Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumEvidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard': scientists
OSLO (Reuters) - Evidence for man-made global warming has reached a gold standard level of certainty, adding pressure for cuts in greenhouse gases to limit rising temperatures, scientists said on Monday.
Humanity cannot afford to ignore such clear signals, the U.S.-led team wrote in the journal Nature Climate Change of satellite measurements of rising temperatures over the past 40 years.
They said confidence that human activities were raising the heat at the Earths surface had reached a five-sigma level, a statistical gauge meaning there is only a one-in-a-million chance that the signal would appear if there was no warming.
Such a gold standard was applied in 2012, for instance, to confirm the discovery of the Higgs boson subatomic particle, a basic building block of the universe.
Benjamin Santer, lead author of Mondays study at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, said he hoped the findings would win over skeptics and spur action.
The narrative out there that scientists dont know the cause of climate change is wrong, he told Reuters. We do.
Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-temperatures-idUSKCN1QE1ZU
Ocean water is pushed up by the bottom of a pinnacle iceberg as it falls back during a large calving event at the Helheim glacier near Tasiilaq, Greenland, June 22, 2018. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson/File Photo
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)You make a theoretical prediction, that if the theory is true, the true value will lie in a certain interval.
Your measured value is not the true value, but from your measured value you can calculate an estimate where the true value most probably is, the "confidence-interval".
For simplification, the width of the confidence-interval is expressed in terms of how much probability there is that the true value is inside that interval.
The theory of man-made global-warming predicts that certain values should not be smaller than x and not larger than y.
The measurements have lead to a probability of 99.99994% that the (unknown) true value is in that interval.