Climate change the science & the lies Tony Eggleton
Outline Some basic climate stuff – what the science says About trust and lies How to misinform 1. Attack the person 2. “It stands to reason” 3. Cherry pick or brush aside 4. Use lots of wrong numbers 5. Use the wrong data 6. Be important, be wrong, and say it anyway
The pillars of climate science causes causes
Global warming. • What is the evidence? • Land-based thermometers Boulia, Qld
Of course one Met station is not enough, but 30,000 is Temperature rise ( ° C) 14.8 14.6 14.4 14.2 14.0 13.8 13.6 13.4 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 NASA Goddard Space Institute
Don’t like scientists’ measurements? • What about oenologists? Date of maturity for grapes is getting earlier every year Mar 20 Mar 1 1930 2010
The Greenhouse Warm body radiates heat away and gets cold
Add a blanket, reduce heat loss
Thicker blanket, more heat trapped, now a hot dog
We are warmed by the sun and radiate our warmth out into space sun earth . There is a lot of cold space out there to accept our radiated heat
OK, so you can see - 23 ° C 14 ° C
We have an atmosphere blanket, the moon does not
Sun’s heat comes in
29% is reflected back into space That is known as Earth’s albedo. Compare Venus 90%, the moon 7%.
Earth warms air, air radiates heat away
1.8 ppm Greenhouse gases and their 0.3 ppm part in keeping us warm 400 ppm = 0.04% 4% ±
Why has the Earth warmed over the past two centuries? Because we have added a lot of CO 2
Are you sure? Perhaps it is just a coincidence!
And what does a bit of warming do? Melts ice, mainly in the Arctic. So what? So melted ice (=seawater) absorbs sunshine, whereas ice would have reflected it. Thus the Arctic Ocean warms. AND
Humidity Warmer air can carry more water vapour – increased humidity. What is the main greenhouse gas? Water vapour. So a bit of warming by CO 2 is enhanced by making a thicker greenhouse blanket of water vapour
Three strikes and you’re hot Strike 1. More CO 2 – a bit of warming Strike 2. Some ice melts, more sunshine absorbed – a bit more warming Strike 3. More water vapour in the air – even more warming.
Snowball earth
Ice ages – different trigger 1. Orbital changes expand north polar ice 2. More ice, less Arctic warming, cooler Earth 3. Cooler Earth, less humidity, more cooling 4. Cooler oceans take up more CO 2 5. Thinner greenhouse blanket, more cooling 6. Glaciation – until... 7. Orbital change melts more summer ice 8. Sequence reverses to an interglacial - now
The Climate Lies Despite the real simplicity of the science, there are people who don’t want you to believe it. They call themselves skeptics. Others call them Deniers You decide what to call them.
When a scientist uses evidence to support an argument, and has not checked to see if that evidence is correct or appropriate, to me that is lying
How do they do convince you the science is faulty? Misinformation step 1: Denigrate climate scientists as self- serving and corrupt (all 30,000 of them)
• The scientists have no respect for data, science and honesty . (I. Plimer) • (The consensus about climate change) is an enormous case of organized scientific fraud... It is also a criminal act . (R Tracinski quoted by R. Carter) • The fact that the climate change establishment creates such misleading information to manipulate opinion is clear evidence that its scientific foundation doesn’t exist. (The Marshall Institute – USA)
Thousands of corrupt climate scientists • Are they all corrupt?
Astronomy Why do the crooked scientists all study climate? Didn’t any do medicine? Engineering?
Are there no young guns eager to show up those crooked old fogeys?
Not only the scientists, the temperature data is corrupt Urban heat island effect From the US Heartland Institute. (They also denied the smoking-cancer link) Surface-based temperature histories of the globe almost certainly contain a significant warming bias introduced by insufficient corrections for the non- greenhouse-gas- induced urban heat island effect.
Bob Carter, reporting Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts Instrumental temperature data have been so widely, systematically and unidirectionally tampered with that it cannot be credibly asserted there has been any significant global warming in the 20th century
Berkeley Group Skeptical physicists and statisticians, they didn’t believe the conclusions of climate scientists and so reanalysed all the temperature data. Goddard Institute for Space Studies (USA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (USA), Hadley Climatic Research Unit (UK)
Result Their results exactly matched the 3 previous analyses. Removing urban Met Stations from the data set made no difference at all.
Berkeley Earth Group Richard Muller: “Call me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I'm now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause." July 2012
Misinformation step 2 • Simplify the science to a single issue and claim commonsense would tell it is wrong
CO 2 rises uniformly, temperature wriggles about, therefore CO 2 cannot explain the temperature – stands to reason!
But maybe there is more than one factor Global temperature depends on several things: • Ocean temperature and currents • Volcanic ash in the upper air acting as a sun- shade • Small changes in the sun – sunspot cycles • Industrial pollutants Which all contribute to the variation
Recent impact of the Southern Oscillation on global temperature -25 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 -20 El Niño – warm Pacific Ocean surface -15 -10 -5 0 5 SOI 10 15 La Niña cool ocean 20 25 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 -20 T -10 0 10 20
Pacific Decadal Oscillation
Volcanic dust and sunspot cycles
Take the long view – 130 years 80 Deviation from average x 100 60 40 20 20 th century average 0 -20 The ups and down are natural variation -40 -60 1905 1925 1945 1965 1985 2005 Goddard institute for Space Studies (NASA)
And another simple example of something apparently so obvious Plimer: Would you expect warming after the Little Ice Age? His Answer “Of course” Why “of course? Shouldn’t you ask why did it get cooler in the first place, then ask why did it not stay cool, or cool more?
The last 13,000 years Marcott et al (2013) in Science
Step 3: cherry-pick Select a limited set of observations and pretend they represent the norm
Earth stopped warming in 1998 80 70 60 Temperature change ( ° C*100) 50 40 30 20 10 This is the data used to make that statement 0 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Looks a bit different if you expand the data set (20-year pick) 80 70 Temperature change ( ° C*100) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
And expand a bit wider: earth is still warming (36-year pick) Global temperature anomaly - ° C x 0.01 80 y = 1.62x - 3193.4 R² = 0.805 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Air temperature (land ocean)
Post-script If the global temperature data are corrupt and so cannot show global warming, how can these same data show that the warming has stopped?
But has the rate of warming the air eased? There has been a slowdown since about 2005
70% 0f the Sun’s heat goes into the ocean 4 every second
In response to extreme temperature “Well the climate has always varied, heat waves are nothing new, some years are hot, some not, it is just natural variation” And “We’ve had heat waves before, it’s a cyclical thing”
Alice Springs # “hot” days (>40 ° C) 2005 20 1961 4 1920 0 2006 26 1962 13 1921 0 2007 9 1963 14 1922 3 2008 21 1964 9 1923 8 2009 6 1965 6 1924 5 2010 7 1966 3 1925 2 2011 3 1967 11 1926 20 2012 26 1968 11 1927 7 2013 31 1969 12 1928 7 2014 17 1970 22 1929 14 Average 6 Average 10 Average 15
Misinformation step 4 Speak with confidence and include lots of numbers – nobody will know if they are correct
Alan Jones, Q&A July 20th 80% of Australia’s energy comes from coal fired power, and it’s about 79 dollars a kilowatt hour, wind power is about 1,502 dollars a kilowatt hour, that is unaffordable Facts: Actually $79 per MEGAwatt hour for coal, OK dumb but easy to make error. Wind about $150-214 in the report supposedly quoted, but by now about $110 Jones has fully admitted the mistakes
Recommend
More recommend
