Are We at a Tipping Point?


I couldn’t help noticing quite a convergence at the end of last week. First the National Academy of Science announces that the earth is the hottest it’s been in 400 years, and human activity is responsible.

Then we have a flurry of local news:

Is Federal energy policy now irrelevant? Can we solve global warming and peak oil with a combination of local policy and enlightened business practices?

,

7 responses to “Are We at a Tipping Point?”

  1. And today and tomorrow we have what might be a real-life effect of our transportation/energy decisions: heat.

    Overall, I believe that it is foolish to think that we can do things like dump stuff into the atmosphere and not suffer any consequences. As for locals vs. the federal gov’t, it doesn’t matter what an entity decides if people below it aren’t willing to go along.

  2. From the recently released
    global climate change report
    Compare the actual words with news reports:
    __________________________________________________

    Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years
    Committee on Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years,
    National Research Council

    OVERALL FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

    Based on its deliberations and the materials presented in Chapters 1-11 and elsewhere,
    the committee draws the following overall conclusions regarding large-scale surface temperature
    reconstructions for the last 2,000 years:
    ? The instrumentally measured warming of about 0.6?C during the 20th century is
    also reflected in borehole temperature measurements, the retreat of glaciers, and other
    observational evidence, and can be simulated with climate models.
    ? Large-scale surface temperature reconstructions yield a generally consistent picture
    of temperature trends during the preceding millennium, including relatively warm conditions
    centered around A.D. 1000 (identified by some as the “Medieval Warm Period”) and a relatively
    cold period (or “Little Ice Age”) centered around 1700. The existence and extent of a Little Ice
    Age from roughly 1500 to 1850 is supported by a wide variety of evidence including ice cores,
    tree rings, borehole temperatures, glacier length records, and historical documents. Evidence for
    regional warmth during medieval times can be found in a diverse but more limited set of records
    including ice cores, tree rings, marine sediments, and historical sources from Europe and Asia,
    but the exact timing and duration of warm periods may have varied from region to region, and
    the magnitude and geographic extent of the warmth are uncertain.
    ? It can be said with a high level of confidence that global mean surface temperature
    was higher during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period
    during the preceding four centuries. This statement is justified by the consistency of the
    evidence from a wide variety of geographically diverse proxies.
    ? Less confidence can be placed in large-scale surface temperature reconstructions for
    the period from A.D. 900 to 1600. Presently available proxy evidence indicates that
    temperatures at many, but not all, individual locations were higher during the past 25 years than
    during any period of comparable length since A.D. 900. The uncertainties associated with
    reconstructing hemispheric mean or global mean temperatures from these data increase
    substantially backward in time through this period and are not yet fully quantified.
    ? Very little confidence can be assigned to statements concerning the hemispheric
    mean or global mean surface temperature prior to about A.D. 900 because of sparse data
    coverage and because the uncertainties associated with proxy data and the methods used to
    analyze and combine them are larger than during more recent time periods.

    From a 157 page report: Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years – http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11676.html

    ________________________________________________
    My interpretation: We are currently the warmest in the 400 years since the time of a little ice age. We are just warming up aftaer an ice age!

    Thanks
    JK

  3. Federal policy is still relevant of course. However, I think we will see Federal policy that is increasingly at odds with common sense and common opinion. Because of the trend towards environmental support among the US population I believe local policy will continue to preempt and eventually come to overshadow Federal policy.

    This is likely true for energy, transportation, environmental and drug policy.

  4. Federal Policy will have an effect, the problem is they’re reshaping something they can’t and have never been able to truly control (Not that they can actually control anything). Besides that the primary problem we have today is because of the wealth “redistribution” that the Feds attempt to undertake. They continually take from the rich so the poor can “get around” which generally happens to be with cars. Fortunately in Portland the people here are a bit more enabled by their push for choices and alternative methods. In most of the country though the redistribution incurs nothing but growth in SOV usage and often times by people that shouldn’t be able to afford it.

    In the end though, it costs us ALL a LOT more.

    If people simply had to “pay to ride” almost ALL of these issues would go away, for the simple fact that millions would simply just stop putzing around for no good reason. Also with the extra wealth back in the private sector instead of being pilfered by the Government there would be a lot of actual REAL motive for people to come up with more creative ways to get around, or simply to live better and easier exactly where they are at.

    Simply said, “The Fed Policy will have an effect”, most likely whatever it is won’t make things better, and could very well make things worse.

  5. Please read the real report – it differs a lot from the news reports. Here is its conclusions section:

    OVERALL FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

    Based on its deliberations and the materials presented in Chapters 1-11 and elsewhere,
    the committee draws the following overall conclusions regarding large-scale surface temperature
    reconstructions for the last 2,000 years:
    ? The instrumentally measured warming of about 0.6?C during the 20th century is
    also reflected in borehole temperature measurements, the retreat of glaciers, and other
    observational evidence, and can be simulated with climate models.
    ? Large-scale surface temperature reconstructions yield a generally consistent picture
    of temperature trends during the preceding millennium, including relatively warm conditions
    centered around A.D. 1000 (identified by some as the “Medieval Warm Period”) and a relatively
    cold period (or “Little Ice Age”) centered around 1700. The existence and extent of a Little Ice
    Age from roughly 1500 to 1850 is supported by a wide variety of evidence including ice cores,
    tree rings, borehole temperatures, glacier length records, and historical documents. Evidence for
    regional warmth during medieval times can be found in a diverse but more limited set of records
    including ice cores, tree rings, marine sediments, and historical sources from Europe and Asia,
    but the exact timing and duration of warm periods may have varied from region to region, and
    the magnitude and geographic extent of the warmth are uncertain.
    ? It can be said with a high level of confidence that global mean surface temperature
    was higher during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period
    during the preceding four centuries. This statement is justified by the consistency of the
    evidence from a wide variety of geographically diverse proxies.
    ? Less confidence can be placed in large-scale surface temperature reconstructions for
    the period from A.D. 900 to 1600. Presently available proxy evidence indicates that
    temperatures at many, but not all, individual locations were higher during the past 25 years than
    during any period of comparable length since A.D. 900. The uncertainties associated with
    reconstructing hemispheric mean or global mean temperatures from these data increase
    substantially backward in time through this period and are not yet fully quantified.
    ? Very little confidence can be assigned to statements concerning the hemispheric
    mean or global mean surface temperature prior to about A.D. 900 because of sparse data
    coverage and because the uncertainties associated with proxy data and the methods used to
    analyze and combine them are larger than during more recent time periods.

    From a 157 page report: Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years – http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11676.html

  6. Jim, in what way does the report differ from news reports?

    The general consensus remains unchanged: temperartures are very likely much higher now than in any recent period of time

    Don’t make the mistake of assuming that scientists are ambigous in their opinions because of terminology indicating some uncertainty. Scientists use the term “theory” to describe concepts that are not 100 percent certain but pretty damn close. This is the same mistake creationists make when referring to evolution as “just a theory”.

    Anyways….I find it difficult to take your points seriously…

    Adron, I’ll buy into your individualistic worldview as soon as there is a critical mass of people evolved enough to implement it. I don’t like the current structure of the Federal government any more than you, but I do feel it reflects *us* as a people and that we need to transcend it rather than shift polarities. What do you think?

Leave a Reply to jim karlock Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *