Climate & Climate Change

A new paper was published in Nature on 13th September, with Jan Veizer as a co-author, entitled ‘Coupling of surface temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations during the Palaeozoic era.’

The abstract says:

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations seem to have been several times modern levels during much of the Palaeozoic era (543–248 million years ago), but decreased during the Carboniferous period to concentrations similar to that of today. Given that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, it has been proposed that surface temperatures were significantly higher during the earlier portions of the Palaeozoic era. A reconstruction of tropical sea surface temperatures based on the 18O of carbonate fossils indicates, however, that the magnitude of temperature variability throughout this period was small4, suggesting that global climate may be independent of variations in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. Here we present estimates of sea surface temperatures that were obtained from fossil brachiopod and mollusc shells using the ‘carbonate clumped isotope’ method—an approach that, unlike the 18O method, does not require independent estimates of the isotopic composition of the Palaeozoic ocean. Our results indicate that tropical sea surface temperatures were significantly higher than today during the Early Silurian period (443–423 Myr ago), when carbon dioxide concentrations are thought to have been relatively high, and were broadly similar to today during the Late Carboniferous period (314–300 Myr ago), when carbon dioxide concentrations are thought to have been similar to the present-day value. Our results are consistent with the proposal that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations drive or amplify increased global temperatures.

Steve Milloy of junkscience.com has spoken to Veizer:

A new study published in the journal Nature (Sep. 13) crafted to support the notion that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide drive increases in global temperature actually, if read carefully, casts further doubt on that idea.

The story begins in 2000 when the University of Ottawa’s Jan Veizer and others published a study in Nature reporting that their reconstruction (via fossil shells) of tropical sea surface temperatures for that last 550 million years only made sense if carbon dioxide were not the principle driver of climate variability on a geological timescale.

Veizer, along with Nir Shaviv of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, followed up the 2000 paper with a July 2003 study in GSA Today (a journal published by the Geological Society of America). That report said at least 66 percent and perhaps as much as 75 percent of the variance in the Earth’s temperature over the past 500 million years may be due to cosmic ray flux.

Obviously, none of this was good for ever-fragile climate hysteria and the alarmists struck back with the new Nature study, which, surprisingly, includes Veizer as a co-author.

The new study that uses a different method to reconstruct sea surface temperatures from fossil shells claims to report results that “are consistent with the proposal that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations drive or amplify increased global temperatures.”

So has Veizer participated in the debunking of his own work as the new study seems to imply? Hardly.

First, Veizer reluctantly told me the “text” of the Nature study, that is, the above-quoted conclusion, represented a “compromise” between the study’s disagreeing authors where Veizer’s side apparently did all the compromising for reasons that had little to do with the science.

While Veizer didn’t want to elaborate on the politics of the Nature study, he told me “not to take the tone of the paper as the definitive last word.”

Veizer went on to say that the new Nature study has not refuted his original study. The new study, in fact, appears to have confirmed the original study with respect to its most important point that the historical sea surface temperature data indicate atmospheric carbon dioxide does not drive global temperature.

Even if the new study proves to be valid, Veizer says, at most it reduces the statistical variation in sea surface temperature estimated by the original study. This correction, however, has little bearing on the nature of the carbon dioxide-temperature relationship.

Veizer says the basic pattern of reconstructed sea surface temperatures in both his original study and the new study remain inconsistent with notion that atmospheric carbon dioxide drives global temperatures.

If it turns out that the new study reconstructs historical sea surface temperatures more accurately than his original study, Veizer added, it would only represent an increase in the impact of cosmic rays on the climate that was reported in the 2003 GSA Today paper.

There’s another point worth spotlighting in all this. It seems that the politics of global warming including the multibillion-dollar-funding of global warming research resulted in the publication in a prestigious science journal of a “compromise” conclusion that is not supported by the study’s own data.

Yes, I’ve returned from Spain where 2007 was Madrid’s coolest summer since 1997, ranking 37th in the hottest summers since records began 115 years ago, despite predictions that 2007 would be one of the hottest ever. No jelly fish invasion on the Costa Del Sol, and electricity consumption due to air conditioning was down on previous years.

I also discovered a new sceptic called Anton Uriarte, a professor of Physical Geography at the University of the Basque Country. He says climate is always changing and there is no evidence to support the global warming thesis: “It’s just a political thing, and the lies about global warming are contributing to the proliferation of nuclear energy.” He also claims CO2 emission are good, “Far from provoking the so-called greenhouse effect, they stabilise the climate.”

However, a ‘Junta de Andalucia’ study predicts a 3C rise in temperatures in Malaga by 2100, minimum temperature increases will lead to the loss of certain species, and there could be up to 17 per cent less rainfall.

Check back in 2100 to verify these predictions, given that they didn’t get 2007 right!

The Junta also produced a 10 point ‘climate action plan,’ which includes ‘Urban Planning’ where growth is compact rather than spread out, ‘Green Zones,’ ensuring native trees are used to reduce irrigation and increase CO2 absorption, ‘Mobility and Transport,’ promoting short distance maritime transport, HOV lanes for cars, encouraging bio-fuels and more efficient motoring, ‘Renewable Energies,’ such as the installation of solar energy units in urban areas.

Meanwhile, work has started at Malaga Airport on a second ‘jumbo jet’ friendly runway and terminal building, without delay or ‘climate camp,’ to be completed by the end of 2009. Malaga will then deal with 20 million passengers per year, compared to the current 13 million. Just like elsewhere, Spain majors in climate rhetoric, and minors in action due to economic reality.

Searched for by mariners since the 15th century, the legendary Northwest Passage across the Arctic Ocean appears to have opened up again, according to satellite pictures from the European Space Agency. Satellite measurements of Arctic sea ice began less than 30 years ago. The Northwest Passage is a shipping route between Europe and Asia. The route linking the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans is shorter than using the Panama Canal.

To some this will be seen as more evidence of man-made global warming due to the burning of fossil fuels. To others it is more evidence of natural climate variability – the route was open during previous warm periods when man was not burning fossil fuels.

Norwegian explorer Roald Amunsden proved that the route was navigable in 1906, after a 3-year expedition. Since that time, only ice breaking ships have been able to get through.

A word of caution though for anyone planning an historic solo trip from this article in Australia’s Herald Sun:

Ice blocks British solo sailor

A BRITISH yachtsman attempting the first solo Arctic sea passage across northern Russia was examining his options after heavier than expected ice blocked his route, his manager said.

Adrian Flanagan is discussing with Russian authorities the possibility of using a nuclear-powered icebreaker to lift his boat out of the water and carry it round the most icebound stretch of Russia’s Northern Sea Route.

“Basically it just means we’re putting plan B into operation so if the worst comes to the worst and there isn’t a break in the weather, we’ve got a plan,” Louise Flanagan, his manager and ex-wife said from Britain.

The 46-year-old entered the eastern end of the treacherous sea route that stretches from Asia to Europe across northern Russia in late July.

He had hoped that his 11m reinforced yacht would be able to get all the way to Europe due to lighter ice conditions observed in recent years, thought to be a result of global warming.

Dear Colleagues,

Following is a chart showing the definite physical relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide and sea surface temperatures.

It can be regarded as the experience curve of reality.

I used CO2 data from Mauna Loa as it is at a higher elevation and well mixed.

I used recent global average sea surface temperatures based on satellite sensing as they are the only reliable data we have on average SST.

I used a 21 year moving average of SST values as the oceans breathe carbon dioxide in and out with the El Nino and La Nina cycles.

The net result is a clear firm relationship.

It is what would be expected from the solubility curve of CO2 in water.

The little bumps on the line can be traced to volcanic events.

I note that the oceans scavenge excess CO2 from volcanic events within about 2 years.

This chart shows that it is physically impossible for man-made emissions of carbon dioxide to accumulate in the atmosphere.

It proves that CO2 is not a pollutant.

Lance Endersbee
Former Dean of Engineering (1976-1988) and Pro-Vice Chancellor of Monash University

————————–
And Jen is reminded of a note from Arnost, dated March 29, 2007 and entitled ‘Why Are There No Major “Spikes or Troughs” in the Official Direct Measurements of C02?’ click here: https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/001976.html

Hi Jennifer,

Bob Ferguson of the Science and Public Policy Institute has just asked me to draw your attention to the fact that he’s published my analysis of the IPCC review.

It’s titled “Peer Review, What Peer Review” and can be found at http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/sppi_originals/peerreview.html

A key finding in the document is that the WG I chapter that attributed warming to human activities had 62 reviewers but many had a vested interest (chapter authors, IPCC editors, researchers whose work was cited). Just FOUR reviewers without any vested interest explicitly endorsed the principal claim. Not thousands of researchers, not even hundreds, just 4.

Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters has picked up on the article and written about it at length (and with lots of quotes) at http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/09/09/what-media-won-t-tell-you-about-u-n-climate-panel

You might also be interested in another of my documents that Bob Ferguson has just published. It’s titled “Fallacies about Global Warming” and can be found at http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/sppi_originals/fallacies_about_global_warming.html.

Cheers,
John McLean

Paul Kelly writing in today’s The Australian has suggested that

“The Sydney climate change declaration is a success for John Howard, a good outcome for APEC and an incremental step on the long journey to find global agreement on a post-2012 emissions policy.

“The leaders’ declaration is exactly what the APEC forum was established to do – confront the big issues and strike a regional position to influence global outcomes…

“It is the first time so many nations from the developed and developing worlds have backed this concept [a long-term aspirational global emissions reduction goal]. It is also the first time the APEC region has embraced aspirational targets for energy efficiency and forest expansion.

“This is the first such agreement involving the major polluters, the US, China and the Russian Federation,” Howard said at APEC’s conclusion.

A friend of mine in Washington emailed this morning:

“APEC and the ‘Sydney Declaration’ got ten sentences at the bottom of page 14 in today’s New York Times. There was a story above it by a staff reporter that commented that the Australian media were more interested in what the President ate than his policies – it made us look like complete hicks – unfortunately it’s true. And then the article went on to explain that ‘Bums for Bush’ was not a campaign by hobos – but rather a nude protest.”