Opinion polls of climate change
According to a 2007 Newsweek poll, 42% of Americans believe that "there is a lot of disagreement among climate scientists about whether human activities are a major cause" of global warming". I posed the same question to members of the wunderground community on Monday, and even higher 56% of them thought so. However, the results of a poll that appears in this week's edition of the journal EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, reveals that the public is misinformed on this issue. Fully 97% of the climate scientists who regularly publish on climate change agreed with the statement, "human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures".
Figure 1. Response to the question, "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?" The general public data come from a 2008 Gallup poll (see http://www.gallup.com/poll/1615/Environment.aspx). Image credit: EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Union.
The anonymous poll was performed in late 2008 by Peter Doran, University of Illinois at Chicago associate professor of earth and environmental sciences, along with former graduate student Maggie Kendall Zimmerman. Doran and Kendall Zimmerman sought the opinion of the most complete list of earth scientists they could find, contacting more than 10,200 experts at universities and government labs around the world listed in the 2007 edition of the American Geological Institute's Directory of Geoscience Departments. The 2-minute, two-question poll had 3146 responses (30.7% of those polled). Approximately 90% of the scientists who responded were from the U.S., and about 90% held a Ph.D. degree. Of these scientists, 5% were climate scientists who published more than 50% of all their peer-reviewed publications in the past five years on the subject of climate change. The authors noted that the survey included participants with well-documented dissenting opinions on global warming theory. Question #1 was, When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?" About 90% of all the scientists and 97% of the climate scientists said temperatures had risen. Question #2 was, "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?" About 82% of all the scientists agreed, and 97% (75 of 77) climate scientists agreed. This contrasts with the results of a recent Gallup poll that suggests only 58% of the general public would answer yes. Interestingly, petroleum geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest doubters in the new EOS poll, with only 47 and 64 percent, respectively, believing in human involvement.
In a press release on the study, author Peter Doran commented, "The petroleum geologist response is not too surprising, but the meteorologists' is very interesting," he said. "Most members of the public think meteorologists know climate, but most of them actually study very short-term phenomenon." He was not surprised, however, by the near-unanimous agreement by climate scientists. "They're the ones who study and publish on climate science. So I guess the take-home message is, the more you know about the field of climate science, the more you're likely to believe in global warming and humankind's contribution to it." Doran and Kendall Zimmerman conclude that "the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes. The challenge, rather, appears to be how to effectively communicate this fact to policy makers and to a public that continues to mistakenly perceive debate among scientists."
Commentary
The scientists most involved in assessing the current state of the climate are the most likely to have the "pulse of the planet"--a deep understanding of how the climate works and where we are headed. If 97% of these scientists believe in significant human impact on the climate, then it is probably so. Why is there such a disparity, then, between what they believe, and what the public and other scientists, such as petroleum geologists, believe? Dr. Ricky Rood has some excellent commentary on this issue in his latest wunderground Climate Change blog, and I offer these three reasons:
1) There are a few good climate scientists (3%) that believe humans are not significantly impacting the climate. One tends to hear the beliefs of this tiny minority a disproportionate amount. This is primarily because the fossil fuel industry pumps millions of dollars into PR campaigns to make sure you hear these dissenting views. That's not to say that these scientists are paid lackeys of the fossil fuel industry--that is not the case. These scientists' point of view happens to coincide with arguments that would protect the profits of the fossil fuel industry, so naturally the industry spends a lot of money making sure you hear these points of view. The fossil fuel industry PR campaigns also emphasize the contrarian views of a handful of non-publishing scientists working for private think tanks, who provide a distorted, non-objective view of climate change science (e.g., the attempt to hide summertime Arctic sea ice loss by quoting irrelevant statistics about wintertime global sea ice). These efforts have been highly successful in casting doubt on what is an overwhelming (though not unanimous) consensus among climate scientists. The fossil fuel industry PR campaigns are similar to the ones run by the cigarette industry to cast doubt on the harmfulness of smoking. "Doubt is our product," a cigarette executive once observed, "since it is the best means of competing with the 'body of fact' that exists in the minds of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy." I recommend a reading of the 2008 book, "Doubt is Their Product", which discusses the many efforts by industry over the years to cast doubt on established scientific facts in order to protect industry profits.
2) The media contributes to the disproportionate coverage of the dissenting views, since one can make a news story more compelling by dramatizing conflict and giving equal weight to both sides.
3) Many people have a deep-seated belief in the relative insignificance of humans on a planetary scale. Geologists, who take the long view of time over geologic history, are particularly prone to this. Indeed, the planet is vast, and we are but tiny ants crawling upon its surface during a brief moment in geologic time. However, when one works regularly with the data, it becomes apparent that human activities are beginning to substantially impact weather and climate. When presented with facts contrary to ones beliefs, a good scientist will check the facts extra thoroughly to verify their validity, but then abandon those beliefs that don't fit the facts. The facts as accepted by 97% of our top climate scientists are that atmosphere is but a relatively thin, fragile layer of volatile gases beginning to show unmistakable changes due to the geometric explosion in human population over recent centuries. Those effects are only now beginning to be detectable, which is why human-caused global warming is so controversial in the public's eye. I predict that twenty years from now, climate change will be so obvious that the controversy regarding human responsibility will be gone.
Figure 2. The atmosphere viewed edge on from space. Tall thunderstorm clouds can be seen on the right side of the image, silhouetted against an orange layer of lower atmospheric gases (the troposphere) back-lit by the sun, just below the horizon. Above this layer is the clear blue of the stratosphere and the blackness of space. Seen from space, one can appreciate the thinness and potential vulnerability of the layer of gases that make up our atmosphere. Image credit: NASA Space Shuttle Flight 6 on 4 April 1983.
How representative is this poll?
The findings of another, more in-depth poll of scientists done in 2007 pretty much agreed with this week's Doran/Zimmerman poll, but were much more interesting. The 2007 poll, conducted by Fergus Brown, Roger Pielke, Sr., and James Annan, attempted to assess whether "a significant set of climate scientists agree or disagree with the perspective of the role of humans within the climate system as reported by the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report". Out of the 1807 scientists in 53 countries who were contacted, 140 responded. Almost all respondents (at least 97%) concluded that the "human addition of CO2 into the atmosphere is an important component of the climate system and has contributed to some extent in recent observed global average warming". Among the other findings:
1) No scientists were willing to admit to the statement that global warming is a fabrication and that human activity is not having any significant effect on climate [0%].
2) The largest group of respondents (45-50%) agreed with the 2007 IPCC report.
3) A significant minority (15-20%) concluded that the IPCC overstated the role of the human role in affecting the climate.
4) A significant minority (15-20%) concluded that the IPCC understated the seriousness of the threat from human additions of CO2. Ten of the 140 respondents (7%) took the most pessimistic view that we are "seriously damaging the climate" and face "devastating consequences".
Here's the full text of the poll, which I've also put up on my latest wunderpoll to vote on, if you're a Weather Underground member:
Which one statement most nearly matches your personal opinion about the physical science basis of global warming, as exemplified by the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report, Working Group 1 (WG1)? [If your personal opinion falls between two adjacent statements, please mark both]
1. There is no warming; it is a fabrication based on inaccurate/inappropriate measurement. Human activity is not having any significant effect on Climate. The data on which such assumptions are made is so compromised as to be worthless. The physical science basis of Anthropogenic Global Warming theory is founded on a false hypothesis.
2. Any recent warming is most likely natural. Human input of CO2 has very little to do with it. Solar, naturally varying water vapor, and similar variables can explain most or all of the climate changes. Projections based on Global Climate Models are unreliable because these are based on too many assumptions and unreliable data sets.
3. There are changes in the atmosphere, including added CO2 from human activities, but significant climate effects are likely to be all within natural limits. The 'scares' are exaggerations with a political motive. The undue emphasis on CO2 diverts attention away from other, important research on climate variability and change.
4. There is warming and the human addition of CO2 causes some of it, but the science is too uncertain to be confident about current attributions of the precise role of CO2 with respect to other climate forcings. The IPCC WG1 overestimates the role of CO2 relative to other forcings, including a diverse variety of human climate forcings.
5. The scientific basis for human impacts on climate is well represented by the IPCC WG1 report. The lead scientists know what they are doing. We are warming the planet, with CO2 as the main culprit. At least some of the forecast consequences of this change are based on robust evidence.
6. The IPCC WG1 is compromised by political intervention; I agree with those scientists who say that the IPCC WG1 is underestimating the problem. Action to reduce human emissions of CO2 in order to mitigate against serious consequences is more urgent than the report suggests. This should be done irrespective of other climate and environmental considerations.
7. The IPCC WG1 seriously understates the human influence on climate. I agree with those scientists who say that major mitigation responses are needed immediately to prevent catastrophic serious warming and other impacts projected to result from human emissions of CO2. We are seriously damaging the Earth's climate, and will continue to face devastating consequences for many years.
Figure 3. Results of the 2007 opinion poll by Fergus Brown, Roger Pielke, Sr., and James Annan of climate scientists, organized by question number (one to seven). In the USA, the mean response was 4.8, compared to 5.2 in all other countries, and 5.6 in EU countries.
Commentary
The majority of climate scientists polled believe the 2007 IPCC reports essentially "gets it right", which is in part why I like to refer to the IPCC report as representing "the official word" on climate. This report concluded that there was a greater than 90% chance that most of the observed global warming in the past 50 years was due to emission of greenhouse gases by human activity. However, there are substantial minorities that believe the IPCC underestimates or overestimates the potential impacts, and these voices need to be respected, as well.
Dr. Ricky Rood talks in greater depth on this issue in his latest wunderground Climate Change blog: "There are many thousands of scientists, and while large groups of individuals often share many like-minded values and beliefs, they are never in lockstep on the details of all aspects of their beliefs. It is not expected that in a community of thousands of scientists that there is a uniform chant of doctrine. This is especially true given the very nature of scientific investigation of an enormously complex system."
Other voices on climate scientist polls
Dr. James Annan's blog
Planet Gore
Realclimate.org.
Jeff Masters
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 — Blog Index
no kidding that should we an invest or TC something tells me it won't effect land though
GOM IR Loop Link
60 Hour Surface Current Forecast Link
(Loop Current and Eddy)
(3:50 pm CST)
2150 GMT on 01/31/2009:Link
Wind Direction Wind Direction (WDIR): SE ( 140 deg true )
Wind Speed Wind Speed (WSPD): 9.7 kts
Wind Gust Wind Gust (GST): 13.6 kts
Wave Height Wave Height (WVHT): 1.3 ft
Dominant Wave Period Dominant Wave Period (DPD): 6 sec Average Period Average Period Mean Wave Direction Mean Wave Direction (MWD): ESE ( 102 deg true )
Atmospheric Pressure Atmospheric Pressure (PRES): 30.20 in
Pressure Tendency Pressure Tendency (PTDY): -0.09 in ( Falling )
Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology
Queensland Tropical Cyclone Warning Centre
Media: The Standard Emergency Warning Signal should NOT be used with this warning.
TOP PRIORITY
TROPICAL CYCLONE ADVICE NUMBER 2
Issued by the Bureau of Meteorology, Brisbane
Issued at 6:54am on Sunday the 1st of February 2009
A Cyclone WARNING remains current for coastal and island communities from Cairns to Ayr.
At 6:00 am EST Tropical Cyclone Ellie, Category 1 was estimated to be 165 kilometres east of Cairns and 205 kilometres northeast of Cardwell and moving slowly southwest towards the coast.
TROPICAL CYCLONE ELLIE, CATEGORY 1, with gusts up to 100 km/h may be close to the coast by Monday morning.
STRONG GALES may develop on the coast during this afternoon between Cairns and Ayr.
Higher than normal tides are expected, but the sea level should not exceed the highest tide of the year. Large waves are likely along the beachfront.
Flooding is likely in the warning area due to heavy rain.
Details of Tropical Cyclone Ellie at 6:00 am EST:
.Centre located near...... 17.2 degrees South 147.3 degrees East
.Location accuracy........ within 55 kilometres
.Recent movement.......... towards the southwest at 9 kilometres per hour
.Wind gusts near centre... 100 kilometres per hour
.Severity category........ 1
.Central pressure......... 990 hectoPascals
The next advice will be issued by 10:00 am EST Sunday 01 February.
This warning is also available through TV and Radio Broadcasts; the Bureau's website at www.bom.gov.au or call 1300 659 212. The Bureau and the State Emergency Service would appreciate this warning being broadcast regularly.
6:22PM DISCUSSION FROM ALBANY
STILL KEEPING A CLOSE EYE ON ALL SOURCES OF GUIDANCE PERTAINING TO
COMPLEX SYSTEM MONDAY NIGHT THROUGH TUESDAY...AND BEYOND. NOT WORTH
OVERANALYZING EVERY LITTLE DETAIL OF EVERY SOURCE OF
GUIDANCE/ENSEMBLES SINCE THEY ARE ALL JUST COARSE SIMULATIONS OF
THE ATMOSPHERE.
...(continued)HOWEVER...THERE ARE 2 OUT OF 20 GFS ENSEMBLE PERTURBATIONS THAT HAVE A CONSIDERABLY MORE NORTH AND WEST TRACK
TO THE SYSTEM. MANY OF US WHO REMEMBER A PARTICULAR STORM 9 YEARS AGO LIKE TO KEEP ALL OPTIONS OPEN UNTIL THE STORM IS CLOSER TO
POTENTIAL IMPACT.
Does anyone know which storm they are refering to?...I cant remember that storm...although there is one storm that I remember from atleast 5 years ago that dumped like 18 inches on New Yorks Hudson Valley...Those were th days
Tropical Cyclone Advice Number THREE
TROPICAL CYCLONE ELLIE, CATEGORY ONE
9:50 AM EST February 1 2009
==========================================
At 9:00 AM EST, Tropical Cyclone Ellie, Category One (990 hPa) located at 16.9S 147.2E or 150 kms east of Cairns and 205 kms northeast of Cardwell has 10 minute sustained winds of 40 knots with gusts of 55 knots. The cyclone is reported as moving slowly southwest towards the coast.
TROPICAL CYCLONE Ellie, CATEGORY 1, with gusts up to 100 km/h may be close to the coast on Monday morning.
STRONG GALES may develop on the coast during this evening between Cairns and Ayr.
Higher than normal tides are expected, but the sea level should not exceed the highest tide of the year. Large waves are likely along the beachfront.
Flooding is likely to continue in the warning area due to heavy rain.
Tropical Cyclone Warning
========================
A Cyclone WARNING is current for coastal and island communities from Cairns to Ayr.
Thanx,..it was getting a lil stale here..
LOL
Are we done with the Poll's yet?
Area of interest (SW Indian Ocean)
---
hard to believe the JTWC has not issued disturbance summaries for the low
High Quality: Positive
HD: N/A
I think many tropical cyclones goes "unnoticed" They should use a recon
Corpus Christi, Base Reflectivity 0.50 Degree Elevation Range 248 NMI Link
I was watching that channel and they made fun of Sarah Palin, too in the ad (In Alaska, you can see Russia... and WYVERNS!!!)
Tropical Disturbance Summary
DEPRESSION, Ex-Hettie (08F)
9:00 AM FST February 1 2009
=====================================
At 21:00 PM UTC, Depression, Ex-Hettie (1006 hPa) located at 23.9S 179.1E is reported as moving slowly. Position GOOD based on multispectral.GOES visible imagery with animation and latest QUIKSCAT Pass. Sea surface temperatures is around 27C
The system has lost all its tropical characteristics and lies underneath an upper level trough. The depression is slow moving at this stage.
Most global models weaken and fill in the low, and analyse this area. as a trough instead.
THIS WILL BE THE LAST SUMMARY ISSUED ON THIS SYSTEM UNLESS RE-DEVELOPMENT OCCURS.
Quikscat,GOM NDBC page Link
High Sea Forecast
0:00 AM UTC, February 1 2009
==================================
Tropical Disturbance [1004 hPa] located at 15.8S 69.2E.. This disturbance is expected to intensify.
Special pages document NDBC stations that measured data
during the passage of selected hurricanes in recent years.
2008 Link
Hurricane Gustav Link Hurricane Ike Link
Cool, thanks Pat.
The Gustav link is busted, btw. Your text in place on link...
thanx,
..I modified and corrected that bad linkie.
If We Had Some Global Warming
Can't stop laughing!!
a volcano went off?... which one?
\
Monday, October 4. 2004
Volcano Satellite Imagery
With all the Mount St. Helens seismic and eruption activity, some folks may be itching to see what a volcano eruption looks like from a satellite's point-of-view.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reminded us all that they have a satellite division devoted to Mount St. Helens, and the link is below. There are some great images on there from the recent steam eruptions.
The second link below is a high resolution satellite image from the major eruption in 1980.
Mount St. Helens Satellite Imagery Link
Mount St. Helens satellite image from 1980 eruption (high res) Link
Popcatepetl Is dark at the moment, but sometimes at night, you can catch it's orange glow.
Projects Adopting CF:
* AMIP: Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project
* APE: Aqua-Planet Experiment
* CCMVal: Chemistry-Climate Model Validation Activity
* CEOP: Coordinated Energy and Water Cycle Observation Project
* CFMIP: Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project
* C-LAMP: CCSM Carbon LAnd Model intercomparison Project
* CMIP3: Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (Phase 3)
* C3-Grid: Collaborative Climate Community Data and Processing Grid
* DAMOCLES: Developing Arctic Modeling and Observing Capabilities for Long-term Environmental Studies
* ENSEMBLES
* Godiva2 Data Visualization System
* Gulf of Maine Model Interoperability Project
* Humboldt
* IOOS: Integrated Ocean Observing System
* MERSEA: Marine Environment and Security for the European Area
* MetaMod
* NARCCAP: North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program
* NERC DataGrid
* NERC RAPID THCMIP (Thermohaline Circulation Model Intercomparison Project)
* PMIP: Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project
* SAMOS: Shipboard Automated Meteorological and Oceanographic System
* SeaDataNet
* TF HTAP Coordinated Model Studies (TF HTAP = Task Force on Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollutants)
Tropical Cyclone Advice Number FOUR
TROPICAL CYCLONE ELLIE, CATEGORY ONE
12:50 PM EST February 1 2009
==========================================
At 12:00 PM EST, Tropical Cyclone Ellie, Category One (989 hPa) located at 17.2S 147.1E or 145 kms east southeast of Cairns and 205 kms northeast of Cardwell has 10 minute sustained winds of 40 knots with gusts of 55 knots. The cyclone is reported as moving slowly southwest towards the coast.
Tropical Cyclone Ellie may be close to the coast on Monday morning. GALES may develop on the coast during this evening between Cairns and Ayr.
Higher than normal tides are expected, but the sea level should not exceed the highest tide of the year. Large waves are likely along the beachfront.
Flooding is likely to continue in the warning area due to heavy rain.
Tropical Cyclone Warning
========================
A Cyclone WARNING remains current for coastal and island communities from Cairns to Ayr.
DAMOCLES (Developing Arctic Modeling and Observing Capabilities for Long-term Environmental Studies) is an integrated ice-atmosphere-ocean monitoring and forecasting system designed for observing, understanding and quantifying climate changes in the Arctic. DAMOCLES is specifically concerned with the potential for a significantly reduced sea ice cover, and the impacts this might have on the environment and on human activities, both regionally and globally. Link
global warming is a crazy idea thought up by some tree hugger. If you get research from climatologist, environmentalist or meteorologist who are not paid by interests groups or are no interests groups supported by government. You will get completely contradictory evidence than the Global Warming Fanatics. Guess what, Global Warming%u2026 the earth is getting warmer consistently, thats what that means. And its not. From the research I read, the average global temperature has risen .01 degrees. HOLY COW! We re all going to burn alive! Give me a break, and thats over the last 100 YEARS! Also! If there the environmental groups were getting paid SO MUCH MONEY to say these things I%u2019d say they might have some credibility and if they bases their research with an open mind and not an agenda. Also, If we weren%u2019t finding frozen animals DEEP IN ICE! %u2026my goodness. Maybe global warming is happening.. Its natural, obviously the ice these animals are in didnt used to be there! HINT, HINT! And what about the record ice recovery over the past few years. We%u2019ve had some of the biggest ice regrowths in recorded history, dont hear that in the news. The only thing you hear. Is(during the summer) the polar bears are drowning, the polar bears are drowning it must be global warm it couldnt ever just be summertime could it. They can swim, they chose to swim miles to get to places, sometimes they make it, sometimes they dont. so before you tell me there is global warming open your mind to the THOUSANDS of scientist that say its natural and not causes by man.. Because they have facts and research to back it up. Global warming is just as crazy as evolution, two of the biggest scams in history. Darwin would roll over in his grave if he knew what Scientist have done with his THEORY! He eve debunked his own theory A LONG TIME AGO! He said if the cell was any more complicated than it was in his day the idea of evolution was absurd. The human body alone Darwin agreed could not have evolved. So evolutionist base their THEORY they make out to be fact on a dead science. Do some rounded research yourself, Evolution and global warming is about money and political agendas. If al gore really believe global warming he wouldnt fly around in a jet, or make MILLIONS UP MILLIONS for himself supporting it.
Weather News
=====================================
The low pressure area evolving far to the northeast of Rodrigues has intensified into a tropical depression. It is moving slowly towards the southwest, though of weak stage now, there is a strong likeliness that it will intensify further next week due to favorable atmospheric and oceanic conditions in the vicinity of Mauritius.
Arctic Saw Fastest August Sea Ice Retreat On Record, NASA Data Show Link
ScienceDaily (Sep. 28, 2008) — Following a record-breaking season of arctic sea ice decline in 2007, NASA scientists have kept a close watch on the 2008 melt season. Although the melt season did not break the record for ice loss, NASA data are showing that for a four-week period in August 2008, sea ice melted faster during that period than ever before.
Cyclone Ellie to hit Cairns
Article from: The Courier-Mail
February 01, 2009 11:46am
COASTAL communities off Cairns are bracing for Cyclone Ellie, which has formed 150km off the coast and is expected to make landfall early tomorrow morning.
The Bureau of Meteorology warns residents between Cairns and Ayr, near Townsville, to prepare for the Category 1 cyclone
Viewing: 851 - 901
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 — Blog Index