Global Warming: A Primer.
In the simplest terms, global warming is just what it sounds like: the worldwide rise in surface temperatures. The National Academy of Science has put the rise at 1 degree F over the course of the 20th century, but measurements from satellites of both land and sea surfaces are showing that the rate of warming is increasing sharply.
It's more than just surface temperatures that are going up, however. A lot of research into temperature changes in the upper layers of the atmosphere, as well as the deep oceans, is showing warming. Then, there are the more obvious signs: the rapid retreat of glaciers in Greenland, Alaska, the Himalaya, the Antarctic Peninsula and on high tropical mountains; the thinning and disappearance of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean during summer; the melting of permafrost in Canada, Alaska and Siberia; and the rise of sea level and an increase in extreme weather.
The cause of global warming is what's called the "greenhouse effect." That's shorthand for the ability of gases in the atmosphere to slow down the release of heat into space at night. Some gases are better at this than others. Carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide are the top three "greenhouse gases." They are very good at absorbing sunlight and converting that energy into heat – rather like a rock does just sitting in the sun.
Surprisingly, the greenhouse effect isn't a bad thing. It's essential for life on Earth – when it's not too vigorous. If not for the greenhouse effect, the temperature on the surface of Earth would be like that of the airless moon – swinging wildly from 225 degrees F (107 C) during the day to -243 degrees F (-153 C) at night. Not a good place for life.
The greenhouse effect is only troublesome when it gets too strong and warms things too much. And that's just what scientists say has happened over the last 150 years or so as the people of industrialized nations have extracted Earth's vast buried stores of fossil fuels and burned them. Since the start of the Industrial Revolution the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased nearly 30 percent, methane has more than doubled, and the nitrous oxide concentration is up about 15 percent. All those extra greenhouse gases mean more and more solar energy is being trapped in the atmosphere, exacerbating the greenhouse effect and making things warmer.
The result: 2005 was Earth's warmest year in a century, according to NASA climatologists. The years 1998, 2002, 2003 and 2004 were the next four runners-up. The year 2005 was also a record-breaking year for Atlantic hurricanes in which the coastal city of New Orleans – made all the more vulnerable because of sea level rise – was almost wiped off the map by Hurricane Katrina.
Of course, because the effects of global warming on local climates are very complicated, it remains to be seen exactly how different regions will feel the heat.
"Global warming is a term that's extremely useful when you're running a planet," says John Cox, author of the book Climate Crash. "But it's regional change that affects people. It's the wet and cold and hot and dry."
That's why climate modelers are constantly refining their simulations, and climate scientists continue to refine our view of past climate changes to create a better idea of what to expect.
By Larry O'Hanlon
A little about Larry O'Hanlon
More than seventeen years as an independent science journalist, live science radio broadcaster, newspaper reporter, documentary script writer, museum exhibits writer and interpreter of science for the public.
Special expertise in writing news, feature articles and scripts on topics in Earth, planetary, marine and space sciences.
This includes, but is not limited to, seismology, hydrology, geophysics, meteoritics, oceanography, marine sciences, evolutionary biology, astrobiology, meteorology, climatology, research technology, solar science, astronomy and astrophysics.
He has also written extensively about biotechnology.
Graduate Certificate in Science Writing, 1993
Science Communication Program University of California, Santa Cruz.
B.A. Earth Sciences, 1987
Emphasis on paleontology
University of California, Santa Cruz.
Oakes College distinguished service award.
2007 Kavli Science Journalism Workshop:The Universe
2000 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Earth Science Directorate Grant in collaboration with Strong Mountain Productions.
Numerous awards for writing and graphics from the Nevada Press Association from 1994 through 1998, including state Journalist of Merit for small dailies in 1994.
AFFILIATIONS
National Association of Science Writers
New Mexico Science Writers Association
International Science Writers Association
Rio Grande Astronomical Society (board member)
Astronomical Society of the Pacific
The Albuquerque Astronomical Society
wil.
In the simplest terms, global warming is just what it sounds like: the worldwide rise in surface temperatures. The National Academy of Science has put the rise at 1 degree F over the course of the 20th century, but measurements from satellites of both land and sea surfaces are showing that the rate of warming is increasing sharply.
It's more than just surface temperatures that are going up, however. A lot of research into temperature changes in the upper layers of the atmosphere, as well as the deep oceans, is showing warming. Then, there are the more obvious signs: the rapid retreat of glaciers in Greenland, Alaska, the Himalaya, the Antarctic Peninsula and on high tropical mountains; the thinning and disappearance of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean during summer; the melting of permafrost in Canada, Alaska and Siberia; and the rise of sea level and an increase in extreme weather.
The cause of global warming is what's called the "greenhouse effect." That's shorthand for the ability of gases in the atmosphere to slow down the release of heat into space at night. Some gases are better at this than others. Carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide are the top three "greenhouse gases." They are very good at absorbing sunlight and converting that energy into heat – rather like a rock does just sitting in the sun.
Surprisingly, the greenhouse effect isn't a bad thing. It's essential for life on Earth – when it's not too vigorous. If not for the greenhouse effect, the temperature on the surface of Earth would be like that of the airless moon – swinging wildly from 225 degrees F (107 C) during the day to -243 degrees F (-153 C) at night. Not a good place for life.
The greenhouse effect is only troublesome when it gets too strong and warms things too much. And that's just what scientists say has happened over the last 150 years or so as the people of industrialized nations have extracted Earth's vast buried stores of fossil fuels and burned them. Since the start of the Industrial Revolution the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased nearly 30 percent, methane has more than doubled, and the nitrous oxide concentration is up about 15 percent. All those extra greenhouse gases mean more and more solar energy is being trapped in the atmosphere, exacerbating the greenhouse effect and making things warmer.
The result: 2005 was Earth's warmest year in a century, according to NASA climatologists. The years 1998, 2002, 2003 and 2004 were the next four runners-up. The year 2005 was also a record-breaking year for Atlantic hurricanes in which the coastal city of New Orleans – made all the more vulnerable because of sea level rise – was almost wiped off the map by Hurricane Katrina.
Of course, because the effects of global warming on local climates are very complicated, it remains to be seen exactly how different regions will feel the heat.
"Global warming is a term that's extremely useful when you're running a planet," says John Cox, author of the book Climate Crash. "But it's regional change that affects people. It's the wet and cold and hot and dry."
That's why climate modelers are constantly refining their simulations, and climate scientists continue to refine our view of past climate changes to create a better idea of what to expect.
By Larry O'Hanlon
A little about Larry O'Hanlon
More than seventeen years as an independent science journalist, live science radio broadcaster, newspaper reporter, documentary script writer, museum exhibits writer and interpreter of science for the public.
Special expertise in writing news, feature articles and scripts on topics in Earth, planetary, marine and space sciences.
This includes, but is not limited to, seismology, hydrology, geophysics, meteoritics, oceanography, marine sciences, evolutionary biology, astrobiology, meteorology, climatology, research technology, solar science, astronomy and astrophysics.
He has also written extensively about biotechnology.
Graduate Certificate in Science Writing, 1993
Science Communication Program University of California, Santa Cruz.
B.A. Earth Sciences, 1987
Emphasis on paleontology
University of California, Santa Cruz.
Oakes College distinguished service award.
2007 Kavli Science Journalism Workshop:The Universe
2000 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Earth Science Directorate Grant in collaboration with Strong Mountain Productions.
Numerous awards for writing and graphics from the Nevada Press Association from 1994 through 1998, including state Journalist of Merit for small dailies in 1994.
AFFILIATIONS
National Association of Science Writers
New Mexico Science Writers Association
International Science Writers Association
Rio Grande Astronomical Society (board member)
Astronomical Society of the Pacific
The Albuquerque Astronomical Society
wil.
If you don't want to call it 'global warming', well pick a name for it that helps you sleep better at night. Whatever.
The rate of more C02 being trapped in the earth's atmosphere is just ALARMING. Which is the bulk of what Gore was saying. His theorys on the aftermath of such is questionable.
Go ask the guys at the olympics that feel the need to travel the city with a filter mask on, see if they think it's made up.
The rate of more C02 being trapped in the earth's atmosphere is just ALARMING. Which is the bulk of what Gore was saying. His theorys on the aftermath of such is questionable.
Go ask the guys at the olympics that feel the need to travel the city with a filter mask on, see if they think it's made up.
Wilheim...
there are errors in your post
"rate of warming is increasing sharply" wrong, GISS temps show a 0.13C decline over 20 years and 0.41C decline over 10 years. UAH MSU shows a decline of 0.20C over 20 years and 0.76 decline over 10 years. Measured June 2008 vs June 1998 and June 1988. Don't believe me, look it up. And in the last 20 years CO2 is up 10%. Something is wrong with your theory.
"rise of sea level"....show me data
"increase in extreme weather".....show me data
"CO2, methane and nitrous oxide are the top greenhouse gases"...wrong..water vapor is number one
"2005 was warmest year" yes by GISS, but 1998 was warmest year by Hadley and MSU
Show us data, not opinion
Rob Funk wrote "Go ask the guys at the olympics that feel the need to travel the city with a filter mask on, see if they think it's made up." That is not CO2. That is pollution. CO2 is invisible, orderless and tasteless.
Death eats a cracker....there is no unusual increase in sea levels
in recent years...and you are right "Much ado about nothing."
there are errors in your post
"rate of warming is increasing sharply" wrong, GISS temps show a 0.13C decline over 20 years and 0.41C decline over 10 years. UAH MSU shows a decline of 0.20C over 20 years and 0.76 decline over 10 years. Measured June 2008 vs June 1998 and June 1988. Don't believe me, look it up. And in the last 20 years CO2 is up 10%. Something is wrong with your theory.
"rise of sea level"....show me data
"increase in extreme weather".....show me data
"CO2, methane and nitrous oxide are the top greenhouse gases"...wrong..water vapor is number one
"2005 was warmest year" yes by GISS, but 1998 was warmest year by Hadley and MSU
Show us data, not opinion
Rob Funk wrote "Go ask the guys at the olympics that feel the need to travel the city with a filter mask on, see if they think it's made up." That is not CO2. That is pollution. CO2 is invisible, orderless and tasteless.
Death eats a cracker....there is no unusual increase in sea levels
in recent years...and you are right "Much ado about nothing."
stocks, where do you get your numbers? I went to one of the most liberal schools in the nation, western wash U., I got a minor in enviro studies to go with my ecn major and I can tell you 99% of the profs in that department do not believe all the media and politicized hoop-la.
There is no real debate from anyone that our climate is changing, that I would venture to say is where you are getting your 99% number. But when you start suggesting that man is responsible for the climate changes then your percentage starts falling off rapidly. It is amazing to watch some classes with first year enviro students....they get a big does of truth in the first week of the introduction level classes. much of what they thought they knew is thrown right out the window as junk.
When you are talking 100 years, well that is ridiculous. The earth has warmed and cooled for millions of years, most of which were not anywhere near as populated as we are today.
To the extent that we know exactly what is going on with our world and the cause, when we cannot even predict the weather 1 week in advance, is ludicrous.
Hey Blue that 99% may not be correct but its close I cant remember the exact number but it was over 90%. I saw it on discovery channel that almost all the worlds scientist agree with global warming and the few that did'nt most of them were being funded by people with an interest in saying that there is not global warming.
Anyway I dont like to argue about stuff and I'm probaly not the smartest person in the world but I am a logical thinker and the thorey of global warming makes perfect sense to me and then add that to some real world results I think its kind of an obvious answer. But hey thats just me maybe I'm wrong.
Anyway I dont like to argue about stuff and I'm probaly not the smartest person in the world but I am a logical thinker and the thorey of global warming makes perfect sense to me and then add that to some real world results I think its kind of an obvious answer. But hey thats just me maybe I'm wrong.
A couple years ago I did some research to quell the rantings of lunatics on message boards. It turned out that recent sea level rise was 1 inch per 10 years. Hardly worth considering.
I decided to support this statement by research and found this on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise
"Church and White (2006) found a sea-level rise from January 1870 to December 2004 of 195 mm, a 20th century rate of sea-level rise of 1.7 ± 0.3 mm per yr and a significant acceleration of sea-level rise of 0.013 ± 0.006 mm per year. If this acceleration remains constant, then the 1990 to 2100 rise would range from 280 to 340 mm,<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-church2006_2-0>[3]"</SUP>
1.7 mm per year is 1.7 cm every 10 years which is less than 1 inch per 10 years. No, the sky is not falling for all you chicken littles out there.
stocks wrote "...then add that to some real world results..."
Here are real world data...GISS temps show a 0.13C decline over 20 years and 0.41C decline over 10 years. UAH MSU shows a decline of 0.20C over 20 years and 0.76 decline over 10 years. Measured June 2008 vs June 1998 and June 1988. Don't believe me, look it up. And in the last 20 years CO2 is up 10%.
Here are real world data...GISS temps show a 0.13C decline over 20 years and 0.41C decline over 10 years. UAH MSU shows a decline of 0.20C over 20 years and 0.76 decline over 10 years. Measured June 2008 vs June 1998 and June 1988. Don't believe me, look it up. And in the last 20 years CO2 is up 10%.
What is the GISS and UAH MSU?
I just did a brief search and found there are a few ways of averaging tempature and the most acurate way is the way NASA mesures it and they're info says its been rising steadily since 1980
Heres they're chart at the bottom of this page
http://jasonleggett.greenoptions.com/2007/08/15/green-myth-busting-global-average-temperature/
I just did a brief search and found there are a few ways of averaging tempature and the most acurate way is the way NASA mesures it and they're info says its been rising steadily since 1980
Heres they're chart at the bottom of this page
http://jasonleggett.greenoptions.com/2007/08/15/green-myth-busting-global-average-temperature/
Stocks
GISS is the Goodard Institute, which is the NASA temp people you talked about. A link to there data is here:
GISS temp source … http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
AUH MSU is the University of Alabama Huntsville Microwave Sensing Unit (I think that is the name). They take satellite readings and turn it into temps. Here is a link to them:
AUH MSU temps.. http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/public/msu/t2lt/tltglhmam_5.2
CO2 data is here:
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt
The interesting thing is that the temperatures stopped going up about 3 years ago, but CO2 is still going up. And the temps have come down so fast that they show declines from both June 1998 and June 1988 to June 2008. This is a big problem for CO2 caused global warming.
Go to the sites and see for yourself.
GISS is the Goodard Institute, which is the NASA temp people you talked about. A link to there data is here:
GISS temp source … http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
AUH MSU is the University of Alabama Huntsville Microwave Sensing Unit (I think that is the name). They take satellite readings and turn it into temps. Here is a link to them:
AUH MSU temps.. http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/public/msu/t2lt/tltglhmam_5.2
CO2 data is here:
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt
The interesting thing is that the temperatures stopped going up about 3 years ago, but CO2 is still going up. And the temps have come down so fast that they show declines from both June 1998 and June 1988 to June 2008. This is a big problem for CO2 caused global warming.
Go to the sites and see for yourself.
co2 is going to fry the planet -- so say the same computer models that so effectively predict our weather and any random sporting event.
The debate is over -- the science is settled.
Let's spend trillions wrecking entire economies to make ourselves feel good.
Give ourselves a great big pat on the head for saving the cute and cuddly polar bear while millions of Africans die from starvation and disease because they won't have access to basic sanitation, electricity -- essentially, evil polluting western technology.
If that isn't religion, I have no idea what is.
Liberalism is beyond sick.
uke1:
The debate is over -- the science is settled.
Let's spend trillions wrecking entire economies to make ourselves feel good.
Give ourselves a great big pat on the head for saving the cute and cuddly polar bear while millions of Africans die from starvation and disease because they won't have access to basic sanitation, electricity -- essentially, evil polluting western technology.
If that isn't religion, I have no idea what is.
Liberalism is beyond sick.
uke1:stocks...
I was referring to the monthly values
their calendar year estimate doesn't show on the monthly list, or at least I can't find it.
I think this is a direct link to annual estimates
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/ZonAnn.Ts.txt
by the way, GISS is usually the highest (warmest) of the major reporting groups
eek...
water vapor is the number 1 greenhouse gas
I was referring to the monthly values
their calendar year estimate doesn't show on the monthly list, or at least I can't find it.
I think this is a direct link to annual estimates
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/ZonAnn.Ts.txt
by the way, GISS is usually the highest (warmest) of the major reporting groups
eek...
water vapor is the number 1 greenhouse gas
It's interesting that you mention water vapor. There's a reason the earth hasn't accumulated greenhouse gases to the point of Venus where the temps are in the 100's of degrees on the surface. Let me explain why.
- When the oceans of the world get warmer (as they are now) more water vapor is evaporated.
- The more water vapor that is evaporated the more clouds form.
- The more clouds you have the cooler the surface.
- The cooler the surface the less water vapor you have.
- The less water vapor you have the fewer clouds you have.
- The fewer clouds you have the more the sun can warm the surface.
I saw discovery channel was doing a special about some blood sucking beast in Virginia or something. The witnesses claimed it was a vampire sort of being that drank their pets blood yet the animals showed no signs of struggle. Discovery channel is also the channel that produced Man vs. Wild (although a great show, they were not entirely truthful about the show), and they produced deadliest catch (also a show that lied to its viewers). Now you can believe this or not, my point is just that you should not believe everything you believe on TV, even the educational channels.
And, I also saw a special on the discovery channel where they had scientists on there talking about Antarctica. If I remember correctly, they were talking about how the last ice age was first started by a little warming of the polls. They showed maps of the ice breaking up and showed how this had already happened. The scientists warned an Ice Age was much more likely and something we should really be concerned with. There are many other scientists who at least share the same cooler rather then hotter belief. I am not sure how accurate it is, but again it is just another view that was on TV too.
That number you are inferring is close to 90%, is not even close imo. In my experience almost every single one of my profs had something negative to say about things like Gore and "An Inconvenient Truth", something many students were shocked to hear from Enviro science/studies profs. They liked to talk much more about cycles than about human caused global warming. To be fair, there were a few profs who were part of the "90%", however even most of these also talked about the various cycles the Earth goes through.
You say you like to think about this in a logical way. Please, I love logic. Explain to me the logic of exactly why we are causing or planet to heat. And remember the earth has gone through some pretty dramatic climate changes themselves. Do I think we are doing damage to our Earth in many ways? yes. we need to take care of it as best we can. We just need to know what we can and cannot fix.
I just saw a program on the National Geographic Channel (which is fast becoming my favorite channel). They say:
- The more CO2 in the atmosphere the warmer it gets.
- The warmer the atmosphere gets the warmer the oceans get.
- The warmer the oceans get the more plankton grow.
- The more plankton grow the more CO2 they consume from the atmosphere.
- The more CO2 that is consumed by plankton the cooler the earth gets.
