Het Grote Klimaatverandering Topic

quote:

Op zondag 26 september 2010 22:44 schreef InverHouse het volgende:
Klimaatverandering. Wat ik niet snap is het feit dat het ijs op het noordelijk halfrond 10x harder smelt dan op het zuidelijk halfrond. Is de klimaatverandering dan groter op het Noordelijk halfrond?

quote:

Old, pressed flowers give climate clues: study

By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent
OSLO | Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:47am EDT
(Reuters) - Flowers picked up to 150 years ago in Victorian England show that old collections of pressed plants around the world can help the study of climate change, scientists said on Wednesday.

Ecologists compared samples of early spider orchids, held in collections with notes showing the exact day in spring when they were picked in southern England from 1848-1958, and dates when the same flower blossomed in the wild from 1975-2006.

"Warmer years were associated with earlier flowering ... In both cases flowering was advanced by about six days per 1 degree Celsius (1.8 Fahrenheit) rise in average spring temperature," they wrote in the Journal of Ecology after cross-checking with local temperature records.

The match between higher temperatures and quicker flowering for both old and modern orchids showed for the first time that botanical collections could be a reliable source to study climate, even if temperature records were lacking, they said.

Vast numbers of specimens of plants and animals are in collections around the world, some of them dating back 250 years and long before there were reliable temperature records in many nations.

"It potentially opens up new uses for ... specimens -- this could provide us with long-term data about climate," said Anthony Davy, a professor at the University of East Anglia who was a co-author of the study led by colleague Karen Robbirt.

The U.N. panel of climate scientists said in a 2007 report that average world temperatures rose 0.7 degree Celsius (1.3 F) over the 19th century, mainly in recent decades due to a build-up of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels.

Tree rings are among biological indicators of climate in past centuries, caused by natural swings. Manmade global warming is very likely to be the dominant cause of warming in the past half-century, according to the U.N panel.

The 77 pressed orchids, picked when in full bloom, had meticulous records of dates and sites. Early spider orchids have greenish petals and a purple-brown part which looks like the back of a spider.

Davy told Reuters that spring temperatures were the main factor determining flowering times for orchids -- rather than the length of daylight or the changing availability of nutrients.

He said one issue for future study was whether climate change might bring a mismatch between the appearance of flowers and insects vital for their pollination. Bees, for instance, might not be around when fruit trees are in bloom.

quote:

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.

Anthony Watts describes it thus:

This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door. It is worthy of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.

It’s so utterly damning that I’m going to run it in full without further comment. (H/T GWPF, Richard Brearley).

Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:

1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.

3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.

4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.<

5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.

6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.

APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?

I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.

I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Hal

quote:

Tragere bevolkingsgroei vermindert CO2-uitstoot

BRUSSEL, 12 oktober 2010 (IPS) - Een vertraging van de wereldwijde bevolkingsgroei kan bijdragen bij tot een aanzienlijke vermindering van de CO2-uitstoot. Dat blijkt nieuw onderzoek door een internationaal team van klimaatwetenschappers en demografen.

Demografen van de Verenigde Naties achten het plausibel dat de wereldwijde bevolkingsgroei tegen het midden van deze eeuw vertraagt. Die vertraging kan goed zijn voor 16 tot 29 procent van de vermindering van de CO2-uitstoot die nodig wordt geacht om de gevolgen van de klimaatwijziging te temperen. Tegen het einde van deze eeuw kan de vertraging nog meer invloed hebben op de CO2-uitstoot, zegt de studie.

Dat er een verband is tussen een verandering in de demografie en de uitstoot van broeikasgassen, wisten wetenschappers al langer. Maar hoe groot dat effect is, daarover bestonden nog geen exacte gegevens.
Niet oplossen

"Als de wereldwijde bevolkingsgroei vertraagt, zal dat het klimaatprobleem niet oplossen, maar het kan een bijdrage leveren, vooral op langere termijn", zegt hoofdauteur Brian O'Neill van het National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in de Verenigde Staten.

De impact van de vertraging zal niet overal dezelfde zijn, zegt Shonali Pachauri van het International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), dat zijn zetel in Oostenrijk heeft. In ontwikkelingslanden zal de impact groter zijn. "Maar ook in de ontwikkelde landen zal de tragere bevolkingsgroei gevolgen hebben voor de uitstoot, gezien het grotere energieverbruik per inwoner."
Steden en vergrijzing

De studie ontdekte ook een rechtstreeks verband met verstedelijking en veroudering. In sommige ontwikkelingslanden kan de bevolkingsgroei in stedelijke gebieden de verwachte CO2-uitstoot voor die landen met 25 procent doen stijgen. Dat heeft grotendeels te maken met hogere productiviteit en hogere consumptie. Vooral voor China en India is dat van belang.

In geïndustrialiseerde landen kan de verwachte uitstoot met 20 procent dalen als gevolg van de vergrijzing. Een oudere bevolking betekent minder productiviteit en dus een lagere economische groei.

De derde partner in het onderzoek, naast het NCAR en het IIASA, is de National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in de Verenigde Staten. De studie wordt gepubliceerd in de Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
IPS(RP, JG)

quote:

Op donderdag 7 oktober 2010 08:05 schreef ExperimentalFrentalMental het volgende:
07-10-2010

"Een sterkere zon doet de Aarde afkoelen"
[...]

quote:

Op maandag 11 oktober 2010 22:51 schreef tntkiller het volgende:
http://blogs.telegraph.co(...)een-in-my-long-life/

quote:

APS Comments on Harold Lewis’ Resignation of his Society Membership

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a recent letter to the American Physical Society (APS) President Curtis A. Callan, chair of the Princeton University Physics Department, Harold Lewis, emeritus physics professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara, announced that he was resigning his APS membership.

In response to numerous accusations in the letter, APS issues the following statement:

There is no truth to Dr. Lewis’ assertion that APS policy statements are driven by financial gain. To the contrary, as a membership organization of more than 48,000 physicists, APS adheres to rigorous ethical standards in developing its statements. The Society is open to review of its statements if members petition the APS Council – the Society’s democratically elected governing body – to do so.

Dr. Lewis’ specific charge that APS as an organization is benefitting financially from climate change funding is equally false. Neither the operating officers nor the elected leaders of the Society have a monetary stake in such funding. Moreover, relatively few APS members conduct climate change research, and therefore the vast majority of the Society’s members derive no personal benefit from such research support.

On the matter of global climate change, APS notes that virtually all reputable scientists agree with the following observations:

* Carbon dioxide is increasing in the atmosphere due to human activity;
* Carbon dioxide is an excellent infrared absorber, and therefore, its increasing presence in the atmosphere contributes to global warming; and
* The dwell time of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is hundreds of years.

On these matters, APS judges the science to be quite clear. However, APS continues to recognize that climate models are far from adequate, and the extent of global warming and climatic disruptions produced by sustained increases in atmospheric carbon loading remain uncertain. In light of the significant settled aspects of the science, APS totally rejects Dr. Lewis’ claim that global warming is a “scam” and a “pseudoscientific fraud.”

Additionally, APS notes that it has taken extraordinary steps to solicit opinions from its membership on climate change. After receiving significant commentary from APS members, the Society’s Panel on Public Affairs finalized an addendum to the APS climate change statement reaffirming the significance of the issue. The APS Council overwhelmingly endorsed the reaffirmation.

Lastly, in response to widespread interest expressed by its members, the APS is in the process of organizing a Topical Group to feature forefront research and to encourage exchange of information on the physics of climate.

APS Climate Change Statement and Commentary

quote:

Zij vinden dat de topbestuurders maar een termijn van zes jaar mogen volmaken, de tijd die nodig is voor het maken van een rapport, in plaats van meerdere termijnen van twee jaar.

quote:

Chair:
A 12-year appointment (two terms) is too long for a field as dynamic and contested as climate change.

Recommendation: The term of the IPCC Chair should be limited to the timeframe of one assessment.

Bureau:
Members of the Bureau are eligible to serve for 2 consecutive terms. [..]most Working Group Chairs to date have served only one term

Recommendation: The terms of the Working Group Co-chairs should be limited to the timeframe of one assessment.