Environment & Energy

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts) Thu Jul 9, 2015, 01:33 PM Jul 2015

Society has been discussing climate change's impacts long before we knew it existed

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-07/w-shb070915.php

[font face=Serif]Public Release: 9-Jul-2015
[font size=5]Society has been discussing climate change's impacts long before we knew it existed[/font]

Wiley

[font size=3]For the first time, a new analysis shows an impact of climate change on human society long before we knew the climate was actually changing.

Exploring Google's scanned book collection, the analysis finds that society in general increasingly discussed some of the predicted effects of climate change--such as heat waves, drought, and flooding--long before current global weather alterations were widely known about.

The authors note that while the science of climate change and climate action has come under sustained political attack, buttressing the physical record with social evidence presents a useful counterargument.

"Though climate change came to global attention in the late 1980s, this analysis suggests we were responding to it far earlier," said Dr. Will Grant, lead author of the Weather study. "In fact, in this very precise area we humans are perhaps more responsive to climate change than even traditional physical indicators of climate change like tree ring measurements."

…[/font][/font]

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wea.2504

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Society has been discussing climate change's impacts long before we knew it existed (Original Post) OKIsItJustMe Jul 2015 OP

Ice Age HankIII Jul 2015 #1

Welcome to DU - You’re referring to the Laurentide ice sheet OKIsItJustMe Jul 2015 #2

Good post. Chemisse Jul 2015 #3

Cooling really wasn’t a fear among climate scientists OKIsItJustMe Jul 2015 #5

I likely recall the media coverage. Chemisse Jul 2015 #7

There was never a consensus on cooling - nothing even approaching the start of one hatrack Jul 2015 #10

Except the little ice age... Blanks Jul 2015 #4

What claim does it run contrary to? OKIsItJustMe Jul 2015 #6

It runs contrary to the claim... Blanks Jul 2015 #8

Got it! OKIsItJustMe Jul 2015 #9

HankIII

(1 post)

1. Ice Age

Reply to OKIsItJustMe (Original post)

Thu Jul 9, 2015, 02:07 PM

Jul 2015

Still have no good explanation for the retreat of the 1/4 mile thick layer of ice from my home state of Ohio only 14,000 short years ago...we've been cyclically warming for a long, long time...

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)

2. Welcome to DU - You’re referring to the Laurentide ice sheet

Reply to HankIII (Reply #1)

Thu Jul 9, 2015, 02:14 PM

Jul 2015

http://polarmet.osu.edu/PolarMet/paleonwp.html

There is an explanation. I suggest you read about “Milankovitch cycles.”

In the 1970’s a few scientists warned that (due to “Milankovitch cycles”) we might be looking at a period of re-glaciation. However, the warming effects of “greenhouse gases” are much greater than the cooling effects of the “Milankovitch cycle.”

This is the source of the “global cooling” myth, i.e. “that in the 1970's all scientists believed the earth was cooling…” (The “logic” goes like this, scientists can’t make up their minds, we shouldn’t have believed them then, so we shouldn’t believe them now.)

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1

Chemisse

(30,813 posts)

3. Good post.

Reply to OKIsItJustMe (Reply #2)

Thu Jul 9, 2015, 05:33 PM

Jul 2015

I remember when cooling was the fear. We know so much more climate science than we did then.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)

5. Cooling really wasn’t a fear among climate scientists

Reply to Chemisse (Reply #3)

Thu Jul 9, 2015, 09:10 PM

Jul 2015

Check out this item: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1

Chemisse

(30,813 posts)

7. I likely recall the media coverage.

Reply to OKIsItJustMe (Reply #5)

Thu Jul 9, 2015, 10:01 PM

Jul 2015

I wasn't a person of science way back then, so would not have dug deeper than the headlines of the day.

hatrack

(59,587 posts)

10. There was never a consensus on cooling - nothing even approaching the start of one

Reply to Chemisse (Reply #3)

Fri Jul 10, 2015, 08:34 PM

Jul 2015

It was a nine-paragraph slice from an article in Newsweek 40 years ago. It wasn't even in Scientific American - or Popular Mechanics . . .

But it gets regurgitated again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again again and again and again and again and again in the absence of facts, or measurements of any kind.

http://www.dailyclimate.org/tdc-newsroom/2014/01/newsweek-global-cooling-reporter

Blanks

(4,835 posts)

4. Except the little ice age...

Reply to HankIII (Reply #1)

Thu Jul 9, 2015, 07:24 PM

Jul 2015

The link below mentions:

Several causes have been proposed: cyclical lows in solar radiation, heightened volcanic activity, changes in the ocean circulation, an inherent variability in global climate, or decreases in the human population.

One theory suggests that as many as 95% of the people that were living in the Americas died due to diseases brought over by explorers after America was 'discovered'. The native Americans cleared forests by burning to channelize the buffalo as well as other activities that contributed to warming the planet, so the planet cooled.

When such a large percentage of that population was decimated, the CO2 levels decreased due to the increase in forest.

Of course that's just one theory, the fact that the earth hasn't been warming consistently from a single point in time several thousand years ago is the important thing. That fact runs contrary to your claim.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)

6. What claim does it run contrary to?

Reply to Blanks (Reply #4)

Thu Jul 9, 2015, 09:20 PM

Jul 2015

As for the “Little Ice Age,” it appears to have been caused by volcanoes.
http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2012/01/30/new-cu-led-study-may-answer-long-standing-questions-about-enigmatic-little

[font face=Serif][font size=5]New CU-led study may answer long-standing questions about enigmatic Little Ice Age[/font]

January 30, 2012

[font size=3]A new University of Colorado Boulder-led study appears to answer contentious questions about the onset and cause of Earth’s Little Ice Age, a period of cooling temperatures that began after the Middle Ages and lasted into the late 19th century.

According to the new study, the Little Ice Age began abruptly between A.D. 1275 and 1300, triggered by repeated, explosive volcanism and sustained by a self- perpetuating sea ice-ocean feedback system in the North Atlantic Ocean, according to CU-Boulder Professor Gifford Miller, who led the study. The primary evidence comes from radiocarbon dates from dead vegetation emerging from rapidly melting icecaps on Baffin Island in the Canadian Arctic, combined with ice and sediment core data from the poles and Iceland and from sea ice climate model simulations, said Miller.

While scientific estimates regarding the onset of the Little Ice Age range from the 13th century to the 16th century, there is little consensus, said Miller. There is evidence the Little Ice Age affected places as far away as South America and China, although it was particularly evident in northern Europe. Advancing glaciers in mountain valleys destroyed towns, and famous paintings from the period depict people ice skating on the Thames River in London and canals in the Netherlands, waterways that were ice-free in winter before and after the Little Ice Age.

…

The new study suggests that the onset of the Little Ice Age was caused by an unusual, 50-year-long episode of four massive tropical volcanic eruptions. Climate models used in the new study showed that the persistence of cold summers following the eruptions is best explained by a sea ice-ocean feedback system originating in the North Atlantic Ocean.

…[/font][/font]

Blanks

(4,835 posts)

8. It runs contrary to the claim...

Reply to OKIsItJustMe (Reply #6)

Fri Jul 10, 2015, 01:53 PM

Jul 2015

That the earth has been warming since the end of the last ice age (not a claim that you made).

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)

9. Got it!

Reply to Blanks (Reply #8)

Fri Jul 10, 2015, 02:53 PM

Jul 2015

Thanks!

In Hank’s defense, he did say, “we’ve been cyclically warming for a long, long time...”

I took that as cyclically warming and cooling, but with an overall warming trend, which, is generally true (even including the “Little Ice Age.”)

Reply to this discussion