Climate Change

Climate Change A Trip Down Science Lane

The Ice IS Melting

Of course it is!

In the late 20 th century it is warmer and spring is coming sooner

What part of “DUH” don’t you get?!?

There is real measured temperature stuff. For 60 years lots of temperature measurements are higher

True stuff!!!

http://shootyoureyeout.net/ ©Jack Vermillion

I Have Seen It Myself

It WAS colder when you were a kid

The Satellites do show less ice on the North Pole

March is the new April

Science Has Spoken

Got all that data folks of all that heat and melting and birdsong

Get Used to it!

There is a LOT more C0 2

Science again here folks – not arm waving goin’ on to fool ya

Got all those cool instruments all over the place measuring it

Real facts here folks

Move it along here -- Facts – C0 2 was .0315% of the air in 1958 and is .0390% today – NOAA writes it down

C0 2 is BAD, UmmKay http://shootyoureyeout.net/ ©Jack Vermillion

Summary

Hotter Air

More C0 2

Melting Ice

Climate in the last ½ of 20 th Century has real measured, checked, verified data that all this is true

Give it up

There Will Be Changes If This Continues

Sea Levels will rise

Animals, people and plants will be displaced and life on earth will be different

If the climate changes everything else will have to adjust to it

This is just plain “how stuff works” – change something and something else has to change to keep in balance

Science here folks – wanting it different won’t make it different

Science To The Rescue!

Hurray, we are saved!

“ The Scientists” will fix it and we can carry on!

“ They” told us about the problem and “They” will fix it!

Hurray, we are saved!

What are we being “Saved” From?

Climate Change FOOL – you just told us humans made this problem and we can fix it. Well “The Scientists” can fix it and we will do what they say

WOAH – Who Said What?!? I told you no such thing! Take the wax outta your ears. What con artist told you humans caused climate change? Did Bernie Madoff, scum of the earth, come by here?!?

Now Wait A Minute!

Yeah, like I said, S-C-I-E-N-C-E. Not Star Trek. Not believe and make it so. Not the bible. Follow the S-C-I-E-N-C-E.

Let’s go start at the beginning again.

What is the temperature of the “Climate?”

You got it – there is no “temperature of the Climate” or the Earth that any science or group or anything says is accepted, correct, less correct, or incorrect. There are about as many ways to figure that out as Bernie Madoff stole dollars.

Earth Is Earth

Yep, lots of measurement about air and water and city streets, and glaciers – bajillions of them over the last 100 years

Fact check here – there is no scientific theory, consensus, definition or any of that that says how you do anything with them and put them together to give you any meaningful datum to measure anything against. Sorry, this is messy stuff

Besides, if there were some magic measurements you could take who says, after 4 billions some odd years of existence of this planet and everything it has been – just what is the “correct” temperature this should be? Huh?

More Earth

Absolute fact – “if” humans mucked with the path that the climate dynamic was on, by things we have done, then a correct temperature would be one that the earth would have taken if we had not screwed with it.

Nobody can disagree with that. If humans made it better or worse, we made it different. If you say no humans is correct then you can define that as where the earth climate temperature should be – if humans were not around

Volcanos, exploding stars, asteroids, sun changes, anything else leads to correct temperature – completely fair way to determine correct.

Doesn’t mean anything at all , but a definition anyways.

Now The Question For Science

Did Humans Cause Climate Change, if you define climate change as rising temperatures during the late 20 th century?

That’s right I just blew off all the other temperatures we think we know from the past before 1900. All the C0 2 measurements from that past, all that smoke and confusion that goes with them.

The REAL QUESTION that everybody is asking is: did humankind muck up the climate with C0 2 ?

We know that the C0 2 increase by humans only matters from the early 20 th century till now.

Real science says ask the right questions and get rid of all the confusion and conjecture and answer the question you need to answer

Just The Facts Ma’am

I do understand what you are saying about all the old temperatures of the Earth’s air and water for the last 1000 years

You are trying to say that the temperatures you calculate from things like ice and tree rings are cooler than today. Further, humans have been making lots of C0 2 for the last 60 years, and therefore they are causing the higher temperatures. I get it

I am sorry, nobody every taught you to argue proofs. All you have done is state a question based on a conjecture and two pieces of unrelated evidence. In effect – humans were there, so humans are guilty.

Sherlock Holmes and Dr. House would not even talk to you and bother to explain that you don’t have a clue how to frame evidence of a crime!

1000 years already?!? That is tiny, insignificant, meaningless, and unimportant in the history of the planet – come back then when you have a billion years or something that matters, OK.

C0 2 has Physical Properties

Got that part too, already agreed that C0 2 has properties that it absorbs and emits photons.

Yep, the fact that there is more C0 2 now – yes, sure that too.

So, that is just part of your question – we already said that you are correct in asking it and that it deserves an answer. It is important. Got that to about melting ice and all.

Agree with all that stuff.

221b Baker Street

Let’s go to that mythical place for how we answer you question

All evidence in Sherlock’s world and the world of crime and punishment is circumstantial. Movies and TV aside that is the way it is. You prove motive and opportunity and collect tons of evidence to show that, and then Bernie goes to jail. Life of a lawyer in ALL cases.

Science

Science is NOT 221b Baker Street or a court of law. THANK GOD!

Science takes proof and repeatable experiments, validated mathematical constructs, and accumulated evidence that things happen the same way every time – and proof of that.

Circumstantial evidence has no place in science.

How To Answer The Question

Show your work

Hahahahaha – you thought it was going to be a long and tedious definition didn’t you!

All you do is show the question, the data you used, the analysis you performed, the experiments you did, and let other people try to duplicate it and expand it with the same everything.

Do please call me when the Human Climate Change promoters do this. They HAVE NOT done this yet to date.

Let’s Back Up

Go to NASA and ask how to do science

Go to NASA Langley Research Center

Go to http://scifiles.larc.nasa.gov/text/educators/tools/pbl/scientific_method.html

You find the following scientific method flowchart

The NASA LARC Scientific Method

Concept: Illustrate the course of action taken when applying the scientific method.

Purpose: Provide a visual image of the steps or processes taken during a scientific investigation.

Strategy

Review the process beginning with Define/Identify the Problem.

Emphasize that scientists do not take actions in a linear sense but rather move ahead in an investigation once they have collected evidence that satisfies their questions

Define key terms such as hypothesis and observations.

Provide examples of how to create and write a hypothesis in the correct form.

Provide examples of tools (ex., graphs, spreadsheets, etc.) that can be used to organize and analyze data.

Emphasize the importance of maintaining a science journal and show examples of good science journal entries.

Discuss the importance of changing one variable at a time when conducting experiments.

Emphasize the importance of multiple trials before drawing conclusions.

Demonstrate how to make general and specific conclusions about an experiment.

Emphasize the importance of communicating the results and discuss possible audiences.

The NASA LARC Method Steps

Define/Identify the Problem

Form a Hypothesis

Make Observations or Test Hypothesis and Perform Experiments

Organize and Analyze Data

Do Experiments and Observations Support Hypothesis?

If No, Perform New Experiments and Repeat Step 4

Draw Conclusions

Communicate Results

The NASA LARC Flow http://shootyoureyeout.net/ ©Jack Vermillion

Melting Ice

Early Spring

Warmer Summers –

Winters

=

Climate Changing

Measure temps & CO 2

for late 20 th century

Temp proxies show cooler

past sometimes

Warmer temps and more

CO 2 last ½ 20 th century

More Human Impacts

More CO 2 around

CO 2 absorbs some

photons emits

others (properties)

=

CO 2 causes climate change

None None None CO 2 causes All Climate Change

Collect temp &

CO 2 data

Record temps are

changing & more

CO 2 last 60 years*

Temperatures are changing & there is more CO 2 last 60 years CO 2 Causes Climate Change No *Some measured temperatures in the late 20 th century may be changing at a different rates than some proxy temperatures did at some times In the recent past, based on statistical analysis of the statistically derived proxy temperatures. The Current Climate Science http://shootyoureyeout.net/ ©Jack Vermillion

The Details 1

Here’s how you do it and what you need to show to prove that humans have caused climate warming in the last 60 years:

Construct a definition in precise terms of what the climate temperature of the earth is and publish it and get consensus from the scientific community.

More Details 2

List all the variables driving the climate temperature. Sun, water vapor, C0 2 , dust, albedo, etc., etc., etc.

Analyze and publish results for the contribution of each variable to the climate temperature

Use only measured data, test data, historical data, etc. for each variable

Construct an analysis showing how all the variables drive the climate temperature as a system and analyze the contribution of each to the climate temperature

More Details 3

Analyze all the measurements for each variable and correct the measurements for errors. Publish all this too.

Establish a set of physical sensors – temperature, wind, etc that represent you earth climate temperature definition. Start collecting data and fill in data from the past 60 years as much as you can for all of them with all the corrections for errors you defined and checked

More Details 4

Build a computer model of your Earth Climate with all the variables, all their connections, all their error corrections

Run your model and adjust it to predict the temperatures you get with all your sensors to a level of accuracy you think is correct

Adjust your model and all the inputs and parameters and data until it matches the temperature sensors

Publish all this and get the scientific community to agree in consensus

More Details 5

Now do a bunch of runs with your adjusted model of past temperatures and sensor measurements you have correlated with measured data for your sensors.

Juggle all the parameters again and test each variable, C0 2 , water vapor, sunshine, etc., again to match the past temperatures as best you can

Also collect data for the relative importance of each variable to the temperatures – parametric analysis

More Details 6

Now you run the model and check it and adjust it all over again so that it matches both the current and the past data

You are ready to say something now – you can say what you believe the relative weight of each variable you used is worth to the temperature predictions

You can start to say if C0 2 has a big or a small effect on temperatures from your model – you theory now has more weight

More Details 7

Last after all the feedback on your publications, model correlations, runs with data, earth climate definition -- you do the real test:

You can now run your model to predict the future

You run a whole bunch of future runs with different variable weights and assumptions about how they will change

You start checking your model against what happens and keep correlating and improving all your sensor measurements

The Last Details

Now you can say which variables, like C0 2 and sunshine matter and what you think will happen in the future. You keep correlating your model and keep getting more and better sensor measurements. Keep doing this for about 10 years.

You now have empirical proof for your question if humans and C0 2 are a problem for the climate or not.

Now you can tell people what C0 2 means and what other things mean and make informed decisions with data and predictions that will be generally accepted. Everybody starts to feel comfortable about making policy.

You can “show everybody the numbers!”

Now Wait A Minute More

Yes, just proposed an empirical proof, not a hard scientific proof.

I did not measure an effect, compare it to a closed ended scientific theory, then correlate the output back through the derivation of the theory.

I cheated and made a computer model of the system and populated it with real measured data and separated variables to weigh contributions by each then compared that back to the theory.

That is a completely fair thing to do when you can’t test the whole system in real life – engineers have built the modern world exactly that way.

Almost “circumstantial evidence” it is.

Pure Science

No such thing, but for discussion.

In physics theory, relativity for example, you have a theory and a mathematical construct, take data in an experiment, eliminate all other variables, take more data, compare to theory.

Now show everybody else what you did, let them mess with theory, math, experiment, do their own experiments, have them show everybody. Have everybody keep doing this until most agree that the theory and the experiments and the data are producing the same results.

With something as simple as gravity you can do experiments to test theories and eliminate variables.

Simple Gravity

The Stanford University/Lockheed Martin Gravity Probe B spacecraft is measuring the “geodetic effect,” curve of space-time near the earth right now.

That data confirms Einstein’s General Relativity.

Science does this kind of thing all the time.

Can’t do that kind of thing with CO 2 in the atmosphere and it’s theorized effect on global temperature.

CO 2 Relativity

If you want hard proof ie scientific proof like Gravity Probe B for carbon in the air, you have to turn the carbon on or off quickly. Then measure weather changes for a handful of decades after each switch on or off, then correlate the results with your theory.

Keep all the other variables constant during all this time – first define and quantify all those other variables – which has NOT been done yet either.

Then you get hard science proof.

Science Relativity

Yes, I know real science is messy and hard proofs are rare as hens teeth.

Yes, you use computer models to replace closed mathematical constructs all the time.

Yes, you never get clean data or eliminate or quantify ALL the other variables exactly, almost all of the time.

Yes to all.

Absolute NO to not using good science and experimental practice to quantify and separate variables, measure them, publish them, publish models, make predictions, test predictions, publish tests, and all that.

Yes, the Human Caused Climate Change proponents say “No!” to the “No” list above and do not do all that checking, testing, publishing, modeling, and re-checking.

Unbroken Circle

We are back around again to doing the best science we can do with predictive computer models that are correlated with real measured data and well designed experiments -- then testing against the real earth climate.

The Human Climate Change proponents do not want you to look behind the curtain and ask for Hard Science and Hard Computer Model Correlation and Verification.

They want you to keep letting them guess and wave arms and make simpleton graphs of CO 2 in the air and temperature guesses for the air and tree rings -- and not do all the hard work to test all that for real.

Sherlock Holmes, Dr. House, and Albert Einstein are just plain disgusted by this manipulation of science and logic the “climaters” are perpetrating on everybody -- they are snake oil sellers – they are Wall Street Bankers selling credit default swaps

Today Again

The proof of human driven C0 2 enables climate change with a validated analysis using measured data that is open and peer reviewed DOES NOT exist in any form today

There is circumstantial evidence, conjecture, bad logic, arm waving, belief without facts for a crime that nobody can even agree has been committed

Bad science is bad science is bad science no matter how you slice it

Does All This Matter?

Yes and No

Yes, twisting science to be political and like a law court is crap science and takes away from all the hard work and dedication of most scientists and the work that has called them to it.

No, I really do not believe that C0 2 has any significant impact on climate change, defined as warmer March and melting ice.

Been in the science/engineering/technology world for too long to not trust my gut on this

Spent to many years doing heat transfer research and engineering design with it to trust Al Gore

Last: there are too many people on the earth and any change to climate that normal populations would adjust to are screwed up. To many people living in so many marginal places at such low levels of subsistence get in trouble when something happens.