Independent study confirms global warming exists

Forbes.com ^ | 10/24/2011 | Alex Knapp

[cogitator]

"...While climate is certainly an extraordinarily complicated mechanism, the facts keep pointing back to this simple fact of chemistry. Increased CO2 and methane may not be the sole cause of climate change, but it’s definitely a cause and almost certainly a major one.

Now, what next? My Forbes colleague Tim Worstall argues that this is a serious situation, but one in which the human race can make “marginal changes and still survive and thrive.” I agree with him on this – as long as we act quickly. The technology is moving at a rapid pace, and the industries are catching up. Just take solar power, for example – it’s currently one of the fastest growing industries in the United States with total growth of 6.8% from 2010 – 2011. Over 100,000 people are employed in the solar industry domestically, and solar companies plan on hiring about 24,000 people in the coming year. That’s an amazing success story."

[TheBigIf]

Whew! Thanks! I was really getting worried. I had thought that maybe I was suffering from some real virus that you had inflicted into my morning cereal. So I guess the part about you leaving voice messages in my bosses voice mail disguised as me are not true either? So then that really is me?

[Grizzled Bear]

We’ve got a new Willie Green!

[Grizzled Bear]

It had nothing to do with your melty icecream, either!

;-)

[dfwgator]

[Bidimus1]

Berkeley = independent ?

Also they did not use Argo data and continue to use the data from NASA that has been “adjusted” to fit.

GIGO

[mountainlion]

I miss witless Willis. We have new poster for our amusement.

[GOPJ]

Independent study confirms global warming exists...

Independent of what? Bias? Liberal influence? Group-think? Grant money?

The earth warms - it cools - been like that since the beginning. Politics enters when 'solutions' damage or help one group over another - artificially.

[CynicalBear]

Plant more trees.

[allmendream]

Get this straight and never forget it.

We will burn up every single drop of fossil fuel that can be brought up out of the Earth for less energy than will be provided when burning it. Every single drop.

We can stop worrying about fossil fuels at that point - but never let that simple fact escape you.

We will burn every single drop of cost effectively available fossil fuel.

[kroll]

First before we all lose it, this study only says that the temperature has been increasing and not that there is AGW which is the real question that the alarmists having jumping the gun on, anyway. Also regarding the points that you made :

Berkeley = independent ?

Meaning independent of the govt.
The funding sources are listed on their website
link
and the largest donor is the Koch foundation. The reason is that over the past two years the head of this study has been among the biggest climate skeptics out there.

DONORS

The Lee and Juliet Folger Fund ($20,000)
William K. Bowes, Jr. Foundation ($100,000)
Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research (created by Bill Gates) ($100,000)
Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation ($150,000)
The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($50,000)

Also they did not use Argo data and continue to use the data from NASA that has been “adjusted” to fit.

You obviously haven't read the papers. The study only looks at land based stations, since it only measures average land temperature. So ARGO (which are ocean floats) have nothing to do with it. Also the study considers data from every land based station in the world. And their approach is very different from NASA GIS.

[kroll]

Oops, I was wrong. Its not really independent. Its partly funded by the govt.

OTHER FINANCIAL SUPPORT

This work was supported in part by the Director, Office of Science, of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231 ($188,587)

[bt_dooftlook]

Yup, I would say it is a 100% lie - if you accept the historical record, revealed by Antarctic ice cores, that proves that temperature increase PRECEDES CO2 increase by 800-1200 years.

[cuban leaf]

I put it this way: CO2 causes global warming like ashes start fires.

Ashes are the RESULT of fires.

[Bidimus1]

How droll .. kroll

Argo data and the ADJUSTED land data conflict, now which is more reliable ?

Argo which is not near Urban Heat Islands or land based that have to be adjusted to fit.

and claiming the author is a major skeptic is a stretch..

“he San Francisco Chronicle reported in 2006:

… Muller estimates 2 in 3 odds that humans are causing global warming…”

[Bidimus1]

...

and please tell us why including more land stations makes it better, the American Stations are supposed to be the “gold standard” and have to be “adjusted” so now we add in more stations of inconclusive provonence to tack on to proxies that for some reason are GREAT till about 1960 or so and then go all wobbly..

Sorry as Computer Sys. Guy... GIGO is the word for most studies relying on adjusted data.

[kroll]

First, I agree he is not a climate skeptic(in the sense that we are) but he has been pretty critical of scientists trying to prove AGW (the hockey stick nonsense for example) by falsehoods. I imagine that is why the Koch foundation saw fit to fund his study.
Regarding your questioning the science, i dont actually see an argument.
First ARGO has a very short time series indeed (10 years) with gradually increasing resolution (as more floats were added) so it is rather insufficient to say anything about mean temperatures from that data set yet. So why on earth are you stuck onto ARGO?
Also what on earth do you mean “adjusted”? Can I have a reference about this “adjustment”. Besides, every study does not (and cannot) have to show everything. This study focuses on trying to resolve a long-standing question about biases in urban land stations vs rural ones.
Personally, I have no problems believing that temperatures can rise, the problem is with this AGW stuff which is a clear jumping-the-gun scenario.