Cha-am Jamal, Thailand

  1. At the close of the 19th century Svante Arrhenius and his co-workers expressed the heat trapping effect of the atmosphere in terms of its composition, specifically with respect to trace quantities of water vapor and carbon dioxide. They were working on very long time scales to explain the earth’s history of alternating ice ages and interglacial periods (Arrhenius, 1896) (Hogbom, 1895) (Langley, 1889) (Tyndall,1861). Although his theory of ice ages has long been discredited (Ewing, 1958) (Martinson, 1987), the warming effect of atmospheric CO2 put into the scientific literature by Arrhenius survived.
  2. It was applied to a much shorter time scale of a century or less by Guy Callendar in 1938 (callendar_1938). Callendar was concerned about carbon dioxide emissions from the combustion of “large quantities” of fossil fuels by the industrial economy. His concern was that the carbon in fossil fuels dug up from deep under the ground by humans had been sequestered from the atmosphere for millions of years. He reasoned that this carbon does not belong in the current account of the carbon cycle and that therefore the injection of such external carbon into a delicately balanced carbon cycle is an artificial perturbation that could upset both the carbon cycle and climate system and cause runaway artificial warming with unknown and possibly catastrophic consequences (Callendar, 1938).
  3. Soon after the publication of a series of global warming papers by Callendar, the world plunged into thirty-five years of cooling that lasted until at least 1975. During that time the Arrhenius warming effect of atmospheric composition and the related Callendar concern about fossil fuel combustion subsided. They were replaced by concerns about the cooling effects of aerosols in fossil fuel emissions (Rasool&Schneider, 1971) (Schneider, 1975) (Kukla, 1972).
  4. That changed again in the late 1970s when the temperature curve reversed to a strong warming trend and two landmark papers by James Hansen and Andrew Lacis changed the narrative from cooling to man-made catastrophic global warming (Hansen, 1981) (Hansen-Lacis, 1984). These papers form the blueprint of the modern version of the theory of anthropogenic global warming and climate change (AGW) as the Arrhenius effect of carbon dioxide produced by the combustion of fossil fuels by humans.
  5. The theory of surface warming due to absorption and re-radiation in the infrared band by atmospheric carbon dioxide (Pierrehumbert, 2010) yields the testable implication first proposed by Jule Charney that surface temperature should be proportional to the logarithm of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration (Charney, 1979). Called the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS), it was computed by Charney as the increase in temperature in Celsius units for each doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration and that convention has persisted.
  6. Jule Charney consolidated results from five climate models to report Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity variously as ECS=[2.0-3.5], [2.6-4.1], and [1.5-4.5]. Charney then declared without elaborating that the most likely value of the ECS = 3 with its uncertainty indicated by the range ECS=[1.5-4.5] (Charney, 1979). This range was adopted by the IPCC and has since become dogma in climate science.
  7. However, the first significant paper on AGW in the modern era by James Hansen cited the first Charney estimate and reported ECS = [2.0-3.5] (Hansen, 1981). The IPCC uses the dogma Charney estimate and consistently reports climate sensitivity as ECS = [1.5-4.5] (IPCC, 2013) (IPCC, 2007).
  8. Significant works on the estimation of the ECS with climate models and also from observations and paleo reconstructions have been reported in the last two decades (Andronova, 2000) (Gregory, 2002) (Forest, 2002) (Knutti, 2002) (Frame, 2005) (Murphy, 2004) (Stainforth, 2005) (Hegerl, 2006) (Kummer, 2017) (Johansson, 2015) (Stevens, 2016) (Aldrin, 2012) (Dressler, 2018). Their results are summarized here.
  9. (Andronova, 2000) used 142 years of observations constrained by climate models and reported that ECS = [2.0-5.0] but found that more than half of that figure can be explained by solar variability with residual CO2 sensitivity ECS=[0.94-2.35]. Although not directly acknowledged by the climate science literature, this finding weakens the AGW argument that warming is human caused by way of the
    Arrhenius effect of fossil fuel emissions.
  10. (Gregory, 2002) derived sensitivity from observations 1860-2000 constrained by models for ocean heat uptake and derived a probability distribution of ECS which shows that the symmetry of the ECS distribution assumed by Charney and the IPCC in reporting confidence intervals does not exist. Gregory’s results show a long tailed distribution that is skewed right. The author reports its properties as a median of ECS = 6 and a 90%CI of ECS = 1.1 to infinity. The high end is not bounded. However, it is shown that with certain assumptions and model constraints the range can be reduced to 90% CI of ECS = [1.7 – 2.3]. The motivation for these assumptions is described by the author as “a range as narrow as that would be a great improvement on the current state of knowledge”.
  11. The ECS Probability distribution derived from climate model simulations constrained by recent observations (Gregory2002) (Forest, 2002) yield a fairly wide symmetrical distribution with a 90%CI for ECS = [1.4 – 7.7]. The spread of 6.3 is more than twice that assumed by Charney and institutionalized by the IPCC. Also the asymmetry with a bias toward higher values of sensitivity does not exist in the IPCC and in the institutionalized AGW narrative.
  12. The (Knutti, 2002) authors use A climate model with both CO2 and aerosol forcing to generate Monte Carlo simulations and thereby to construct a probability distribution of climate sensitivity. They find that the IPCC has grossly underestimated the width and location of the 90%CI for ECS. with the underestimation described as “a 40 per cent probability that warming will exceed the rise predicted by the IPCC, and a 5 per cent probability that warming will fall below that range”. The 90%CI for climate sensitivity is reported as ECS = [2.7 – 8.7]. This distribution is twice as wide as the IPCC distribution and offset by 1.2C towards higher values.
  13. (Frame, 2005) estimates model constrained climate sensitivity from observations and reports a 90%CI for ECS = [1.4–4.1] with the median skewed left at ECS = 2.4. The results are in good agreement with Charney and IPCC values.
  14. (Murphy, 2004) used large ensemble climate model runs to estimate the climate sensitivity and its uncertainty. They find that the sensitivity is represented by a 90%CI range of ECS = [2.4–5.4] slightly higher than Charney/IPCC but with comparable uncertainty.
  15. (Stainforth, 2005) is a unique paper. It presents results from the large ensemble model study carried out in the event organized by Oxford University (, 2004). Thousands of members participated in a “grand ensemble of simulations” with a general circulation model. They discovered a surprisingly large uncertainty in sensitivity estimates. The authors report a 90%CI of ECS = [1.9 – 11.5]. The results indicate that both climate sensitivity and its uncertainty are much higher than the estimates presented by Charney and the IPCC.
  16. (Hegerl, 2006) uses 700 years of paleo climate data constrained with models to report observed sensitivity as high as ECS = [7.7-9.0] but a 90% CI of ECS=[1.5-6.2]. The uncertainty is greater than the Charney/IPCC estimates and the range is skewed right toward higher values.
  17. More recently, (Kummer, 2017) presented empirical estimates of observational climate sensitivity constrained by climate models in a doctoral dissertation and reported ECS = 2.3 with uncertainty given by the 90%CI of ECS = [ 1.6-4.1]. These results support the Charney/IPCC values although they are somewhat lower.
  18. (Johansson, 2015) addresses the uncertainty issue in climate sensitivity and finds that uncertainty in ECS can be reduced with appropriate corrections for the ‘pause’ in warming 2000-2014. The pause was most likely due to ENSO effects or low solar activity. Its effect on the lower bound of the 90%CI for ECS has been incorrectly estimated by the IPCC. He finds that the lower bound of the 90%CI should remain at 2°C and that lowers uncertainty to ECS = [2.0 – 4.5].
  19. (Aldrin, 2012) estimates model constrained ECS from observational data and reports an asymmetrical probability distribution for ECS that is skewed right similar to the Gregory 2002 distribution shown in Figure 1. The authors (co-authors include Gunnar Myhre) report 90%CI for observational sensitivity unconstrained by models as ECS ≈ [1.2 – 7.7] and model constrained intervals of ECS ≈ [1.0 – 2.7], [1.0 – 3.5], [1.0 – 4.2], [1.3 – 4.9], [1.5 – 7.8], [1.5 – 7.3], and [1.0 – 7.0].
  20.  (Lewis and Curry 2018)  carried out a detailed analysis of observational climate sensitivity constrained by models. They report low sensitivity with 90%CI given by ECS=[1.05-4.05]. The uncertainty closely matches that of the IPCC with the range shifted towards lower values.
  21. The so called “uncertainty monster” in climate sensitivity research (Curry/Webster, 2011) is apparent in these findings in terms of the possibility of ECS<1.5 and ECS>4.5. The confusion and uncertainty in the value for the ECS is further explored in Munshi 2018  where unconstrained observational ECS values are presented for the HADCRU temperature reconstruction 1850-2017. The results show a large range of ECS in a moving 60-year window. The observed ECS values range from small negative values to ECS>6. In addition, a split half test shows an unacceptable difference in ECS values between first and second halves of the study period. These results are not consistent with the existence of a climate sensitivity parameter that determines surface temperature according to atmospheric CO2 concentration. They are indicative of an unstable regression coefficient.
  22. Statistically, the ECS is a linear regression coefficient that describes the responsiveness of surface temperature to the logarithm of atmospheric CO2 and its reliability depends on a correlation between these variables. The reason for the instability of this regression coefficient is that the assumed correlation is not found in the data. The correlation seen in the source data is shown to be spurious when the two time series are detrended. The details of the instability issue are described in a related post Spurious Correlations in Climate Science and a downloadable paper posted on SSRN Validity and Reliability of Charney Climate Sensitivity. These works demonstrate that although regression coefficients may be computed without the assumed correlation, these coefficients will tend to be unstable with a wide range of possible values that have no interpretation because they are based on a sensitivity that does not exist.
  23. It is now recognized that uncertainty in climate sensitivity is a serious issue in climate science and that it must be resolved. In (Stevens, 2016) Bjorn Stevens (co-authors include Steven Sherwood and Mark Webb) attempts to rescue the ECS concept and proposes ways to address the uncertainty issue in climate sensitivity research. The authors show that the IPCC sensitivity range of 90%CI(ECS) = [1.5 – 4.5] can be maintained and additional uncertainty controlled by addressing causes for extreme values. For example, aerosol forcing can yield values lower than 1.5 ECS and higher solar irradiance forcing can show higher values than 4.5 ECS. They argue that when such known effects are factored out, the correct CO2 effect can be extracted from the extreme values reported by purely observational estimates of ECS and ECS can be shown to lie within the Charney/IPCC range of ECS = [1.5 – 4.5].
  24. A more radical proposal is found in (Knutti, 2017). Here the authors propose to abandon the ECS concept saying that the effort by climate science to address the uncertainty issue in climate sensitivity has failed and that this failure implies that the ECS must be abandoned because it has not proven to be a useful metric for presenting the essential relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide and temperature that is central to the theory of anthropogenic global warming or AGW.
  25. Knutti et al (co-authors Rugenstein and Hegerl) suggest that the failed ECS parameter should be replaced with the more stable and reliable carbon climate response to cumulative emissions (CCR) described in (Matthews, 2009). The authors state that “estimates of the CCR are better constrained than those of the ECS in observed warming and are more relevant for predicting warming over the next decades”.
  26. Three papers, all of them published in 2009, broke new ground for climate science along the lines described by Knutti et al 2017. Matthews et al 2009 (co-authors Gillett, Stott, Zickfield) demonstrated a stable linear relationship between cumulative emissions and surface temperature and argued that this proportionality, computed as the slope of the line and referred to as the Carbon Climate Response (CCR) is the appropriate metric to relate warming to carbon dioxide emissions; with the further claim that it is more stable and reliable than equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS).
  27. However, the CCR, later called the TCR, also contains a statistical flaw in terms of a spurious correlation. The spuriousness of the correlation between temperature and cumulative emissions is described in the companion blog post Spurious Correlations in Climate Science. Additional information on this issue may be found in the corresponding SSRN papers at Limitations of the TCRESpuriousness of Correlations Between Cumulative Values, and Some Methodological Issues in Climate Science.
  28. Establishing a functional correlation between time series data is fraught with complexity and traps for the unwary. Time series often contain long term trends in the data that, if allowed to remain, can generate spurious correlations at any given time scale that is smaller than the time span of the data (Munshi, Spurious correlations in time series data, 2016). In such cases, detrended correlation analysis is used to separate long term trend effects from fluctuations at the time scale of interest (Von-Storch, 1999) (Shumway, 2011) (Prodobnik, 2008) (Munshi, Spurious correlations in time series data, 2016).
  29. An additional issue in time series analysis is the use of moving windows or of cumulative values to derive a new time series from the source time series for further analysis. All such procedures require repeated use of the same data items from the source series to construct the target series. The repeated use of the same data items in the source series in the construction of the target series, reduces the effective sample size and the degrees of freedom in the target series (Illusory Statistical Power in Time Series Analysis ).
  30. Cumulative value analysis can be described as the opposite of detrended fluctuation analysis because it does exactly the opposite. It overwhelms fluctuations at any short time scale with information about the overall drift in time so that fluctuations appear to vanish and an apparent high degree of correlation magically appears in the full span of the series. Yet it is the fluctuations at a given time scale that contain the correlation information relevant to a theory of causation at that time scale.
  31. The repeated use of the same data values in the calculation of cumulative values erases both time scale and degrees of freedom from the time series by reducing the effective value of the sample size and the corresponding degrees of freedom. See:  Effective Sample Size of the Cumulative Values of a Time Series . In the computation of cumulative values of a time series of length N, the first value in the series is used N times, the second value N-1 times and so on until the Nth value which is used once. In general, the Jth value is used N-J+1 times. Thus, in total, (N*(N+1)/2) numbers are used in the computation of cumulative values. Since there are only N distinct values in the source series, the average multiplicity of use is M = (N*(N+1)/2)/N or M = (N+1)/2.
  32. Multiplicity reduces the effective sample size to EFFN = N/M. In the case of cumulative values, the effective samples size is EFFN = (2*N)/(N+1). For an infinitely large sample, the effective sample size of cumulative values will be EFFN ≈ 2 and for any finite sample size less than infinity, EFFN < 2. In the evaluation of the statistical significance of observed sample correlations and regression coefficients, the degrees of freedom parameter, DF = EFFN-2, has a maximum value of DF = 0 for an infinite series of cumulative values. This means that time series of cumulative values have no degrees of freedom and therefore no statistical power. This principle has been demonstrated with Monte Carlo simulation and also with examples drawn from climate data in Limitations of the TCRESpuriousness of Correlations Between Cumulative Values, and Some Methodological Issues in Climate Science.
  33. These considerations imply that the apparent advantage the CCR and TCR over the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) in terms of stability, reliability, lower values, and tight confidence intervals is illusory. The CCR/TCR values have no interpretation because there is neither time scale nor degrees of freedom in the time series of cumulative values.
  34. A complete list of my SSRN papers may be found at SSRN.
  1. Most of Europe was once covered with ice. A few million years ago, the present site of the city of Chicago was buried under three kilometers of frost. On Mars, and elsewhere in the solar system, we see features that could not be produced today, landscapes carved hundreds of millions or billions of years ago when the planetary climate was probably very different.
  2. There is an additional factor that can alter the landscape and the climate of Earth: intelligent life, able to make major environmental changes. Like Venus, the Earth also has a greenhouse effect due to its carbon dioxide and water vapor. The global temperature of the Earth would be below the freezing point of water if not for the greenhouse effect. It keeps the oceans liquid and life possible. A little greenhouse is a good thing. Like Venus, the Earth also has about 90 atmospheres of carbon dioxide; but it resides in the crust as limestone and other carbonates, not in the atmosphere. If the Earth were moved only a little closer to the Sun, the temperature would increase slightly. This would drive some of the CO2 out of the surface rocks, generating a stronger greenhouse effect, which would in turn incrementally heat the surface further. A hotter surface would vaporize still more carbonates into CO2, and there would be the possibility of a runaway greenhouse effect to very high temperatures. This is just what we think happened in the early history of Venus, because of Venus’ proximity to the Sun. The surface environment of Venus is a warning: something disastrous can happen to a planet rather like our own.
  3. The principal energy sources of our present industrial civilization are the so-called fossil fuels. We burn wood and oil, coal and natural gas, and, in the process, release waste gases, principally CO2, into the air. Consequently, the carbon dioxide content of the Earth’s atmosphere is increasing dramatically. The possibility of a runaway greenhouse effect suggests that we have to be careful:
  4. Even a one- or two- degree rise in the global temperature can have catastrophic consequences. In the burning of coal and oil and gasoline, we are also putting sulfuric acid into the atmosphere. Like Venus, our stratosphere even now has a substantial mist of tiny sulfuric acid droplets. Our major cities are polluted with noxious molecules. We do not understand the long- term effects of our course of action.
  5. But we have also been perturbing the climate in the opposite sense. For hundreds of thousands of years human beings have been burning and cutting down forests and encouraging domestic animals to graze on and destroy grasslands. (This statement is false. These human activities did not begin until the Neolithic Revolution in the early Holocene.) Slash-and-burn agriculture, industrial tropical deforestation and overgrazing are rampant today. But forests are darker than grasslands, and grasslands are darker than deserts. As a consequence, the amount of sunlight that is absorbed by the ground has been declining, and by changes in the land use we are lowering the surface temperature of our planet (not a currently held view).  Might this cooling increase the size of the polar ice cap, which, because it is bright, will reflect still more sunlight from the Earth, further cooling the planet, driving a runaway albedo2 effect?
  6. Our lovely blue planet, the Earth, is the only home we know. Venus is too hot. Mars is too cold. But the Earth is just right, a heaven for humans. After all, we evolved here. But our congenial climate may be unstable. We are perturbing our poor planet in serious and contradictory ways. Is there any danger of driving the environment of the Earth toward the planetary Hell of Venus or the global ice age of Mars? The simple answer is that nobody knows. The study of the global climate, the comparison of the Earth with other worlds, are subjects in their earliest stages of development. They are fields that are poorly and grudgingly funded. In our ignorance, we continue to push and pull, to pollute the atmosphere and brighten the land, oblivious of the fact that the long-term consequences are largely unknown.
  7. A few million years ago, when human beings first evolved on Earth, it was already a middle-aged world, 4.6 billion years along from the catastrophes and impetuosities of its youth. But we humans now represent a new and perhaps decisive factor. Our intelligence and our technology have given us the power to affect the climate. How will we use this power? Are we willing to tolerate ignorance and complacency in matters that affect the entire human family? Do we value short-term advantages above the welfare of the Earth? Or will we think on longer time scales, with concern for our children and our grandchildren, to understand and protect the complex life-support systems of our planet? The Earth is a tiny and fragile world. It needs to be cherished.

    Source: From his book “Cosmos” with text provided online by


  1. 2013: Dunlap, Riley E., and Peter J. Jacques. “Climate change denial books and conservative think tanks: Exploring the connection.” American Behavioral Scientist 57.6 (2013): 699-731. {The conservative movement and especially its think tanks play a critical role in denying the reality and significance of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), especially by manufacturing uncertainty over climate science. Books denying AGW are a crucial means of attacking climate science and scientists, and we examine the links between conservative think tanks (CTTs) and 108 climate change denial books published through 2010. We find a strong link, albeit noticeably weaker for the growing number of self-published denial books. We also examine the national origins of the books and the academic backgrounds of their authors or editors, finding that with the help of American CTTs climate change denial has spread to several other nations and that an increasing portion of denial books are produced by individuals with no scientific training. It appears that at least 90% of denial books do not undergo peer review, allowing authors or editors to recycle scientifically unfounded claims that are then amplified by the conservative movement, media, and political elites}
  2. 2010: Dunlap, Riley E., and Aaron M. McCright. “14 Climate change denial: sources, actors and strategies.” Routledge handbook of climate change and society (2010): 240. {Climate denialism is an outgrowth of the conservative movement’s environmental skepticism during the Reagan years}
  3. 2011: McCright, Aaron M., and Riley E. Dunlap. “The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public’s views of global warming, 2001–2010.” The Sociological Quarterly 52.2 (2011): 155-194. {We examine political polarization over climate change within the American public by analyzing data from 10 nationally representative Gallup Polls between 2001 and 2010. We find that liberals and Democrats are more likely to report beliefs consistent with the scientific consensus and express personal concern about global warming than are conservatives and Republicans. Further, the effects of educational attainment and self‐reported understanding on global warming beliefs and concern are positive for liberals and Democrats, but are weaker or negative for conservatives and Republicans. Last, significant ideological and partisan polarization has occurred on the issue of climate change over the past decade}
  4. 2015: Lewandowsky, Stephan, et al. “Seepage: Climate change denial and its effect on the scientific community.” Global Environmental Change 33 (2015): 1-13. {Vested interests and political agents have long opposed political or regulatory action in response to climate change by appealing to scientific uncertainty. Here we examine the effect of such contrarian talking points on the scientific community itself. We show that although scientists are trained in dealing with uncertainty, there are several psychological reasons why scientists may nevertheless be susceptible to uncertainty-based argumentation, even when scientists recognize those arguments as false and are actively rebutting them. Specifically, we show that prolonged stereotype threat, pluralistic ignorance, and a form of projection (the third-person effect) may cause scientists to take positions that they would be less likely to take in the absence of outspoken public opposition. We illustrate the consequences of seepage from public debate into the scientific process with a case study involving the interpretation of temperature trends from the last 15 years. We offer ways in which the scientific community can detect and avoid such inadvertent seepage}
  5. 2013: Elsasser, Shaun W., and Riley E. Dunlap. “Leading voices in the denier choir: Conservative columnists’ dismissal of global warming and denigration of climate science.” American Behavioral Scientist 57.6 (2013): 754-776. {The conservative “echo chamber” is a crucial element of the climate change denial machine. Although social scientists have begun to examine the role of conservative media in the denial campaign, this article reports the first examination of conservative newspaper columnists. Syndicated columnists are very influential because they reach a large audience. We analyze 203 opinion editorials (“op-eds”) written by 80 different columnists published from 2007 to 2010, a period that saw a number of crucial events and policy proposals regarding climate change. We focus on the key topics the columnists address and the skeptical arguments they employ. The overall results reveal a highly dismissive view of climate change and critical stance toward climate science among these influential conservative pundits. They play a crucial role in amplifying the denial machine’s messages to a broad segment of the American public}
  6. 2016: Boussalis, Constantine, and Travis G. Coan. “Text-mining the signals of climate change doubt.” Global Environmental Change 36 (2016): 89-100. {Climate scientists overwhelmingly agree that the Earth is getting warmer and that the rise in average global temperature is predominantly due to human activity. Yet a significant proportion of the American public, as well as a considerable number of legislators in the U.S. Congress, continue to reject the “consensus view.” While the source of the disagreement is varied, one prominent explanation centres on the activities of a coordinated and well-funded countermovement of climate sceptics. This study contributes to the literature on organized climate scepticism by providing the first systematic overview of conservative think tank sceptical discourse in nearly 15 years. Specifically, we (1) compile the largest corpus of contrarian literature to date, collecting over 16,000 documents from 19 organizations over the period 1998–2013; (2) introduce a methodology to measure key themes in the corpus which scales to the substantial increase in content generated by conservative think tanks over the past decade; and (3) leverage this new methodology to shed light on the relative prevalence of science- and policy-related discussion among conservative think tanks. We find little support for the claim that “the era of science denial is over”—instead, discussion of climate science has generally increased over the sample period}
  7. 2013: Farmer, G. Thomas, and John Cook. “Understanding climate change denial.” Climate change science: a modern synthesis. Springer Netherlands, 2013. 445-466. {At its heart, climate denial is the rejection of the scientific consensus that humans are disrupting the climate. Denial of a consensus can be identified by five telltale characteristics: fake experts, cherry picking, logical fallacies, impossible expectations and conspiracy theories. These techniques are observed in the tactics and strategies of the climate denial movement, disseminated by ideological think-tanks, some conservative governments and vested interests through a range of media streams. The key to responding to climate misinformation is to provide alternative narratives that are more compelling than the myths they replace}
  8. 2007: Hamilton, Clive. Scorcher: The dirty politics of climate change. Black Inc. {Wiki: Scorcher: The Dirty Politics of Climate Change is a 2007 book by Clive Hamilton which contends that Australia rather than the United States is the major stumbling block to a more effective Kyoto Protocol. In the final chapter of the book Hamilton argues that the Howard Government has been actively working to destroy the Kyoto Protocol. Scorcher is an updated version of Hamilton’s 2001 book, Running from the Storm}
    Shearer, Christine. Kivalina: a climate change story. Haymarket Books, 2011. {This book looks at the struggle of Kivalina, a small Alaska Native village that filed a legal claim against some of the world’s largest fossil fuel companies for damaging their homeland and creating a false debate around climate change. Academic and journalist Christine Shearer explores the history leading up to the lawsuit, and its relationship to past misinformation campaigns involving lead, asbestos, and tobacco. The book also considers the interconnections between fossil fuels, the global political-economy, and disaster management. Kivalina’s struggle for safe relocation, the book argues, is part of our common struggle to acknowledge and address climate change before it is too late}
  9. 2010: McKnight, David. “A change in the climate? The journalism of opinion at News Corporation.” Journalism 11.6 (2010): 693-706. {In 2007 the global media company News Corporation announced that it would become ‘carbon neutral’ and generally endorsed scientific warnings about global warming. Its CEO, Rupert Murdoch, signaled not only that the media group held a corporate view toward the issue of climate change but that its editorial coverage would henceforth change. This article examines the period before this change of direction. From 1997 to 2007 newspapers and television stations owned by News Corporation, based on their editorials, columnists and commentators, largely denied the science of climate change and dismissed those who were concerned about it. While the intensity of commentary and editorials about climate change varied between media outlets owned by News Corporation in the USA, Britain and Australia, its corporate view framed the issue as one of political correctness rather than science. Scientific knowledge was portrayed as an orthodoxy and its own stance, and that of ‘climate sceptics’ as one of courageous dissent}
  10. 2009: Barnard, Phoebe. “Climate Change Denialism”, Researchgate Barnard Paper, {How can we make sense of this contradictory information? You could be forgiven if you’re a bit confused. The world in the Internet age is awash with information, and anyone with a blog-site can and does post their own views – right, wrong or somewhere in between. Who knows what they’re talking about? Who’s right?}
  11. 2011: McCright, Aaron M., and Riley E. Dunlap. “Cool dudes: The denial of climate change among conservative white males in the United States.” Global environmental change 21.4 (2011): 1163-1172. {We examine whether conservative white males are more likely than are other adults in the U.S. general public to endorse climate change denial. We draw theoretical and analytical guidance from the identity-protective cognition thesis explaining the white male effect and from recent political psychology scholarship documenting the heightened system-justification tendencies of political conservatives. We utilize public opinion data from ten Gallup surveys from 2001 to 2010, focusing specifically on five indicators of climate change denial. We find that conservative white males are significantly more likely than are other Americans to endorse denialist views on all five items, and that these differences are even greater for those conservative white males who self-report understanding global warming very well. Furthermore, the results of our multivariate logistic regression models reveal that the conservative white male effect remains significant when controlling for the direct effects of political ideology, race, and gender as well as the effects of nine control variables. We thus conclude that the unique views of conservative white males contribute significantly to the high level of climate change denial in the United States}
  12. 2013: Boykoff, Maxwell T. “Public enemy no. 1? Understanding media representations of outlier views on climate change.” American behavioral scientist 57.6 (2013): 796-817. {Outlier voices—particularly those views often dubbed climate “skeptics,” “denialists,” or “contrarians”—have gained prominence and traction in mass media over time through a mix of internal workings such as journalistic norms, institutional values and practices, and external political economic, cultural, and social factors. In this context, the article explores how and why these actors—through varied interventions and actions—garner disproportionate visibility in the public arena via mass media. It also examines how media content producers grapple with ways to represent claims makers, as well as their claims, so that they clarify rather than confuse these critical issues. To the extent that mass media misrepresent and/or gratuitously cover these outlier views, they contribute to ongoing illusory, misleading, and counterproductive debates within the public and policy communities, and poorly serve the collective public. Furthermore, working through mass media outlets, these outlier interventions demonstrate themselves to be (at times deliberately) detrimental to efforts seeking to enlarge rather than constrict the spectrum of possibility for varied forms of climate action}
  13. 2013: Washington, Haydn. Climate change denial: Heads in the sand. Routledge, 2013. {Wiki: Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand is a non-fiction book about climate change denial, coauthored by Haydn Washington and John Cook, with a foreword by Naomi Oreskes. Washington had a background in environmental science prior to authoring the work, and Cook was educated in physics and founded the website Skeptical Science which compiles peer-reviewed evidence of global warming. The book was first published in hardcover and paperback formats in 2011 by Earthscan, a division of Routledge. The book presents an in-depth analysis and refutation of climate change denial, going over several arguments point-by-point and disproving them with peer-reviewed evidence from the scientific consensus for climate change. The authors assert that those denying climate change engage in tactics including cherry picking data purported to support their specific viewpoints, and attacking the integrity of climate scientists. They use social science theory to examine the phenomenon of climate change denial in the wider public, and call this phenomenon a form of pathology}
  14. 2013: Goldenberg, Suzanne. “Secret funding helped build vast network of climate denial thinktanks.” The Guardian 14 (2013): 681-694. {Conservative billionaires used a secretive funding route to channel nearly $120 million to more than 100 groups casting doubt about the science behind climate change, the Guardian has learned. The funds, doled out between 2002 and 2010, helped build a vast network of think tanks and activist groups working to a single purpose: to redefine climate change from neutralscientific fact to a highly polarizing “wedge issue” for hardcore conservatives}
  15. 2012: Goeminne, Gert. “Lost in translation: Climate denial and the return of the political.” Global Environmental Politics 12.2 (2012): 1-8. {In this deliberately provocative commentary, I interrogate the relationship between two critical perspectives on the one-sided scientific framing of the climate issue: a constructivist interpretation of climate modeling on the one hand and the debate in political theory on the depoliticization of the public sphere on the other. I argue how they could be tied together in order to provide an enriched understanding of climate denial as a symptom rather than a cause of dysfunctional climate politics. It is my claim that in attempting to translate the universal validity of scientific knowledge into the contours of an inclusive, consensual negotiation model, the constitutive role of exclusion in the emergence of scientific objectivity is overlooked}
  16. 2015: Lewandowsky, Stephan, et al. “Recurrent fury: Conspiratorial discourse in the blogosphere triggered by research on the role of conspiracist ideation in climate denial.” Journal of Social and Political Psychology 3.1 (2015): 142-178. {A growing body of evidence has implicated conspiracist ideation in the rejection of scientific propositions. Internet blogs in particular have become the staging ground for conspiracy theories that challenge the link between HIV and AIDS, the benefits of vaccinations, or the reality of climate change. A recent study involving visitors to climate blogs found that conspiracist ideation was associated with the rejection of climate science and other scientific propositions such as the link between lung cancer and smoking, and between HIV and AIDS. That article stimulated considerable discursive activity in the climate blogosphere—i.e., the numerous blogs dedicated to climate “skepticism”—that was critical of the study. The blogosphere discourse was ideally suited for analysis because its focus was clearly circumscribed, it had a well-defined onset, and it largely discontinued after several months. We identify and classify the hypotheses that questioned the validity of the paper’s conclusions using well-established criteria for conspiracist ideation. In two behavioral studies involving naive participants we show that those criteria and classifications were reconstructed in a blind test. Our findings extend a growing body of literature that has examined the important, but not always constructive, role of the blogosphere in public and scientific discourse}
  17. 2001: Stoll-Kleemann, Susanne, Tim O’Riordan, and Carlo C. Jaeger. “The psychology of denial concerning climate mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss focus groups.” Global environmental change 11.2 (2001): 107-117. {Various studies of public opinion regarding the causes and consequences of climate change reveal both a deep reservoir of concern, yet also a muddle over causes, consequences and appropriate policy measures for mitigation. The technique adopted here, namely integrated assessment (IA) focus groups, in which groups of randomly selected individuals in Switzerland looked at models of possible consequences of climate change and questioned specialists as to their accuracy and meaning, revealed a rich assembly of reactions. Respondents were alarmed about the consequences of high-energy futures, and mollified by images of low-energy futures. Yet they also erected a series of psychological barriers to justify why they should not act either individually or through collective institutions to mitigate climate change. From the viewpoint of changing their lifestyles of material comfort and high-energy dependence, they regarded the consequences of possible behavioural shift arising from the need to meet mitigation measures as more daunting. To overcome the dissonance created in their minds they created a number of socio-psychological denial mechanisms. Such mechanisms heightened the costs of shifting away from comfortable lifestyles, set blame on the inaction of others, including governments, and emphasised doubts regarding the immediacy of personal action when the effects of climate change seemed uncertain and far away. These findings suggest that more attention needs to be given to the social and psychological motivations as to why individuals erect barriers to their personal commitment to climate change mitigation, even when professing anxiety over climate futures. Prolonged and progressive packages of information tailored to cultural models or organised belief patterns, coupled to greater community based policy incentives may help to widen the basis of personal and moral responsibility}
  18. 2013: Lewandowsky, Stephan, Klaus Oberauer, and Gilles E. Gignac. “NASA faked the moon landing—therefore, (climate) science is a hoax: An anatomy of the motivated rejection of science.” Psychological science 24.5 (2013): 622-633. {Although nearly all domain experts agree that carbon dioxide emissions are altering the world’s climate, segments of the public remain unconvinced by the scientific evidence. Internet blogs have become a platform for denial of climate change, and bloggers have taken a prominent role in questioning climate science. We report a survey of climate-blog visitors to identify the variables underlying acceptance and rejection of climate science. Our findings parallel those of previous work and show that endorsement of free-market economics predicted rejection of climate science. Endorsement of free markets also predicted the rejection of other established scientific findings, such as the facts that HIV causes AIDS and that smoking causes lung cancer. We additionally show that, above and beyond endorsement of free markets, endorsement of a cluster of conspiracy theories (e.g., that the Federal Bureau of Investigation killed Martin Luther King, Jr.) predicted rejection of climate science as well as other scientific findings. Our results provide empirical support for previous suggestions that conspiratorial thinking contributes to the rejection of science. Acceptance of science, by contrast, was strongly associated with the perception of a consensus among scientists}
  19. 2011: Gifford, Robert. “The dragons of inaction: psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation.” American Psychologist 66.4 (2011): 290. {Most people think climate change and sustainability are important problems, but too few global citizens engaged in high-greenhouse-gas-emitting behavior are engaged in enough mitigating behavior to stem the increasing flow of greenhouse gases and other environmental problems. Why is that? Structural barriers such as a climate-averse infrastructure are part of the answer, but psychological barriers also impede behavioral choices that would facilitate mitigation, adaptation, and environmental sustainability. Although many individuals are engaged in some ameliorative action, most could do more, but they are hindered by seven categories of psychological barriers, or “dragons of inaction”: limited cognition about the problem, ideological worldviews that tend to preclude pro-environmental attitudes and behavior, comparisons with key other people, sunk costs and behavioral momentum, discredence toward experts and authorities, perceived risks of change, and positive but inadequate behavior change. Structural barriers must be removed wherever possible, but this is unlikely to be sufficient. Psychologists must work with other scientists, technical experts, and policymakers to help citizens overcome these psychological barriers}
  20. 2011: Hoffman, Andrew J. “Talking past each other? Cultural framing of skeptical and convinced logics in the climate change debate.” Organization & Environment 24.1 (2011): 3-33. {This article analyzes the extent to which two institutional logics around climate change—the climate change “convinced” and the climate change “skeptical” logics—are truly competing or talking past each other in a way that can be described as a logic schism. Drawing on the concept of framing from social movement theory, it uses qualitative field observations from the largest climate deniers conference in the United States and a data set of almost 800 op-eds from major news outlets over a 2-year period to examine how convinced and skeptical arguments of opposing logics employ frames and issue categories to make arguments about climate change. This article finds that the two logics are engaging in different debates on similar issues with the former focusing on solutions while the latter debates the definition of the problem. It concludes that the debate appears to be reaching a level of polarization where one might begin to question whether meaningful dialogue and problem solving has become unavailable to participants. The implications of such a logic schism is a shift from an integrative debate focused on addressing interests, to a distributive battle over concessionary agreements with each side pursuing its goals by demonizing the other. Avoiding such an outcome requires the activation of, as yet, dormant “broker” categories (technology, religion, and national security), the redefinition of existing ones (science, economics, risk, ideology), and the engagement of effective “climate brokers” to deliver them}
  21. 2005: Antilla, Liisa. “Climate of scepticism: US newspaper coverage of the science of climate change.” Global environmental change 15.4 (2005): 338-352. {This two-part study integrates a quantitative review of one year of US newspaper coverage of climate science with a qualitative, comparative analysis of media-created themes and frames using a social constructivist approach. In addition to an examination of newspaper articles, this paper includes a reflexive comparison with attendant wire stories and scientific texts. Special attention is given to articles constructed with and framed by rhetoric emphasising uncertainty, controversy, and climate scepticism}
  22. 2007: Boykoff, Maxwell T. “Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006.” Area 39.4 (2007): 470-481. {The journalistic norm of ‘balanced’ reporting (giving roughly equal coverage to both sides in any significant dispute) is recognised as both useful and problematic in communicating emerging scientific consensus on human attribution for global climate change. Analysis of the practice of this norm in United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK) newspaper coverage of climate science between 2003 and 2006 shows a significant divergence from scientific consensus in the US in 2003–4, followed by a decline in 2005–6, but no major divergence in UK reporting. These findings inform ongoing considerations about the spatially‐differentiated media terms and conditions through which current and future climate policy is negotiated and implemented}
  23. 2012: MacKay, Brad, and Iain Munro. “Information warfare and new organizational landscapes: An inquiry into the ExxonMobil–Greenpeace dispute over climate change.” Organization Studies 33.11 (2012): 1507-1536. {A defining characteristic of the emergence of new organizational landscapes is that information is not just being used as a tool by organizations, as it is more usually understood, but also as a weapon in a ‘war of position’. As organizations seek to influence public perception over emotive issues such as climate change, conflict at the ideational level can give rise to information warfare campaigns. This concerns the creation and deployment of often ideologically infused ideas through information networks to promote an organization’s interests over those of its adversaries. In this article, we analyse the ways in which ExxonMobil and Greenpeace employ distinctive informational tactics against a range of diverse targets in their dispute over the climate change debate. The purpose of this article is to advance the neo-Gramscian perspective on social movement organizations as a framework for understanding such behaviour. We argue that information warfare is likely to become common as corporations and non-governmental organizations are increasingly sensitive to their informational environment as a source of both opportunity and possible conflict}
  24. 2002: Van den Hove, Sybille, Marc Le Menestrel, and Henri-Claude De Bettignies. “The oil industry and climate change: strategies and ethical dilemmas.” Climate Policy 2.1 (2002): 3-18. {This paper explores the different climate change strategies chosen by three major multinational oil corporations: ExxonMobil, TotalFinaElf and BP Amoco. They are referred to, as the ‘fight against emission constraints,’ ‘wait and see,’ and ‘proactive’ strategies, respectively. The justifications given to support these strategies are identified. They cover the business, scientific, political, economic, technological and social dimensions. In a business ethics framework, the issue of climate change brings forth an ethical dilemma for the oil industry, in the form of a tension between profits and CO2 emissions. The strategies are analysed as three attitudes towards this dilemma: (i) placing priority on the business consequences while weakening the perception that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are causing climate change; (ii) avoiding responsibility; and (iii) placing priority on the need for a modification of the business process while limiting the negative effect in terms of business consequences. In conclusion, we propose that beyond the ethical issues proper to climate change itself, additional ethical issues are raised if society at large is instrumentalised by an industry in its search for profit. Publicly gauging and valorising the ethical commitment of a corporation appear as ways of inducing more collaborative and proactive attitudes by business actors}
  25. 2007: Begley, Sharon, et al. “The truth about denial.” Newsweek 150.7 (2007): 20-27. {Sen. Barbara Boxer had been chair of the Senate’s Environment Committee for less than a month when the verdict landed last February. “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal,” concluded a report by 600 scientists from governments, academia, green groups and businesses in 40 countries. Worse, there was now at least a 90 percent likelihood that the release of greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels is causing longer droughts, more flood-causing downpours and worse heat waves, way up from earlier studies. Those who doubt the reality of human-caused climate change have spent decades disputing that. But Boxer figured that with “the overwhelming science out there, the deniers’ days were numbered.” As she left a meeting with the head of the international climate panel, however, a staffer had some news for her. A conservative think tank long funded by ExxonMobil, she told Boxer, had offered scientists $10,000 to write articles undercutting climate science}
  26. 2009: Anderson, Alison. “Media, politics and climate change: Towards a new research agenda.” Sociology compass 3.2 (2009): 166-182. {Climate change is one of the most pressing issues of our time, and the media have been demonstrated to play a key role in shaping public perceptions and policy agendas. Journalists are faced with multiple challenges in covering this complex field. This article provides an overview of existing research on the media framing of climate change, highlighting major research themes and assessing future potential research developments. It argues that analysis of the reporting of climate science must be placed in the wider context of the growing concentration and globalization of news media ownership, and an increasingly ‘promotional culture’, highlighted by the rapid rise of the public relations industry in recent years and claims‐makers who employ increasingly sophisticated media strategies. Future research will need to examine in‐depth the targeting of media by a range of actors, as well as unravel complex information flows across countries as media increasingly converge}
  27. 2009: Adam, David. “ExxonMobil continuing to fund climate sceptic groups, records show.” The Guardian 1 (2009). {The world’s largest oil company is continuing to fund lobby groups that question the reality of global warming, despite a public pledge to cut support for such climate change denial, a new analysis shows. Company records show that ExxonMobil handed over hundreds of thousands of pounds to such lobby groups in 2008. These include the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) in Dallas, Texas, which received $75,000 (£45,500), and the Heritage Foundation in Washington DC, which received $50,000}
  28. 2014: Brulle, Robert J. “Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of US climate change counter-movement organizations.” Climatic Change 122.4 (2014): 681-694. {This paper conducts an analysis of the financial resource mobilization of the organizations that make up the climate change counter-movement (CCCM) in the United States. Utilizing IRS data, total annual income is compiled for a sample of CCCM organizations (including advocacy organizations, think tanks, and trade associations). These data are coupled with IRS data on philanthropic foundation funding of these CCCM organizations contained in the Foundation Center’s data base. This results in a data sample that contains financial information for the time period 2003 to 2010 on the annual income of 91 CCCM organizations funded by 140 different foundations. An examination of these data shows that these 91 CCCM organizations have an annual income of just over $900 million, with an annual average of $64 million in identifiable foundation support. The overwhelming majority of the philanthropic support comes from conservative foundations. Additionally, there is evidence of a trend toward concealing the sources of CCCM funding through the use of donor directed philanthropies}
  29. 2015: Douglas, Karen M., and Robbie M. Sutton. “Climate change: Why the conspiracy theories are dangerous.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 71.2 (2015): 98-106. {Uncertainty surrounds the public understanding of climate change and provides fertile ground for conspiracy theories. Typically, such conspiracy theories assert that climate scientists and politicians are distorting or hijacking the science to suit their own purposes. Climate change conspiracy theories resemble other conspiracy theories in some respects, but in others they appear to be quite different. For example, climate change conspiracy theories appear to be motivated by the desire to deny or minimize an unwelcome and threatening conclusion. They also appear to be more contentious than other types of conspiracy theories. Perhaps to an unparalleled extent, people on both sides of the issue champion climate change conspiracy theories. Finally, more than other conspiracy theories, those concerning climate change appear to be more politically loaded, dividing opinion across the left-right continuum. Some empirical evidence suggests that climate change conspiracy theories may be harmful, steering people away from environmentally friendly initiatives. They therefore present a significant challenge for governments and environmental organizations that are attempting to convince people to take action against global warming}
  30. 2012: Hamilton, Clive. “Theories of climate change.” Australian Journal of Political Science 47.4 (2012): 721-729. {On the face of it, the climate crisis lends itself to a Marxist analysis, and Max Koch duly
    interprets it as a stage in the development of capitalism. We see burgeoning greenhouse gas emissions due to relentless accumulation of capital, a powerful lobby protecting its interests at home and exporting its dirty business to poor countries, and governments placing the interests of corporations before those of the vulnerable and powerless. Above all, around the world the response to the existential threat posed by a warming globe has always been to give
    priority to economic growth, the conditio sine qua non for continued capital accumulation. The natural environment becomes no more than the means to the end of capital accumulation}
  31. 2011: Norgaard, Kari. “Climate denial: Emotion, psychology, culture and political economy.” Oxford handbook on climate change and society (2011): 399-413. {From Wikipedia: To investigate the lack of response in Western societies to the implications of global warming, Norgaard collected ethnographic data and took interviews in a rural community in west Norway during the winter of 2000–2001 when unusually warm conditions damaged the skiing industry and prevented ice fishing. Both local and national media linked the problems to global warming, and while the public treated this as common knowledge, they failed to demand a political response or change their own fuel usage. She investigated described this form of denial on various levels. The conventional information deficit model explained opposition or indifference by assuming that the public are ill-informed or misinformed, but in Norway a well informed public showed declining interest in the issue. Her interviews revealed that their response to an apparently insuperable problem was comparable to the condition called psychic numbing. Adopting Eviatar Zerubavel’s concept of socially organized denial, she saw this as a collective form of what Stanley Cohen had called implicatory denial}
  32. 2018: Haltinner, Kristin, and Dilshani Sarathchandra. “Climate change skepticism as a psychological coping strategy.” Sociology Compass (2018): e12586. { This article explores current sociological scholarship on climate skepticism and, drawing on recent literature in social psychology and behavioral science, presents an argument for future research on the relationship between emotion, information aversion, and climate denial. We extrapolate and unite these disconnected bodies of scholarship to argue that strong emotions such as fear may drive climate change skepticism and denial among some adherents. By partnering the scholarship outlined above with advances in research on conspiracy ideation, we argue that climate change skepticism and denial is, at least in some cases, a form of an exaggerated ostrich effect, whereby adherents are so driven to avoid learning about a specific problem; they actively seek to construct an alternative, safer, narrative. Given this predisposition, attempting to challenge such skepticism with information is counterproductive. As such, this paper presents alternative possibilities for communicating research findings on climate change}
  33. 2017: Jylhä, Kirsti, and Kahl Hellmer. “Populist attitudes and climate change denial: On the roles of conservative values, anti-egalitarianism, xenophobia, and anti-political establishment attitudes.” The 40th Annual Scientific Meeting of the International Society of Political Psychology. 2017 {Despite the extensive scientific evidence for human induced climate change, many still question or deny it. Previous research has shown that individuals who support right-wing populist parties tend to deny climate change to a higher degree than individuals supporting established parties. However, populism combines different views, and from the current state of knowledge it is unclear if these views uniquely correlate with climate change denial. Importantly, both populist discourses and rejection of climate science tend to include anti-establishment arguments, but it has been questioned if the true motivation behind them indeed lies in anti-establishmentarianism. For example, populism seems to be driven by xenophobic and anti-minority attitudes, and climate change denial has been connected to endorsement of group-based dominance. To improve our understanding of the populism-denial relation, the present study (N = 1588) tested the correlations between climate change denial and views commonly held by right-wing populists. Specifically, we investigated the effects of conservative values, anti-egalitarian attitudes (antifeminism and homophobia), xenophobia, and anti-political establishment attitudes on climate change denial. Positive zero-order correlations were found between all variables. Next, stepwise regression analysis revealed that conservative values, antifeminism, homophobia, and xenophobia have unique effects on denial, but anti-political establishment attitudes do not explain any unique variance in denial above the other included variables. Our results provide important insight about the potential motivations to dispute climate change among populist parties and their voters. Rather than reflecting anti-establishmentarianism per se, climate change denial seems to be driven by endorsement of traditional values and power structures}
  34. 2015: Stoknes, Per Espen. What we think about when we try not to think about global warmingToward a new psychology of climate action. Chelsea Green Publishing, 2015. {The more facts that pile up about global warming, the greater the resistance to them grows, making it harder to enact measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prepare communities for the inevitable change ahead. It is a catch-22 that starts, says psychologist and economist Per Espen Stoknes, from an inadequate understanding of the way most humans think, act, and live in the world around them. With dozens of examples—from the private sector to government agencies—Stoknes shows how to retell the story of climate change and, at the same time, create positive, meaningful actions that can be supported even by deniers. In What We Think About When We Try Not To Think About Global Warming, Stoknes not only masterfully identifies the five main psychological barriers to climate action, but addresses them with five strategies for how to talk about global warming in a way that creates action and solutions, not further inaction and despair.
  35. 2001: Marshall, George. “Denial and the psychology of climate apathy.” The Ecologist (2001): 46-68. {Most of us recognize that climate change is real yet we do nothing to stop it. What is the psychological mechanism that allows us to know something is true but act as if it is not? George Marshall’s search for the answers brings him face to face with Nobel Prize-winning psychologists and Texas Tea Party activists; the world’s leading climate scientists and those who denounce them; liberal environmentalists and conservative evangelicals. What he discovers is that our values, assumptions, and prejudices can take on lives of their own, gaining authority as they are shared, dividing people in their wake}
  36. 2011: Weber, Elke U., and Paul C. Stern. “Public understanding of climate change in the United States.” American Psychologist66.4 (2011): 315. {This article considers scientific and public understandings of climate change and addresses the following question: Why is it that while scientific evidence has accumulated to document global climate change and scientific opinion has solidified about its existence and causes, U.S. public opinion has not and has instead become more polarized? Our review supports a constructivist account of human judgment. Public understanding is affected by the inherent difficulty of understanding climate change, the mismatch between people’s usual modes of understanding and the task, and, particularly in the United States, a continuing societal struggle to shape the frames and mental models people use to understand the phenomena. We conclude by discussing ways in which psychology can help to improve public understanding of climate change and link a better understanding to action}
  37. 2018: Jeffrey A Harvey, etal, Internet Blogs, Polar Bears, and Climate-Change Denial by Proxy, BioScience, Volume 68, Issue 4, April 2018, Pages 281–287. {Increasing surface temperatures, Arctic sea-ice loss, and other evidence of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) are acknowledged by every major scientific organization in the world. However, there is a wide gap between this broad scientific consensus and public opinion. Internet blogs have strongly contributed to this consensus gap by fomenting misunderstandings of AGW causes and consequences. Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) have become a “poster species” for AGW, making them a target of those denying AGW evidence. Here, focusing on Arctic sea ice and polar bears, we show that blogs that deny or downplay AGW disregard the overwhelming scientific evidence of Arctic sea-ice loss and polar bear vulnerability. By denying the impacts of AGW on polar bears, bloggers aim to cast doubt on other established ecological consequences of AGW, aggravating the consensus gap. To counter misinformation and reduce this gap, scientists should directly engage the public in the media and blogosphere}
  1. 1994: Rosenzweig, Cynthia, and Martin L. Parry. “Potential impact of climate change on world food supply.” Nature 367.6459 (1994): 133-138. While some countries in the temperate zones may reap some benefit from climate change, many
    countries in the tropical and subtropical zones appear more vulnerable to the potential impacts of global climate change.
  2. 2017: Haile, Mekbib G., et al. “Impact of climate change, weather extremes, and price risk on global food supply.” Economics of Disasters and Climate Change 1.1 (2017): 55-75. We analyze the determinants of global crop production for maize, wheat, rice, and soybeans over the period 1961–2013. Using seasonal production data and price change and price volatility information at country level, as well as future climate data from 32 global circulation models, we project that climate change could reduce global crop production by 9% in the 2030s and by 23% in the 2050s. Climate change leads to 1–3% higher annual fluctuations of global crop production over the next four decades. We find strong, positive and statistically significant supply response to changing prices for all four crops. However, output price volatility, which signals risk to producers, reduces the supply of these key global agricultural staple crops—especially for wheat and maize. We find that climate change has significant adverse effects on production of the world’s key staple crops. Especially, weather extremes— in terms of shocks in both temperature and precipitation— during crop growing months have detrimental impacts on the production of the abovementioned food crops. Weather extremes also exacerbate the year-to-year fluctuations of food availability, and thus may further increase price volatility with its adverse impacts on production and poor consumers. Combating climate change using both mitigation and adaptation technologies is therefore crucial for global production.017:
  3. 2018: Michelle Tigchelaar etal: Future warming increases probability of globally synchronized maize production shocks, PNAS June 26, 2018. 115 (26) 6644-6649; Here, we use global datasets of maize production and climate variability combined with future temperature projections to quantify how yield variability will change in the world’s major maize-producing and -exporting countries under 2 °C and 4 °C of global warming. We find that as the global mean temperature increases, absent changes in temperature variability or breeding gains in heat tolerance, the coefficient of variation (CV) of maize yields increases almost everywhere to values much larger than present-day values. This higher CV is due both to an increase in the SD of yields and a decrease in mean yields. For the top four maize-exporting countries, which account for 87% of global maize exports, the probability that they have simultaneous production losses greater than 10% in any given year is presently virtually zero, but it increases to 7% under 2 °C warming and 86% under 4 °C warming. Our results portend rising instability in global grain trade and international grain prices, affecting especially the ∼800 million people living in extreme poverty who are most vulnerable to food price spikes. They also underscore the urgency of investments in breeding for heat tolerance.
  4. 2007: Morton, John F. “The impact of climate change on smallholder and subsistence agriculture.” Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 104.50 (2007): 19680-19685. Some of the most important impacts of global climate change will be felt among the populations, predominantly in developing countries, referred to as “subsistence” or “smallholder” farmers. Their vulnerability to climate change comes both from being predominantly located in the tropics, and from various socioeconomic, demographic, and policy trends limiting their capacity to adapt to change. However, these impacts will be difficult to model or predict because of (i) the lack of standardised definitions of these sorts of farming system, and therefore of standard data above the national level, (ii) intrinsic characteristics of these systems, particularly their complexity, their location-specificity, and their integration of agricultural and nonagricultural livelihood strategies, and (iii) their vulnerability to a range of climate-related and other stressors. Some recent work relevant to these farming systems is reviewed, a conceptual framework for understanding the diverse forms of impacts in an integrated manner is proposed, and future research needs are identified.
  5. 2010: Schlenker, Wolfram, and David B. Lobell. “Robust negative impacts of climate change on African agriculture.” Environmental Research Letters 5.1 (2010): 014010. There is widespread interest in the impacts of climate change on agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), and on the most effective investments to assist adaptation to these changes, yet the scientific basis for estimating production risks and prioritizing investments has been quite limited. Here we show that by combining historical crop production and weather data into a panel analysis, a robust model of yield response to climate change emerges for several key African crops. By mid-century, the mean estimates of aggregate production changes in SSA under our preferred model specification are − 22, − 17, − 17, − 18, and − 8% for maize, sorghum, millet, groundnut, and cassava, respectively. In all cases except cassava, there is a 95% probability that damages exceed 7%, and a 5% probability that they exceed 27%. Moreover, countries with the highest average yields have the largest projected yield losses, suggesting that well-fertilized modern seed varieties are more susceptible to heat related losses.
  6. 2006: Scott, Daniel, and Brenda Jones. “The impact of climate change on golf participation in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA): a case study.” Journal of Leisure Research 38.3 (2006): 363-380 {Golf is identified as a large recreation industry that is particularly sensitive to weather and climate, yet research assessing the direct relationship between them is extremely limited. Consequently, the potential implications of climate change for the industry remain largely unexamined. This case study presents findings of an analysis of the influence of weather conditions on the number of rounds played at a golf course in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) of Southern Ontario (Canada). An empirical relationship between daily rounds played and weather variables, derived through multiple regression analysis, was then used to examine the potential impacts of two climate change scenarios on the length of the golf season and the number of rounds played in the 2020s, 2050s and 2080s. The model projected that as early as the 2020s the average golf season could be one to seven weeks longer and with much improved shoulder seasons annual rounds played could increase 5.5% to 37.1%. The model results for the warmer long-term climate change scenario (2080s) were very similar (average golf season within 3% and average rounds played within 2%) to a spatial climate analogue (Columbus, Ohio)}
  7. 2007: Scott, Daniel, and Brenda Jones. “A regional comparison of the implications of climate change for the golf industry in Canada.” The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien 51.2 (2007): 219-232 {Golf is a recreation industry particularly sensitive to climate, yet the potential implications of climate change for the industry remain largely unexamined. This study presents findings of the first known impact assessment to compare the regional impacts of projected changes in the climate on the golf industry in Canada (or internationally). Empirical relationships between daily rounds played and four weather variables were defined through multiple regression analysis and then used to examine the potential impacts of two climate change scenarios on the length of the golf season and the number of rounds played in three regions of Canada (West Coast, Great Lakes, East Coast). Regionally, the West Coast region was projected to benefit the least from projected climate change, as golf courses that are currently open year round experienced only slight projected increases in rounds played in the 2020s and 2050s. Golf courses in the Great Lakes region could experience a 10‐ to 51‐day longer average golf season and a 21 percent to 3 percent increase in rounds as early as the 2020s, and an even more pronounced increase in the 2050s. East Coast golf courses were projected to benefit the most under both climate change scenarios, experiencing larger gains in average operating seasons (25 to 45 days in the 2020s) and a 40 percent to 48 percent increase in rounds played by as early as the 2020s}
  8. 2007: Scott, Daniel, and Geoff McBoyle. “Climate change adaptation in the ski industry.” Mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change 12.8 (2007): 1411. {The characteristics of ski areas with higher adaptive capacity are identified. Considering the highly competitive nature of the ski industry and the generally low climate change risk appraisal within the industry, climate change adaptation is anticipated to remain individualistic and reactive for some time. With only a few exceptions, the existing climate change literature on winter tourism has not considered the wide range of adaptation options identified in this paper and has likely overestimated potential damages. An important task for future studies is to develop methodologies to incorporate adaptation so that a more accurate understanding of the vulnerability of the international ski industry can be ascertained}
  9. 2001:Agnew, Maureen D., and David Viner. “Potential impacts of climate change on international tourism.” Tourism and hospitality research 3.1 (2001): 37-60 {Global temperatures rose by over 0.5°C during the 20th century and current estimates suggest that they will continue to rise at between 0.2 and 0.3°C per decade during the course of the 21st century. This increasing trend towards warmer temperatures could have major consequences for the tourism industry, which is heavily dependent on present climatic and environmental conditions. The ecosystems of many international holiday destinations are potentially vulnerable to climate change. This paper reviews the potential impacts of climate change for ten international tourist destinations. The most serious impacts will result from the effects of sea-level rise on small island states. Other impacts likely to affect tourism include coral bleaching, outbreaks of fire, changed migration patterns of animals and birds, flooding, the spread of vector-borne diseases and shorter skiing seasons. Without appropriate adaptive measures, climate change could produce a shift in the comparative attractiveness of tourist destinations around the globe}
  10. 2008: Shaw, W. Douglass, and John B. Loomis. “Frameworks for analyzing the economic effects of climate change on outdoor recreation.” Climate Research 36.3 (2008): 259-269 {Climate change is increasingly recognized as a major factor that may influence the recreational use of outdoor environments. Despite awareness of the pervasive effects of climate change, its effects on outdoor recreation have only recently been studied in detail. In this study we consider an economic framework that allows the modeling of the direct and indirect effects of climate change on users of recreation resources, via the impacts on natural resources upon which outdoor recreation depends. We also present a brief summary of selected empirical results bearing on climate-sensitive recreational activities. With the relatively small increases in temperature that are likely from near-term climate change, the number of people partaking in certain outdoor recreational activities—such as boating, golfing and beach recreation—is expected to increase by 14 to 36%. Numbers partaking in other activities—most notably snow sports like skiing—will likely fall. We discuss critical areas of future research that are needed to provide more detailed estimates of changes in recreation activities (along with associated economic effects) that are likely to arise from climate change in the future}
  11. 2018: Newbold, T. (2018) Future effects of climate and land-use change on terrestrial vertebrate community diversity under different scenarios, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.0792 {Land-use and climate change are among the greatest threats facing biodiversity, but understanding their combined effects has been hampered by modelling and data limitations, resulting in part from the very different scales at which land-use and climate processes operate. I combine two different modelling paradigms to predict the separate and combined (additive) effects of climate and land-use change on terrestrial vertebrate communities under four different scenarios. I predict that climate-change effects are likely to become a major pressure on biodiversity in the coming decades, probably matching or exceeding the effects of land-use change by 2070. The combined effects of both pressures are predicted to lead to an average cumulative loss of 37.9% of species from vertebrate communities under ‘business as usual’ (uncertainty ranging from 15.7% to 54.2%). Areas that are predicted to experience the effects of both pressures are concentrated in tropical grasslands and savannahs. The results have important implications for the conservation of biodiversity in future, and for the ability of biodiversity to support important ecosystem functions, upon which humans rely}
  12. 2017: Pecl, Gretta T., et al. “Biodiversity redistribution under climate change: Impacts on ecosystems and human well-being.” Science 355.6332 (2017): eaai9214. {The geographical range limits of species are dynamic but climate change is causing redistribution of life on Earth. The first response to changing climate is often a shift in location, to stay within preferred climate conditions. At the cooler extremes of their distributions, species are moving poleward, whereas range limits are contracting at the warmer range edge, where temperatures are no longer tolerable. On land, species are also moving to cooler, higher elevations; in the ocean, they are moving to colder water at greater depths. Because different species respond at different rates and to varying degrees, key interactions among species are often disrupted, and new interactions develop. These idiosyncrasies can result in novel biotic communities and rapid changes in ecosystem functioning, with pervasive and sometimes unexpected consequences. Human population growth and human caused climate change taken together put stresses on biodiversity and cause a redistribution of Earth’s species. Human activities must be changed accordingly}
  13. 2015: Kerr, Jeremy T., et al. “Climate change impacts on bumblebees converge across continents.” Science 349.6244 (2015): 177-180. {Responses to climate change have been observed across many species. There is a general trend for species to shift their ranges poleward or up in elevation. Not all species, however, can make such shifts, and these species might experience more rapid declines. Kerr et al. looked at data on bumblebees across North America and Europe over the past 110 years. Bumblebees have not shifted northward and are experiencing shrinking distributions in the southern ends of their range. Such failures to shift may be because of their origins in a cooler climate, and suggest an elevated susceptibility to rapid climate change}
  14. 2014: Bonebrake, Timothy C., et al. “From global change to a butterfly flapping: biophysics and behaviour affect tropical climate change impacts.” Proc. R. Soc. B 281.1793 (2014): 20141264 {Difficulty in characterizing the relationship between climatic variability and climate change vulnerability arises when we consider the multiple scales at which this variation occurs, be it temporal (from minute to annual) or spatial (from centimetres to kilometres). We studied populations of a single widely distributed butterfly species, Chlosyne lacinia, to examine the physiological, morphological, thermoregulatory and biophysical underpinnings of adaptation to tropical and temperate climates. Microclimatic and morphological data along with a biophysical model documented the importance of solar radiation in predicting butterfly body temperature. We also integrated the biophysics with a physiologically based insect fitness model to quantify the influence of solar radiation, morphology and behaviour on warming impact projections. While warming is projected to have some detrimental impacts on tropical ectotherms, fitness impacts in this study are not as negative as models that assume body and air temperature equivalence would suggest. We additionally show that behavioural thermoregulation can diminish direct warming impacts, though indirect thermoregulatory consequences could further complicate predictions. With these results, at multiple spatial and temporal scales, we show the importance of biophysics and behaviour for studying biodiversity consequences of global climate change, and stress that tropical climate change impacts are likely to be context-dependent}
  15. 2013: Thomas, Chris D. “The Anthropocene could raise biological diversity.” Nature News 502.7469 (2013): 7. {Human activity changes the environment, as last week’s release of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reminds us. But not all change is bad. One way in which animals and plants respond to warming temperatures, for example, is to move beyond their historical distributions, just as they do when they are transported to new regions by humans. The response of people who find themselves ‘invaded’ by such ‘displaced’ species is often irrational. Deliberate persecution of the new — just because it is new — is no longer sustainable in a world of rapid global change. It is true that some invasive species damage ecosystems and can eradicate resident species. As a result, the European Commission, for example, is planning laws to control the ‘adverse’ impacts of species introduced through human activities, albeit without quite saying how those impacts should be defined. But the same process can also increase ecological diversity. On average, less than one native species dies out for each introduced species that arrives. Britain, for instance, has gained 1,875 established non-native species without yet losing anything to the invaders. Human development, dubbed the age of the Anthropocene, boosts biodiversity in other ways too}
  16. 2014: Dornelas, Maria, et al. “Assemblage time series reveal biodiversity change but not systematic loss.” Science344.6181 (2014): 296-299. {The extent to which biodiversity change in local assemblages contributes to global biodiversity loss is poorly understood. We analyzed 100 time series from biomes across Earth to ask how diversity within assemblages is changing through time. We quantified patterns of temporal α diversity, measured as change in local diversity, and temporal β diversity, measured as change in community composition. Contrary to our expectations, we did not detect systematic loss of α diversity. However, community composition changed systematically through time, in excess of predictions from null models. Heterogeneous rates of environmental change, species range shifts associated with climate change, and biotic homogenization may explain the different patterns of temporal α and β diversity. Monitoring and understanding change in species composition should be a conservation priority}
  17. 2015: Pacifici, Michela, et al. “Assessing species vulnerability to climate change.” Nature Climate Change 5.3 (2015): 215. {The effects of climate change on biodiversity are increasingly well documented, and many methods have been developed to assess species’ vulnerability to climatic changes, both ongoing and projected in the coming decades. To minimize global biodiversity losses, conservationists need to identify those species that are likely to be most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. In this Review, we summarize different currencies used for assessing species’ climate change vulnerability. We describe three main approaches used to derive these currencies (correlative, mechanistic and trait-based), and their associated data requirements, spatial and temporal scales of application and modelling methods. We identify strengths and weaknesses of the approaches and highlight the sources of uncertainty inherent in each method that limit projection reliability. Finally, we provide guidance for conservation practitioners in selecting the most appropriate approach(es) for their planning needs and highlight priority areas for further assessments}
  18. 2012: Bonebrake, Timothy C., and Curtis A. Deutsch. “Climate heterogeneity modulates impact of warming on tropical insects.” Ecology 93.3 (2012): 449-455 {Evolutionary history and physiology mediate species responses to climate change. Tropical species that do not naturally experience high temperature variability have a narrow thermal tolerance compared to similar taxa at temperate latitudes and could therefore be most vulnerable to warming. However, the thermal adaptation of a species may also be influenced by spatial temperature variations over its geographical range. Spatial climate gradients, especially from topography, may also broaden thermal tolerance and therefore act to buffer warming impacts. Here we show that for low‐seasonality environments, high spatial heterogeneity in temperature correlates significantly with greater warming tolerance in insects globally. Based on this relationship, we find that climate change projections of direct physiological impacts on insect fitness highlight the vulnerability of tropical lowland areas to future warming. Thus, in addition to seasonality, spatial heterogeneity may play a critical role in thermal adaptation and climate change impacts particularly in the tropics}
  19. 2010: Bonebrake, Timothy C., and Michael D. Mastrandrea. “Tolerance adaptation and precipitation changes complicate latitudinal patterns of climate change impacts.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107.28 (2010): 12581-12586 {Global patterns of biodiversity and comparisons between tropical and temperate ecosystems have pervaded ecology from its inception. However, the urgency in understanding these global patterns has been accentuated by the threat of rapid climate change. We apply an adaptive model of environmental tolerance evolution to global climate data and climate change model projections to examine the relative impacts of climate change on different regions of the globe. Our results project more adverse impacts of warming on tropical populations due to environmental tolerance adaptation to conditions of low interannual variability in temperature. When applied to present variability and future forecasts of precipitation data, the tolerance adaptation model found large reductions in fitness predicted for populations in high-latitude northern hemisphere regions, although some tropical regions had comparable reductions in fitness. We formulated an evolutionary regional climate change index (ERCCI) to additionally incorporate the predicted changes in the interannual variability of temperature and precipitation. Based on this index, we suggest that the magnitude of climate change impacts could be much more heterogeneous across latitude than previously thought. Specifically, tropical regions are likely to be just as affected as temperate regions and, in some regions under some circumstances, possibly more so}
  20. 2006: Rodrigues, Ana SL, et al. “The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation.” Trends in ecology & evolution 21.2 (2006): 71-76. {The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is the most comprehensive resource detailing the global conservation status of plants and animals. The 2004 edition represents a milestone in the four-decade long history of the Red List, including the first Global Amphibian Assessment and a near doubling in assessed species since 2000. Moreover, the Red List assessment process itself has developed substantially over the past decade, extending the value of the Red List far beyond the assignation of threat status. We highlight here how the Red List, in conjunction with the comprehensive data compiled to support it and in spite of several important limitations, has become an increasingly powerful tool for conservation planning, management, monitoring and decision making}
    • 2012: Bellard, Céline, et al. “Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity.” Ecology letters 15.4 (2012): 365-377. {the majority of models indicate alarming consequences for biodiversity, with the worst‐case scenarios leading to extinction rates that would qualify as the sixth mass extinction in the history of the earth}
    • 2012: Reed, David H. “Impact of climate change on biodiversity.” Handbook of Climate Change Mitigation. Springer US, 2012. 505-530. {climate change will cause serious disruptions to Earth’s ecological systems, resulting in an overall loss of biodiversity and a reduction in the goods and services provided to humans. Extinction rates in the future are difficult to predict. However, with immediate and decisive action to mitigate climate change, losses of biodiversity can be minimized and humans can continue to reap many of the benefits nature provides. Business as usual scenarios will likely lead to the loss of >50% of all plant and animal species on Earth and the collapse of many ecosystems}
    • 2003: Pearson, Richard G., and Terence P. Dawson. “Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful?.” Global ecology and biogeography 12.5 (2003): 361-371. {Bioclimate Envelope Models can provide a useful first approximation of the impact of climate change on biodiversity but at the spatial scale at which these models are applied model results should not be interpreted without consideration of model limitations}
    • 2009: Cheung, William WL, et al. “Projecting global marine biodiversity impacts under climate change scenarios.” Fish and fisheries 10.3 (2009): 235-251 {A newly developed dynamic Bioclimate Envelope Model shows that climate change may lead to local extinctions of marine life in the sub‐polar regions, the tropics and semi‐enclosed seas. Species invasion is projected to be most intense in the Arctic and the Southern Ocean. Together, they result in dramatic species turnover of over 60% of the present biodiversity}
    • 2004: Thomas, Chris D., et al. “Extinction risk from climate change.” Nature 427.6970 (2004): 145. {15–37% of species in our sample of regions and taxa will be ‘committed to extinction’ by the year 2050. Minimal climate-warming scenarios produce lower projections of species committed to extinction (18%) than mid-range (24%) and maximum-change (35%) scenarios. These estimates show the importance of rapid implementation of technologies to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and strategies for carbon sequestration}
    • 2009: Heller, Nicole E., and Erika S. Zavaleta. “Biodiversity management in the face of climate change: a review of 22 years of recommendations.” Biological conservation 142.1 (2009): 14-32. {Species ranges and ecological dynamics are already responding to recent climate shifts, and current reserves will not continue to support all species they were designed to protect}
    • 2005: Araújo, Miguel B., et al. “Validation of species–climate impact models under climate change.” Global Change Biology 11.9 (2005): 1504-1513. {Increasing concern over the implications of climate change for biodiversity has led to the use of species–climate envelope models to project species extinction risk under climate‐change scenarios. However, recent studies have demonstrated significant variability in model predictions and there remains a pressing need to validate models and to reduce uncertainties}
    • 2014: Sharafi, Saeed, etal “Impacts of climate change on biodiversity.” (2014). {Climate change impacts on biodiversity through habitat loss and fragmentation, invasive species, species exploitation and nutrient enrichment. Distributions tend to shift down temperature gradients. The direction of shifts vary considerably among species depending on which bioclimatic variables are most important in the models for each species}
    • 2007: Thuiller, Wilfried. “Biodiversity: climate change and the ecologist.” Nature 448.7153 (2007): 550. {The evidence for rapid climate change now seems overwhelming. Global temperatures are predicted to rise by up to 4 °C by 2100, with associated alterations in precipitation patterns. Assessing the consequences for biodiversity, and how they might be mitigated, is a Grand Challenge in ecology}
    • 2007: Barnett, Jon, and W. Neil Adger. “Climate change, human security and violent conflict.” Political geography 26.6 (2007): 639-655. {Climate change undermines human security by reducing access to, and the quality of, natural resources that are important to sustain livelihoods. Climate change is also likely to undermine the capacity of states to provide the opportunities and services that help people to sustain their livelihoods. These changes may in turn increase the risk of violent conflict}
    • 2003: Schwartz, Peter, and Doug RandallAn abrupt climate change scenario and its implications for United States national security. CALIFORNIA INST OF TECH PASADENA JET PROPULSION LAB, 2003. {Once temperature rises above some threshold, adverse weather conditions could develop relatively abruptly, with persistent changes in the atmospheric circulation causing drops in some regions of 5-10F in a single decade. An abrupt climate change scenario could destabilize the geopolitical environment, leading to skirmishes, battles, and even war due to resource constraints such as food shortages due to decreases in net global agricultural production, decreased availability and quality of fresh water in key regions due to shifted precipitation patters, causing more frequent floods and droughts, and disrupted access to energy supplies due to extensive sea ice and storminess}
    • 2007: Zhang, David D., et al. “Global climate change, war, and population decline in recent human history.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104.49 (2007): 19214-19219. {long-term fluctuations of war frequency and population changes followed the cycles of temperature change such that cooling impeded agricultural production, which brought about price inflation, war, famine, and population decline}
    • 2007: Brown, Oli, Anne Hammill, and Robert McLeman. “Climate change as the ‘new’security threat: implications for Africa.” International affairs 83.6 (2007): 1141-1154. {Projected climatic changes for Africa suggest a future of increasingly scarce water, collapsing agricultural yields, encroaching desert and damaged coastal infrastructure. Such impacts, should they occur, would undermine the ‘carrying capacity’ of large parts of Africa, causing destabilizing population movements and raising tensions over dwindling strategic resources. In such cases, climate change could be a factor that tips fragile states into socio‐economic and political collapse}
    • 2010: Buhaug, Halvard, Nils Petter Gleditsch, and Ole Magnus Theisen. “Implications of climate change for armed conflict.” Social dimensions of climate change: Equity and vulnerability in a warming world (2010): 75-101. {Climate change has far-reaching implications for international relations and for personal, national and regional security. Tremendous strides have been made in improving scientific understanding of the human processes driving global climate change and the likely impacts on socio-economic systems – what the consequences will be for society, and how best to address them. The World Bank convened an international workshop in March, 2008, with the participation of community activists, former heads of state, leaders of Indigenous Peoples, representatives of non-governmental organizations, international researchers, and staff of the World Bank and other international development agencies.}
    • 2005: Patz, Jonathan A., et al.Impact of regional climate change on human health.” Nature 438.7066 (2005): 310. {There is growing evidence that climate–health relationships pose increasing health risks under future projections of climate change and that the warming trend over recent decades has already contributed to increased morbidity and mortality in many regions of the world. Warming and precipitation trends due to anthropogenic climate change of the past 30 years has claimed more that 150,000 lives per year}
    • 2006: Haines, Andy, et al. “Climate change and human health: impacts, vulnerability and public health.” Public health 120.7 (2006): 585-596. {Climate change affects health as a result of increased frequency and intensity of heat waves, reduction in cold related deaths, increased floods and droughts, changes in the distribution of vector-borne diseases and effects on the risk of disasters and malnutrition. The overall balance of effects on health is likely to be negative and populations in low-income countries are likely to be particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects}
    • 2006: McMichael, Anthony J., Rosalie E. Woodruff, and Simon Hales. “Climate change and human health: present and future risks.” The Lancet 367.9513 (2006): 859-869. {Epidemiological evidence shows that climate variations and trends affect various health outcomes. Recent global warming has already affected some health outcomes due to thermal stress, extreme weather events, and infectious diseases, regional food yields and prevalence of hunger}
    • 1993: Kalkstein, L. S., and K. E. Smoyer. “The impact of climate change on human health: some international implications.” Experientia 49.11 (1993): 969-979. {Heat-related mortality is will rise significantly if the earth warms, with the greatest impacts in China and Egypt. The most sensitive areas are those with intense but irregular heat waves. In the United States, air pollution does not appear to impact daily mortality significantly when severe weather is present but has an influence when weather conditions are not stressful}
    • 2012: Shindell, Drew, et al. “Simultaneously mitigating near-term climate change and improving human health and food security.” Science 335.6065 (2012): 183-189. {Tropospheric ozone and black carbon (BC) contribute to both degraded air quality and global warming. Targeting methane and BC emissions that reduce projected global mean warming ~0.5°C by 2050 avoids 0.7 to 4.7 million annual premature deaths from outdoor air pollution and increases annual crop yields by 30 to 135 million metric tons due to ozone reductions in 2030 and beyond. Benefits of methane emissions reductions are valued at $700 to $5000 per metric ton, which is well above typical marginal abatement costs (less than $250). The selected controls target different sources and influence climate on shorter time scales than those of carbon dioxide–reduction measures. Implementing both substantially reduces the risks of crossing the 2°C threshold}
    • 2005: Epstein, Paul R. “Climate change and human health.” New England Journal of Medicine 353.14 (2005): 1433-1436. {Heat waves like the one that hit Chicago in 1995, killing some 750 people and hospitalizing thousands, have become more common.1 Hot, humid nights, which have become more frequent with global warming, magnify the effects. The 2003 European heat wave — involving temperatures that were 18°F (10°C) above the 30-year average, with no relief at night — killed 21,000 to 35,000 people in five countries. But even more subtle, gradual climatic changes can damage human health. During the past two decades, the prevalence of asthma in the United States has quadrupled, in part because of climate-related factors. For Caribbean islanders, respiratory irritants come in dust clouds that emanate from Africa’s expanding deserts and are then swept across the Atlantic by trade winds accelerated by the widening pressure gradients over warming oceans. Increased levels of plant pollen and soil fungi may also be involved. When ragweed is grown in conditions with twice the ambient level of carbon dioxide, the stalks sprout 10 percent taller than controls but produce 60 percent more pollen. Elevated carbon dioxide levels also promote the growth and sporulation of some soil fungi, and diesel particles help to deliver these aeroallergens deep into our alveoli and present them to immune cells along the way. The melting of the earth’s ice cover has already become a source of physical trauma. Alaska Inuits report an increase in accidents caused by walking on thin ice}
    • 2003: Hughes, Terry P., et al. “Climate change, human impacts, and the resilience of coral reefs.” science 301.5635 (2003): 929-933. {Projected increases in carbon dioxide and temperature over the next 50 years exceed the conditions under which coral reefs have flourished over the past half-million years but reefs will change rather than disappear entirely, with some species already showing far greater tolerance to climate change and coral bleaching than we thought was possible}
    • 2007: Hoegh-Guldberg, Ove, et al. “Coral reefs under rapid climate change and ocean acidification.” science 318.5857 (2007): 1737-1742. {Warming and ocean acidification will compromise carbonate accretion, with corals becoming increasingly rare on reef systems. The result will be less diverse reef communities and carbonate reef structures that fail to be maintained. Climate change will drive reefs toward the tipping point for functional collapse. There will be serious consequences for reef-associated fisheries and tourism}
    • 2008: Carpenter, Kent E., et al. “One-third of reef-building corals face elevated extinction risk from climate change and local impacts.” Science 321.5888 (2008): 560-563. {The proportion of corals threatened with extinction has increased dramatically in recent decades and exceeds that of most terrestrial groups. The Caribbean has the largest proportion of corals in high extinction risk categories, whereas the Coral Triangle (western Pacific) has the highest proportion of species in all categories of elevated extinction risk. Our results emphasize the widespread plight of coral reefs and the urgent need to enact conservation measures}
    • 2008: Baker, Andrew C., Peter W. Glynn, and Bernhard Riegl. “Climate change and coral reef bleaching: An ecological assessment of long-term impacts, recovery trends and future outlook.” Estuarine, coastal and shelf science 80.4 (2008): 435-471. {Bleaching episodes have resulted in catastrophic loss of coral cover in some locations, and have changed coral community structure in many others, with a potentially critical influence on the maintenance of biodiversity in the marine tropics. Bleaching has also set the stage for other declines in reef health, such as increases in coral diseases, the breakdown of reef framework by bioeroders, and the loss of critical habitat for associated reef fishes and other biota. Secondary ecological effects, such as the concentration of predators on remnant surviving coral populations, have also accelerated the pace of decline in some areas}
    • 2010: Hoegh-Guldberg, Ove, and John F. Bruno. “The impact of climate change on the world’s marine ecosystems.” Science328.5985 (2010): 1523-1528. {Rapidly rising greenhouse gas concentrations are driving ocean systems toward conditions not seen for millions of years, with an associated risk of fundamental and irreversible ecological transformation. The impacts of anthropogenic climate change so far include decreased ocean productivity, altered food web dynamics, reduced abundance of habitat-forming species, shifting species distributions, and a greater incidence of disease}
    • 2007: Hughes, Terence P., et al. “Phase shifts, herbivory, and the resilience of coral reefs to climate change.” Current Biology17.4 (2007): 360-365. {Many coral reefs worldwide have undergone phase shifts to alternate, degraded assemblages because of the combined effects of overfishing, declining water quality, and the direct and indirect impacts of climate change}
    • 1999: Hoegh-Guldberg, Ove. “Climate change, coral bleaching and the future of the world’s coral reefs.” Marine and freshwater research 50.8 (1999): 839-866. {Sea temperatures in many tropical regions have increased by almost 1°C over the past 100 years, and are currently increasing at ~1–2°C per century. Coral bleaching occurs when the thermal tolerance of corals and their photosynthetic symbionts (zooxanthellae) is exceeded. Mass coral bleaching has occurred in association with episodes of elevated sea temperatures over the past 20 years and involves the loss of the zooxanthellae following chronic photoinhibition. Mass bleaching has resulted in significant losses of live coral in many parts of the world}
    • 2004: Edwards, Martin, and Anthony J. Richardson. “Impact of climate change on marine pelagic phenology and trophic mismatch.” Nature 430.7002 (2004): 881. {Using long-term data of 66 plankton taxa during the period from 1958 to 2002, we investigated whether climate warming signals4 are emergent across all trophic levels and functional groups within an ecological community. Here we show that not only is the marine pelagic community responding to climate changes, but also that the level of response differs throughout the community and the seasonal cycle, leading to a mismatch between trophic levels and functional groups}
    • 2007: Brander, Keith M. “Global fish production and climate change.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104.50 (2007): 19709-19714. {There are strong interactions between the effects of fishing and the effects of climate because fishing reduces the age, size, and geographic diversity of populations and the biodiversity of marine ecosystems, making both more sensitive to additional stresses such as climate change. Inland fisheries are additionally threatened by changes in precipitation and water management. The frequency and intensity of extreme climate events is likely to have a major impact on future fisheries production in both inland and marine systems. Reducing fishing mortality in the majority of fisheries, which are currently fully exploited or overexploited, is the principal feasible means of reducing the impacts of climate change}
    • 2006: Sims, David. “Impacts of climate change on fish.” Marine Climate Change Impacts Annual Report Card (2006). {There is substantial global evidence that climate change has impacted marine fish populations and communities. Significant fluctuations in fish abundance acting through reproduction, phenology, rExpected declines in northerly distributed species with recent warming remains equivocal. Boreal species may have retracted north in some regions but not in others. Current
      understanding suggests climate effects on fish reflect species-specific responses in addition to complex interactions between species (e.g. predatorprey relationships). Although climate influences marine fish assemblages, the precise mechanisms underlying most observed changes remain unclear}
    • 2013: Simpson, Stephen D., J. L. Blanchard, and M. G. Genner. “Impacts of climate change on fish.” (2013). {The shelf seas surrounding the British Isles have warmed four times faster than the global average over the last 30 years. Recent warm conditions are unlike anything in the last 20,000 years. Recent warming has caused some cold-water demersal (bottom-dwelling) species to move northwards and into deeper water (e.g. cod, whiting, monkfish), and has caused some warm-water demersal species to become more common or “invade” new areas (e.g. John dory, red mullet). Pelagic (blue-water) species are showing distributional shifts, with mackerel now extending into Icelandic and Faroe Island waters (with consequences for management), sardines and anchovies invading Irish and North Sea environments, and anchovies establishing breeding populations in the southern North Sea. But we don’t know if that’s due to the North Atlantic Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation or Global Warming}
    • 2009: Rijnsdorp, Adriaan D., et al. “Resolving the effect of climate change on fish populations.” ICES journal of marine science66.7 (2009): 1570-1583. {Global warming results in a shift in abundance and distribution (in patterns of occurrence with latitude and depth) of fish species. Pelagic species exhibit clear changes in seasonal migration patterns related to climate-induced changes in zooplankton productivity. Lusitanian species have increased in recent decades (sprat, anchovy, and horse mackerel), especially at the northern limit of their distribution areas, while Boreal species decreased at the southern limit of their distribution range (cod and plaice), but increased at the northern limit (cod). Although the underlying mechanisms remain uncertain, available evidence suggests climate-related changes in recruitment success to be the key process, stemming from either higher production or survival in the pelagic egg or larval stage, or owing to changes in the quality/quantity of nursery habitats}
    • 2008: Dulvy, Nicholas K., et al. “Climate change and deepening of the North Sea fish assemblage: a biotic indicator of warming seas.” Journal of Applied Ecology 45.4 (2008): 1029-1039. {North Sea winter bottom temperature has increased by 1·6 °C over 25 years, with a 1 °C increase in 1988–1989 alone. During this period, the whole demersal fish assemblage deepened by ~3·6 m decade−1 and the deepening was coherent for most assemblages. The latitudinal response to warming was heterogeneous, and reflects (i) a northward shift in the mean latitude of abundant, widespread thermal specialists, and (ii) the southward shift of relatively small, abundant southerly species with limited occupancy and a northern range boundary in the North Sea. Synthesis and applications. The deepening of North Sea bottom‐dwelling fishes in response to climate change is the marine analogue of the upward movement of terrestrial species to higher altitudes. The assemblage‐level depth responses, and both latitudinal responses, covary with temperature and environmental variability in a manner diagnostic of a climate change impact. The deepening of the demersal fish assemblage in response to temperature could be used as a biotic indicator of the effects of climate change in the North Sea and other semi‐enclosed seas}
    • 2009: Cheung, William WL, et al. “Projecting global marine biodiversity impacts under climate change scenarios.” Fish and fisheries 10.3 (2009): 235-251. {We investigate the global patterns of impacts by projecting the distributional ranges of a sample of 1066 exploited marine fish and invertebrates for 2050 using a newly developed dynamic bioclimate envelope model. Our projections show that climate change may lead to numerous local extinction in the sub‐polar regions, the tropics and semi‐enclosed seas. Simultaneously, species invasion is projected to be most intense in the Arctic and the Southern Ocean. Together, they result in dramatic species turnovers of over 60% of the present biodiversity, implying ecological disturbances that potentially disrupt ecosystem services}
    • 2004: Lal, Rattan. “Soil carbon sequestration impacts on global climate change and food security.” science 304.5677 (2004): 1623-1627. {Strategies to increase the soil carbon pool include soil restoration and woodland regeneration, no-till farming, cover crops, nutrient management, manuring and sludge application, improved grazing, water conservation and harvesting, efficient irrigation, agroforestry practices, and growing energy crops on spare lands. An increase of 1 ton of soil carbon pool of degraded cropland soils may increase crop yield by 20 to 40 kilograms per hectare (kg/ha) for wheat, 10 to 20 kg/ha for maize, and 0.5 to 1 kg/ha for cowpeas. As well as enhancing food security, carbon sequestration has the potential to offset fossil fuel emissions by 0.4 to 1.2 gigatons of carbon per year, or 5 to 15% of the global fossil-fuel emissions}
    • 2008: Lobell, David B., et al. “Prioritizing climate change adaptation needs for food security in 2030.” Science 319.5863 (2008): 607-610. {An analysis of climate risks for crops in 12 food-insecure regions was conducted to identify adaptation priorities, based on statistical crop models and climate projections for 2030 from 20 general circulation models. Results indicate South Asia and Southern Africa as two regions that, without sufficient adaptation measures, will likely suffer negative impacts on several crops that are important to large food-insecure human populations}
    • 2007: Schmidhuber, Josef, and Francesco N. Tubiello. “Global food security under climate change.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104.50 (2007): 19703-19708. {Of the four main elements of food security, i.e., availability, stability, utilization, and access, only the first is routinely addressed in simulation studies. To this end, published results indicate that the impacts of climate change are significant, however, with a wide projected range (between 5 million and 170 million additional people at risk of hunger by 2080) strongly depending on assumed socio-economic development. The likely impacts of climate change on the other important dimensions of food security are discussed qualitatively, indicating the potential for further negative impacts beyond those currently assessed with models}
    • 2013: Wheeler, Tim, and Joachim Von Braun. “Climate change impacts on global food security.” Science 341.6145 (2013): 508-513. {Climate variability and change will exacerbate food insecurity in areas currently vulnerable to hunger and undernutrition. Likewise, it can be anticipated that food access and utilization will be affected indirectly via collateral effects on household and individual incomes, and food utilization could be impaired by loss of access to drinking water and damage to health. The evidence supports the need for considerable investment in adaptation and mitigation actions toward a “climate-smart food system” that is more resilient to climate change influences on food security}
    • 2005: Gregory, Peter J., John SI Ingram, and Michael Brklacich. “Climate change and food security.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences360.1463 (2005): 2139-2148. {Climate change may affect food systems in several ways ranging from direct effects on crop production (e.g. changes in rainfall leading to drought or flooding, or warmer or cooler temperatures leading to changes in the length of growing season), to changes in markets, food prices and supply chain infrastructure. The relative importance of climate change for food security differs among regions. In southern Africa, climate is among the most frequently cited drivers of food insecurity because it acts both as an underlying, ongoing issue and as a short-lived shock. The low ability to cope with shocks and to mitigate long-term stresses means that coping strategies that might be available in other regions are unavailable or inappropriate. In other regions, though, such as parts of the Indo-Gangetic Plain of India, other drivers, such as labour issues and the availability and quality of ground water for irrigation, rank higher than the direct effects of climate change as factors influencing food security}
    • 2008: Brown, Molly E., and Chris C. Funk. “Food security under climate change.” (2008). {Climate change impacts on farmers will vary by region, depending on their use of technology. Technological sophistication determines a farm’s productivity far more than its climatic and agricultural endowments. Food insecurity, therefore, is not solely a product of “climatic determinism” and can be addressed by improvements in economic, political, and agricultural policies at local and global scales. In currently food-insecure regions, farming is typically conducted manually, using a hoe and planting stick with few inputs. The difference between the productivity of these farms and those using petroleum-based fertilizer and pesticides, biotechnology-enhanced plant varieties, and mechanization is extreme (5). Not only will climate change have a differential effect on ecosystems in the tropics due to their already warmer climates, but also poor farmers in the tropics will be less able to cope with changes in climate because they have far fewer options in their agricultural system}
    • 1994: Rosenzweig, Cynthia, and Martin L. Parry. “Potential impact of climate change on world food supply.” Nature 367.6459 (1994): 133-138. {Doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide will lead to a small decrease in global crop production but developing countries will bear  the brunt of the problem. Simulations of the effect of adaptive measures by farmers imply that these will do little to reduce the disparity between rich and poor countries}
    1. Wikipedia: The global warming conspiracy theory invokes claims that the scientific consensus on global warming is based on conspiracies to produce manipulated data or suppress dissent. It is used in climate change deniers to legitimize controversy to dispute consensus. Global warming conspiracy theorists typically allege that, through worldwide acts of professional and criminal misconduct, the science behind global warming has been invented or distorted for ideological or financial reasons, or both.
    2. Oxford University: While scientists have alerted the public and policy makers to the dangers of continuing carbon emission, policy proposals intended to curb carbon emission and thereby mitigate climate change have been resisted by a segment of the public. Most alarming are those who oppose solutions to climate change because they believe, or at least claim to believe, that anthropogenic climate change is not really happening and that climate scientists are lying and their data are fake.
    3. Sage Journal: Climate change conspiracy theories are motivated by the desire to deny an unwelcome conclusion. They are more contentious than other types of conspiracy theories. Climate change conspiracy theories are more politically motivated, dividing opinion across the left-right continuum. Empirical evidence suggests that climate change conspiracy theories are harmful, steering people away from environmentally friendly initiatives. They therefore present a significant challenge for governments and environmental activists trying to convince people to take action against global warming.
    4. Rational Wiki: Anthropogenic human-caused global warming, is the rising average temperature of Earth’s atmosphere and oceans and its related effects. Global warming denialism refers to fossil fuel industry-funded claims that global warming is: not happening, not caused by humans, or not significant enough to be a threat. They highlight hypothetical positive effects ( grow crops in the Arctic) while ignoring strong evidence for negative effects (crops will have lower nutrient levels). Deniers should not be confused with those that accept that anthropogenic global warming is a major threat, but may hold reasonable doubt about the effectiveness of proposed climate action.
    5. European Journal of American Studies: The concerted effort to discredit the scientific consensus over man-made global warming has been continuing for two decades in the United States, and shows no sign of weakening. It is very often described as an attempt on the part of corporate America, most notably the fossil fuel industries, to hinder governmental regulations on their activities. The US climate denial movement is complex, not just the mere defense of the oil and gas industries. There are additional factors which have been instrumental in blocking strong climate action. First, climate denial stems from the strong ideological commitment of small-government conservatives and libertarians to laisser-faire and their strong opposition to regulation. Second, in order to disarm their opponents, US climate deniers often rest their case on the defense of the American way of life, defined by high consumption and ever-expanding material prosperity. The US climate denial movement is best understood in these terms.
    6. Bioscience Journal: Increasing surface temperatures, Arctic sea-ice loss, and other evidence of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) are acknowledged by every major scientific organization in the world. However, there is a wide gap between this broad scientific consensus and public opinion. Internet blogs have strongly contributed to this gap by fomenting misunderstandings of AGW causes and consequences. Polar bears are a “poster species” for AGW, making them a target of those denying AGW evidence. Blogs that deny or downplay AGW disregard the overwhelming scientific evidence of Arctic sea-ice loss and polar bear vulnerability. By denying the impacts of AGW on polar bears, bloggers aim to cast doubt on other established ecological consequences of AGW, aggravating the consensus gap. To counter misinformation and reduce this gap, scientists should directly engage the public in the media and blogosphere.
      A high level of interest in tropical cyclones derives from an unusually active hurricane season in 2004 when more than 14 tropical cyclones formed in the North Atlantic basin. Four of these storms intensified to Category 4 or greater and made landfall in the USA causing considerable damage. The even more dramatic 2005 season followed in its heels with more than thirty depressions. Four of them intensified to Category 5 and three made landfall. The most intense was Hurricane Wilma but the most spectacular was Hurricane Katrina which made landfall in Florida and again in Louisiana. Its devastation was facilitated by a breach in a levee system that was unrelated to AGW but its dramatic consequences made it an icon of the possible extreme weather impacts of fossil fuel caused global warming. Climate scientists stepped up quickly and said that Katrina was confirmed as a climate change even by climate models. More info:
      Man-made global warming is melting the vast peat bogs of Siberia. The melt will release enough methane and carbon dioxide to bring about climate change Armageddon by virtue of a positive feedback and its non-linear process gone berserk. This scare is repeated in 2007 saying that global warming is causing the Alaska coast to melt. More info:
      Climate scientists see all coral bleaching as anomalous and unnatural and therefore symptoms of human caused global warming, as if they had never seen coral bleaching before. In 2006, they issued an alarm that “it was already too late for the coral” because we have put too much CO2 into the atmosphere and the warming and acidification of the oceans thus caused will kill off all the world’s coral. More info:
      It has been more than a year now that scientists and climate experts sought a budget of 100 billion baht to build a sea wall 80 kilometers long from the mouth of the Ta Chin river to the Bang Pakong river to protect the city of Bangkok from being inundated by the sea that was projected to rise by 20 cm per year due to man-made global warming. More info:
      Ahead of the Bali meeting in 2007, climate scientists flooded the media with press releases that were increasingly alarmist in their pitch to save the planet from fossil fuels, so much so that they got carried away and announced that it was too late to save the planet for we had passed the tipping point because the damage done by the carbon dioxide already in the air had put into motion irreversible non-linear changes that would lead us to climate doom whether or not we cut emissions. Soon thereafter, having realized their folly, they quickly reversed themselves just in time for Bali by saying that there was still time to save the planet after all. More info:
      A comparison of Landsat photos taken on 8/11/1985 and 9/5/2002 shows that global warming caused by our use of fossil fuels is melting the massive Greenland ice sheet and exposing the rocky peninsula beneath the ice previously covered by ice. More info:
      The rate of retreat of the retreating Gangotri glacier in the Himalayan mountains has accelerated from 19 meters/yr in 1971 to 34 meters/yr in 2001. Extrapolated of the observed acceleration forward shows that global warming devastation due to carbon dioxide was only a decade away for people who depend on the Ganges and other rivers with headwaters in the Himalayas. More info:
      Global warming caused by our use of fossil fuels has devastated the Andes Mountains in South America where they are losing their ice and water supplies. We must help these poor people by reducing fossil fuel emissions and thereby curbing global warming and climate change. More info:
      Climate science declares that the low sea ice extent in the Arctic is the leading indicator of climate change. We are told that the Arctic “is screaming”, that Arctic sea ice extent is the “canary in the coal mine”, and that Polar Bears and other creatures in the Arctic are dying off and facing imminent extinction. Scientists say that the melting sea ice has set up a positive feedback system that would cause the summer melts in subsequent years to be greater and greater until the Arctic becomes ice free in the summer of 2012. We must take action immediately to cut carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels.
      The unusual summer melt of Arctic sea ice in 2007 has encouraged climate science to warn the world that global warming will cause a steep decline in the amount of ice left in subsequent summer melts until the Arctic becomes ice free in summer and that could happen as soon as 2080 or maybe 2060 or it could even be 2030. This time table got shorter and shorter until, without a “scientific” explanation, the ice free year was brought up to 2013. In the meantime, the data showed that in 2008 and 2009 the summer melt did not progressively increase as predicted but did just the opposite by making a comeback in 2008 that got even stronger in 2009. More info:
      In the Bali climate meeting scientists declare economic development is a bad thing because hurricanes, cyclones, snowstorms, and floods are killing people as a result of the war on nature waged by humanity in pursuit of economic development. More info:
      In the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol climate action plan, only the rich industrialized Annex-1 and Annex-2 countries have emissions reduction and other climate action obligations. Poor developing countries, classified as non-Annex, have no climate action obligation but in fact are allowed to increase their emissions to achieve economic development and property alleviation. Yet development agencies like the UNDP and development banks, particularly the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, whose stated mission is to help developing countries to develop are using their leverage with the poor instead to trick them into climate action by refusing development assistance for projects that violate the climate action and emission reduction standards of rich countries. These actions are illegal and criminal. More info:
      A semi-arid region subject to droughts and supplied by melt water from evanescent glaciers that have come and gone in cycles for thousands of years is selected by climate scientists to show that fossil fuel emissions cause drought. More info:
      Since 1998, and most recently in 2007, we have been told on a fairly regular basis that climate change caused by our use of fossil fuels has reached the “tipping point”. When asked to define the term they said that it is not a point of no return and that a definition would be forthcoming; but that there is no doubt that we have reached the tipping point in 2007. More info:
      The Civil Society Coalition on Climate Change has published a report showing that the mortality rate from extreme weather events in the period 1990-2006 is almost half of that for the prior 90 years of the 20th century and that this mortality rate is not rising but has been falling steadily since 1920. Climate scientists say that this report is not credible because its authors are in the pay of oil companies. More info:
      The penguins are flightless and not well dispersed and therefore at risk of extinction but that extinction, if it happens, will lead to a new species and even greater biodiversity. This is how nature works. Nature does not need environmentalists, much less UN bureaucrats, to micromanage these processes nor is such micromanagement possible. More info:
      Climate scientists say that errors in their climate model do not detract from the importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions because the reduction can only do good and can do no harm. They also warn us that contrarians that say otherwise are paid agents of the fossil fuel industry and not real scientists. More info:
      Climate scientists say that at the current rate of increase in the use of fossil fuels, the sea level would rise by 7 meters in 100 years and devastate low-lying countries like Bangladesh. When these estimates were challenged and their internal inconsistencies exposed, the IPCC quietly revised the 100-year forecast downward 100-fold from 7 meters to 7 centimeters on their website but the news media alarm about 7 meters continued unabated with “thousands of years” quietly inserted in place of “100 years. More info:
      Climate scientists say that Venus represents earth’s fate if we don’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels. It is yet another desperate attempt to scare us into going along with their war against fossil fuels. More info:
      Scientists say that an effect of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels is that droughts, floods, landslides, and rising sea levels are becoming commonplace in Indonesia. More info:
      Tropical cyclones over the Bay of Bengal that make landfall in Bangladesh with the severity of Cyclone Sidr or greater are common. The mother of them all was the cyclone of 1970. It killed 550,000 people and the devastation eventually led to the birth of the country we know as Bangladesh. It is not possible to represent these events as evidence that CO2 from rich countries is devastating poor countries. More info:
      The Kiribati and Tuvalu islands are atolls and atolls often sink by subduction. Bangladesh is a delta where its natural dynamics contain sand spit formation and erosion. The Darfur area is semi-arid and prone to droughts. The North Atlantic Basin is an active tropical cyclone area known for occasional severe storms.
      The entire case presented by climate science against greenhouse gases in terms of such fearmongering rests on forecasts that are so far in the future that they can’t be proven wrong. More info:
      The Thailand meteorology department having subscribed headlong into the climate science activism against fossil fuels declared in 2007 that temperatures lower than 15C in Thailand was a thing of the past because of global warming caused by our use of fossil fuels (Rise in average temperatures seen, Bangkok Post, November 3, 2007). The very next year cruel nature gave these scientists temperatures well below the 15C mark. More info:
      There is an optimum level of fear at which climate research funding is maximized. The idea that global warming is past the “tipping point” or a point of no return is well beyond that optimum. No research funding for mitigation of global warming will be forthcoming if mitigation is not possible. Yet it is used when traditional fearmongering fails to get the desired attention and then quickly recanted to seek funds for climate action. More info:
      Climate scientists say that the Arctic is on its way to becoming ice free in summer and that therefore the polar bear should be declared an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act and we must act quickly and decisively to cut emissions and turn the climate temperature knob down to where the Polar Bear can survive. More info:
      Tens of thousands of climate scientists flew in from around the world to gather in Bali in 2007 and Poznan in 2008 and they are going to do it again in Copenhagen in 2009, and yet, these thousands of brilliant minds have yet to come up with practical plan of action for mankind to mitigate climate change that is allegedly being caused by human. The elusive nature of this agreement likely derives from a mis-specified and flawed problem statement for mankind neither causes climate change nor has any leverage over nature to mitigate climate change. More info:
      In May 2008 Cyclone Nargis, with unremarkable maximum wind speeds of 100 mph, struck Myanmar and caused a freak storm surge that went up the Irrawaddy River and killed 140,000 people. Climate science was quick to claim Nargis as an impact climate change and reason to fear fossil fuels. This assessment created widespread panic in the region with Myanmar, Thailand, Bangladesh, and India all forecasting and fearing Nargis-like storm surges. In Thailand, the meteorology department had Samut Prakarn area residents in fear for years with repeated forecasts of destruction by Nargis-like storm surges. They never came and those scary forecasts have stopped coming. More info:
      Our use of fossil fuels is devastating the Arctic where the volume of sea ice “fell to its lowest recorded level to date” this year and that reduced ice coverage is causing a non-linear acceleration in the loss of polar ice because there is less ice to reflect sunlight. More info:
      The Bangkok Post declares that the IPCC is the world’s most respected scientific agency and pushes for the success of the Poznan climate talks. More info:
      More than 10,000 delegates are attending a meeting in Poland of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) from December 1 to the 12th. There has been a flurry of scary press releases saying that human activity is causing the earth to become warmer and that global warming will soon be out of control and that there will be devastating consequences to our use of fossil fuels, all of them based on hypothetical statements that state that if event X occurs then a devastation Y is likely to follow. More info:
      Mt. Erebus along with most of the mountains in Antarctica are volcanic mountains and it is now known with certainty that volcanic activity under the ice there is causing great amounts of ice to melt and to cause glaciers to flow faster. The attempt by climate scientists to represent these events as climate change phenomena is inconsistent with this reality. More info:
    32. 2008: THE ARCTIC WILL BE ICE FREE IN SUMMER IN 2008, 2013, 2030, OR 2100
      The unusually low summer sea ice extent in the Arctic in 2007
      The IPCC has taken note and has revised its projection of an ice free Arctic first from 2008 to 2013 and then again from 2013 to 2030. The way things are going it may be revised again to the year 2100. More info:
      Climate scientists looking through satellite pictures found a crack in the Petermann glacier in Greenland and concluded that it could speed up sea level rise because huge chunks of ice the size of Manhattan were hemorrhaging off. Yet, scientists who has been travelling to Greenland for years to study glaciers say that the crack in the glacier is normal and not different from other cracks seen in the 1990s. More info:
      Promoting the carbon footprint as the overarching environmental issue does more harm than good because it trivializes more important pollution issues and also because some measures taken to reduce the carbon footprint create more environmental problems than they solve. For example, the use of fertilizer to grow renewable energy crops causes an extreme form of water pollution by nitrogen compounds called eutrophication. Environmentalism has gone awry. It’s broke and it need to be fixed: More info:
      Temperature data taken very diligently at Mohonk, NY since 1896 show a temperature increase of 16 Centigrade degrees over 112 years, equivalent to 0.14285 Centigrade degrees per year However, an examination of the Mohonk station shows a warming trend of 0.0133C/year, not 0.1428C/year. Over the same period, on average, the temperature at Rochester, NY increased 0.0056 degrees/year, at Albany, NY it decreased 0.00167 degrees/year, and at Maryland, NY it decreased 0.0074 degrees/year. Clearly it is not possible to use data from a single weather station to draw conclusions about temperature trends even in just the state of New York, much less the entire world. More info:
      There has been much speculation in the Thai media recently as to the surge effects on the low-lying coastal mudflats of Samut Prakarn should a storm like Cyclone Nargis form in the Gulf of Thailand due to climate change and rising seas caused by fossil fuel emissions. More info:
      The IPCC claimed that it had the scientific evidence to prove that our use of fossil fuels caused Hurricane Katrina to forecast with a great certainty that there was more to come in the 2006 hurricane season but the 2006 hurricane season turned out to be milder than normal. The IPCC blamed the dissipation of El Nino for the mild hurricane season in 2006 and issued a new warning that 2007 will be the hottest year on record and will bring a killer hurricane season worse than 2005 but the 2007 forecast also failed. The IPCC’s dream hurricane season has finally arrived in 2008 unannounced and unexpected with strong hurricanes Gustav and Hanna expected to be followed by Ike and a dozen others before the season is through. More info:
      When there was a greater focus on Antarctica climate scientists said that global warming was melting the West Antarctic Ice Shelf; but the melting was found to be localized and with an active volcano underneath the melting and the attention of “melt forecast” climate science shifted to Arctic sea ice after the an extensive summer melt was observed in September 2007. More info:
      Climate scientists say that fossil fueled global warming causes extreme weather and then waits for weather events such as Cyclone Nargis that can be called extreme, claims that it was caused by global warming, and the forecasts more of the same in that area. In the very sad case of Thailand, the deadly storm surge of Cyclone Nargis was forecast to become normal for this region and a specific forecast was made that a cyclone would form in the Gulf of Thailand and that it would cause a storm surge that would devastate the province of Samut Prakarn. No such cyclone occurred but the economic and emotional distress caused by these forecasts were probably equally damaging. More info:
      Climate science predicted that in 2008 man-made climate change would cause the hot season in Thailand to arrive earlier than usual and to be so much hotter that parts of the country would experience heavy rains and floods while other parts will be hit by a severe drought (A hot summer expected to arrive early this year, Bangkok Post, February 3, 2008). None of this occurred. Tt was a normal year weather-wise. More info:
      The book “The Great Warming” by Brian Fagan says that the climate is not at the mercy of man but that man is at the mercy of the climate. It is natural for climate to change. All we can hope to do is to adapt to the changes when they occur. More info:
      Environmental extremism is not benign but rather poses a serious risk to us all that in the long run is more dangerous than terrorism. Malaria, dengue, and other mosquito borne diseases, that had been all but eradicated by DDT, have been able to make a come-back because of a ban on DDT in the hysterical aftermath of the book “Silent Spring”. The lifting of the ban by the WHO in 2006 is a tacit admission that the worldwide ban on DDT was a mistake that had cost humanity millions of lives. More info:
      The city of Bangkok is sinking due to subsidence. This is a real problem and its real causes must be addressed for a solution. It is cruel opportunism for climate scientists to use this tragedy to sell their man-made global warming agenda. More info:
      Climate scientists say that man-made global warming has caused a rise in the sea level and an increase in the frequency and intensity of natural disasters in Asia. They cite the recent cyclone in Burma, a typhoon in the Philippines, and the earthquake in China. It is implied that these events could hav e been avoided or moderated had we not used fossil fuels. More info:
      Climate activists at the G* meeting wanted the G8 to make a “commitment” to a specified greenhouse gas reduction by 2020. They were denied. Then they asked the G8 to “seriously consider” a reduction by 2020. They were denied. So finally they wanted the G8 to issue a statement of a “shared vision” for climate change for 2020. They were denied. Finally, they begged for and received a “shared vision” statement for 2050. More info:
      Climate scientists say that man-made global warming has caused a rise in the sea level sufficient to inundate an atoll in Kiribati, a chain of 33 such islands, and created climate refugees. More info:
      The survival of the polar bear is threatened because man made global warming is melting ice in the Arctic. It is true that the Arctic sea ice extent was down in negative territory in September 2007. This event emboldened global warming scaremongers to declare it a climate change disaster caused by greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels and to issue a series of scenarios about environmental holocaust yet to come. More info:
      Climate scientists have determined that Adelie penguins in Antarctica are threatened because climate change is melting Antarctic glaciers although it is not clear whether the melting is caused by volcanic activity underneath the ice. More info:
      A volcano under the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, that last erupted 2000 years ago, is now active and responsible for melting ice and for retreating glaciers in that part of the continent (The fire below, Bangkok Post, April 28, 2008). Yet, climate scientists claim that these changes are man-made and that they are caused by carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels as predicted by their computer model of the earth’s climate. More info:
      Regardless of the fact that none of our extreme weather predictions have come true and that 2007 was not the hottest year on record, and that Antarctica is not melting like we said, please consider for a moment the devastating tragedy that could befall us if the earth did warm by an extreme amount although we can’t support that by the actual but boring data. More info:
      Climate scientists say that carbon dioxide from human activity involving the use of fossil fuels is absorbed into the ocean where it forms carbonic acid and causes environmental devastation by killing shellfish and coral. More info:
      Global warming scientists used a computer climate model to determine that by the year 2030 yields of critical crops will fall sufficiently in southern Africa and in South Asia to cause famine. The good news is that this catastrophe can be avoided by giving up fossil fuels and using renewable energy. More info:
      The population of Adelie Penguins in the northern reaches of the Peninsula has declined in recent decades but this decline has been more than offset by robust growth in other areas of Antarctica and other species of penguins are thriving in the Peninsula. The mix of penguin species in Antarctica has never been stable and has undergone dramatic changes over millennia. More info:
      Climate change is causing mass extinctions of species and is expected to devastate the biodiversity of the although in prior epochs of climate change the data in the fossil record show that climate change causes not a net reduction in the number of species but an explosion in the number of species. More info:
      The summer melt of the Arctic ice is not unprecedented, extreme weather events have not become more frequent or more severe, and atolls in the South Pacific are not sinking under rising sea levels. The IPCC’s claim that Hurricane Katrina was caused by man-made global warming has been thoroughly discredited and their forecasts for more severe hurricane seasons in 2006 and 2007 have been proven wrong. They are merchants of fear and their method is the dissemination of convenient lies. More info:
      Temperature data 1957-2008 show that the whole of Antarctica including Western Antarctica, the Antarctic Peninsula, and Eastern Antarctica, is warming due to CO2 emissions from fossil fuels. More info:
      It is reported that “Southeast Asia is facing problems from rising sea levels that bring more frequent flooding in coastal zones and river basins” (Thai firms not ready for climate change, Bangkok Post, January 22, 2009). It is noteworthy that none of these flooding events has been reported in the media. More info:
      It is reported that an increase in coastal erosion observed this year in Phuket, Thailand, is due to rising sea levels caused by man-made global warming. Phuket is on the Andaman side of the isthmus of Thailand. Nearby is the Koh-Tapao sea level measuring station monitored by the University of Hawaii sea level database. The time series of these data from 1996 to 2008 do not show any trend. More info:
      Man-made global warming is causing Greenland’s glaciers to melt at an alarming rate. By the year 2100 all the ice there will have melted causing a calamitous rise in the sea level that will inundate Bangladesh, the Maldives, Bangkok, New Orleans, and atolls in the Pacific. More info:
      In 25 to 50 years global warming will have a measurable impact on ski slopes by melting snow at lower altitudes and forcing skiers to move uphill. Climate scientists appear to be more comfortable with forecasts with a time horizon long enough so that they cannot be proven wrong in their lifetime. More info:
      The tuatara reptile is one of a many species identified by climate scientists as being threatened by global warming caused by our use of fossil fuels. It is part of an overall theory that climate change threatens biodiversity because it will reduce the number of species by causing some of them to become extinct. More info:
      The carbon trading scheme allows rich countries to buy carbon credits from poor countries in a contract that prevents the poor country from pursuing development projects that would increase CO2 emissions or decrease CO2 removal by photosynthesis. The international carbon trading scheme allows rich countries to trade these contracts among themselves. More info:
      The current warming period began about 1800 at the end of the little ice age, long before there was an appreciable increase of CO2. There have been similar and even larger warmings several times in the 10,000 years since the end of the last ice age. These earlier warmings clearly had nothing to do with the combustion of fossil fuels. More Info:
      James Lovelock, of Gaia fame who rose to prominence as a guru of environmentalism in the 1960s, says that by the year 2040 carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels will turn Europe into a desert and that by the year 2100 the entire planet will be dead. More info:
      Climate scientists say that the melting of Antarctica is more severe than “previously thought” because the melt is not limited to the Antarctic Peninsula but extends to West Antarctica as well. More info:
      Australian authorities are urging married people not to divorce because living separate lives would increase their carbon footprint and exacerbate global warming. More info:
      Hypothesis must be tested by a different set of data than that used to develop them, for otherwise one falls prey to circular reasoning. The climate model of the IPCC contains this very fundamental scientific flaw because there is only one history. The historical climate data that are used to develop the model and its empirical parameters are the same data that are used to validate the model. More info:
      New data show that the West Antarctic ice shelf collapses every 40,000 years or so and that this cyclical process has been regular feature of this ice shelf for millions of years (Antarctica ice collapses were regular, Bangkok Post, March 19, 2009). These melting episodes can raise the sea level by as much as 5 meters but the process takes a thousand years or more. More info:
      Bangkok is sinking at about 2 or 3 cm per year and this phenomenon is blamed for the increasing severity of floods that occur when a rain swollen Chao Phraya River coincides with unusually high tides. These flooding incidents cannot be related to global warming or sea level rise. More info:
      A new biofuels plant in Singapore is to make bio-diesel from palm oil and sell the product to Europeans at around $900 per ton at a time when real diesel is available at $600 per ton. The reason for targeting the European market is that there is a greater likelihood of finding a high degree of gullible environmentalism that might motivate consumers there to pay more for diesel if they get can a warm and fuzzy feeling of having done something good for the environment. The reality of course is dramatically different here in Asia where the rapid growth in palm oil plantations has been called an environmental disaster. More info:
      Non-Annex developing countries like Thailand have no emission reduction obligation under the Kyoto Protocol and UNFCC Convention but ever since ceding that rational advantage to the poor countries, they have been working overtime to find a way around it using acronyms for each scheme as a way of making it seem important. The 2009 version of this effort is the “low carbon growth model” (LCGM). The bottom line is that developing countries must reduce emissions to save the earth from climate change catastrophe. More info:
      Climate scientists say that the Wilkins Ice Shelf collapse is caused by warming of the Antarctic Peninsula due to man-made “global climate change”. More info:
      Between 2005 and 2007 the UN repeatedly declares that we have passed the tipping point and that it is “already too late to late. The planet is doomed. But in 2009, Ban Ki Moon contradicts his staff and describes the effect of carbon dioxide emissions on climate as “our foot is stuck on the accelerator and we are heading towards an abyss”. That we are not at the abyss yet and there is till time to act. More info:
      Southeast Australia is a semi-arid drought prone area with a history of severe droughts during which its primary river system can go bone dry. The current drought there is part of this weather pattern. More info:
      Our use of fossil fuels has, through global warming, caused a prolonged drought and severe aridity in northern China and the appropriate response for us is to take climate action and cut emissions. More info:
      After sustained criticism from skeptics, climate scientists have revised their forecast for the rise in sea levels by the year 2100 from 5 meters to 38 cm. In releasing the rather innocuous new figure the scientists had to try extra hard to maintain the fear level saying that the lower figure does not mean we are safe and that things could turn out to be much worse. More info:
      Rapid advance of a glacier in Argentina that was supposed to retreat is explained by climate scientists as an anomaly. “We are not sure why this happens. But not all glaciers respond equally to climate change” In other words, they don’t take data to test the hypothesis because their hypothesis is correct by definition. They take data to test the data. If the data support their theory the data are deemed to be good. Otherwise the data are deemed spurious and additional theories are needed to explain how these observations could occur in the age of global warming. In this kind of science, the man-made global warming hypothesis cannot be proven wrong by the data. More info:
      Climate scientists say that the excessive emphasis on the impact of global warming on poor countries was a mistake and that they need to find new ways to bring the horror of global warming home to the citizens of the rich countries in order to ensure the passage of the post Kyoto AGW mitigation measures they will present in Copenhagen. More info:
      Climate scientists were sure they could prove that global warming is increasing the frequency and severity of extreme weather but with nothing but Katrina to go on, they have turned to studying crashing hoping to scare us with increasing wave intensity as evidence of extreme weather. More info:
      In 2005 the Amazon Basin was suffering from drought conditions and this year it was deluged under a devastating flood. The rapid succession of drought and flood is described by climate science as “climate chaos”. They have determined that it was caused by global warming driven by fossil fuel emissions. More info:
      The effort by epidemiologists to pin a malaria outbreak on global warming is quite possibly not unbiased scientific inquiry but rather an effort to fudge the data and the methodology until the findings meet the expectations and the utility of the global warming community and thereby facilitate further funding. More info:
      Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels have caused the following alarming changes to our planet: (1) ice covering the Arctic Ocean shrank in 2007 to its smallest since satellite records began, (2) In Antarctica, a section of the Wilkins Ice Shelf has broken up in recent days, (3) glaciers in the Himalayan mountains are shrinking and threatening to disrupt water supplies to hundreds of millions of people, (4) melting permafrost in Siberia will release large quantities of methane into the atmosphere and hasten global warming, and (5) if all of the land based ice in Antarctica melted it would raise the sea level by 80 meters. More info:
      The Asian Development Bank issues a report on “the economics of climate change in Southeast Asia” – patterned after its mother report, “The economics of climate change” by Nicholas Stern and funded by the British. It tries to trick SE Asian non-Annex countries with no UNFCCC climate action obligation to take climate action with the fear of consequences if they don’t. More info:
      Although climate science presents climate change as a global issue with global emissions changing global language, the ADB tries to trick SE Asian non-Annex countries into climate action with a report that implies that climate change in SE Asia is responsive to emissions from SE Asia and if no action is taken climate change will lead to decreasing rainfall and millions will suffer from water shortages”; “Rice production will decline threatening food security”; “Forests will turn into scrub land”; “Floods, droughts, cyclones, and other extreme weather events will become common”; “Deaths from cardiovascular and respiratory disease, malaria, and dengue fever will increase”; “Sea levels will rise by 70 cm or more inundating entire islands and low lying areas”; and the biggest lie of all, “All of these dangers may be mitigated by reducing CO2 emissions from fossil fuels”. More info:
      Our carbon dioxide emissions are wreaking havoc on the world’s coral reefs according to climate scientists. Sadly, the obsession with carbon dioxide has done more harm to the environment and to coral reefs than good by belittling and hiding real pollution issues. More info:
      Climate scientists say that climate action has become urgent because of the possibility of rapid sea level rise. We are urged to reduce “greenhouse gas emissions” from fossil fuels because in prior interglacial periods the sea level had risen by as much as 3 meters in 100 years and so we should expect it do so again in the interglacial period in which we now live. More info:
      The oft repeated claim that Bangladesh is being inundated by rising sea levels caused by man-made climate change ignores the relevant data that the total land mass of the country is not decreasing. In fact, the total land mass of Bangladesh is increasing just as it always has by virtue of silt deposition. More info:
      Ban Ki Moon says that we are approaching the abyss and if Copenhagen fails we will soon find ourselves at the abyss – and suddenly everything that any UN bureaucrat says about climate change contains the word abyss. A new climate buzzword has thus been invented to hype the Copenhagen climate summit which incidentally failed miserably just as the rest of them have, all funded by taxpayers. More info:
      Ban Ki-Moon says that he went to the Arctic Ocean and was horrified to see the remains of a glacier that just a few years ago was a majestic mass of ice and that had just collapsed – not slowly melted – just collapsed. He thereby became convinced that the only resolution for the “climate crisis” is a binding emission reduction agreement at the Copenhagen meeting in December 2009: More info:
      Citing the high cost of the EU carbon emission reduction plan ill timed to coincide with a long and painful global recession, Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi announced that Italy will not comply and moreover that he intends to use Italy’s veto power to block the measure. More info:
      The second lowest was 2008 and the first lowest was 2007. This is not a trend that shows that things are getting worse. It shows that things are getting better and yet it is being sold and being bought as evidence that things are getting worse due to rising fossil fuel emissions. More info:
      In 2005 two glaciers in Greenland were found to be moving faster than they were in 2001. Scientists concluded from these data that the difference observed was a a long term trend of glacial melt in Greenland and that carbon dioxide was the cause of this trend. The assumed trend was then extrapolated forward and we were told that carbon dioxide would cause the land based ice mass of Greenland to be discharged to the sea and raise the sea level by six meters. They said that the only way out of the devastation was to drastically reduce carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels. However, in 2009, just before a meeting in Copenhagen where these deep cuts in emissions were to be negotiated, it was found that the glaciers had returned to their normal rate of discharge. More info:
      The Institute for Public Policy Research in the UK proposes to fight climate change by rationing energy. The program would include gasoline, natural gas, heating oil, electricity, diesel, and even airline tickets and holidays. Each person or household will be issued ration cards for a prescribed amount of energy each month and when the that amount has been consumed, excess consumption will be possible only by purchasing carbon credits. More info:
      It is claimed that carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels are causing Himalayan glaciers to melt and thereby to threaten devastation but the available data do not support this conclusion. More info:
      The old Club of Rome argument that “we can’t all live like white people because that would overwhelm the planet” is now made with climate change as the rationale. More info:
      The CDM (clean development mechanism) and the carbon offset scheme offers the rich industrialized West to fight climate change simply by buying carbon offsets from poor countries, in effect, paying poor to stay poor so that the rich can stay rich by buying the right to their continued use of fossil fuels. More info:
      Global warming caused by our use of fossil fuels is driving polar bears to extinction and threatening the livelihood of the people of Nunavut. More info:
      Climate scientists say that sea level rise due to man-made global warming is causing Shanghai to be inundated with sea water. The truth is that the inundation problem in Shanghai was first noted and measured by geologists back in 1921 when atmospheric carbon dioxide was below 300 ppm. The problem is attributed to subsidence caused by the removal of ground water and the weight of the buildings in the downtown area of the city. The subsidence continues to this day and it is estimated that Shanghai is sinking at an annual rate of about one cm per year. More info:
      Bangladeshis displaced by Cyclone Sidr in 2007 are “climate refugees” because they have been rendered homeless by a climate change event that was caused by carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and it suggests that cyclones like Sidr will continue to ravage this poverty stricken nation unless we forge a plan in Copenhagen and do away with fossil fuels. More info:
      An alarm is raised that the extreme summer melt of Arctic sea ice in 2007 was caused by humans using fossil fuels and it portends that in 20 years human caused global warming will leave the Arctic Ocean ice-free in the summer raising sea levels and harming wildlife. More info:
      Our use of fossil fuels causes global warming. Global warming causes sea level rise. Sea level rise causes South Pacific atolls to become inundated. The inundation of these islands creates climate refugees. More info:
      A positive feedback loop from hell that could cause explosive climate change is described between volcanic activity and climate change with each pushing the other forward. More info:
      Some glaciers on north and northeast Greenland terminate in fiords with long glacier tongues that extend into the sea. It is found that the warming of the oceans caused by our use of fossil fuels is melting these tongues and raising the specter of devastation by sea level rise. More info:
      Climate scientists continue to extrapolate the extreme summer melt of Arctic sea ice in 2007 to claim that the summer melt of 2007 was a climate change event and that it implies that the Arctic will be ice free in the summer from 2012 onwards. This is a devastating effect on the planet and our use of fossil fuels is to blame. More info:
      This old Gore hypothesis is endorsed by climate science but ss it turns out, the loss of ice interpreted here was due to aridity and not warming; the process is sublimation not melting; and it started at least as early as 1912 when atmospheric CO2 was below 300 ppm. Furthermore, the ice appears to have stabilized and the various projections of its demise by 2016, 2020, or 2030 have all been withdrawn. More info:
      Typhoon Ketsana devastated the Philippines in 2009 and it was a high profile news item so naturally it was adopted by the United Nations climate meeting in Bangkok to sell their war against fossil fuels. More info:
      Encroachment by sea water in the Bangkok Groundwater Area, that includes Samut Prakan, is a well known effect of land subsidence caused by ground water extraction unrelated to carbon dioxide emissions, global warming, or climate change. More info:
      Himalayan ice is rapidly vanishing because of human caused global warming and will be gone by 2035. The great rivers of Asia that are originate there will shrivel and die and cease to provide water to a quarter of humanity. More info:
      There are too many people in poor countries. They can’t all live like white people because that would overload the planet with too much carbon dioxide. So please keep the status quo and we will take care of you with billions of Euros of aid should global warming’s devastation strike. More info:
      Summer melt of Arctic ice was the third most extensive on record in 2009, second 2008, and the most extensive in 2007. These data show that warming due to our carbon dioxide emissions are causing summer Arctic ice to gradually diminish until it will be gone altogether. More info:
      It would be a sad chapter in human history if we commit economic suicide Jim Jones style in the vain and Quixotic belief that we are in control of the planet’s climate. The human race with all its knowledge and technology, is insignificant on a planetary scale. On what basis do we expect to be able to stabilize nature? We appear to be in the grip of some kind of mass insanity. More info:
      In 2007, 2008, and 2009 climate science issued the dire warning that global warming caused by our fossil fuel emissions is weakening and destabilizing the annual South Asian monsoon weather pattern. Monsoons in South Asia will be weakened and delayed. The results will be devastating and will include drought, crop failure, and widespread hunger. These dire forecasts were finally withdrawn in 2010 when they were proven false.
      In the unusually cold winter of the year 2009, declared an anomaly and a case of natural variability, climate scientists evaluated the unusually warm winter nine of 2000 not as natural variability nor as an anomaly but as absolute proof of the theory of global warming by way of fossil fuel emissions: More info:
      The article pretends to describe wheat production in all of China but cites only the failure of a new venture to grow wheat in semi-desert Gansu Province with where one finds large desert areas and where the only economic activity had been mining. It is true that the experimental wheat farms had rough years in the beginning but by 2017 the experiment had borne fruit with about 3000 hectares under cultivation. Wheat production is booming in the main wheat producing provinces of Heilongjiang, Henan, and Hebei. The implication of the article that wheat production in China has been adversely affected by fossil fueled global warming is inconsistent with the data. More info:
      The Copenhagen climate summit was advertised by the UN and by climate scientists as a “do or die” watershed event for the global warming movement. Its spectacular failure threw the movement into a chaotic war between rich and poor with the poor developing countries accusing the rich industrialized countries of having been the perpetrators of climate change and demanding compensation. More info:
      In 2005 climate science had latched on to Hurricane Katrina as the harbinger of killer hurricane super storms created by fossil fueled global warming but after no further cyclone activity in the North Atlantic Basin in the next three years, they were rewarded with Cyclone Nargis in the Indian Basin. Though not unusually strong, Nargis did create a freak storm surge in rising tides that swept up the Irrawaddy River in Burma and claimed a horrific death toll. Nargis thus became the biggest news story in Asia. Climate scientists quickly changed their focus from the North Atlantic Basin to the Indian Basin and claimed Cyclone Nargis as a creation of climate change caused by fossil fuel emissions and as the harbinger of “destruction on a global scale” by human caused global warming. More info:
      Bangladesh is a low lying delta where the Ganges, the Brahmaputra, and other Indian rivers drain. Over the last few decades an explosive growth of shrimp farming along the coast and construction of irrigation dams upstream in India has caused coastal salinity to move further upstream causing considerable harm to agriculture. This tragedy is now claimed by climate science as an impact of fossil fueled global warming by way of rising seas. Yet, if rising seas were the cause of the salinity problem, the land area of Bangladesh would be shrinking – but it is growing. More info:
      Global warming theory is strictly in global terms and yet it is often interpreted in regional terms as in this case where typhoons in Vietnam are interpreted in terms of SE Asian emissions. More info:
    118. 2009: THE MEKONG IS TOAST
      The Mekong River is drying up because there is not enough snow in the Himalayas. This tragic situation was created with fossil fuel emissions that cause global warming and climate change. It can be solved by cutting fossil fuel emissions and restoring the Himalayas to their former pristine and unchanging condition.
      Climate science has determined that IF climate change causes sufficiently extreme weather and IF they devastate agriculture in China, THEN the impact on the economic and social development of China would be incalculable”. The fear of global warming is now being delivered as pure hypothetical statements using the words “if” and “could”. More info:
      Human caused global warming is causing havoc in Antarctica with potentially incalculable results. Over one hundred icebergs broke off and a huge flotilla of them are floating up to New Zealand. More info:
      Our carbon dioxide emissions are causing the East Antarctic ice shelf to lose 57 billion tonnes of ice per year and that if CO2 emissions are not reduced this process could raise sea levels by 5 meters. More info:
      The recent rapid growth in palm oil plantations in SE Asia is not for the cooking oil market but for the renewable biofuels market. This market was created by climate scientists in their urgent call for a rapid increase in biofuels to replace fossil fuels as a way of mitigating global warming and saving the planet. The same climate scientists are now complaining that their medicine is worse than the disease, that their solution to global warming causes global warming, and that their single minded obsession with carbon dioxide compromises real environmental issues. More info:
      In 1989 there were 178000 Porcupine caribou in the Yukon and “their number now is estimated to be 100,000” because global warming is killing off the caribou. Global warming causes freezing rain in the calving season and that makes it hard for calving caribou to feed. But if we don’t cherry pick the start of the study period as 1989 and look at all the available data we find that the population rose steadily from 100000 in 1972 to 178000 in 1989 and then decreased steadily down to 120000 in 2005. These data suggest, and caribou biologists agree, that caribou populations go through a 30 to 40-year cycle of growth and decay. This population dynamic cannot be related to global warming or carbon dioxide. More info:
      Drought and a drinking water shortage in Guangdong are the result of global warming due to too much carbon dioxide in the air put there by our use of fossil fuels. However, China’s very extensive historical weather record in the Fang Zhi shows that cycles of drought and flood have been characteristic of this region for 2500 years long before atmospheric carbon dioxide rose above 300 ppm. Guangdong’s growing drinking water crisis is due to rapid industrialization and population growth with large numbers of migrant workers flooding into the region. More info:
      Fossil fuel emissions cause global warming, global warming in turn causes glaciers in Iceland to melt, and melting glaciers lighten the weight of the ice cap on volcanoes and thereby trigger eruptions (Ice cap thaw may awaken Icelandic volcanoes, April 17, 2010). That it was geothermal activity that caused the melting of the Eyjafjallajoekull glacier is not mentioned. Instead climate science tells us that the we must cut fossil fuel emissions to save Iceland from climate change hell.
      Bhutan is a tiny country. Its main features are poverty, illiteracy, and poor medical and infrastructure services. Bhutan is carbon negative, not carbon neutral as claimed by climate science. To achieve carbon neutrality, Bhutan must increase fossil fuel consumption many fold.
      Climate science has determined that the earth is “overheated, under-resourced, and out of time”. Fortunately, although we are out of time, there is still time to save the planet. We can do that by moving to a Green Economy that would require that we stop using fossil fuels and change to renewable energy.
      Climate science says that fossil fueled global warming is causing ice to melt and sea levels to rise and that the destruction that this process can cause is already evident in that the ocean has taken back an island from Bangladesh. (Note: New Moore Island, Talpatti in local lingo, is one of many evanescent islands that come and go on the coast of this delta nation but in the net land is gained not lost). More info here
      It appears that climate change will be harder to sell than previously thought. Hurricane Katrina, sinking tropical islands, climate refugees, and melting glaciers in the Himalayas have been oversold and they are no longer effective. The credibility of climate scientists has been eroded by the Climategate email scandal and also by the revelation of data anomalies. More info:
      The UNFCCC emission reduction plan is confounded with a complicated classification of nations and their responsibilities and such bureaucratic double-speak as “Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities” (CBDRRC); and it is further corrupted by the built-in weakness of the carbon credit plan. These weaknesses have turned the UN emission reduction plan into a giant money game in which rich countries can pay developing countries to not develop and a great enthusiasm among countries classified as “vulnerable” to tout their vulnerability and demand money. More info: Also this:
      Global warming is melting ice in the Arctic and devastating the ecosystem that nurtures the habitats of the Polar Bear and the Walrus. Urgent climate action is needed to save these great creatures of the North. More info:
      Climate scientists say the extreme weather is caused by man-made climate change if they can come up with a rationale to explain that effect. In cases where they can’t come up with a rationale the weather effect is explained as a case where natural variability had temporarily overcome human caused global warming. More info:
      Since Callendar 1938 and right up to Hansen 1981 and IPCC 2007 the human-caused global warming argument has been that the use of hydrocarbon fuels by humans since the industrial revolution injects new external carbon into the carbon cycle that is not part of the current account of the carbon cycle and therefore it is a perturbation of nature’s current account of the carbon cycle. This means that all human caused CO2 emissions are not at issue – only those from fossil fuels because fossil fuels are external to the carbon cycle and their use injects new carbon into the carbon cycle. So for example, human respiration is not human caused CO2 emissions because that CO2 belongs to the current account of the carbon cycle. Somewhere along the way the climate scientists lost track of this aspect of their own theory and have begun to identify even natural non-fossil fuel elements of the current account of the carbon cycle as causes of rising atmospheric carbon dioxide. More info:;