News24

Global warming blamed for heat

2012-08-05 14:45

Washington - An analysis by a top government scientist says the extreme heat and drought seen in the US, Europe and other regions in recent years must be global warming.

Specifically the study by Nasa scientist James Hansen blames climate change for last year's drought in Texas and Oklahoma, the 2010 heat wave in Russia and the 2003 European heat wave that led to tens of thousands of deaths.

Hansen told The Associated Press in an interview that the world is now experiencing scientific fact.

Hansen's research is respected by other climate scientists. But he is also an activist who has pushed for curbing greenhouse gases. Some experts don't expect the new study to change any minds. Hansen's work was published online on Saturday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.

Comments
  • Johan De Beer - 2012-08-05 14:50

    No sh:t, Sherlock?

      goyougoodthing - 2012-08-05 16:41

      "It must be global warming' is not very scientific. There are noises in my room at night, it MUST be the cupboard monster. WTF

  • John - 2012-08-05 15:18

    This is not science, its about money, carbon tax initiative is the biggest rip off for making more money. Why is the focus not on the environment and encouraging people to plant more trees and clean our rivers instead its on the carbon tax this is all about money and slowing third world development.....

      robin.stobbs.9 - 2012-08-05 15:37

      Right on John. This is all about weather - not climate change, and certainly not 'global warming'. No thinking person believes a word Hansen has to say anyway

      ianon.ym - 2012-08-05 16:20

      Totally agree, a dreamt-up money making racket.

      ernst.j.joubert - 2012-08-05 16:34

      @John: 98% of active climate scientists agree that there is substantial evidence that human activity is damaging the stability of the climate. A 2010 paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States (PNAS) reviewed publication and citation data for 1,372 climate researchers and drew the following two conclusions: (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers. @Robin: "...not climate change, and certainly not 'global warming'. No thinking person believes a word Hansen has to say anyway..." Sweeping statement. You call Hansen a liar, yet you love citing scientists that fall in category ii) mentioned above.

      robin.stobbs.9 - 2012-08-05 17:29

      @Ernst. What a joke - 5 out of 6 film stars use Lux! So where did that famous “consensus” claim that “98% of all scientists believe in global warming” come from? It originated from an endlessly reported 2009 American Geophysical Union (AGU) survey consisting of an intentionally brief two-minute, two question online survey sent to 10,257 earth scientists by two researchers at the University of Illinois. Of the about 3.000 who responded, 82% answered “yes” to the second question, which like the first, most people I know would also have agreed with. Then of those, only a small subset, just 77 who had been successful in getting more than half of their papers recently accepted by peer-reviewed climate science journals, were considered in their survey statistic. That “98% all scientists” referred to a laughably puny number of 75 of those 77 who answered “yes”. And Hansen? Yes; he's in the same clique as Gore and Mann et al.

      ernst.j.joubert - 2012-08-05 18:50

      @Robin: Did you read my post thoroughly? Note the section in caps below. This has NOTHING to do with any questionaire. This is based on citation and publication data. 1) Consulting websites and sources, whose main aim is to misinform and spread disinformation, only highlights your ignorance. 2) Calling scientists liars and degrading their work when you have no climate science qualifications is clearly a sign of your blind arrogance. 3) Have you published any climate science papers? How can you insult an expert if you do not have the expertise to enable you to distinguish right from wrong? A 2010 paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States (PNAS) REVIEWED PUBLICATION AND CITATION DATA for 1,372 climate researchers and drew the following two conclusions: (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.

      douglas.hollis.7 - 2012-08-05 23:06

      One can only wonder at the intelligence of some of the posters. Questioning the validity of anthropogenic climate change, when humanity is pumping out 30+ billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere EACH YEAR, means you must question the most basic high school physics. We have just about every major glacier in the world busy retreating, yet the deniers keep saying the earth is 'cooling down'. LOL. They almost sound like the pro-tobacco lobbyists of old. Why do some people feel so compelled to be 'independent-minded' that they are willing to accuse, with no substantial proof whatsoever, 98% of the world's premiere climate scientists as forming part of some crazy global conspiracy/moneymaking scheme?! It's incredible, the lengths people will go to just to hold on to their own beliefs. Incidentally, it has been conclusively shown that the rate of warming our planet has experienced post-1900 exceeds anything that natural variability could throw at us. We are seeing more and more extreme weather events, and even 53% of Republicans are now admitting that climate change is real. Thanks Ernst, for your contributions. Much appreciated, keep up the good work.

      arthur.hugh - 2012-08-08 14:51

      Uhm Ernst as far as I recall the total human contribution to global warming is something like 5% and the rest is all natural climatic cycles. Just like the pole shifts etc - or are you going to blame that on too many rumbling cars too?

      arthur.hugh - 2012-08-08 14:59

      LOL Douglas I think this applies to you: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/b00p6vln

  • J.Stephen.Whiteley - 2012-08-05 16:00

    It all comes from the US and I don't think the US is even primarily concerned about curbing China's economic growth. There are madheads there who dream of World Government: any economic and social chaos, from paper money to mothballed nuclear plants, will serve.

  • NickvanderLeek - 2012-08-05 16:01

    turn up the heat even further, the frogs aren't frightened yet. funny how in the world science is still considered a fiction and faith is considered (by the majority) as a fact. well then you (that is we) all deserve to burn for being so deliberately stupid.

      ernst.j.joubert - 2012-08-05 16:37

      @Nick: Well said. I hope we burn, because that is what we deserve.

  • John Mustart - 2014-02-21 21:32

    How much money is allocated to prove that their is no climate change? Is money only spent on proving climate change? Their is something going terribly wrong on earth. Should the scientists ignore the possibility of climate change by doing nothing. Let things just happen? Read the Book of Isaiah and consider what it says. Because of our greed we abuse the earth. One's mind has to be very narrow and closed to think that we are not harming the Earth's environment. We disrespect what God has given us. The Creation expresses the Glory of God and we are disrespecting His Glory. We will pay the price and are increasingly paying the price for our ignorance, pride and greed. Jesus was sent to save us and redeem us from our sin. If we ignore his offer of grace, forgiveness and eternal life we will pay the price both individually and nationally. Each person or country that turns its back on God will go down a dangerous path. The unexamined life is not worth living.

  • pages:
  • 1