Environmental news from California and beyond

« Previous | Greenspace Home | Next »

Global warming: The book

Dire_predictions_2 As an environmental reporter for the L.A. Times, with a particular focus on global warming, I have too many newly published books crossing my desk. Do I feel guilty that I don't have the time to read them all? Of course. And do I feel ashamed not to have absorbed the thousands of pages and graphs disgorged over the past eight years by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the Nobel Prize-winning group of the world's leading climate scientists?  To be sure.

But now comes a handy guide for every harried individual daunted by the complexities of greenhouse effects, carbon-cycle feedbacks, ocean conveyor belts and climate modeling. "Dire Predictions: Understanding Global Warming" bills itself as "The illustrated guide to the findings of the IPCC." If that sounds dull, think again. The 208-page volume, from DK Publishing, known for its "information architects," is chock-full of easy-to-understand graphics overlaid on stunning photographs, with simple text that even the science-challenged can grasp.

But simple doesn't mean dumbed-down. The authors are climatologist Michael E. Mann, director of Penn State's Earth System Science Center and lead author of the 2001 IPCC report's chapter on "Observed Climate Variability and Change," and Lee R. Kump, a Penn State geosciences professor with 75 peer-reviewed publications under his belt. Mann, a founder of the science-based website, is also known as the father of the "hockey stick" graph of temperature trends.

The book is divided into five parts: Climate Change Basics, which answers such questions as "Why is it called the greenhouse effect?" and "What can a decade of western North American drought tell us about the future?"; Climate Change Projections, which looks at what's expected in the next century and how different regions are expected to vary; The Impacts of Climate Change, which explains the effects from coral reefs to polar permafrost; Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change, which examines economic effects, water and agriculture; and Solving Global Warming, which analyzes strategies from green building to geoengineering and advises on how to cut your own carbon footprint.

Southern Californians take note: There's a section on Is it time to sell that beach house?

— Margot Roosevelt

Photo credit: DK Publishing Inc.

Comments () | Archives (27)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Science is a search for the truth yet never assuming we have found it. Only through testing hypotheses subjectively through imperical observations and calculations can we approach it. Politics has no place in science! Challenging scientific hypotheses is productive, but persecution of scientists with opposing views is political.

This comments section is perfect proof of why one should simply ignore the deniers who post their fringe element, totally discredited, X-Files worthy distractions which are merely designed to waste our time and take our eye off the ball - the ball in this case being the earth and the circle of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses that surround our planet and threaten our way of life.

A million links along with a billion words on their part will not change the truth about our climate situation or the work that needs to be done. So let the deniers talk to the hand and never acknowledge them or their worthless noise. They only want to keep us tied up in debate at the expense of the action we know we must take.

That being said, I own this book and have been reading and studying it. I agree with Margo, it's a terrific resource and does an outstanding job of explaining the facts.

Pauvre Leigh - that 'definitive document' is a mishmash written by a retired coal-chemist and anti-IPCC lobbyist. It isn't science, and it isn't definitive - it's a vent.

The definitive document completely discrediting the IPCC:

Team of 13 International Scientists Write Letter To UN Sec. Gen. – IPCC ‘Must be called to account and cease its deceptive practices’ - 14th of July, 2008 (LINK)

Australian scientist reverses view on man-made warming - Now a Skeptic! Now says 'new evidence has seriously weakened' the case - (By Mathematician, Rocket Scientist & Engineer Dr. David Evans, who did carbon accounting for the Australian Government) – July 18, 2008 (LINK)

Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever, Declares Himself Dissenter: ‘I am a skeptic’ - 'Global warming has become a new religion' - July 2, 2008 - (LINK)

Top UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Turns on IPCC. Calls Warming Fears: ‘Worst scientific scandal in the history’ – June 27, 2008 - By Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist who specializes in optical waveguide spectroscopy from the Yokohama National University, also contributed to the 2007 UN IPCC AR4 (fourth assessment report) as an expert reviewer. (LINK)

New scientific paper shows CO2’s effect on temperature was overstated 500-2000% - Published in Physics and Society journal of the American Physical Society – July 2008 (LINK)

Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Roy Spencer, formerly of NASA, presented ‘smoking gun’ analysis showing UN IPCC models ‚significantly overstated climate sensitivity to human climate forcings’ - June 17, 2008 – (LINK)

Four prominent scientists warn 'global warming out, global cooling in'- ‘Potential for a significant decline in the average mean temperature' - July 12, 2008 (LINK) & (LINK)

Arctic ice INCREASES by nearly a half million square miles over same time period in 2007 - July 18, 2008 – (LINK)

Australian astronomical Society warns of global COOLING as Sun's activity 'significantly diminishes' – June 29, 2008 – (LINK) & (LINK)

New Study Exposes UN IPCC as ‘single-interest organization’ with echo chamber process – July 15, 2008 – By Climate data analyst John McLean (LINK)

Atmospheric Scientist Tennekes: 'Sun may cause some cooling' - 'No evidence at all for catastrophic global warming' - July 14, 2008 (By Atmospheric scientist Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, a scientific pioneer in the development of numerical weather prediction and former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute.) (LINK)

Atmospheric Physicist James Peden Dissents from man-made CO2 Fears – ‘The so-called Greenhouse Effect is a Myth’ – Peden is formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh and Extranuclear Laboratories in Blawnox, Pennsylvania, studying ion-molecule reactions in the upper atmosphere. (LINK)

South African Scientist: 'There is no evidence man-made CO2 causes climate change' – By Dr. Kelvin Kemm, formerly a scientist at South Africa’s Atomic Energy Corporation. (LINK)

Climatologist dismisses extreme weather predictions due to man-made warming as ‘complete nonsense’ – By Hydro-climatologist Stewart Franks, an Associate Professor of Environmental Engineering at the University of Newcastle in Australia. (LINK)

Another scientist dismisses fearmongers: Midwest Floods and ‘Completely Unjustified’ Climate Change Fear Mongering – June 22, 2008 - By Mike Smith is a certified consulting meteorologist and a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society He is CEO of WeatherData Services, Inc., an AccuWeather Company, based in Wichita.) (LINK)

U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) report shows Hurricanes declining, NO increases in drought, tornados, thunderstorms, heat-waves – June 20, 2008 – (LINK)

Going Down: Death Rates Due to Extreme Weather Events (LINK)

Analysis in peer-reviewed journal finds COLD PERIODS – not warm periods – see INCREASE in floods, droughts, storms, famine – April 24, 2008 - (LINK)

Top Australian Scientist: Why so much climate change talk is hot air – (By William Kininmonth. formerly head of Australia's National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological Organization. He is author of Climate Change: A Natural Hazard (Multi-science Publishing, 2004) (LINK)

MIT Scientist Dr. Robert Rose wrote on July 8, 2008, “Cooler heads [are] needed in global warming debate” and linked warming and cooling cycles to the “orbit and the tilt and wobble of the axis of the Earth's spin.” Rose also questioned climate model predictions by stating, “Clearly, these are not ‘facts.’ They are computer models.” (Rose is a professor of Materials Science and Engineering at MIT with approximately 50 years of experience teaching various scientific disciplines at the graduate and undergraduate levels.) (LINK)

Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology declared she was skeptical of man-made climate fears – February 27, 2008 - Excerpt: “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly,” Simpson, formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies, wrote in a public letter on February 27. “As a scientist I remain skeptical,” she wrote. Simpson was described by former Colorado State Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke, Sr. as “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.” (LINK)

Veteran UN Climate Scientist Resigns Science Group in Protest: "AN ORCHESTRATED LITANY OF LIES" By UN IPCC Chemist Dr. Vincent Gray (LINK)

Award-winning Philippines ecologist and evolutionary biologist Dr. Perry Ong declared climate fears were “hyped up.” – May 18, 2008 – Ong is the director of the Institute of Biology at the University of the Philippines’ College of Science.) (LINK)

International climate declaration tops 1,100 endorsers – Man-made climate fears rejected – June 19, 2008 – (LINK)

Prominent scientist refutes his own theory, finds warming does not increase hurricanes – July 15, 2008 - Dr. Kerry Emanuel, an MIT professor of atmospheric science (LINK) & (LINK)

Another prominent hurricane expert reconsiders view: New study says global warming not worsening hurricanes – May 19, 2008 - By Meteorologist Tom Knutson of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s fluid dynamics lab in Princeton, N.J. (LINK)

UK Scientist Calls Man-Made Warming Fears ‘Dangerous Nonsense of the Age’ – July 17, 2008 - By Biogeography Professor Philip Stott, emeritus of the University of London (LINK)

Global Warming Has Ended – The Next Climate Change to A Pronounced Cold Era Has Begun - The Space and Science Research Center Issues A Formal Declaration: - July 1, 2008 (LINK)

U.S Army Chief Scientist Dr. Bruce West Says Sun, Not Man, Is Driving Climate Change – June 3, 2008 – (LINK)

Oceans Cooling! Scientists puzzled by “mystery of global warming's missing heat”- March 19, 2008 - (LINK)

New Data from NASA’s Aqua satellite is showing “greatly reduced future warming projected as a consequence of carbon dioxide.” – March 22, 2008 - (LINK )

Report: 31,000 + scientists dispute UN’s man-made global warming claims! – May 16, 2008 (LINK)

New Peer-Reviewed Study Finds Greenland Ice Melt ‘not changing’ or ‘dropping’ – July 4, 2008 - (LINK) & (LINK)

Peer-reviewed study finds Antarctic fails to warm as climate models predicted – May 7, 2008 – (LINK)

Media Hype on ‘Melting’ Antarctic Ignores Record Ice Growth – March 27, 2008 – (LINK)

Arctic ice INCREASES by nearly a half million square miles over same time period in 2007 - July 18, 2008 – (LINK)

New Peer-Reviewed Study Shows Arctic COOLING Over last 1500 years! - Feb 5, 2008 - Published in Climate Dynamics on 30 January 2008 (LINK)

Numerous Peer-Reviewed Studies Show Natural Causes of Arctic Warming and Ice Reduction - Jan. 2008 – (LINK)

New analysis finds Arctic ice reduction may be due to undersea volcanoes – June 26, 2008 - (LINK)

New Report finds global sea ice GROWING: ‘World sea ice in April 2008 reached levels that were ‘unprecedented’ for the month of April in over 25 years.’ (LINK)

U.S. Senate Report Debunks Polar Bear Extinction Fears - Jan 30, 2008 – (LINK)

Top Ivy League Forecasting expert Dr. Scott Armstrong says polar bear models critically flawed - Bear populations increased in recent decades – May 8, 2008 - (LINK)

Swedish scientists: 'No concrete global warming proof in polar region' – June 21, 2008 – (LINK)

Climate Audit: May Global Sea Ice at '10th highest on record' – June 20, 2008 (LINK)

Study: 'Absolutely no evidence of warming for all of Antarctica' – July 1, 2008 – Study conducted by Vesa Laine of the Finnish Meteorological Institute in Helsinki; the work was funded by the Academy of Finland and the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation (LINK)

Global warming may not affect sea levels, study finds - Jan 11, 2008 – (LINK)

After being stripped of his title, skeptical Oregon state climatologist George Taylor steps aside - Feb 22, 2008 – (LINK) [ See also July 2007 comprehensive report detailing how skeptical scientists have faced threats and intimidation - LINK ]

Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Roy Spencer, formerly of NASA, found not one peer-reviewed paper has 'ruled out a natural cause for most of our recent warmth' – March 20, 2008 - (LINK)

UN IPCC in 'Panic Mode' as Earth Fails to Warm, Scientist Paleoclimatologist Dr. Bob Carter says – March 25, 2008 - (LINK )

UN IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri “to look into the apparent temperature plateau so far this century.” – January 24, 2008 - (LINK)

Canadian Climatologist Dr. Timothy Ball: CO2 from human or natural sources is not causing global warming – June 23, 2008 – (LINK)

New scientific analysis shows Sun “could account for as much as 69% of the increase in Earth's average temperature”- March 2008 - (LINK) & (LINK)

Scientists find dust free atmosphere may be responsible for up to .36 F rise in global temps – March 3, 2008 - (LINK)

New York Times Laments Media's incorrect hyping of frogs and global warming – March 24, 2008 - (LINK)

MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen’s March 2008 presentation of data from the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office found the Earth has had “no statistically significant warming since 1995.”- (LINK)

An International team of scientists released a March 2008 report to counter UN IPCC, declaring: “Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate” (LINK)

Emitting MORE CO2 may 'be good for life on Earth', says atmospheric scientist Dr. Roy Spencer, formerly of NASA in May 2008. (LINK)

Former Colorado State Climatologist Pielke Sr. Rails Against Abuse of the scientific method’ in global warming study (LINK)

Sun in deep slumber: 10.7 solar flux hits record low value – July 16, 2008 - By Meteorologist Anthony Watts (LINK)

Science Daily: Scientists not sure why Sun 'continues to be dead' – June 9, 2008 (LINK)

Climate models fail again! Scientist 'startled' to discover 50% of ozone destroyed in lower atmosphere – June 26, 2008 – (LINK)

Report: In praise of CO2: Earth 'is the greenest it's been in decades, perhaps in centuries' – June 7, 2008 – (LINK)

'Global Warming Will Stop,' New Peer-Reviewed Study Says - Global Warming Takes a Break for Nearly 20 Years? - April 2008 - (LINK)

Cooling Underway: Global Temperature Continues to Drop in May - 'Significantly Colder' - 16-month temperature drop of -0.774°C! (LINK)

Earth's 'Fever' Breaks: Global COOLING Currently Under Way - February 27, 2008 - (LINK)

Alaska sees ‘longest stretch of no-nineties in the Alaska climate record, since 1904’ – June 25, 2008 - By Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks (LINK)

Chill out: Alaskan faces 'cool gloomy' summer – July 17, 2008 – (LINK)

Peru declares state of emergency due to record-breaking cold spell – 61 children die – June 19, 2008 – (LINK)

Why have the oceans been cooling for 5 years? – July 2008 (LINK)

Delaware: ‘Unheard of’ Cold ocean temperatures in July slow fishing – July 16, 2008 – (LINK)

Meteorologist: 'It's mid-summer and Lake Superior is still chilly' – July 15 , 2008 - By Meteorologist Karl Bohnak of Michigan’s TV6 and holds the American Meteorological Society’s broadcast seal of approval) (LINK)

Geophysicist calls man-made climate fears ‘a fraud’ and ‘hysterical scare tactic’ – June 29, 2008 - (By Dr. David Deming is a geophysicist and associate professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma who has published peer-reviewed climate studies) (LINK)

U.S. Scientists Sign Document Refuting Man-made Climate fears - "Prominent Americans among those demanding an end to climate hysteria" – June 27, 2008 – (LINK)

Climate Audit's Steve McIntyre: IPCC 'claimed to have destroyed all their working documents' - Violates 'objective, open and transparent' process! – June 20, 2008 (LINK)

Report: Nature may soon cool climate debate as 'fairly cold period' set to begin – June 18, 2008 - (LINK)

Meteorologist says Man-Made Global Warming Movement ‘Rapidly Running Out of Gas’ In past year - June 17, 2008 - (By Award winning Chief Meteorologist James Spann of Alabama ABC TV) (LINK) & (LINK)

NASA Aerospace Engineer Rejects Man-Made Climate fears (By Dirck T. Hartmann, who worked on the Apollo Space Program and many other significant NASA projects. Hartmann is a scientist/ aerospace engineer/physicist) (LINK)

How cold is it getting? Harsh winters force Mongolian horsemen to abandon nomadic life (LINK)

Somaliland resident in Africa: Global warming hysteria, ‘more to do with Europe’s prosperous middle class politics than Science’ (LINK)

Another Dissenter: ‘There is only 1/19 as much CO2 in the air today as there was 520 million years’ – By Geologist/Earth Scientist Greg Benson: - July 15, 2008 – Benson is an earth scientist with 30 years of geologic study and currently works as a research specialist in geologic modeling. (LINK)

New study finds cleaner skies 'contributing to at least half the warming that has occurred' - July 9, 2008 From New Scientist (LINK)

UN Scientist Debunks Warming Fears: ‘No correlation between the anthropogenic emissions of GHGs and global temperature’ - By IPCC Reviewer and climate consultant Richard Courtney – (LINK)

“No 'greenhouse' gas other than water has ever influenced the global climate perceptibly” By Chemical Scientist Dr. Brian G. Valentine, professor at University of Maryland (LINK)

UK scientist Dissents: ‘More proof that global warming is natural’ - June 26, 2008 (By Botanist Dr. David Bellamy) – (LINK)

Lindzen has participated in several climate science reviews and doesn't dispute that the earth is warming. Despite his presence on those panels, he hasn't convinced climatologists (or informed observers) that his claims are genuine. He doesn't publish much about them in the reviewed literature. He doesn't find evidence for them from observations. This is perhaps not surprising, his work is not in climatology, but weather dynamics.

In scientific circles, his claims are unsupported opinion. Why would he do that? He has always had an argumentative personality, and in this case that turns can be a lucrative asset -

Scientists Offered Cash to Dispute Climate Study

"The American Enterprise Institute is more than just a thinktank, it functions as the Bush administration's intellectual Cosa Nostra. They are White House surrogates in the last throes of their campaign of climate change denial. They lost on the science; they lost on the moral case for action. All they've got left is a suitcase full of cash."

Lindzen pleads that he hasn't take grants from energy companies. He consults for them for thousand$ / day.

Leigh, with regard to the MWP, yes, temperatures were relatively high then but there is scant evidence that these temperatures were global in nature (the evidence suggests they were regional in nature (northern hemisphere). As well, I’m not aware of any data which suggest the MWP temperatures were, on a global basis, higher than global temperatures of the last 30 years. As well, the temperature is rising faster now than at any time in the last one or even two thousand years. If you can point me to some data in the peer reviewed literature showing the MWP as being warmer than today, I’d be grateful.

As far as the last decade, temperatures remain well above mean temperatures over the long haul. Yes, it’s possible to show a slight decline in temperatures if you cherry pick your years, say, 1998 (the year of the strongest El Nino in history) and 2008 (a strong La Nina). But you can do multiple regression analyses of several time periods in recent years and get positive trends. But all of these are less than meaningful because if you don’t choose a long enough time period, the “trend” is not scientifically meaningful. Trends in climate science are usually established over 30+ year periods.

Kind regards.

For anyone who wants to know the origins of the corruption of science - and specifically climate science, cut and paste the link below for an absolutely brilliant paper written by Richard Lindzen from MIT:

...and for anyone else reading this exchange - notice how ShrillDeFool is attacking ME (untruths, non-sequiturs, rant...etc.) - but never actually gets around to answering my posted questions or pointing out any factual "untruths" I supposedly have commited. This is how the cult members do it in every forum - attack the person in the post! Their intelligence, their english, their motivation, their education - they will do anything except debate the subject because their arguments and data cannot stand up to logical or scientific scruitny because it is all manipulated to support the conclusion they desire. Confront these people before the worldwide Carbon Credit Scam seizes power and control over the US economy (what's left of it) and begins the largest extortion of weatlh in world history.

You are a fool, just like all of your cult members. I could list you dozens of sites along with thousands of scientists and their scientific papers that rip apart every single concept, theory, data set, climate model and proponent of this scam. You act like one internet site it the holy grail of all knowlege - what a joke. I've done the research. The IPCC is a corrupt organization of politicians who are manipulating every single piece of data and report so that it supports only one conclusion. Don't worry, even if the earth were warming you've certainly had enough kool-aid to get you through it just fine.

To "Leigh": Wow. I didn't know that so many untruths and non-sequiturs could be packed into so short a rant. If ever there was someone in need of the site RealClimate mentioned above in the main article, it is you.

Read it, learn it, before you continue to embarrass yourself in this forum or elsewhere in the public sphere.

Notice now none of these AGW cult member bother to address my question about the medieval warming period - where temperatures were in fact much warmer than they are now. That is because they have to continually rely on quoting "experts" and using their pathetic cop-out "consensus" argument. They all act as if anyone who received any funding from a business threatened by the AGW agenda is discredited, but all of the scientist & environmentalist promoting this scam are receiving grants and funding ONLY because and as long as they are concluding that AGW exists. So tell me you "experts" how is it that the warming has now stopped for the last decade - yet CO2 levels have continued to rise? I don't expect an answer from you on this question either. Liars, thieves and criminally ignorant - all of you.

from the most recent IPCC report, the most exhaustive scientific review of the state of current knowledge about climate change to date:

from "the summary for policy makers", a strengthening of the original conclusions of Mann and co-authors:
"Average Northern Hemisphere temperatures during the second half of the 20th century were very likely higher than during any other 50-year period in the last 500 years and likely the highest in at least the past 1,300 years."

from chapter 6 of the report, a total discrediting of the claims of McIntyre and his ilk:
"The ‘hockey stick’ reconstruction of Mann et al. (1999) has been the subject of several critical studies. Soon and Baliunas (2003) challenged the conclusion that the 20th century was the warmest at a hemispheric average scale. They surveyed regionally diverse proxy climate data, noting evidence for relatively warm (or cold), or alternatively dry (or wet) conditions occurring at any time within pre-defined periods assumed to bracket the so-called ‘Medieval Warm Period’ (and ‘Little Ice Age’). Their qualitative approach precluded any quantitative summary of the evidence at precise times, limiting the value of their review as a basis for comparison of the relative magnitude of mean hemispheric 20th-century warmth (Mann and Jones, 2003; Osborn and Briffa, 2006). Box 6.4 provides more information on the ‘Medieval Warm Period’. McIntyre and McKitrick (2003) reported that they were unable to replicate the results of Mann et al. (1998). Wahl and Ammann (2007) showed that this was a consequence of differences in the way McIntyre and McKitrick (2003) had implemented the method of Mann et al. (1998) and that the original reconstruction could be closely duplicated using the original proxy data. McIntyre and McKitrick (2005a,b) raised further concerns about the details of the Mann et al. (1998) method, principally relating to the independent verification of the reconstruction against 19th-century instrumental temperature data and to the extraction of the dominant modes of variability present in a network of western North American tree ring chronologies, using Principal Components Analysis. The latter may have some theoretical foundation, but Wahl and Amman (2006) also show that the impact on the amplitude of the final reconstruction is very small (~0.05°C; for further discussion of these issues see also Huybers, 2005; McIntyre and McKitrick, 2005c,d; von Storch and Zorita, 2005)."

a little background reading for the ill informed:

"A number of reports have noted strong ties between climate skeptics and oil company, ExxonMobil. In his biography and in news coverage, McIntyre is reported to be a former director of several small public mineral exploration companies. But in 2003, the annual report of CGX Energy, Inc., an oil and gas exploration company, listed McIntyre as a “strategic advisor”.

While investigating this story, ES&T contacted CGX Energy and asked to speak with Stephen McIntyre. A secretary responded that she did not think that he worked in the building but that contact information could be left and McIntyre would call back. McIntyre admits to ES&T that he “occasionally consults” for the company, but he says he is not funded by industry."

read the full article:

from "Climate Progress"

Sorry deniers, hockey stick gets longer, stronger: Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years

The “hockey stick” graph is a reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere temperatures over the past thousand years. It showed a sharp rise starting about a century ago. Global warming deniers and doubters have long attacked the graph asserting that we were as warm if not warmer hundreds of years ago. But a 2006 National Academy of Sciences report largely reaffirmed the analysis.

A new peer-reviewed study by climatologists and earth scientists Michael Mann, Zhihua Zhang, Malcolm Hughes, Raymond Bradley, Sonya Miller, Scott Rutherford, and Fenbiao Ni now extends the reconstruction back nearly 2000 years:

Here is a link to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences study, “Proxy-based reconstructions of hemispheric and global surface temperature variations over the past two millennia.”...

for the full article.

Well, I'm with Richard Ordway on this. Yes, there have been issues in Mann's research having to do with applying decentered PCA in the statistical analysis. But those issues do not invalidate the main thrust of the research: that Northern Hemisphere temperatures have been rising significantly in recent decades.

And to suggest that most of the AGW case rests on the hockey stick is not correct. There is the basic science of IR absorption and the role GHGs play in that, there are glacier and ice studies, observations of ocean and troposphere temperatures, there are models.

And no one has come up with an alternate theoretical position that is backed by data to explain the warming of the last 30 or so years. The solar explanations--TSI and sunspots, primarily-- just don't correlate well enough with the rising temperatures.

Frankly, I hope all of us who are more or less convinced by the science behind the AGW theory are wrong. I hope all of you who are convinced AGW is not real are right. But I have yet to see the science that convinces me you're right, and I've seen plenty to make me feel pretty certain AGW is real and is going to have significant impacts on global ecosystems in the decades to come.

Mann's work has never been discredited. SMac's attempts only work as a has-bean-counting exercise. Nine other studies have shown more curve or less curve, but the fundamental expression of a 20th century warming anomaly has never been overturned. There is no accredited science report that has ever refuted them.

The claim that the AGW case rests on the hockey stick is nonsense. At the chemistry level, the tabletop level, and the global level, the greenhouse effect varies according to its concentrations. Now the concentrations are 40% over natural levels. They are rising. Thanks to the internet, the science has been overrun with blog slogs of misiniformation and disinformation. Rather than gallery shoot one 'butwhaddabout' at a time, go discover that your objection is already on file:-

As for the 'more and more', the overwhelming trend has added more support for AGW - the ocean cooling that wasn't; the upper atmosphere cooling that wasn't, the winter arctic ice recovery that didn't; and now the tropical atmosphere discrepancy that wasn't:-


This is so sad and so maddening. Ms. Roosevelt presents Mann's book, and in particular, his theory and 'Hockey Stick', as simple, plain, unvarnished fact(s).

She frankly admits that she does not, and can not read everything that she receives for review. That is admirable but therein lies the problem.

As Larry (above) rightly says; the 'Hockey Stick' has been pretty well demolished by several authorative sources, including the one Larry cites. Ms. Roosevelt could and should check this out with a few googly clicks

That, like it or not, is the real simple, unvarnished truth.

Few serious people in the field would call Steve McIntyre of being a 'pretend' scientist. Just a quick visit to his site: would demonstrate his expertise and knowledge and again, sadly, show that Mann is far less frank than Ms. Rooseelt.

Given that most of the AGW case rests on the 'Hockey Stick', it is no wonder that more and more people, thanks to the internet, are coming to realise that, at best, AGW (via CO2) is a false theory, and at worst, a developing scam.

Richard, if you've been in the field of Climate Science for 11 years as you claim - what happened to the Medieval Warming perior in the Hockey Stick graph? There are only three types of people perpetuating the Anthropogenic Global Warming Scam, liars, thieves and the ignorant. The liars want power, the thieves want money (grants, carbon credits...) and the ignorant buy the BS and think they are helping to save the world. The earth has been warming and cooling since the beginning of time and has always averaged a couple degrees +/- every century. Perhaps you should go to the library and study some more. Every single aspect the the AGW scam is under legitimate scientific dispute. You are a fool.

"Are you not aware that Mann's hockey stick has been totally discredited by Steve McIntyre of Climate Audit"

Your comments are severely misinformed. Steve does not submit his work in the juried, refereed world-wide journals for analysis/scrutiny/fact checking such as Science Journal, Nature, etc.(but he could).

Michael Mann, Gavin Schmitt etc. do. They are real scientists...not pretend ones like Steve. I have been in the climate science field for over eleven years.

If you read Science, Nature, Climate, Geophysical letters, etc, you would know that not only has Mann's work stood up recently to scrutiny, but that he has added an even older record as well. It is only special interest groups and misinformed people who are fighting it.

It is this kind of misinformation that is severely hampering the world, in my opinion. Anyone can write a blog and put up information...there is no one to fact check.

You need to go to your library and research Nature, Science journals, etc. that have been fact checked...otherwise you are spitting in the wind in my opinion.

The hockey stick has been completely discredited. Period. For an "environmental reporter unaware of this development is very sad.

Are you not aware that Mann's hockey stick has been totally discredited by Steve McIntyre of Climate Audit? Also,

"Statisticians Blast Hockey Stick".

The recently released final report of a panel of three independent statisticians chaired by an eminent statistics professor, Edward Wegman, Chairman of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences' Committee on Theoretical and Applied Statistics, has resoundingly upheld criticisms of the famous "hockey stick" graph of Michael Mann and associates.

Overall, our committee believes that Mann's assessments that the decade of the 1990s was the hottest decade of the millennium and that 1998 was the hottest year of the millennium cannot be supported by his analysis.

[The] fact that their paper fit some policy agendas has greatly enhanced their paper's visibility. ,,,The 'hockey stick' reconstruction of temperature graphic dramatically illustrated the global warming issue and was adopted by the IPCC and many governments as the poster graphic. The graphics' prominence together with the fact that it is based on incorrect use of [principal components analysis] puts Dr. Mann and his co-authors in a difficult face-saving position.


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...


Recent News
Invitation to connect on LinkedIn |  December 12, 2013, 9:58 am »
New Cook Islands Shark Sanctuary proposed |  December 8, 2011, 8:00 am »