American Physical society climate change review panel

[Andrew]

I was totally gobsmacked to see the people on this 6 person panel!

www.aps.org/policy/statements/upload/climate-review-bios.pdf

As things stand at the moment APS intend their climate policy statement to be available mid November. Fairly amazing! I had totally no idea these people were so deeply involved at such a high level.

I was imagining the review would be a whitewash but now??

[sigurdur]

They already met. A transcript should still be available.

[acidohm]

I recognise Christy and Curry....from my knowledge of these two, the results are not likely to please any alarmists??


2007 report....

"Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring.

If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now."

2010

"There is a substantial body of peer reviewed scientific research to support the technical aspects of the 2007 APS statement. The purpose of the following commentary is to provide clarification and additional details.

The first sentence of the APS statement is broadly supported by observational data, physical principles, and global climate models."

"The evidence for global temperature rise over the last century is compelling. However, the word "incontrovertible" in the first sentence of the second paragraph of the 2007 APS statement is rarely used in science because by its very nature science questions prevailing ideas."

"The fourth paragraph, first sentence, recommends an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on Earth's climate. This sentence should be interpreted broadly and more specifically: an enhanced effort is needed to understand both anthropogenic processes and the natural cycles that affect the Earth's climate. Improving the scientific understanding of all climate feedbacks is critical to reducing the uncertainty in modeling the consequences of doubling the CO2-equivalent concentration. In addition, more extensive and more accurate scientific measurements are needed to test the validity of climate models to increase confidence in their projections."



These statements were 3 years apart...will be interesting to see how/if their position has changed after 5 years.

[Andrew]

Sept 13, 2015 5:46:03 GMT acidohm said:

I recognise Christy and Curry....from my knowledge of these two, the results are not likely to please any alarmists??


2007 report....

"Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring.

If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now."

2010

"There is a substantial body of peer reviewed scientific research to support the technical aspects of the 2007 APS statement. The purpose of the following commentary is to provide clarification and additional details.

The first sentence of the APS statement is broadly supported by observational data, physical principles, and global climate models."

"The evidence for global temperature rise over the last century is compelling. However, the word "incontrovertible" in the first sentence of the second paragraph of the 2007 APS statement is rarely used in science because by its very nature science questions prevailing ideas."

"The fourth paragraph, first sentence, recommends an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on Earth's climate. This sentence should be interpreted broadly and more specifically: an enhanced effort is needed to understand both anthropogenic processes and the natural cycles that affect the Earth's climate. Improving the scientific understanding of all climate feedbacks is critical to reducing the uncertainty in modeling the consequences of doubling the CO2-equivalent concentration. In addition, more extensive and more accurate scientific measurements are needed to test the validity of climate models to increase confidence in their projections."



These statements were 3 years apart...will be interesting to see how/if their position has changed after 5 years.

It must be a certainty that when the statement comes out on November 15th it will not satisfy people like Christie and then the society will be able to bury it n procedure for another 5 years.

Tellingly one of the commentators at the climate review said he had just got back from NASA and it is clear that the next generation of satellites is very much on the line. The pressure on scientists to support funding for NASA must be fairly huge. Scientists are unlikely to want to go back to the old days of small salaries, small houses, small cars and so forth. Something will have to give however and not just in hard up America.