18 de fevereiro de 2010

E continua... Clima/tempo, ciência, negacionismo e evidências

Clima e Tempo:
  • Op-Ed Columnist - Global Weirding Is Here - NYTimes.com: "Avoid the term “global warming.” I prefer the term “global weirding,” because that is what actually happens as global temperatures rise and the climate changes. The weather gets weird. The hots are expected to get hotter, the wets wetter, the dries drier and the most violent storms more numerous. The fact that it has snowed like crazy in Washington — while it has rained at the Winter Olympics in Canada, while Australia is having a record 13-year drought — is right in line with what every major study on climate change predicts: The weather will get weird; some areas will get more precipitation than ever; others will become drier than ever."
  • Is “Global Weirding” here? « Climate Progress: "We are engaged in a multi-year messaging struggle here.  The planet is going to get hotter and hotter, the weather is going to get more extreme.  One of the reasons to be clear and blunt in your messaging about this is that even if you don’t persuade people today, the overall message will grow in credibility as reality unfolds as we have warned.  To shy away from telling people the truth because they don’t want to hear it or they think it’s liberal claptrap is just incredibly un-strategic.  Some groups, like EcoAmerica, doesn’t want people to talk about “global warming.”  And — even worse — they don’t want people to talk about extreme weather, which, as I have previously argued, is in fact the same thing that the climate deniers want — see “Why do the deniers try to shout down any talk of a link between climate change and extreme weather?“  You must tell people what is coming, not just because it is strategic messaging, but also I believe because we have a moral responsibility." 
Economia:
Ciência (e negacionismo, também):
 
Time series of global mean heat storage (from 0 to 1.24 miles).
  • Part 2: A Scientist’s Defense of Greenhouse Warming - Dot Earth Blog - NYTimes.com: "Here’s the second (and final) installment from Andrew A. Lacis of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies providing more detail on his view of the evidence showing a human warming influence on the climate. [A primeira parte está imediatamente acima.] This post builds on his earlier efforts here to challenge arguments of skeptics of human-driven warming. (I’ve added a link or two to Web sites explaining some of the acronyms.)" 
Negacionismo:
  • RealClimate: Whatevergate: "However, since the emails were released, and despite the fact that there is no evidence within them to support any of these claims of fraud and fabrication, the UK media has opened itself so wide to the spectrum of thought on climate that the GW hoaxers have now suddenly find themselves well within the mainstream. Nothing has changed the self-evidently ridiculousness of their arguments, but their presence at the media table has meant that the more reasonable critics seem far more centrist than they did a few months ago. [...] All of these stories are based on the worst kind of oft-rebunked nonsense and they serve to make the more subtle kind of scepticism pushed by Lomborg et al seem almost erudite." A dado passo, fala-se da Overton window: é um conceito interessante, e tem a ver com o modo como evoluem as percepções das pessoas sobre a razoabilidade, a plausibilidade, a aceitabilidade, das opiniões, das teses, das proposições - para dar um exemplo, quando um político do PSD regional, defendeu a necessidade de ligar algumas das ilhas dos Açores por túneis (à canal da Mancha), a reacção que recebeu demonstrou que a sua opinião estava, por uma grande distância, fora da Janela de Overton da problemática das comunicações insulares. 
  • Did Phil Jones really say global warming ended in 1995?: "A headline in the Daily Mail has spread like wildfire, claiming that Phil Jones, ex-director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, said 'there has been no global warming since 1995'. Not only did Phil Jones not say these words, this interpretation shows a poor understanding of the scientific concepts behind his words. To fully understand what Phil Jones was saying, one needs to read his actual words and understand the science discussed. Here is the relevant excerpt from the BBC interview:"  
Evidências:
  • Greenland: Fjords Contribute to Melting of Glaciers | Climate Ark: "Greenland`s glaciers are melting faster than they used to, contributing to the rise of sea levels worldwide. While warmer atmospheric temperatures thin all the glaciers from above, scientists have wondered if warmer waters are also melting the many glaciers that flow into the fjords. Two studies published in Nature Geoscience provide evidence that this is the case."

Sem comentários: