“Pausen” i den globale opvarmning nærmer sig hastigt officiel erkendelse II

Diverse — Drokles on January 29, 2013 at 7:08 pm

Erkendelsen af at den globale temperatur ikke er steget de seneste 15 års tid spreder sig for tiden. Det største tyskspogede nyhedsmagasin Der Spiegel havde i ugens løb en større artikel om ‘pausen’ i opvarmingen. Spiegels artikel giver mulighed for den etablerede videnskab at komme med sine bud på, hvorfor temperaturen er stoppet med at stige, men den slår fast at det nu er gængs viden. Man kalder det forsigtigt en pause for at holde liv i drømmen om katastrofen, der kan stoppe kapitalismen. Morfar er ikke død, han sover bare. Her er et uddrag fra Global Warming Policy Foundations oversættelse af Spiegels artikel, Klimawandel: Forscher rätseln über Stillstand bei Erderwärmung.

Flowers are blooming earlier, sea level is rising – no doubt the climate is changing. The last year, as reported by NASA, was the ninth warmest since measurements began 132 years ago. The past decade was the warmest in this period.

But it has become common knowledge for some time that the climate has recently developed differently than predicted. The warming has stalled for 15 years; the upward trend in the average global temperature has not continued since 1998 (sic). “The standstill has led to the suggestion that global warming has stopped,” NASA admit.

The British Met Office has recently forecast that the warming standstill could continue until the end of 2017 – despite the rapid increase in greenhouse gas emissions. Then global warming would have stalled for 20 years. How many years – goes a now common question – has the temperature standstill to last until climate scientists start to reconsider their forecasts of future warming?

IPCC meeting

Scientists previously thought 14 years without further warming could be brought into line with their forecasts – but not “15 years or more,” as NASA scientists stated four years ago in the journal “Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society”. In an email to colleagues a renowned scientist wrote on 7 May 2009, at a time when the warming standstill had already lasted for eleven years: “the ‘no upward trend’ has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.”

Now, 15 years without warming has happened. The warming standstill of the global surface temperature shows that the uncertainties of climate predictions are surprisingly large. The interested public anxiously awaits whether the IPCC’s new Assessment Report, which is due in September, will address the warming pause – the discussions are ongoing in Australia’s Hobart. The researchers are discussing several cogent reasons that might have slowed the upward trend of temperatures.

Den store diskussion om årsagerne til den manglende opvarmning afslører først og fremmest at diskussionen ikke er død, som det ellers var blevet så populært at hævde. Det er væsentligt for klimapanelets rapporter gjorde to ord uhyre populære blandt deres tilhængere i medier, det politiske univers, forskere, virksomheder og organisationer, nemlig unequivocal og unprecedented, ubetvivleligt og uden fortilfælde. Begge dele er altså forkert og de der har troet og sagt sådan har taget fejl, ikke deres kritikere. Autoriteten er udhulet. Nu engagerer de sig så modvilligt i den svære balancegang at placere skylden for den manglende opvarmning på den natur de hvædede at vide mere end rigeligt om uden også at tillæge den æren for den opvarmning som har været i gang siden lille istid. for jo mere Naturen kan have hæmmet varmen jo mere tiltror man den også selv at stå bag.

Tilbagetoget sker på flere fronter blandt eksperterne. Et norsk forskerhold har med statens velsignelse (den der betaler orkestret bestemmer jo også musikken) cumputersimuleret sig frem til at klimaets undergang sker væsentligt mere behersket end FN’s klimapanel ellers har simuleret sig frem til. Express skriver

GLOBAL warming is likely to be less extreme than claimed, researchers said yesterday. The most likely temperature rise will be 1.9C (3.4F) compared with the 3.5C predicted by the Intergovern­mental Panel on Climate Change.

The Norwegian study says earlier predictions were based on rapid warming in the Nineties. But Oslo University’s department of geosciences included data since 2000 when temperature rises “levelled off nearly completely”.

Professor Terje Berntsen said: “The Earth’s mean temperature rose sharply during the ­Nineties. This may have caused us to overestimate climate sensitivity. We are most likely witnessing natural fluctuations in the climate system – changes that can occur over several decades – and which are coming on top of a long-term warming.” He insisted, though, that his study did not justify “complacency” about human-induced global warming.

Den store konklusion er igen at diskussionen er vidt åben, at forskerne ikke er sikre i deres sag, ensige enige. Imens i England vejrer den næste generation af politikere da også morgenluft. London’s borgmester Boris Johnson kaster menigmands godtkøbsbetragtninger i spil i Telegraph og positionernerer sig til fremtidens opgør med de, der er mest syltet ind i fortidens dogmatik

…I am sitting here staring through the window at the flowerpot and the bashed-up barbecue, and I am starting to think this series of winters is not a coincidence. The snow on the flowerpot, since I have been staring, has got about an inch thicker. The barbecue is all but invisible. By my calculations, this is now the fifth year in a row that we have had an unusual amount of snow; and by unusual I mean snow of a kind that I don’t remember from my childhood: snow that comes one day, and then sticks around for a couple of days, followed by more.

I remember snow that used to come and settle for just long enough for a single decent snowball fight before turning to slush; I don’t remember winters like this. Two days ago I was cycling through Trafalgar Square and saw icicles on the traffic lights; and though I am sure plenty of readers will say I am just unobservant, I don’t think I have seen that before. I am all for theories about climate change, and would not for a moment dispute the wisdom or good intentions of the vast majority of scientists.

But I am also an empiricist; and I observe that something appears to be up with our winter weather, and to call it “warming” is obviously to strain the language. I see from the BBC website that there are scientists who say that “global warming” is indeed the cause of the cold and snowy winters we seem to be having.

(…)

I am speaking only as a layman who observes that there is plenty of snow in our winters these days, and who wonders whether it might be time for government to start taking seriously the possibility — however remote — that Corbyn is right. If he is, that will have big implications for agriculture, tourism, transport, aviation policy and the economy as a whole. Of course it still seems a bit nuts to talk of the encroachment of a mini ice age.

But it doesn’t seem as nuts as it did five years ago. I look at the snowy waste outside, and I have an open mind.

Og nu er det altså også legitimt at sætte ord på sit åbne sind.

0 Kommentarer »

Ingen kommentarer endnu.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Kommentér indlægget...

Monokultur kører på WordPress