Discussion: View Thread

  Thread closed by the administrator, not accepting new replies.
  • 1.  IPCC Additional Information

    Posted 06-21-2017 12:05 PM
    No replies, thread closed.
    It is always worthwhile to hear an intelligent counter opinion on controversial theories and topics.  Dr. Morner of Stockholm has a very informative lecture on the subject online.  The title of the lecture is Sea Levels-Fact & Fiction and it can be found on YouTube.  Dr. Morner is the most preeminent ocean expert in the world.


  • 2.  RE: IPCC Additional Information

    Posted 06-22-2017 09:17 AM
    No replies, thread closed.
    Is there a website to which I could go or document of some sort available that has the raw data with earth temperatures, greenhouse gas concentrations, sea levels, etc.?

    ------------------------------
    Thomas Mansur P.E., D.WRE, M.ASCE
    City Engineer
    Tulsa OK
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: IPCC Additional Information

    Posted 06-23-2017 09:37 AM
    No replies, thread closed.
    See IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

    ------------------------------
    Dov Rosen P.E., M.ASCE
    Sergiu Dov Rosen Sea Shore Rosen Engineering Consultants
    Haifa
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: IPCC Additional Information

    This message was posted by a user wishing to remain anonymous
    Posted 06-27-2017 05:56 PM
    No replies, thread closed.
    This post was removed


  • 5.  RE: IPCC Additional Information

    Posted 06-26-2017 12:44 PM
    No replies, thread closed.
    Another source of raw data is the Berkeley Earth Project, Home - Berkeley Earth  Interesting story.  Here's an excerpt from their website. 

    "Berkeley Earth was conceived by Richard and Elizabeth Muller in early 2010 when they found merit in some of the concerns of skeptics. They organized a group of scientists to reanalyze the Earth's surface temperature record, and published their initial findings in 2012. Berkeley Earth became an independent non-profit 501(c)(3) in February 2013."

    Dr. Muller is a respected scientist and initially a climate skeptic, working out of the University of California, Berkeley, no less,  that bastion of liberalism.  Initially, this project was funded in part by the Koch brothers.  My inference here is that the Koch brothers saw a great opportunity to prove man-made climate change was bunk.  What better than to have a professor from Berkeley show that when you look deep into all of the Earth temperature data, you find that humans aren't causing global warming. 

    So, the Mullers acquire, analyze and assess the data.  Some months later, Richard Muller writes an op ed for the New York Times saying that he used to be a climate change skeptic, but after assessing the data, he realized he was wrong.  Climate change is mostly human caused.  Whoops!  See http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html 

    I checked the funding sources for the Berkeley Earth Project.  After their initial contribution, the Koch brothers never contributed to the project again.  Gee, what a surprise.

    ------------------------------
    William Wallace ENV SP, F.ASCE
    Wilsonville OR
    ------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: IPCC Additional Information

    Posted 06-27-2017 05:56 PM
    No replies, thread closed.
    ​I just read that the scientist from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory concluded that the satellite temperature data is much lower than the climate models are projecting. They had to admit there is a substantial difference.

    ------------------------------
    Frederick Rouse P.E., M.ASCE
    CHF ENVIR ENGR
    Stanley Consultants
    Phoenix AZ
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: IPCC Additional Information

    Posted 06-27-2017 05:57 PM
    No replies, thread closed.
    One thing to remember about global temperature is that there is really only one source that does not have fingers adjusting the data.  That is the satellite data.  At the bottom of that page is the actual Lower Troposphere data, and there is much other information there.
    Our local "official" data source has been in three different locations over the past few decades, and is now at the airport, where continuing development has increased the amount of asphalt pavement nearby since then.

    Another source for understanding the deeper science is an interesting interview on You Tube with Freeman Dyson here

    For a good intro on CO2 science itself, a series of pages by Jack Barrett and David Bellamy is here.

    ------------------------------
    Stephen Hemphill P.E., M.ASCE
    Semi-Retired
    Rio Rancho NM
    ------------------------------



  • 8.  RE: IPCC Additional Information

    Posted 06-30-2017 03:21 PM
    No replies, thread closed.
    Implying that satellite data is somehow superior because it does not have "fingers adjusting the data" is based on an untrue premise and is contrary to a plain scientific truth: data requires review, quality control, adjustment, and judgment in application. That is the very basis of the art of science.

    A good example is the recent NOAA adjustment that relied on their network of "pristine" locations deployed around 2001. They were able to filter out localized effects at other stations where human influence, relocation, and other factors confused matters, allowing those data sets spanning periods of change in human activity to have higher confidence and more value. 

    As for satellites: they don't measure temperature directly, but detect radiant energy across spectral bandwidths that can be used to estimate temperature among many other properties (infiltration and chlorophyll concentrations are two off the top of my head). The satellite array is not a homogeneous set of instruments purpose-built for this, and so intelligence must be applied to the data that is available, and manipulations are necessarily made.

    In short, virtually ALL data requires "fingers adjusting," and satellite data in particular requires "fingers adjusting" to yield a temperature at all.

    ------------------------------
    Timothy Groninger P.E., M.ASCE
    White Plains NY
    ------------------------------



  • 9.  RE: IPCC Additional Information

    Posted 06-27-2017 06:04 PM
    Edited by Veronique Nguyen 06-27-2017 06:03 PM
    No replies, thread closed.
    https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends.html
    https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/General/sealevel.html--

    ------------------------------
    Frank Mele PE MS
    Consultant, Disaster Assessment Specialist
    Rancho Cordova, CA
    ------------------------------



  • 10.  RE: IPCC Additional Information

    Posted 07-07-2017 02:42 PM
    No replies, thread closed.

    Seeking primary reference:   CO2 causes warming?

    **  Does anyone know what method was used to reach this conclusion (that CO2 causes global warming), who did the research, and where is the primary research paper? **
    I want to know whether industry best practice for scientific research (ie., formal test of hypothesis) has been used to reach this conclusion, or whether an inferior method has been substituted, or whether no valid method at all has been used.     And where has the method been objectively peer reviewed in the USA?     Has any organization in the USA (a federal agency, funding organization, professional association, university.... anyone?) done the due diligence of properly reviewing the primary research paper and method before committing their organization to endorse this conclusion? 
     
    Some background:

    I wanted to evaluate this CO2 controversy myself . . .  and so sought to read the primary research article, describing application of the method used to reach the conclusion that CO2 causes global warming.  But so far, I have not located this primary reference cited anywhere in the IPCC reports or elsewhere, or found where this method has been properly peer reviewed.    By their own statement, the IPCC does not do original research, so they cannot be the primary reference.  (IPCC cannot be the objective reviewer for USA either, because they are a foreign political organization.)   So where is the primary reference?   

    I looked in the obvious places (such as the Federal Register - Endangerment Finding by EPA), expecting to find the primary reference clearly cited,  but so far have not found where anyone has done what they should have done regarding proper citation and peer review ....  not IPCC, not US EPA, nor NSF, nor NASA, not AAAS or any of the scientific organizations signing letters to Congress.   So I am asking for some assistance, and more eyes to look in case I missed something.    At this point, it looks to me like most of the responsible organizations in the USA, including federal agencies, foundations, professional associations, universities have not done due diligence.    

    Finding this primary reference, and its proper peer review, is important also regarding professional ethics and practice:  

    No responsible scientist or engineer should endorse this conclusion (that CO2 causes global warming), or lead their clients into expenditures to control CO2,  unless the primary research paper and research method are clearly identified and objectively peer reviewed.    Engineers should not rely on reports and methods which have not been properly reviewed.   



    ------------------------------
    Kathryn Hatcher P.E., M.ASCE
    Civil Engr
    Athens GA
    ------------------------------



  • 11.  RE: IPCC Additional Information

    Posted 07-07-2017 02:56 PM
    No replies, thread closed.
    Response to @Kathryn Hatcher

    The bibliography at the end of this comment includes (in chronological order) 36 references most of which predate the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which published its first assessment in 1990. As a former U.S. delegate to the IPCC (2007-2010), I would not attempt to argue that no component of the IPCC process is influenced by politics. However, those political entities include countries that are major fossil fuel producers and consumers, as well as countries who are likely most vulnerable to climate change. Furthermore, the IPCC carries out a technical assessment of thousands of scientific, peer-reviewed scientific articles. Teams of researchers prepared the individual chapters and technical summaries, and therefore they are beyond neither the control nor dominance of any one entity. These technical components are then independently reviewed in an open and transparent process that is accessible by the public. The only portion of the IPCC process that directly involves non-technical, government officials is the crafting of the Summary for Policymakers. The content of the Summary for Policymakers cannot contradict the underlying technical analyses, but the level of emphasis on any one finding can be raised or lowered through the consensus process.

    If an individual is serious about trying to understand the science supporting conclusions about the role of anthropogenic drivers of climate change, they could do worse than to read the 36 references listed here. The additional primary literature cited by the IPCC, and the IPCC volumes themselves, largely address nuances or strive to reduce uncertainty in key findings from these early papers. 

     

    Bibliography

    The first 31 papers can be obtained in a bound volume entitled The Warming Papers: The Scientific Foundation for the Climate Change Forecast, (edited by D. Archer and R. Pierrehumbert) Blackwell Publishing Ltd ISBN 978-1-4051-9616-1 (pbk.).

    1. Baptiste, J., and Fourier, J. (1824) On the Temperatures of the Terrestrial Sphere and Interplanetary Space: Annales de Chimie et de Physique, V. XXVII, pp 136-167.
    2. Tyndall, J., (1861) On the Absorption and Radiation of Heat by Gases and Vapours, and on the Physical Connection of Radiation, Absorption, and Conduction: Philosophical Magazine, Series 4, V.22, pp. 169-94.
    3. Arrhenius, S. (1896) On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground: The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 5th Series, 41, no. 251, 39 p.
    4. S. Callendar (1938) The Artificial Production of Carbon Dioxide and its Influence on Temperature: Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, V. 64, p. 223-240.
    5. Plass, G.N. (1956) The-Influence of the 15 µ Carbon-dioxide Band on the Atmospheric Infra-red Cooling Rate: Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 82, p. 310-324.
    6. Revelle, R., and H. E. Suess (1957) Carbon Dioxide Exchange Between Atmosphere and Ocean and the Question of an Increase of Atmospheric C02 during the Past: Tellus, 9, p. 18-27.
    7. Bolin, B. and E. Eriksson (1958) Distribution of Matter in the Sea and Atmosphere: Changes in the Carbon Dioxide Content of the Atmosphere and Sea due to Fossil Fuel Combustion: The Atmosphere and Sea in Motion: Scientific Contributions to the Rossby Memorial Volume, 130-142, Rockefeller Institute Press, New York.
    8. Keeling, C. D. (1960) The Concentration and Isotopic Abundances of Carbon Dioxide in the Atmosphere: Tellus, XI, No. 2, p. 200-203.
    9. Manabe, S., and Wetheral, R.T. (1967) Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Given Distribution of Relative Humidity: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 24, No. 3, p. 241-258.
    10. Budyko, M.I. (1968) The Effect of Solar Radiation Variations on the Climate of the Earth: Tellus, XIX, p. 611-619.
    11. Sellers, W.D. (1968) A Global Climatic Model Based on the Energy Balance of the Earth-Atmosphere System: Journal of Applied Meteorology, v. 8, p. 392-400.
    12. Keeling, C.D. (1970) Is Carbon Dioxide from Fossil Fuel Changing Man's Environment? Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, v. 114, no. 1, p. 10-17.
    13. Sawyer, J. S. (1972) Man-Made Carbon Dioxide and the "Greenhouse" Effect: Nature, v. 239, p. 23-26.
    14. Manabe, S., and Wetheral, R.T. (1975) The Effects of Doubling the C02 Concentration on the Climate of a General Circulation Model: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, v. 32, no. 1, p. 3-15.
    15. Bolin, B. (1977) Changes of Land Biota and Their Importance for the Carbon Cycle: Science 196 (4290): p. 613-615.
    16. Broecker, W.S., and T. Takahashi (1977) Neutralization of Fossil Fuel C by Marine Calcium Carbonate: in The Fate of Fossil Fuel CO2 in the Oceans, N. R. Andersen, A. Malahoff (eds). Plenum Press, New York, p. 213-248.
    17. Charney, J. C., A. Arakawa, D. J. Baker, B. Bolin, R. E. Dickinson, R. M. Goody, C. E. Leith, H. M. Stommel and C. I. Wunsch (1979) Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scientific Assessment, National Academy of Sciences.
    18. Hansen, J. A. Lacis, D. Rind, G. Russell, P. Stone, I. Fung, R. Ruedy, and J. Lerner (1984) Climate Sensitivity: Analysis of Feedback Mechanisms: AGU Geophysical Monograph 29, Maurice Ewing, 5 Hansen, J.E., and T. Takahasi, (eds.) p. 130-163, American Geophysical Union.
    19. Neftel, A., E. Moor, H. Oeschger and B. Stauffer (1985) Evidence From Polar Ice Cores for the Increase in Atmospheric C02 in the Past Two Centuries: Nature, v. 315: p. 45-47.
    20. D. Jones, T. M. L. Wigley and P. B. Wright (1986) Global Temperature Variations between 1961 and 1984: Nature, v. 322, p. 430-434.
    21. Barnola, J.M., D. Raynaud, Y.S. Korotkevich and C. Lorius (1987) Vostok Ice Core Provides 160,000-Year Record of Atmospheric C02: Nature, v. 329, p. 408-414.
    22. Tans, P. P., I. Y. Fung and T. Takahashi (1990) Observational Constraints on the Global Atmospheric C02 Budget: Science, v. 247, p. 1431-1438.
    23. Mitchell, J. F. B. , T. C. Johns, J. M. Gregory and S. F. B. Tett (1995) Climate Response to Increasing Levels of Greenhouse Gases and Sulphate Aerosols: Nature, v. 376 (6540), p. 501-504.
    24. Mann, M.E., R. S. Bradley and M. K. Hughes ( 1999) Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 26(6), p. 759-762.
    25. Kennett, J. P. and L. D. Stott (1991) Abrupt Deep-Sea Warming, Palaeoceanographic Changes and Benthic Extinctions at the End of the Palaeocene: Nature, v. 353, p. 319-322.
    26. Walker, James C. G., and J.F. Kasting (1992) Effects of Fuel and Forest Conservation on Future Levels of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide: Global and Planetary Change, v. 5(3), p. 151-189.
    27. Riebesell, U., I. Zondervan, B. Rost, P. D. Tortell, R. E. Zeebe and F. M. M. Morel (2000) Reduced Calcification of Marine Plankton in Response to Increased Atmospheric C02: Nature, v. 407, p. 364-367.
    28. Cox, P.M., Betts, R. A., Jones, C.D., Spall, S.A. and I. J. Totterdell (2000) Acceleration of Global Warming Due to Carbon-Cycle Feedbacks in a Coupled Climate Model: Nature, v. 408, p. 184-187.
    29. Zwally, H.J., W. Abdalati, T. Herring, K. Larson, J. Saba and K. Steffen (2002) Surface Melt-Induced Acceleration of Greenland Ice-Sheet Flow Caldeira, K., and Michael E. Wickett (2003) Anthropogenic Carbon and Ocean pH: Science 297 (5579), p. 218-222.
    30. Fu, Q., Celeste M. Johanson, Stephen G. Warren and Dian J. Seidel (2004) Contribution of Stratospheric Cooling to Satellite-Inferred: Nature, v 429(6987), p. 55-58.
    31. Hansen, J., Nazarenko, R. Ruedy, M. Sato, J. Willis, A. Del Genio, D. Koch, A. Lacis, K. Lo, S. Menon, T. Novakov, J. Perlwitz, G. Russell, G. A. Schmidt and N. Tausnev (2005) Earth's Energy Imbalance: Confirmation and Implications: Science, v. 308, p. 1431-1435.

    Listed below are additional works of relevance, including several studies carried out by National Academies' National Research Council (NRC) and published by the National Academy Press. While these are consensus reports, not the primary literature, they cover many aspects of the issue and include primary references as source material. "Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Second Assessment," published in 1982 is a follow-up to Chaney et al. (1979; No. 17 above). These two reports lay the foundation for the series of National Climate Assessments called for the Global Change Research Act of 1990. Three other NRC reports published in 1982 and 1983 are included primarily as they represent works that span a time when the role of carbon dioxide as a driver of climate change was a major focus of interest. The growing acceptance, and concern, about anthropogenic climate change by members of the Academy unfolds across these reports. The last reference in the list is actually not an NRC report, but rather a dedicated volume on the subject, published as a National Academy of Sciences Colloquium Proceedings. I included it here, as it represents the findings of individual researchers, rather than the consensus of a committee, at a period pf time when anthropogenic climate change was widely accepted within the scientific community and had become a major concern of the policy community.

    1. National Research Council (1982) Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Second Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18524.
    2. National Research Council (1982) Solar Variability, Weather, and Climate. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/19563
    3. National Research Council. 1982. Meeting the Challenge of Climate. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/19583
    4. National Research Council. 1983. Changing Climate: Report of the Carbon Dioxide Assessment Committee. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18714
    5. National Academy of Sciences. 1997. (NAS Colloquium) Carbon Dioxide and Climate Change. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/6238

     



    ------------------------------
    Dan Walker Ph.D., A.M.ASCE
    Damascus MD
    ------------------------------