Chief Scientist Meeting 2017-05-10 / archived / read-only

 
  • Part of: Points on Climate Change
  • Dilution of Atmospheric Radiocarbon CO2 by Fossil Fuel Emissions by Jamal Munshi :: SSRN
  • 3 Chemists Conclude CO2 Greenhouse Effect Is ‘Unreal’, Violates Laws Of Physics, Thermodynamics
  • Forwarding letter from Kimberley Shrives, Manager Ministerial and Parliamentary Liaison, CSIRO
    • [img: Shrives_Letter.jpg]
  • CSIRO Response to One Nation report ‘On Climate, CSIRO Lacks Empirical Proof’
  • CSIRO acknowledges that it has received and reviewed your response to our submission providing the evidence base for our research into climate change.
  • We understand that you seek from CSIRO the empirical evidence that human activities, through the emission of the trace, radiatively-active, greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane and other synthetic gases such as CFCs), are affecting the global climate.
  • Not correct. We seek empirical evidence that human activities are having a dangerous effect on global climate. We seek quantitive evidence. You may choose to mention the greenhouse effect in your evidence.
  • CSIRO stands behind its researchers and the integrity of the research that they produce. This derives from our commitment to the full and transparent participation in the scientific peer review process which results in evidence-based science of the highest quality.
  • Not part of a logical discussion.
    • Please list the individuals in CSIRO who stand by the researchers.
    • Are these individuals willing to be cross-examined on the extent of their knowledge on global warming?
    • Can CSIRO produce a Red Team report on its stand on global warming?
    • Can any of these individuals show evidence of due diligence on global warming?
    • The ClimateGate emails gave an insight into the quality of the scientific peer review process as regards global warming.
  • In our earlier presentation to you, we outlined the physical scientific basis of the way that human activities affect the global climate. This knowledge is derived by use of the scientific method, which involves developing theories and testing these via experiments and observations, and the use of robust peer-review.
  • Your earlier presentation was entirely unconvincing. Our response was based on 40 pages of graphs from peer-reviewed papers and datasets. We await your response to these questions.
  • This science, based on empirical evidence, provides a clear and compelling case that climate has changed and human activities are the principal driver.
  • Then lay out your clear and compelling case but please do not reproduce your last presentation.
  • The evidence showing that human activities have caused an increase in trace greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and CFCs), which has warmed the Earth and caused other changes in climate, was outlined at our earlier presentation to you.
  • We agree that human activities have caused an increase in trace greenhouse gases that will cause some warming, but you have not given any indication of the amount of warming caused by humans. We found your earlier presentation was entirely unconvincing on this point.

  • Australia’s Academy of Science also undertook, independently of CSIRO, an assessment of climate change science (The science of climate change: Questions and answers, 2015). Their findings are consistent with the information provided here, and in previous presentations and correspondence.

    Source: https://www.science.org.au/learning/general-audience/science-booklets-0/science-climate-change

  • We are familiar with the AAS's Q&As and find that document no more convincing than the CSIRO presentation as it contains no coherent argument. Nor did Dr Garth Paltridge who was on the AAS review team and refused to have his name associated with the document. Below are some reasons why we are skeptical of the AAS Q&As.
    • What follows is an extract from the then executive secretary of the AAS which helps explain our skepticism of the AAS and its Q&As

    • I would have not characterized the AAS document at "lightweight". It is backed up by 100s of citations (available on the link), and represents the best attempt by the leading experts in Climate Change in Australia to summarize the (often complex) finding of Climate Science in an open and objective manner. The purpose of the document was not to provide yet another IPCC report addressed to scientists and policy makers, but rather to produce an educational document accessible by the public at large, to help resolve many issues which have been deliberately rendered obscure by climate change deniers. In this goal it has succeeded very well - there are now over 50,000 copies of the little booklet in circulation, and the AAS imprimatur helps its credibility.

      The document was prepared over many months by a large panel of scientists - drawn from both within and without of the Academy - and it went through many drafts to achieve a form that all could agree on. It had already gone to press by the time the IAC Panel report came out, which is why this is not referenced.

      In any case the IAC Panel was a very serious review, but was more concerned with addressing the issues of proper process by those who worked on the IPCC report than on addressing the science per se. It turned out that the "wrongdoers" were a tiny proportion of the total who worked on the IPCC report, and the procedural issues raised will be fully addressed in the preparation of the next IPCC report. [from an IPCC author: Virtually none have been addressed]

      Needless to say, any adverse findings do great damage to the credibility of climate scientists as a whole, especially in the current climate of almost religious opposition to the acceptance of climate change science as a whole. Regretfully the climate change nay-sayers apply different ethical standards when it comes to their own unsubstantiated proclamations! They remind me of Tea Party activists.

    • This reference indicates that the late Professor Mike Raupach was co-chair of the AAS group. We attended a lecture of his where he finished up with 2 slides that seemed to be from Agenda 21. When questioned on this he replied to the effect that they were from Agenda 21 and wasn't it marvelous. This incident is one reason why some are skeptical of CSIRO climate scientists.
  • Reiterating the peer-reviewed science, including CSIRO’s own research:
  • • The fundamental laws of physics, experiments and direct measurements all confirm that carbon dioxide is a radiatively-active, trace greenhouse gas: i.e. although it is present at “trace” levels, it interacts with the planet’s radiation to cause warming.
  • Agreed

  • • Atmospheric measurements have shown that the long-term average atmospheric level of carbon dioxide before 1750 was around 280 ppm. The presence of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere produces a “natural greenhouse effect” that keeps the planet about 33°C warmer than it would be in the absence of greenhouse gases

    Source: Surface air and lower troposphere temperature: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, State of the Climate 2015, supplement to Vol. 97, No. 8, August 2016

  • Agreed with only minor reservations
  • • Atmospheric measurements conducted by CSIRO, in collaboration with other agencies as part of a global network, find that carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere have increased by more than 40% since 1750.
  • Agreed with some reservations

  • • CSIRO’s research demonstrates that the extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere comes from human activities. This is based on chemical analyses of the isotopic composition of the atmospheric gas samples. Changes in the carbon-13 to carbon-12 isotope ratio accompanying the increasing carbon dioxide trends mean that the sources of the carbon dioxide are human activities relating to fossil fuel use and land-use change.

    Source: State of the Climate 2014 (CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology). Data source: CSIRO data available at: http://www.csiro.au/greenhouse-gases/ and http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/gmd/wdcgg/ Atmospheric concentration of CO2 (red line, ppm) and carbon-13 isotope ratio in CO2 (δ13C, per mil) as measured in air bubbles in ice cores and atmospheric samples at Cape Grim.

  • Agreed with some reservations
  • • CSIRO research in collaboration with other agencies also shows that oxygen concentrations in the atmosphere have declined, at the rate expected from burning carbon-rich fuels.
  • Agreed

  • • The additional carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, caused by human activities, has enhanced (i.e. strengthened) the naturally-occurring greenhouse effect. The empirical evidence supporting this statement comes from remotely-sensed observations of the Earth’s radiation by satellites. These show that less energy is leaving the top of the atmosphere in those wavelengths that are absorbed by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

    Source: Harries et al., Nature (2001)

  • Disagree. Satellite data shows more Outgoing Longwave Radiation is leaving the atmosphere as CO2 rises.
  • • In recent decades, natural sinks in the land and oceans have absorbed more carbon dioxide than emitted through natural processes of respiration and decomposition. Therefore the observed increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere cannot be attributed to the natural cycle of carbon dioxide emissions and uptake.
  • Disagree. Land sinks cannot be directly measured and are computed as the residual after the more measurable flows are included. The resulting variation in land sink rates does not appear plausible.
  • • Multiple lines of empirical evidence point to observed changes in the climate system that are consistent with an enhanced greenhouse effect, including:
  • "Consistent with" is a very weak argument. A cynic would suggest it is only used without a convincing argument.
  • o A consistent trend of warming in the long-term, globally-averaged air temperature record that is measured and analysed by at least four independent agencies. CSIRO stands-by the quality of these temperature records because the (peer-reviewed) methods have been rigorously verified and the long-term (multi-decadal) trends within and between these observational datasets are consistent.
  • Disagree. All four major thermometer datasets rely heavily on the Global Historical Climate Network data maintained by NOAA. GHCN data has been adjusted with a significant upward bias.
  • The quality of climate science peer review was well documented in the ClimateGate emails
  • These four datasets extend back only to 1850. The complexities of the climate extend well beyond this short timescale.

  • o CSIRO analysis of ocean temperature observations reveal consistent multi-decadal trends of warming in the oceans – both near the surface and extending to depths of 2000 m. The empirical evidence of increases in ocean heat content is consistent with an enhanced greenhouse gas effect as the oceans have absorbed over 90% of the additional energy stored by the earth as a result of increased greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere.

    Source: State of the Climate, 2016 and peer-reviewed references therein

  • Agree that there has been erratic warming of the land since the end of the Little Ice Age at about 1850. That the oceans have recently warmed is therefore unremarkable.
  • Consistent with is still a weak argument.
  • o Observations show that sea level has risen as a result of warming and thermal expansion of the oceans, the melting of glaciers and ice sheets, and changes in the amount of water stored on land. Observations show this has increased the frequency of extreme coastal flooding events.
  • Correction. Observations show that sea level has risen. Observations do not show causes.

  • o Other factors that are known to also affect the Earth’s climate, such as the effects of gases emitted from volcanoes and changes in the intensity of the solar output, cannot explain the magnitude, timing and distribution of observed trends.

    Source: IPCC 5th Assessment Report, Working Group I Summary for Policy Makers

  • Unsubstantiated assertion. Are you prepared to defend the IPCC as a scientific, apolitical organisation free from conflicts of interest, all of whose statements are traceable to empirical evidence?
  • • CSIRO science is consistent with conclusions of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2013), based on laws of physics and empirical observations, that:
  • Consistent with again.
  • o “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia
  • Hearsay. Please list these observed unprecedented changes.
  • o The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased
  • So what? Where is the evidence that the warming is caused by human CO2?
  • o It is very likely that the number of cold days and nights has decreased and the number of warm days and nights has increased on the global scale
  • Hearsay.
  • o It is likely that the frequency of heat waves has increased in large parts of Europe, Asia and Australia
  • Hearsay
  • o There are likely more land regions where the number of heavy precipitation events has increased than where it has decreased
  • Hearsay
  • o Human influence has been detected in warming of the atmosphere and the ocean, in changes in the global water cycle, in reductions in snow and ice, in global mean sea level rise, and in changes in some climate extremes.
  • Hearsay
  • o It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century”.
  • Hearsay
Loading page ...

Print options

Expand or collapse list branches

Want checkboxes? Change the list style

List style:

Display or hide list attributes

x

Expand & collapse ec

Import im

Examples and details

Word count wc

Current selection
Words: #{js-wc-sel}
Characters with spaces: #{js-cc-space-sel}
Characters without spaces: #{js-cc-sel}
The whole list
Words: #{js-wc}
Characters with spaces: #{js-cc-space}
Characters without spaces: #{js-cc}

List view options oo

  • hc
  • hf
  • sd
  • List style
  • om

Any email, forwarded to this address, will appear in beginning of this list.

Send an email to yourself and add the sender to Contacts for future use.

  • The email subject becomes the list item's text.
  • The email body becomes the list item's note.
  • All attachments from the email are attached to the list item (PRO only).
  • In the subject, you can also add #tags, ^due dates, and @assignees with Checkvist's smart syntax.

You can also set up voice integration on mobile devices