Heretic
Posts : 3520
| Subject: AGW turned 35 yesterday 7/29/2010, 9:20 am | |
| Happy 35th birthday, global warming! - Quote :
- Global warming is turning 35! Not only has the current spate of global warming been going on for about 35 years now, but also the term “global warming” will have its 35th anniversary next week. On 8 August 1975, Wally Broecker published his paper “Are we on the brink of a pronounced global warming?” in the journal Science. That appears to be the first use of the term “global warming” in the scientific literature (at least it’s the first of over 10,000 papers for this search term according to the ISI database of journal articles).
In this paper, Broecker correctly predicted “that the present cooling trend will, within a decade or so, give way to a pronounced warming induced by carbon dioxide”, and that “by early in the next century [carbon dioxide] will have driven the mean planetary temperature beyond the limits experienced during the last 1000 years”. He predicted an overall 20th Century global warming of 0.8ÂșC due to CO2 and worried about the consequences for agriculture and sea level.
. . .
To those who even today claim that global warming is not predictable, the anniversary of Broecker’s paper is a reminder that global warming was actually predicted before it became evident in the global temperature records over a decade later (when Jim Hansen in 1988 famously stated that “global warming is here”).
Broecker is one of the great climatologists of the 20th Century: few would match his record of 400 scientific papers, a full sixty of which have over 100 citations each! Interestingly, his “global warming” paper is not amongst those highly-cited ones, with “only” 79 citations to date. Broecker is most famous for his extensive work on paleoclimate and ocean geochemistry.
It is very instructive to see how Broecker arrived at his predictions back in 1975 – not least because even today, many lay people incorrectly assume that we attribute global warming to CO2 basically because temperature and CO2 levels have both gone up and thus correlate. Broecker came to his prediction at a time when CO2 had been going up but temperatures had been going down for decades – but Broecker (like most other climate scientists at the time, and today) understood the basic physics of the issue. All part of Al Gore's diabolical plan for da monies. | |
|
BigWhiteGuy
Posts : 689
| Subject: Re: AGW turned 35 yesterday 7/30/2010, 6:57 am | |
| Mickey Mouse celebrates a birthday every year, too...Does that make him real? | |
|
Heretic
Posts : 3520
| Subject: Re: AGW turned 35 yesterday 7/30/2010, 10:50 am | |
| Robin! So good to hear from you. I thought you'd left. Again. - Quote :
- To those who even today claim that global warming is not predictable, the anniversary of Broecker’s paper is a reminder that global warming was actually predicted before it became evident in the global temperature records over a decade later (when Jim Hansen in 1988 famously stated that “global warming is here”).
Broecker is one of the great climatologists of the 20th Century: few would match his record of 400 scientific papers, a full sixty of which have over 100 citations each! Interestingly, his “global warming” paper is not amongst those highly-cited ones, with “only” 79 citations to date. Broecker is most famous for his extensive work on paleoclimate and ocean geochemistry.
It is very instructive to see how Broecker arrived at his predictions back in 1975 – not least because even today, many lay people incorrectly assume that we attribute global warming to CO2 basically because temperature and CO2 levels have both gone up and thus correlate. Broecker came to his prediction at a time when CO2 had been going up but temperatures had been going down for decades – but Broecker (like most other climate scientists at the time, and today) understood the basic physics of the issue. Sorry. I should have spelled it out in crayon. My post above was offered as more proof against the "Al Gore invented it a few years ago for da monies" conspiracy theories that the more retarded conservatives like to believe, in addition to specifically refuting the poorly thought through "it can't predict anything, therefore it ain't science" argument. It was all about that boring science stuff you never want to comment on. The point was not "everything that has a birthday is real", though I can see why you'd be so easily confused. Now quickly! Run away, Sir Robin. Yet again. | |
|
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: AGW turned 35 yesterday | |
| |
|