Global Warming – Too Important for Junk Science

Spare me Al Gore and George Bush on Earth Day.  The topic is much too important for either junk science or simple answers. 

And please no more hysterical articles about the glaciers retreating.  Where my house is in Vermont was under a mile of ice around 12,000 years ago. 

Last Ice Age (12,000 years ago)

With a few notable reversals, the glaciers have been retreating ever since; get over it.  Through most of its history, the earth has not had polar ice caps.  Global warming is NOT new and it does predate the BushAdministration (pronounced as one word, please).

Global warming won’t be solved by the Kyoto treaty even if the US joined it and the joinees observed it.

But global warming may be accelerated by burning fossil fuels.  On the other hand, we could go into a deep freeze.  Worst of all, climate change – real change, not just a gradual creep – could easily happen in our lifetimes.  Or not!

It’s all about nonlinear change.  Scientists used to assume that change happened at a pretty steady pace.  Evolution.  Geography.  Climate.  All stately change over long periods of time.  Not! Doesn’t happen that way unless you’re far enough away not to see the messy details.

Continents drift but they do so in lurches called earthquakes.  Evolution (probably) happens as sudden punctures of an equilibrium.  And the climate lurches violently.  In fact, climate is just weather writ large and, not surprisingly, is just as chaotic.

According to Abrupt Climate Change: Inevitable Surprises published by The National Academies Press and available free online: “Recent scientific evidence shows that major and widespread climate changes have occurred with startling speed. For example, roughly half the north Atlantic warming since the last ice age was achieved in only a decade, and it was accompanied by significant climatic changes across most of the globe. Similar events, including local warmings as large as 16°C, occurred repeatedly during the slide into and climb out of the last ice age.”

They’re referring to a very short period at the end of the Younger Dryas event (a pause in the most recent deglaciation).  “The most spectacular aspect of the YD is that it ended extremely abruptly (around 11,600 years ago), and although the date cannot be known exactly, it is estimated from the annually-banded Greenland ice-core that the annual-mean temperature increased by as much as 10°C in 10 years,” according to The Earth Institute at Columbia University whose site also contains the chart below.

Now notice something else.  After this abrupt event, climate change has been relatively smooth.  And it is during this relatively and atypically calm 12,000 years that we humans have built our civilization.  No wonder we think that climate change is gradual.

Apparently, climate is now changing more quickly than it has in many thousands if not millions of years.  The evidence for this is good although not indisputable because we don’t yet have the means to make exact comparisons between antique evidence of climate change and what we’re seeing today.  Certainly the warming trend that has been going on for the last fifteen thousand years or so is continuing if not accelerating. (But it has been known to reverse; ask George Washington’s troops at Valley Forge).

Moreover, carbon dioxide and methane concentrations in the atmosphere are at historic highs (as far as we know).  Concentrations of these “greenhouse” gasses are associated with warming periods.  What is less clear is how much they are a cause and how much an effect of warming – quite possibly both which causes a feedback loop we may be in today.  For example, thawing of tundra releases greenhouse gasses which may then cause more warming and more thawing of tundra.

The melting of glaciers is also a positive feedback loop.  The more of the earth that is covered with ice, the more sunlight the earth reflects.  The more sunlight the earth reflects, the cooler it is.  Conversely, as the glaciers melt, the earth absorbs more solar radiation and gets warmer and melts more glaciers.

What we don’t know is what causes the earth to oscillate between periods of cooling – both long and short term – and periods of warming.  We don’t know if we’re at the tipping point of a major change or just in a short term oscillation.   We don’t know if human release of hydrocarbons can cause a tipping point.  We do know that it wasn’t necessary to have humans around burning things to cause the last abrupt changes – it may be just our ego that makes us think that we’re the cause this time.  But we could be!

Chaos theory and the math of nonlinear change (and fractals) tells us that the cause of momentous change doesn’t have to be very large at all.  If a butterfly’s wing flapped in China can cause a hurricane in Georgia, a bunch of brand new cars in India could cause global warming – or a new ice age. Or nothing.

Unfortunately, the civilizations we built during a period of relative climate stability are highly dependent on both current climate and current ocean levels – would be surprising if it were otherwise.  So any change is likely to be overall for the worse – although a little rain in the desert wouldn’t hurt.  If change were as gradual as we are used to, we could probably accommodate it (peacefully might be another question).

If climate change is abrupt as it might be, we’re in a hell of a mess!

This post is already too long so a subsequent one will explore what we might do given that we don’t know whether the pace of global warming since the last ice-age is going to continue accelerating, whether we’re affecting it or not, whether we CAN affect it, and whether we’re in for more heat, more cold, or no more change at all.

What we can’t afford to do is make policy based on hysterical observations that the glaciers are continuing their fifteen-thousand year retreat OR a complacent assumption that things will stay the way humans have always seen them.

Comments

[Aaron]

I used to work for the Bureau of Meterology at the Base line Air Pollutions Station (or BAPS) at Cape Grim on the Western most point of Tasmaina Australia as a Technical Service Officer.
We could not say "global Warming" but "long term climate variation" and we were wholly government funded, one of the few, and we couldn't be honest so I therefore do not trust MOST of these so called experts simply because they have had there information filtered through many other people who ARE NOT experts before the information is published. And thats in a Democratic Western Country like Australia. And also they people I worked with had the feeling that the climate was warming by about 0.1 degree C every 50 years natuarlly but in the last 50 has risen by about 0.3 so it is a bit of both. They also thought that global warming would "most likely" lead to an "Ice Age" in the northern hemisphere.

[Harry]

Very entertaining issue. I haven't heard of this one. It will be necessary to visit you on a thicket!

[BOO!]

This is te most worthless oiece of JUNK i have ever SEEN!!!

that is all

[Tom Evslin]

Lucinda:

Good comment. I do think action is needed EVEN THOUGH I don't believe all the answers. And I beleive you and I need to have a say in that action. Posted a reply inspired by your comment http://blog.tomevslin.com/2006/05/blogging_scienc.html.

[Mark I. Gatewood]

Global Warming - The sky is falling, Global Thinking

Is it just me or is it hot in here? Or the real question is: is it just me or am I the only person that can see the truth about "Global Warming". I don't want to start out making this a tirade about some environmental issue, but surly someone else besides myself must realize we live in a closed box.

Sadly to say, we (the human race) are like sheep on plain of grass, feeding with our heads down. We depend way too much on "scientific" authority to guide us on environmental issues. I can remember from Jr. High School science that the Earth is nearing the end of a long term "Ice Age". The fact is that we live near a gigantic ball of burning gas that is slowly cooking our world (literally.) I am more conscious about how we treat our environment than probably most people. But let’s be real here. While CFCs and other "greenhouse gases" may contribute to a depleted ozone layer, arguing the affects these gases is asinine. Think of throwing a lit match into a burning house. Does it make a difference? Scientifically and mathematically it technically must have some affect. Now, suppose man kind never walked the face of the earth to create those pesky greenhouse gases or to release Chlorofluorocarbons into the atmosphere. Psssst.... Guess what, the Sun is still warming the Earth no matter what we do.

I don't need some scientist with a political agenda to sound alarms about the Earth. I only have to walk outside and feel the heat and look up at the Sun to know what is happening. Now the real deal is that we are at the END of the Ice Age. Not a thousand years from now, not hundreds of years from now, NOW. Like it or not. Any 5th grader with an internet access can tell you that there have been more record setting climatological changes in the past 15 years than there has been in the past hundreds of years. Why is that? The reason is that the closer we get to the end of the Earth's Ice Age, the faster the process will accelerate. The simple explanation of this is that the faster the Earth heats up, the faster it will heat up.

The problem with Earth Science is that you "Can't see the Forest for the trees". Sure we have individual scientists, Meteorologists, Volcanologists, Seismologists, Oceanographers, Biologists and every other kind of "ologist". All these people do is tell what their specialty is and historically how global warming is affected their field. As of this writing, I have not heard a single person put it all together. Everyone focuses on some microclimatological change caused by global warming. The fact is, it is all connected. It was not coincidence that we had one of the largest Tsunamis ever just a couple of years back. It has been reported to have been a 9.3 on the Richter Scale. It was the second largest Earthquake EVER recorded. Just for impact here, not ONE of the largest, it was THE second largest. As an example, the Great Earthquake in San Francisco of 1906 was 8.0 on the Richter Scale. The energy release during this Earthquake was equal to about 1 Gigaton of TNT explosives. By comparison, moving up the Richter Scale to 9.3 for the Indian Ocean Earthquake / Tsunami of 2004, the energy released in this quake exceeded 32 Gigatons of TNT explosives. Most people can figure how much larger 32 is than 1. The Richter Scale stops at 10.0. The amount of energy released in a level 10 Earthquake is mind boggling.

It was surprising that two back-to-back Category 5 Hurricanes hit the U.S. Gulf Coast in two weeks time. And of course, how many people realize the significance of the Category 5 Cyclone to hit the Northern coast of Australia? Wow, three of the strongest storms ever all at the same time. You don’t see that very often. But you better get used to it. It is the way things are to be.

The bottom line is that true global warming is accelerating. It is not just affecting one hurricane, earthquake or tornado.

What this really means to us, as human beings, is that we will see first hand, the results of the ending Ice Age. Not future generations. This generation. Me. My kids. Their kids.

By taking a full view of the Earth you can see that it is a closed environment with a hot, liquid center. The heat from the Sun MUST heat the Earth also. It is not possible for the heat from the sun to travel 93,000,000 miles only to stop for the convenience of Humans. The heat is here. The heat is absorbed by the Earth. Period. More heat means melting of the polar ice caps and more heat is absorbed INTO the Earth. It is obvious that small changes in the oceans temperatures and the atmosphere are clearly affecting atmospheric weather phenomena (wind, tornadoes, hurricanes, cyclones, etc.). That is what is on the surface. Guess What? The heat is transferring inside the Earths Core. Guess what? More heat in the Earth’s core mean the hot liquid center will boil more. Just like watching melted chocolate or spaghetti sauce simmering. On Earth we call this affect “Earthquakes” and “Volcanos”. Can you say “V O L C A N O” boys and girls? Sure, I thought you could.

Maybe the governments have censored the scientific leaders from causing panic and stopped them from telling the citizens what is really happening. (I don’t believe that though.) What I do know, and YOU know is that the physical environmental effects are NOW. We all saw it on CNN. And, its not over. It’s not going to be over.

We have seen the changes over the years. Droughts, increased skin cancer, shrinking glaciers. We see the surface changes in the form of Tornadoes, Hurricanes and Cyclones. We feel it more than ever in EXTREME Earthquakes. And now we will experience it in the form of more Earthquakes and Volcanoes. That is the affect of heat building up from the outside in. The heat is building up from the upper atmosphere, to the surface and oceans, to the Earths crust and to the Earths core.

The 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami was the effect of an Earthquake but not the actual quake. We will see very strong Earthquakes in all parts of the world, even where there has been no activity for long periods. The Earth’s temperature changes will cause changes in the jet stream, causing more Hurricanes, Cyclones and Tornadoes.

We could get past Earthquakes; we can rebuild the boxes we live in. We can get past floods and Tsunamis; we should be smart enough to live on higher ground.

Without a doubt, Volcanoes are coming. (Of course they are already here, but they will increase in activity and size.) The potential effects of a large Volcano can end the human race. In January of 2006 I wrote a personal note to myself. I predict that a large Volcano with a global affect and/or a large Earthquake in the U.S.A. will occur by November 1, 2006. I don't know much about Volcanos but I think that a big one will occur soon with worldwide impact on the atmosphere. I think there will be a devasting Earthquake somewhere like California, Japan or Arkansas with a 7+ magnitude causing enough damage that could potentially wipe out the city it hits. A devastating Earthquake / Tsunami in the Pacific would spell doom for West Coast Cities. There is no scientific basis for this, I just am using my own observations because I am smart, I have a brain and I can see.

Long before we overheat from “Global Warming”, the nuclear winter caused by Volcanoes will cause pandemic famine and starvation.

On a hopefully less witty side of this essay, it should be apparent now that we live in a very fragile environment.

I think the days of society worrying about nuclear war, disease and famine will soon be beyond us. The Earth is changing in front of our very eyes. We can’t stop it, We can’t slow it down.

I don’t really worry myself about what is coming. Some people just cannot handle knowing what is really happening. I am OK with that too. I just happen to be able to think for myself and don’t need any expert to tell me what I can see in front of my face.

So where do we go from here? Well, heck, I doubt I would live to be a hundred and fifty anyway. My end is coming. I, for one, intend to walk around just like the rest of the human beings and pretend everything is ok and live life day to day. I hope to live to be at least 85 years old. You should do the same. If you a really worried about it then read the bible, Romans 10:9,10:13.

I mainly just wanted to write this essay because I am tired of hearing educated people give their microscopic opinions of one phenomena or another when they should be looking at the big picture.

I am not too interested in rain gauges, seismographs and Fujita Scales. We are way past observing how intense some event was or creating science to predict the next event. Hey, the world is coming to an end, get over it.
-----------------------
Feel free to email me if you have any thoughts you would like to share.
mark-at-aggies86.com

[lucinda]

i will never understand the willingness of really smart people, like tom, to trust their own judgement in an area where they're ameteurs rather than trust unbiased experts. in this case, we have a brilliant and successful serial technology ceo who thinks he knows more than the 100+ globally leading scientists entrusted by the u.n. to study the issue with scientific detachment. tom, i doubt you'd give much weight to a climitologist's recommentations on how to grow a tech start-up, even if they have read a few books and articles and all the vc blogs.

jeez, guys, we're in trouble. we're contributing to our own demise. let's stop. mudying the waters with the maybe-we-are, maybe-we-aren't argument keeps people from acting.

[Brooks Jordan]

Al Gore's new movie speaks to the trend:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUiP6dqPynE

[Tom Evslin]

Chris, Steve, and Swagy:

Thanks for the thoughtful comments. Am starting to propose some action besides renuclearization (which I already blogged on) with today's post on carbon sequestration.

[Jim Floyd]

Great post, Tom. You may remember me as the AppleTalk evangelist from 87-90 and as a product manager at Microsoft in the Windows CE team in 94-00. I agree that much more study is needed--for example, we don't have accurate solar weather data for much more than a decade or two. There are obvious steps individuals can take--buy more efficient vehicles, recycle, etc.--and governments can take to use less fossil fuels--build nuclear power plants and retire inefficient coal-fired plants wouldn't require any major technological leap. No responsible leader will leap into "solution space" without a great deal more assurance of the causes of the problem and the effects that certain policy changes may have on climate as well as the economy. Who knows, another giant volcanic eruption may occur again in the Java region that will cause a cooling trend, even snows in June in Washington D.C. similar to the event in the 1800s. It's hard to believe in the precision of today's long range climate predictions when local forecasts two weeks out are so often wrong, and the tendency of one side of the argument to shout down any disagreement. A serious problem like this one deserves rational thought, discussion and action--there's time, but not infinite time. If he were here, Sidhu would frown and tut-tut, and Jean Louis would say, "Your idea would be EVEN BETTER if..." ;-) All the best to you and your family, Jim Floyd

[steve]

I'm just a particle physicist, so I am not an expert in the field, but my friends who are real climatologists are strongly of the opinion that the connection between human activity and the change is real. They disagree in details of the models they build, but what is interesting is the growing consensus that most of their models are too conservative.

I was visiting one at Caltech recently and his comment was the feeling in the community is somewhere between despair and terror. We may be nearing the "tipping point"

More research is clearly needed to tune and develop models, but we are very very late in action. There is no reason not to be acting and waiting for high tech solutions is (by this group) generally regarded as foolhardy.

[Swagy]

If any change is to happen the American people need to make far more noise and let their elected representatives know that they are ready for major change. The current cost of gas at nearly $3 might actually be the spur needed to effect change.

[Chris Gilbey]

I dont know whether you have read the recent book by James Lovelock, "Revenge of Gaia". He argues, quite forcefully that it is irrelevant whether humans have caused climate change or not. Fact is that it is happening. And as the ice caps melt, global heating accelerates because of the reduced reflectivity of the Earth.

He suggests (somewhat surprisingly) that if we intend to remain on the planet as a species, we need to move into high gear and build nuclear power stations to serve our energy needs.

He also argues that with only moderate heating we wont survive.

I happen to think he is right. We need the equivalent of a global Marshall Plan. Forget the BS war on terror and start worrying about how to enable planetary survival within our lifetime to be engineered.

So let's get past the rhetoric and figure out how to pull together and survive as a species, which by the way means that we need to pull along with us as much of the rest of the ecosystem as is possible.

[Tom Evslin]

Gee.

I thought I did read this. Note the last sentence: "more research is needed..."

It is certainly possible (as I said) that human activity is or will lead to tipping the environment in one direction or another. It is also possible that it won't and possible that the climate is or will change drastically without our help.

And also possible we will want to intervene (if we can) whether we are at fault or not.

Alfonz, I'm glad you read my post and glad you read the source. But the subject is too important for rhetoric and ad hominem attacks. We need to think this one through, admit we don't know what we don't know, and make decisions which aren't colored by either wishful thinking or preconceptions.

Fact is we don't know if we're causing climate change. It's certainly happened before without our help. But, whether we're causing it or not, it may be faster or more severe than we usually think.

[Alfonz]

Perhaps the author should read the report he cites:

"The review of possible mechanisms in Chapter 3 showed that in a chaotic system, such as the earth’s climate, an abrupt climate change always could occur. However, existence of a forcing greatly increases the number of possible mechanisms. Furthermore, the more rapid the forcing, the more likely it is that the resulting change will be abrupt on the time scale of human economies or global ecosystems. Although abrupt climate changes have shocked ecosystems and societies over the last few millennia, these climate changes have not been as dramatic as those that occurred during the last ice age. It is probably no coincidence that stability of the climate increased when ice-sheet size and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration largely leveled off at the end of the ice age.

Greenhouse gases are accumulating in the earth’s atmosphere and causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise. It is now the consensus of the science community that the changes observed over the last several decades are most likely in significant part the result of human activities and that human-induced warming is expected to continue (NRC, 2001). As discussed in Chapters 2 and 3, the abrupt climate changes of the past were especially prominent when orbital processes were forcing the climate to change most rapidly during the cooling into and warming out of the ice age, consistent with the results from modeling that forcing of climate increases the possibility of crossing thresholds that trigger abrupt change (e.g., Boxes 3.1 and 4.1). Given our understanding of the climatesystem and of the mechanisms involved in abrupt climate change, this committee concludes that human activities could trigger abrupt climate change. Impacts cannot be predicted because current knowledge is limited, but might include changes in coupled modes of atmospheric-ocean behavior, the occurrence of droughts, and the vigor of thermohaline circulation (THC) in the North Atlantic. More research is needed to better understand the relationship between human influences on climate, especially global warming, and possible abrupt climate change."