing that global warming is primarily caused by an increase in greenhouse gases:
"Greenhouse gases likely accounted for more than half of the widespread warmth across the continental United States last year, according to a new study by four scientists at NOAA's Earth System Research Lab in Boulder, Colo. [snip] The NOAA team also found that the probability of U.S. temperatures breaking a record in 2006 had increased 15-fold compared to pre-industrial times because of greenhouse gas increases in Earth's atmosphere."
The report states that 2006's average temperature was "2.1 degrees F above the 20th Century average and marked the ninth consecutive year of above-normal U.S. temperatures." It also confirmed that every state in the continental United States had reported higher than normal temperatures and that 2006 was among the ten hottest years since 1895 (which was when they began to keep the records). The report went on to say that the: "authors also estimate that there is a 16 percent chance that 2007 will bring record-breaking warmth."
This is not new information. Not to the farmers going out of business in Southern California (1.93 inches of rainfall in 2006), or those forests dying in the high Sierras, or the Greek citizens fleeing for their lives from arson and negligence as their cradle of civilization burns, or the drought-stricken Turks converging on mosques in Ankara to pray for rain as the city cuts off their water supply for days at a time -- at the same time as their new, former Islamic party, albeit western leaning, President Abdullah Gul is sworn in against the wishes of their secular military who raised a ruckus at first, but then paused when they saw all those Gul supporters in mosques praying for rain had voted his party in as the majority and decided to wait and see whether Gul's new administration would live up to its secular promise.
It's also not news to the millions displaced by floods in South Asia and in the heartland of the United States, the nonstop rain in Oxfordshire earlier this summer, the imbalance between record heat and floods in Europe, the unexpected snowfall in South Africa... and then there's that whole lake that disappeared in Chile...
What is news? Four scientists from the established U.S. government agency responsible for reporting on the weather have put it in writing: Global warming is real, it is caused primarily by greenhouse gases and it's likely to cause record-breaking temperatures yet again this year.
Here's a link to the NOAA report.
Follow Janet Ritz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/janetritz
With so many other natural factors applying themselves to climate behavior, there can be no doubt that they are far more important, collectively, to determine what our climate does and how the regional weather patterns play out over the long-term.
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?d87f58c3-be16-4959-88e2-906b7c291fd6
Two reasons for expressing doubt come immediately to mind:
1) It prevents the doubters from having to lift a finger to help, since they all know that it makes us work all the harder.
2) It keeps the value of "green" investments down, until doubters can get more money into this valuable market. (Why would they criticize Gore for making money unless he was?)
No doubt there are more.
You mention the economy. The REASON they give is ALWAYS money. Is it true? Unlikely. But it is their claim.
How's this:
Last week I made the comment, “If WE'RE 100% wrong about GW, the WORST to happen will be clean(er) air and water.
If you're 1% wrong, it may spell disaster for all generations to come.”
The FIRST comment in return from this individual was,
”No legitimate, credible, respected, Economist would ever agree with that statement.”
Global warming? Destruction of the planet, wildlife, children and quality of life for every living human EQUALS.....ECONOMIST???
‘Nuff said?
Thanks, friend.
How much of it is going on is now more in question than it has been over the past many years. NOAA needs to stick to the science when it deals with climate change. Making the accusatory statement that global warming is the result of human activity is not science. This is public policy activism which is not NOAA's role.
Comparing the mean of one year in the 21st Century to a 100 year mean in the 20th Century is indefensible from a statistical point of view. It is an apples and oranges comparison that means nothing at all.
The Vostok Ice Core, that generally provides a large part of the foundation for global warming arguments, actually does little to support global warming when plotted across its entire 400,000 year span.
I am increasingly convinced that much of the answer to the increase in global temperature will be found beyond the boundaries of earth. A number of other researchers and scientists are already in pursuit of better exogenous data, which include increasingly rapid changes in solar flares, the solar system's position within the galaxy in relation to where it was during peak warming and cooling cycles in the past, and external forces that bombard the earth and its atmosphere in enormous volume every second of every day.
While I believe the current global warming argument is a red herring, we have long known that the quality of life in our largest urban centers is unacceptable due to airborne pollutants. We should have taken giant steps to make every city livable long ago. It's not too late, and it can be done.
No discussion of global warming should be without a referral to Fred Pearce's book, "With Speed and Violence". The dangers that we face cannot be politically imagined. Partly because we don't have the will to imagine them, because we won't be able to handle them with the social and economic systems we so blindly treasure, and also because they have never happened before. Any one of several tipping conditions COULD change our climate. We are trying as hard as we can to modify them ALL AT THE SAME TIME!!
"Can we spend enough for Africa?" --Rev Billy
I believe it is the latter part of the doomsday equation that is more disturbing because there is nothing we can do to stop natural phenomena, also known as mother nature, from occuring.
PLEASE read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/26/world/asia/26china.html?ex=1345780800&en=c2fb14345e2905b1&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
China is actually VERY CONCERNED about their pollution.
That they don’t care is a MYTH that needs to be stopped.
(I think we all KNOW who spreads it, don’t we?) It's not you (willingly), jnuno.
A VERY important article.
Thank you.