Top 10 Global Warming Myths

[Revmitchell]

MYTH #1—MOST CLIMATE SCIENTISTS AGREE THAT DISASTROUS GLOBAL WARMING IS HERE

We frequently read that, “the vast majority of climate scientists agree that....” To get most scientists to agree that water is wet would be difficult enough, but consensus on something as complex as anthropogenic climate change would be downright impossible.

Few recent surveys of active climatologists have addressed greenhouse warming and its impact. One, after the release of the first report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 1990, demonstrated that there is a wide range of opinion on critical issues. For example, most survey respondents agreed that the climate models do not accurately depict the ocean-atmosphere system. Similarly, a majority agreed it was not possible to attribute the observed warming of about 0.5�C since 1890 to human impacts. Five years later, scientists still can’t agree on how much of this warming was caused by humans.

In reality, one should be careful about giving too much weight to the majority opinions of scientists on any given topic at any given time. Science generally advances through revolution of ideas, not by popular opinion.

Reference:

Singer, S.F. (1991). “No Scientific Consensus on Greenhouse Warming,” Wall Street Journal, Sept. 23. p. 14.

Feature

 

[Revmitchell]

MYTH #2—IN THE UNITED STATES, RECENT YEARS HAVE BEEN THE WARMEST ON RECORD

Because of problems with temperature records, the worst place to look for global warming may be in the surface temperature history. Nevertheless, most discussions of greenhouse warming focus on temperature trends.

After removing biases caused by urbanization, thermometer relocations, instrument changes, and so on, it is clear that there is no trend in mean annual temperatures in the last 65 years. Apart from a sharp rise from 1915 to 1930, when trace-gas concentrations were low, the trend is essentially zero.

Figure 1. Temperature departures (�C) in the United States.

Reference:

Karl, T.R., et al. (1994). Global and hemispheric temperature anomalies—land and marine instrument records. In Trends ’93: A Compendium of Data on Global Climate Change. U.S. Dept. of Energy. 984pp.

 

[Revmitchell]

MYTH #3—NORTHERN HEMISPHERE TEMPERATURE INCREASES OVER THE LAST CENTURY CORRESPOND TO HUMAN-INDUCED WARMING

Based on the best available temperature records, the Northern Hemisphere has warmed about 0.65�C since 1860. However, we weren’t producing much CO2 prior to 1945, so the greenhouse effect should have been most prevalent in the last 40 years. But most of the temperature increase occurred prior to 1945. Why then? The most scientifically defensible position is natural climate variation. There has been little or no trend after 1945, when two-thirds of the greenhouse gases were released.

Figure 2. Temperature departures (�C) in the Northern Hemisphere.

Reference:

Jones, P.D., T.M.L. Wigley, and K.R. Briffa (1994). Global and hemispheric temperature anomalies—land and marine instrument records. In Trends ’93: A Compendium of Data on Global Climate Change. U.S. Dept. of Energy. 984pp.

 

[Revmitchell]

MYTH #4—MORE CO2 YIELDS MUCH HIGHER SURFACE TEMPERATURES

The global climate is a complex and poorly understood system of positive and negative feedbacks. Increasing trace gases will absorb more radiation from the earth and re-emit it back, enhancing the natural greenhouse effect. But the climate system is much more complicated than that. And it is impossible to alter one aspect of the system without affecting the others.

For example, more atmospheric CO2 may enhance growth of plants, which may then transpire more water. What if surface temperatures warm and thus cause more evaporation? Will this produce more clouds? If so, will they be low (water) or high (ice) clouds? Do clouds have a net cooling or warming effect? How about changes in cloud brightness related to sulfates?

General circulation climate models try to mathematically calculate all of these interactions, but they have yet to sufficiently (or even remotely) duplicate current climatic reality. Why, then, should we trust their predictions of future conditions?

 

[Revmitchell]

MYTH #7—MELTING OF THE POLAR ICE CAPS WILL CAUSE SEA LEVEL TO RISE

In Antarctica, there is absolutely no evidence of increasing temperatures since the mid-1960s (see also Vol. 1, No. 1 of the Report). Even if a trend were present, temperatures wouldn’t be hot enough to melt ice.

To test the effects of global warming on sea-level rise from melting North Polar ice, do a little experiment. Put some ice cubes in a glass and then fill it to the rim with water. Then, let the ice melt and see how much overflow there is. The amount of water on your kitchen counter is proportional to sea-level rise from melting of the ice cap on the North Pole.

Figure 5. Temperatures measured at the South Pole.

Reference:

Sansom, J (1989). Antarctic Surface Temperature Time Series. Journal of Climate. 2, 1164–1172.

 

[HankD]

MYTH #7—MELTING OF THE POLAR ICE CAPS WILL CAUSE SEA LEVEL TO RISE

In Antarctica, there is absolutely no evidence of increasing temperatures since the mid-1960s (see also Vol. 1, No. 1 of the Report). Even if a trend were present, temperatures wouldn’t be hot enough to melt ice.

To test the effects of global warming on sea-level rise from melting North Polar ice, do a little experiment. Put some ice cubes in a glass and then fill it to the rim with water. Then, let the ice melt and see how much overflow there is. The amount of water on your kitchen counter is proportional to sea-level rise from melting of the ice cap on the North Pole.

Figure 5. Temperatures measured at the South Pole.

Reference:

Sansom, J (1989). Antarctic Surface Temperature Time Series. Journal of Climate. 2, 1164–1172.

Unless the ice is sitting on a land mass and then melts.
I don't believe there is land mass in the Arctic, the Antarctica yes (I believe).

HankD

 

[rsr]

Why is it that all the references are to studies that are 20 to 30 years old? Just curious.

 

[Lewis]

"Updated data from NASA satellite instruments reveal the Earth’s polar ice caps have not receded at all since the satellite instruments began measuring the ice caps in 1979. Since the end of 2012, moreover, total polar ice extent has largely remained above the post-1979 average. The updated data contradict one of the most frequently asserted global warming claims – that global warming is causing the polar ice caps to recede."
FORBES

 

[rsr]

So it appears that Taylor is mixing not only apples and oranges but also apples and applesauce.

So in sum: 1) total (or global) polar sea ice is in fact declining, according to both NASA and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Cryosphere Today; 2) if you analyze the Arctic and Antarctic separately — which makes more sense to do, as very different things are happening to sea ice in the two places — you realize that the Arctic sea ice decline in particular is very stark; 3) there is also bad news about the melting of ice atop land, based on data that are completely outside of this discussion, but that are perhaps the most worrying of all.

The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...eres-why-theyre-wrong/?utm_term=.5d36c19242d3

 

[Crabtownboy]

Rev cites an out-of-date article inferring that nothing has changed in 22 years.

Did you notice the article referenced:

McKibben, B. (1995). “Hot? Welcome to the 21st century. —Commentary,” Los Angeles Times, Aug. 15.

Lots has happened since 1995!

The OP is a worthless posting!

 

[Lewis]

So it appears that Taylor is mixing not only apples and oranges but also apples and applesauce.

The Washington Post

The Washington Post article does some mixing of apples and oranges themselves.

However directly from NASA -
"An increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.


The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice."

 

[rsr]

Sea Ice Extent Sinks to Record Lows at Both Poles

Sea Ice Extent Sinks to Record Lows at Both Poles

 

[Use of Time]

Any studies since the turn of the century?

 

[carpro]

"Updated data from NASA satellite instruments reveal the Earth’s polar ice caps have not receded at all since the satellite instruments began measuring the ice caps in 1979. Since the end of 2012, moreover, total polar ice extent has largely remained above the post-1979 average. The updated data contradict one of the most frequently asserted global warming claims – that global warming is causing the polar ice caps to recede."
FORBES

Shhh.....

Don't be posting original stuff from NASA. You can only use NASA if they got their info from the right place.

 

[rsr]

Please bother to read. The article conflated polar ice with sea ice. This is not rocket science. Oh wait, it actually is. But the author doesn't know the difference between polar ice vs. sea ice vs. Arctic ice vs. Antarctic ice. Ice is ice, after all. Not.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Stunning Satellite Images of Earth | TIME.com

The Arctic's oldest ice is vanishing | NOAA Climate.gov

Five Pacific islands disappear as sea levels rise - BBC News

 

[Reynolds]

My biggest concern about global warming is that it might make George Straits song "Ocean front property in Arizona" not make sense anymore. Seriously, I live in Appalachia, I am not yet to get flooded out anytime soon.

 

[carpro]

Stunning Satellite Images of Earth | TIME.com

The Arctic's oldest ice is vanishing | NOAA Climate.gov

Five Pacific islands disappear as sea levels rise - BBC News

Time, NOAA and BBC,,3 of the biggest perpetrators of the lies of the left.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Time, NOAA and BBC,,3 of the biggest perpetrators of the lies of the left.

That would have been a lot of work for google to doctor all those satellite images to perpetuate a lie for time.

For the pacific island story of research done by an Australian group reported by :
The Guardian
The telegraph
SBS
National Post
National Geographic
Fox News

Here is the actual paper. Feel free to do your own research to challenge the results.

Interactions between sea-level rise and wave exposure on reef island dynamics in the Solomon Islands - IOPscience

Or better yet, stick to yelling out "Fake News" when you don't like something instead of actually finding out about a topic. I hear it is the in thing to do.

 

[carpro]

That would have been a lot of work for google to doctor all those satellite images to perpetuate a lie for time.