Re: global warming: is it us, or is it the sun?

From: Mike Atkinson (Mike_at_ladsyhotNO.demonSPAM.co.uk)
Date: 08/03/04 

Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 09:50:54 +0100

jjustwwondering wrote:
> That, we do *not* know. We do not even know there *is*
> a practical problem (there certainly is a *scientific* problem).
>
> Moderate warming is not, *per se*, a universally bad thing -
> therefore not a global "problem" in that sense
> (it may cause some local problems, as well as
> some local benefits). The most important
> global effect, so far, has been the increase in vegetation
> and in crop yields - that's hardly a "problem", we could use
> more of that.
>
> Will warming ever become *immoderate* (absent any collective action)?
> That *would* be a problem. But nobody knows if it ever will.
> It *may* moderate itself through a
> negative feedback mechanism (I could name a couple of
> plausible ones that may or may not do the job).
> It may be offset or overwhelmed at any
> time by a turnaround in solar activity.
> And its anthropogenic component is quite likely to
> be reduced or reversed by future trends in
> energy technology.
>
> If none of this occurs before we have a *true* problem (in
> the bad sense of the word) - then will be the time
> to act, not *blindly* as we would act now, but targeting that
> particular problem. With environmental problems, it is as
> with redcoats at Bunker Hill: hold fire until you see the
> whites of their eyes!

I refer you to the graph on page 17 of
http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/un/syreng/spm.pdf
doing nothing until we know we have a serious problem will mean that the
problem will get worse for centuries at least.

In another post I listed the names of some very respected scientists who
think that new data on clouds, aerosols, etc. mean that the IPCC
estimates of temperature rise are low at the upper end. I know of no
scientist who on the basis of new data is saying that the lower end
should be changed downward.

Note that even the IPCC 2001 report has temperature rises of 10C or
more, just not in the next 100 years. The path we have been following
since the report is A1FI (pages 10-11) which is the worst of the
scenarios listed.

Going back to the original topic of the thread
http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/un/syreng/wg1spm.pdf figure 3 shows the
contribution from various forcing factors. Solar forcing is relatively
small. 

-- 
Mike Atkinson
(to reply remove NO SPAM)
Quantcast