Summary: Our dysfunctional politics result largely from polarized views of Americans, both sides shaped by skillful and expensive propaganda. To break free we’ll need to learn their methods and develop far deeper skepticism. This is another in a series of posts looking at examples of our minds being molded by pros. It discusses the work of climate activists, but it’s vital to understand that both sides do this — because it works. {2nd of 2 posts today.}
Yesterday’s post discussed the largely erroneous framing in an article about climate change by investment expert Barry Ritholtz at Bloomberg. How do intelligent, educated people become so convinced by the propaganda of climate activists, dismissing any who disagree with them as “deniers”?
We might find an answer by looking at the work of activists, such as Joe Romm (note that most climate activists are paid employees, unlike most of those on the Right). This post follows his chain of evidence in a typical article, showing how his bold conclusions rest on misrepresentations of the literature, and exaggerating the scope and certainty of specific papers.
The work by activists have large effects because liberals often read only activists, giving them a misunderstanding of climate science — exacerbated because activists seldom cite the work of institutions like the IPCC (designed to make the work of scientists understandable to laypeople).
Today’s example: “NOAA Study Confirms Global Warming Speed-Up Is Imminent” at ThinkProgress, 5 June 201 — Opening …
A major new study from NOAA finds more evidence that we may be witnessing the start of the long-awaited jump in global temperatures. As I reported in April, many recent studies have found that we are about to enter an era of even more rapid global warming. … The new study in Science from a team of NOAA scientists, “finds that the rate of global warming during the last 15 years has been as fast as or faster than that seen during the latter half of the 20th Century,” as NOAA explains.
… What happens when these various temporary factors stop? Karl explained: “Once these factors play out, and they may have already, global temperatures could rise more rapidly than what we have seen so far.” In other words, the long-awaited jump is global temperatures is likely imminent.
The cracks appear right at the start of this. Note the jump between Karl’s careful “may have already … could rise” and Romm’s “likely imminent”. Romm also omits the cautious language Karl gives in the NOAA’s well-written (as always) press releases (first one, second one) …
“Adding in the last two years of global surface temperature data and other improvements in the quality of the observed record provide evidence that contradict the notion of a hiatus in recent global warming trends,” said Thomas R. Karl, LHD, Director, NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information. “Our new analysis suggests that the apparent hiatus may have been largely the result of limitations in past datasets, and that the rate of warming over the first 15 years of this century has, in fact, been as fast or faster than that seen over the last half of the 20th century.”
Activists (Left and Right) often point to one study as definitive, ignoring the contrary conclusions of other studies and painting a false picture of a consensus in the literature. This is an important forecast, but there have been many forecasts showing that the pause will end sometime between now and several decades from now.
Romm mentions an earlier article showing that “many recent studies” find “that we are about to enter an era of even more rapid global warming”: “Long-Awaited ‘Jump’ In Global Warming Now Appears ‘Imminent’” , 2 April 2015. Here’s the opening …
We may be witnessing the start of the long-awaited jump in global temperatures. There is “a vast and growing body of research,” as Climate Central explained in February. “Humanity is about to experience a historically unprecedented spike in temperatures.” A March study, “Near-term acceleration in the rate of temperature change,” makes clear that an actual acceleration in the rate of global warming is imminent — with Arctic warming rising a stunning 1°F per decade by the 2020s.
This is quite an odd article. He sets the stage by listing dots of record warmth (ignoring cold records, or that most such records represent natural variation). These include an outright misrepresentations: “Antarctica appears to have set its all-time temperature record — 63.5°F (17.5°C) — on March 24 at the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula.” That was at Base Esperanza: it’s not even inside the Antarctic circle, and has a record going back only to 1945 (hardly the vast record implied by “all-time”).
The rest of the article discusses the likely El Nino — a multi-year period of the Pacific releasing heat. While that will boost global temperatures, it’s part of a naturally occurring cycle — not an anthropogenic effect.
What about that alarming Climate Central article Romm cites? It has the lurid title of “Looming Warming Spurt Could Reshape Climate Debate” by John Upton (journalist), 27 February 2015 — Opening…
Humanity is about to experience a historically unprecedented spike in temperatures. That’s the ominous conclusion of a vast and growing body of research that links sweeping Pacific Ocean cycles with rates of warming at the planet’s surface — warming rates that could affect how communities and nations respond to threats posed by climate change.
Papers in two leading journals this week reaffirmed that the warming effects of a substantial chunk of our greenhouse gas pollution have been avoided on land for the last 15 to 20 years because of a phase in a decades-long cycle of ocean winds and currents.
… The growing body of research helps explain why ocean temperatures have been rising faster than anticipated, and, perhaps more compellingly, why land temperatures rose less than models had projected after the turn of the century — a mystery, sometimes dubbed the warming “hiatus,” “pause” or “faux pause,” that confounded science until just the last couple of years.
These papers discuss one of the many explanations given in the recent literature for the pause. Neither gives evidence of “looming” warming (i.e., “about to happen”). Upton neglects to mention the many other theories, or even that there are other theories — which disproves that his implication that there is a consensus about the causes and likely duration of the pause.
The first of the two papers he cites is “Quantifying the likelihood of a continued hiatus in global warming“, Christopher D. Roberts et al, Nature Climate Change, April 2015 — It gives a specific forecast: “… we should not be surprised if the current hiatus continues until the end of the decade.” No mention of a “historically unprecedented spike in temperatures”.
The second paper Upton cites is “Atlantic and Pacific multidecadal oscillations and Northern Hemisphere temperatures” by Byron A. Steinman, Michael E. Mann, and Sonya K. Miller in Science, 27 February 2015. Their conclusion gives no specific forecast for its ending (let alone “looming”): “Given the pattern of past historical variation, this trend will likely reverse with internal variability instead, adding to anthropogenic warming in the coming decades. ” No mention of a “historically unprecedented spike in temperatures”.
What does the link John Upton gives for “a vast and growing body of research” point to? It goes to his 22 December 2014 article “Clues in Coral Hint at Looming Temperature Spike“, which in turn points us to the not very alarming “Early twentieth-century warming linked to tropical Pacific wind strength” by Diane M. Thompson et al in Nature Geoscience, February 2015 — Abstract…
Of the rise in global atmospheric temperature over the past century, nearly 30% occurred between 1910 and 1940 when anthropogenic forcings were relatively weak. This early warming has been attributed to internal factors, such as natural climate variability in the Atlantic region, and external factors, such as solar variability and greenhouse gas emissions. However, the warming is too large to be explained by external factors alone and it precedes Atlantic warming by over a decade. For the late twentieth century, observations and climate model simulations suggest that Pacific trade winds can modulate global temperatures, but instrumental data are scarce in the early twentieth century.
Here we present a westerly wind reconstruction (1894–1982) from seasonally resolved measurements of Mn/Ca ratios in a western Pacific coral that tracks interannual to multidecadal Pacific climate variability. We then reconstruct central Pacific temperatures using Sr/Ca ratios in a coral from Jarvis Island, and find that weak trade winds and warm temperatures coincide with rapid global warming from 1910 to 1940. In contrast, winds are stronger and temperatures cooler between 1940 and 1970, when global temperature rise slowed down. We suggest that variations in Pacific wind strength at decadal timescales significantly influence the rate of surface air temperature change.
So we dig down to the end, and find our fears rest on the evidence provided by a coal reef. This is typical activism at work — picking a few studies out of the vast science literature to describe a certain future. This is the path to unreliable conclusions. I suggest instead relying on the IPCC and major climate agencies.
Conclusion
One reason American politics has become so dysfunctional (for us, at least) is that so much money and skilled effort goes to mislead us. It leaves us fragmented and confused about things about which we should have a clear vision. We can do better. I believe as a start we should each try to hear what our political opponents are saying, rather then just denounce them (e.g., as “deniers”). It would be a first small step to a better future.
For More Information
To learn more about the state of climate change see The Rightful Place of Science: Disasters and Climate Change
If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. For more information see the keys to understanding climate change and my posts about climate change. Also, see more examples of climate denial by Left & Right dominates the public debate and these posts about the pause …
- Scientists explore causes of the pause in warming, perhaps the most important research of the decade., with abstracts and links to 37 articles describing 12 theories about causes of the pause.
- One of the most important questions we face: when will the pause in global warming end? with abstracts and links to 15 articles giving predictions from very soon to several decades from now.