What Effect Of Climate Change Is Of Immediate Concern To Pacific Atolls?
What are the climate change facts? Is a disastrous modify in the climate looming? Is homo responsible?
There is expert evidence that global temperatures accept been slowly climbing for the past four centuries and were slowly failing for many centuries prior to that. Simply are these temperature changes a serious threat to our way of life, or are they just a part of normal variation to which we can readily adjust? Sadly, our lives are going to be affected whether global warming is a real threat or not. Global warming has been blamed for almost every ill in our society.ane In his State of the Union speech in 2013, President Obama said this:
Information technology's true that no single event makes a tendency. But the fact is, the 12 hottest years on record have all come in the final 15. Heat waves, droughts, wildfires, floods—all are now more than frequent and more intense. We tin cull to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states take ever seen were all just a freak coincidence. Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science—and act before information technology'south too late.2
Inside this brusk quote, many of the mutual issues related to climatic change are raised—recent events that are not necessarily indicative of a long-term trend, a merits that the "science" is settled, and a warning that we must human action correct now. The president followed these words by vowing that, if legislation were non forthcoming, he would practice all he could by executive social club.
These new policies will almost certainly raise the cost of energy. College energy costs will lower the standard of living for all, particularly the poorest among us. Is a disastrous change in the climate looming? Is man responsible? Let'south begin our journey to respond those two questions by defining our terms.
What Is Climatic change?
The Oxford English Dictionary defines climate change as a change in global or regional climate patterns, in detail a change credible from the mid to late 20th century onward and attributed largely to the increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide produced by the use of fossil fuels.3 Other lexicon definitions are much more than succinct and exercise not specify cause, direction, or time frame. It is not surprising that there is some disparity in the definitions. With controversial subjects, people often disagree on exactly what the words mean. For the purpose of this chapter, the phrase "climatic change" will be used to hateful long-term changes in climate (mainly temperature) without implying any cause for, or direction in, the change.
Do Climate change and Global Warming Mean the Same Affair?
Some use these phrases interchangeably, and others exercise non. Those who see the global temperature every bit going just in ane management ofttimes use them interchangeably. Nonetheless, the phrase "global warming" was much more popular earlier 2006 and 2007 when the average global temperature declined significantly. "Climate change" is much more normally used today and seems much less prejudicial. Therefore, "climate change" volition be used herein.
How Could There Exist And then Much Disagreement over a Scientific Outcome?
When in that location is a lack of good data and when people view the data from two very different perspectives, it is like shooting fish in a barrel to take disagreement.
A Lack of Good Information
Measuring the boilerplate temperature of the globe is very difficult. At any point in fourth dimension, unlike parts of the globe are experiencing different conditions; for case, mean solar day and dark, summertime and winter, cloudy and articulate, arid and boiling, and windy and calm. This level of variability requires frequent measurements to exist made in many places over many years in order to summate an average global temperature. Temperature measurements have been made at land-based weather stations since 1880. Two main factors have made those measurements less accurate than they need to be—drastic changes in the immediate area around some of these atmospheric condition stations and poor distribution of weather stations around the earth. These facts led scientists to push for temperature measurements from satellites.
We are in a very early on stage in the process of understanding climate alter.
Satellites are able to provide much-improved data over country-based systems. But even the satellite measurements, which began in 1979, are non without their issues. In 2002, the satellite orbits were adapted so the measurements could be fabricated at a consistent place and time of day.4 Conspicuously, simply a few years of useful measurements are not enough to give us a good agreement of climate change. That'southward not fifty-fifty enough fourth dimension for the states to be certain that these new satellite measurements are sufficiently authentic. Lord Kelvin said, "To measure is to know." We will never have a articulate understanding of climatic change until nosotros are able to accurately measure the earth's temperature for decades, if not centuries.
The lack of accurate measurements has not stopped scientists from interpreting the data they do take. No problem. That is how science works. Scientists do their best to gather accurate data and advise theories based on those measurements. They test those theories by doing further experiments to run across if the new measurements are consistent with the latest theory. In the procedure of using this scientific method, scientists learn how to do better experiments, make more authentic measurements, and propose amend theories. The trouble here is that we are in a very early stage in the procedure of understanding climatic change. In early stages, researchers accept a strong tendency to develop theories based on their own worldview and to run experiments designed to testify their theory rather than test it. The current bias toward global warming will likely lengthen the time required to construct more accurate climate models.
2 Dissimilar Views of the Globe
To those who believe that the universe is the consequence of the supposed big bang, where invisible particles somehow came into existence and randomly organized themselves into atoms, molecules, stars, and planets, there would be no reason to await that the earth's temperature would be controlled within a specific range. That life exists at all should be considered exceedingly unlikely from this perspective. Stephen J. Gould, an evolutionist, put it this style: "We are hither considering one odd group of fishes had a peculiar fin anatomy that could transform into legs for terrestrial creatures; because the globe never froze entirely during an ice age; because a small and tenuous species, arising in Africa a quarter of a million years agone, has managed, and then far, to survive by claw and by crook. We may yearn for a 'higher' respond—but none exists."5
To those who believe that the heavens and the earth were designed and created by a "higher" power, there is ample reason to await that globe'due south temperature will remain in a range to support life. In fact, God gives united states of america that hope in Genesis 8:22:
While the globe remains,
Seedtime and harvest,
Cold and rut,
Winter and summer,
And day and night
Shall not stop.
Within this worldview information technology makes perfect sense that the earth would have a temperature control arrangement just similar our bodies do, since God designed them both.
Has the Media Accurately Reported on Climate change?
"When a domestic dog bites a man that is not news, just when a man bites a domestic dog that is news."6 Likewise, a stable climate is non news, only a dramatically irresolute ane is.
In the late 1970s, numerous popular media outlets were reporting dire warnings virtually impending climate change. An Apr 28, 1975, article in Newsweek began with this phrase: "In that location are ominous signs that the earth's weather condition patterns have begun to alter dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food product," and ended, "The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with the climatic change once the results become a grim reality" (emphases mine).seven Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Nosotros hear similar pronouncements today. For example, then-Senator Barack Obama said in 2006, "Not only is information technology [global climate change] existent, it'due south here, and its effects are giving ascent to a frighteningly new global phenomenon: the manmade natural disaster" (emphases mine).8
The surprising thing is that the Newsweek article in the 1970s was referring to global cooling, and and so-Senator Obama was referring to global warming. Yep, that'due south correct. The panic in the '70s was that the earth's temperature was declining and would go on to turn down. Today, the business concern is the earth's temperature is rising and that information technology will go on to rise.
How Could Predictions About the Direction of Climate Modify Be And so Unlike Afterwards Merely thirty Years?
If, in the 1970s, you considered the data from only the previous 30 years, it would have been possible to conclude that the brusk-term trend is cooling, particularly if y'all extrapolate well into the future expecting that trend to continue (figure ane). Interpolation of data, trying to estimate a value within a range you have studied, is challenging enough. Simply extrapolation of scientific data into a region that yous know nothing almost is not wise.
If today you again take the perspective of the last 30 years and extrapolate far into the futurity, it is possible to conclude that the short-term trend is warming (figure one).9 Actually, over the final century, information technology appears that the temperature rose from 1900 to 1940, declined slightly from 1940 to 1970 and increased from 1980 to around 2000. Information technology is easy to make headlines past cartoon sweeping conclusions from small ranges of information; however, it is still unclear whether these curt-term trends add up to an unprecedented ascent in global temperature. Some climatologists claim that the science was not settled in the 1970s and that they were not in understanding with the pop press at that time.10 Today those climatologists are convinced that the latest information, at present that it has been corrected, is reliable, and the earth is warming.eleven
Very recently, a few people have begun to conclude that we may actually be in the early stages of another cooling trend.12 Those who suspect this mostly fall in one of two camps. Some are looking at a specific, narrow range of time (1998 to 2012) where in that location has certainly been no increase in global temperature. Others are focused on solar activity. They are convinced that the sun is the major factor in determining global temperature. This, of course, is a very reasonable determination since virtually all our energy comes from the dominicus. In fact, the number of observed sunspots in this latest sunspot bicycle is expected to be the lowest in many decades, and the globe did experience the Little Ice Age at a point in time when sunspot activity was very low.13 Has the global temperature started to decline afterwards having increased for about 400 years? Just time volition tell. Frankly, with our express understanding of the major factors that touch global temperature, no i should be confident in predicting the future global temperature.
What Are the Politics of Climatic change?
At nowadays a number of expert climatologists and the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic change) appear to be in agreement that the globe's temperature is rising and will proceed to rise. However, it is hard to know what the scientific judgment of these individuals would be in the absenteeism of overwhelming political force per unit area. Their funding and their livelihoods are clearly affected by their opinion on this result.
We scientists desire to believe that nosotros are unbiased—that we are strictly interpreting the data and are non swayed by other factors. Are scientists different from all other human beings in this regard? Apparently non. We are swayed by our emotions and our behavior, simply like everyone else. And so beware when scientists get emotionally attached to their theories, ignore the uncertainties in their data, or merits that "all reputable scientists agree" or that "the science is settled."14 When one or more of these is true, you can be certain that the issue being discussed is not purely scientific. When "the science" really is settled, the evidence will be overwhelming, and there will be no need to claim that the scientific discipline is settled.
While investigating whatsoever subject, information technology is interesting to follow the coin. At that place is big coin in climate alter issues. The person that is the most closely associated with "global warming" is Al Gore. "Critics, by and large on the political right and among global warming skeptics, say Mr. Gore is poised to become the globe's first 'carbon billionaire,' profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in."15 "Mr. Gore says that he is simply putting his money where his rima oris is."16 Gore's many multi-million dollar investments in green energy projects and his purchase of a $9M ocean-view dwelling house in California are clear evidence of his financial success in this arena. He volition certainly take a good vantage point from which to sentry a possible rise in sea level!
Is the Truth nearly Climate Change Really Inconvenient?
It is tempting for each of the states to focus but on what has happened in our lifetime. Yet, for questions related to climate, we need a much longer-term perspective. Have the global temperatures in the concluding few decades been significantly higher than in the afar by? Unfortunately, there is no way to know for sure. No temperature measurements are available before 1880. Scientists accept tried to correlate other scientific information with global temperature, simply estimating temperatures in this way is fraught with difficulties. Correlation of ice core or tree ring data to global temperatures is full of assumptions that cannot be verified. Figure 2 shows viii different attempts that were made to predict global temperature.17 The nighttime line is the average of these data for what they presume to be the concluding 12,000 years of earth history. Confused as to why anyone would be convinced by these data? You should be. The most recent reconstructions are shown in the insert of effigy 2 for the last ii,000 years. These information have led many climatologists to conclude that the climate is much warmer at present than in the last 2,000 years.
Historical testify provides a different perspective on global temperatures during the last two millennia. There is good bear witness that the climate in the Northern Hemisphere was warmer almost a thousand years ago—the Vikings were able to farm in Greenland. Subsequently a few hundred years, they stopped farming due to a libation climate. The temperature continued to decline for a few hundred more years, and the Thames in London began to regularly freeze.18 The decline in temperature reversed grade in about A.D. 1700. If this warming trend continues, it may over again be possible to farm in Greenland, and the body of water ice in the north Atlantic may once more be scarce. Figure 3 is an estimation of the relative global temperature from historical observations before 1900 and from atmospheric condition station data afterwards 1990. While we cannot be certain about what was true in ancient times from either historical or scientific data, the historical observations seem more than reliable in this instance. From these limited data, it appears that the global temperature cycles effectually a mean temperature and has been slightly warmer in recorded history than information technology is today. There is no reason to panic.
Are We the Cause of the Rise in Temperature Since the Fiddling Water ice Age?
Many believe that this recent ascension in temperature is caused by an increase in carbon dioxide due to our burning of more than fossil fuels. Let's look at some facts about carbon dioxide and examine the evidence of its upshot on global temperature.
The presence of carbon dioxide in the air is essential to life on earth. Without carbon dioxide, at that place would be no plant life, and without constitute life there would exist no animal life. Despite this, Lisa Jackson of the Ecology Protection Bureau alleged that carbon dioxide was a pollutant under the Clean Air Act and accounted that it was a risk to homo health.19 So is CO2 essential to life or a pollutant? The authorities patently thinks that it is both—essential at low levels and harmful at high levels. But is there a level at which CO2 is too loftier? As with most regime regulations, this regulation preceded our understanding of the scientific discipline. While CO2 does influence the global temperature, the exact relationship has not been established nor has the maximum CO2 concentration in air.
We exercise know that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. Greenhouse gases act equally a blanket over the globe. When sunlight heats the earth'south surface, the warm earth radiates some of that oestrus into the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases slow the escape of that radiated heat. You lot have been led to believe that the virtually important greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide. It is not. Water vapor and clouds are actually responsible for about 80 to 90 percent of the total greenhouse upshot. That's right, at least 80 percent. That is why clear mornings are usually much colder than cloudy mornings. On clear mornings, we do not have that blanket of clouds to hold in the estrus. The percentage of the greenhouse effect attributable to CO2 is believed to exist as high as xx percent past some and every bit low as 4 pct past others.20 Almost everyone agrees that the per centum of COii that is man-made is only about 4 percent of total CO2. Therefore, the greenhouse issue caused past man-made COii is less than 1 percent of the total and may exist a small fraction of 1 percent.
Despite this, many scientists today claim that the rise in man-made CO2 is the major cause of the rise in global temperatures over the by century. Simply because global temperature and CO2 concentrations have risen over the past several decades does not mean that one caused the other. Figure 4 shows that the correlation between the CO2 concentration and global temperature is non strong, particularly between 1900 and 1950. The temperature profile in figure iii also does not lucifer well with man-made CO2 levels because man-made COii was not high during the Medieval Warming Period. These data are non convincing.
Is the Global Temperature Well-nigh Out of Control?
Climatologists' greatest concern is that a temperature increase during the last few decades might be amplified by positive feedback causing the global temperature to spiral out of control. They are worried, for instance, that a higher temperature on the world could melt more than of the permafrost, release more than CO2, and cause a greater greenhouse effect. On the other paw, a higher temperature on earth could cause more evaporation, more deject formation, and more sunlight to be reflected away from the earth. This negative feedback could moderate the global temperature. Which type of feedback is more influential? Scientists are currently not able to quantify them well enough to know whether the negative feedback outweighs the positive.
Engineers familiar with control systems are well aware that control systems dependent on positive feedback easily go out of control whereas those based on negative feedback generally do not. Since the earth'southward temperature has been relatively stable for many centuries, it seems more likely that the earth's climate is chastened past more than powerful negative feedback systems.
It appears that a vivid designer has designed a molecule that is both essential to man life and essential for controlling the climate of the world. H2o is a polar molecule that is able to dissolve salts, proteins, and Dna that are essential for our cells to function and for life to exist. H2o's other concrete properties are but equally critical to controlling the earth's climate. Information technology takes more than estrus to change water from a solid to a liquid or from a liquid to a gas than any other common molecule. The 310,000,000 cubic miles of water on the earth'due south surface are able to concur a tremendous amount of oestrus and provide great temperature stability to the world. Water can readily transfer rut from the earth's surface to the air by evaporation and condensation, a process which is the basis of the hydrological cycle and much of our weather. Cloud formation may also be the key to a negative feedback system that helps moderate temperature changes in the earth'southward temper. Without water, the range of temperature from day to night and from the earth's surface to the upper atmosphere would be much greater. Clearly water is critical to human life in many, many ways.
How Should Nosotros Then Live?
In the first chapter of the start volume of the Bible, God commands us to subdue the earth (meet Genesis one:28). Virtually interpret this to mean that nosotros should take care of the earth and be expert stewards of its natural resources. If it were true that the burning of coal, oil, and natural gas did have a significant negative effect on our environs, it would make sense for the states to modify our behavior. But it appears that nosotros are merely in the upper range of a natural temperature cycle. Information technology is not at all clear that the pocket-sized corporeality of additional CO2 produced past the burning of fossil fuels is detrimental to the environs. It is humbling to remember that when God was judging the earth with a global inundation that He was creating inexpensive fuel sources for time to come generations. Let's obey God's command and use our scientific cognition to be adept stewards of our natural resource and preserve our surroundings for the side by side generation until He comes again.21
Primary Books has graciously granted AiG permission to publish selected chapters of this book online. To buy a copy please visit our online shop.
Source: https://answersingenesis.org/environmental-science/climate-change/should-we-be-concerned-about-climate-change/
Posted by: shepherdfrocution.blogspot.com
0 Response to "What Effect Of Climate Change Is Of Immediate Concern To Pacific Atolls?"
Post a Comment