WebSearch –Try: Management-Methods-Foresight-Prospective Studies-Roadmaps-Innovation.

Custom Search

My visitors whereabouts - tell me more via a comment or back link

Web and Blog List

New Scientist - Environment

Renewable energy : nature.com subject feeds

ScienceDirect Publication: Journal of CO2 Utilization

Shale Debate, UK

News - Steel Market Update - Steel Market Update

Showing posts with label climate science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label climate science. Show all posts

Friday, 15 August 2014

A global temperature conundrum: Cooling or warming climate? _Does not, the authors emphasize, change the evidence of human impact on global climate beginning in the 20th century.

"The scientists call this problem the Holocene temperature conundrum. It has important implications for understanding  and evaluating climate models, as well as for the benchmarks used to create  for the future. It does not, the authors emphasize, change the evidence of human impact on global climate beginning in the 20th century."


A global temperature conundrum: Cooling or warming climate?


Nor must this, I contend, diminish our resolve to take the necessary actions to manage Climate Change deleterious effects both for our sake,for our economies and for future generations (self-interest is a well known motivator & must not be forgotten or excluded by pious calls in abnegation in favour of future generations who naturally have no "voting" power. 


Read more at:

A global temperature conundrum: Cooling or warming climate?

Tuesday, 10 June 2014

Public Understanding vs. Scientific Consensus via Yale


"Public understanding of climate change, however, is starkly different than the expert consensus: only 44% of Americans think global warming is both happening and human caused. " says Yale, School of Forestry & Environmental Studies.

- See more at: See More at Yale Univ. 



Heh! Come on you guys, come on Yale: When the chips are down, and they are down, who do you believe, Scientists whom you do not know and how do not pay your daily bills or Your Boss whom you know and who pays your every day lively hood!!!!

You swallow and hope maybe something will turn up and try to forget for the time being or if you are a real toughy you stick you chest out and bellow any old denial theory posing to be a hard boiled sceptical scientific enquiring mind. So it's

"BUSINESS AS USUAL"  & The boss is happy, hoping he will be in the next issue of Forbes Magazine's Worlds Richest individuals!

SEE for EXAMPLE (cf.): 

ExxonMobil Ignores IPCC Warning, Vows to Burn All Oil Reserves


You can add the strong negative message given by USA in the Huge Shale Fracking industry , huge GHG emission technique in itself and whose poor management of environmental concerns have been underlined by French Publc Television Programme "Envoye Speciale" if I remember correctly.

The public cannot lead on such an issue.  I believe only strongly led International Co-operation(s) at the highest levels can adaquatly respond to such an enormous challenge.  Suggestions I have made may be found in my previous post entitled insired by a summary by New Scientist link as follows:

 A Security Council Issue_Climate science: Why the world won't listen - opinion - 26 September 2013 - New Scientist


A Security Council Issue_Climate science: Why the world won't listen - opinion - 26 September 2013 - New Scientist

"WHEN scholars of the future write the history of climate change, they may look to early 2008 as a pivotal moment. Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth was bringing the science to the masses. The economist Nicholas Stern had made the financial case for tackling the problem sooner rather than later. And the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had just issued its most unequivocal report yet on the link between human activity and climatic change.
The scientific and economic cases were made. Surely with all those facts on the table, soaring public interest and ambitious political action were inevitable?
The exact opposite happened. Fast-forward to today, the eve of the IPCC's latest report on the state of climate science, and it is clear that public concern and political enthusiasm have not kept up with the science. Apathy, lack of interest and even outright denial are more widespread than they were in 2008."
The text quote above gives an excellent summary of the difficulties encountered in tackling climate-change and the more & more hightly likely consequences.
I strongly advise readers to read the full article freely available  in the highly reputable "general public" magazine The New Scientist. (Link html below)
Climate science: Why the world won't listen - opinion - 26 September 2013 - New Scientist

ROI-Return-On-Investment:
I would add one further reason for communication not leading to action. It is not sufficient to simply mention that the Financial & Economic case hase been made. It too must be communicated. It is of no use making appeals to those with the lease influence- for bottom-up action aimed at an ever empoverised population spending to live, and buy, if possible a cheap polluting car if they are fortuneate.  Against this the number of the very very wealthy increases. Do these people care about CC-climate change? Are they still making "dirty money" from their polluting businesses. Having made "dirty money " what action are they taking to correct the current situation & their dire projected consequences -consequences obviouly hitting the most vulnerable!

A Top down appeal for a "Marshal Plan for European Re-construction" following  International Collabortative Action get to the top of the Agenda. The recent European Elections did nothing in this respect, Poorly communicated if communicated at all. There was one list which suggested (promised) to fight to put the equivalent of what was paid to put the Banks afloat. I voted for that list for the EU elections. Not to be too harsh with the banking profession the may need to stat afloat as the sea level are projected to rise. (And what of the insurance Co's...Natural hasard vs IPCC best prevision and physically unacted upon by the Financial Players?)

Will there is still time - on my previous posts -

Why Global Warming Will Cross a Dangerous Threshold in 2036 M.E.Mann in Scientific American_Truely Serious Stuff!


If proper work is done the the crossing of the predicted threshold in 2036 will be avoided and the improvements enacted fully tested. So now is the time for  top politicians (eg G8) and business men (eg Davos) to get their act together. This is truely Security Council issue - we are not talking about Millenium Issues.We are talking about what is to be done now and over the next 10 years, one little decade, a we decade lads & lassies.

Dam-it "Wedge-a-War"  We have just assisted at the the almost unbareable photos take on D-Day.
Millions of deaths, Thousands on the beaches, inaccurate bombing at at that time. Well 70 years on we are again faced with inacurate "bombing" so to speak.

He lies my case gentlemen. "Wedge-a-War"

Sunday, 8 June 2014

Why Global Warming Will Cross a Dangerous Threshold in 2036 M.E.Mann in Scientific American_Truely Serious Stuff!

The full article is freely available at the following link:

Why Global Warming Will Cross a Dangerous Threshold in 2036 by M.E.Mann in Scientific American.


And "irresponsible" general public press reports are quoted and fortuneately explained by Mann in his presentation of the scientific case at the following link:

Earth Will Cross the Climate Danger Threshold by 2036

"The rate of global temperature rise may have hit a plateau, but a climate crisis still looms in the near future

Emitting carbon dioxide at current rates will soon push Earth’s temperature up by 2 degrees Celsius. Here’s how to make the calculation yourself


SEE ALSO - Cf.
Perception of climate change  in PNAS-Proceedings of the National Association for Science (USA) by James Hansen, et al. March 29, 2012.