A cold winter, but how cold?
The meeting this week of global-warming-skeptics in New York, sponsored by the Chicago-based Heartland Institute, is discussing the various reasons they feel climate change science is unconvincing. One reason being bandied about is the cold winter the U.S. has been experiencing. Andrew Revkin covered it for the New York Times. Juliet Eilpern covered it for the Washington Post. "I will admit that we do not have all the pieces," he NYT article quotes Dr. Ignatius Rigor as having said (He works at the Polar Science Center at the University of Washington, Seattle. Dr. Rigor continues, "but as the I.P.C.C. reports, the preponderance of evidence suggests that global warming is real....Climate skeptics typically take a few small pieces of the puzzle to debunk global warming, and ignore the whole picture that the larger science community sees by looking at all the pieces."
I agree with this rigorous (pun fully intended) approach, and am bummed out when I hear people look at a relatively small weather event as evidence for climactic trends over the long term. Plenty of people made that mistake with Hurricane Katrina, and it looks like more people are making it now with regards to the 2007-08 winter chill. I'm pleased to see that at least one of the skeptics on the Heartland Institute meeting program, Patrick Michaels, a climatologist at the Cato Institute libertarian think-tank in DC, makes that same point. Gavin Schmidt (NASA Goddard & RealClimate.org) agrees: "When I get called by CNN to comment on a big summer storm or a drought or something, I give the same answer I give a guy who asks about a blizzard," Dr. Schmidt said. "It's all in the long-term trends. Weather isn't going to go away because of climate change. There is this desire to explain everything that we see in terms of something you think you understand, whether that's the next ice age coming or global warming."
So how big are the fluctuations (weather) relative to the trend (climate)? This graphic from the Times shows this winter's temperature relative to the overall trend. Click on it for the full-size version.
I agree with this rigorous (pun fully intended) approach, and am bummed out when I hear people look at a relatively small weather event as evidence for climactic trends over the long term. Plenty of people made that mistake with Hurricane Katrina, and it looks like more people are making it now with regards to the 2007-08 winter chill. I'm pleased to see that at least one of the skeptics on the Heartland Institute meeting program, Patrick Michaels, a climatologist at the Cato Institute libertarian think-tank in DC, makes that same point. Gavin Schmidt (NASA Goddard & RealClimate.org) agrees: "When I get called by CNN to comment on a big summer storm or a drought or something, I give the same answer I give a guy who asks about a blizzard," Dr. Schmidt said. "It's all in the long-term trends. Weather isn't going to go away because of climate change. There is this desire to explain everything that we see in terms of something you think you understand, whether that's the next ice age coming or global warming."
So how big are the fluctuations (weather) relative to the trend (climate)? This graphic from the Times shows this winter's temperature relative to the overall trend. Click on it for the full-size version.
Also, you may be interested in Real Climate's discussion of the conference.
Labels: climate change, global warming
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home