FriendsOfScience.com denies human agency in climate change, presenting themselves using a scientific argument and tone. For example:
‘MYTH 1: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate.
FACT: Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures…’
Watching the video, it seems they are attributing climate change in part to the same extra terrestrial energy which gave the fantastic four their extraordinary powers: cosmic rays. They argue that when the solar wind is low, more cosmic rays reach the earth which can be shown to be correlated with cloud formation.
Looking at factors such as rapid sea ice loss in the Arctic and prolonged drought in the Southwest, the new assessment suggests that earlier projections may have underestimated the climatic shifts that could take place by 2100.
Carbon dioxide in earth’s atmosphere is considered a trace gas currently occurring at an average concentration of about 385 parts per million by volume or 582 parts per million by mass. The mass of the Earth atmosphere is 5.14×1018 kg, so the total mass of atmospheric carbon dioxide is 3.0×1015 kg (3,000 gigatonnes). Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide fluctuate slightly with the change of the seasons, driven primarily by seasonal plant growth in the Northern Hemisphere. Concentrations of carbon dioxide fall during the northern spring and summer as plants consume the gas, and rise during the northern autumn and winter as plants go dormant, die and decay. Concentrations also vary considerably on a regional basis: in urban areas it is generally higher and indoors it can reach 10 times the background atmospheric concentration.
From Energy@Berkeley: Solutions for Global Warming
18:05 Energy efficiency and conservation is and will remain the lowest hanging fruit for the next several decades, there’s no question about this.
Free markets fail when there is what’s called a commons problem. So what’s a commons problem ? It’s a common shared resource. The fish in the ocean is a common shared resource, and so when one country or one sector doesn’t have total control over this resource, they might think “well, I gotta fish what I can fish, because someone else might over fish and cheat me out of my fair share”, let me put it bluntly, that’s typically what happens , that also happens in air and water pollution issues, sharing of water resources across borders, and the climate change issue and greenhouse gasses is the ultimate commons problem.
The choice of Steven Chu provides strong clues as to the direction of Obama’s upcoming Green New Deal:
21:15 Buildings are 40% of the energy consumption in the United States … Many many progressive architects tell me you can save a factor of two in energy which would have a payback in five years or less.
“Americans told us they wanted:
safe seafood, healthy seafood, number one,
number two clean beaches,
number three, abundant wildlife,
number four stable fisheries -no more of this boom and bust and closures,
and fifth, vibrant coastal communities.
Now I think that’s a really nice summary and synthesis of the way Americans think about oceans. And I think that they truly understand that they appreciate them, they want these things. What they don’t understand is that all of those things depend on healthy, productive, and resilient ecosystems and that’s not what we’re seeing now, we’re seeing serious degradation and disruption and depletion, and climate change is going to exacerbate that very, very seriously.” ~ Jane Lubchenco
From John Holdren’s 7/7 Harvard Talk: Global Warming: What do we know and should do.
“I actually thought the biggest shortcoming in Kyoto achetecture, besides focusing on absolute reductions from 1990 which has a lot of problems, was that if focused altogether too much on targets and not enough on mechanisms. …in a way, focusing on exactly where you need to be by exactly what time is not as important as figuring out what you’re going to do to bend the curve away from this business as usual growth that we’re now on.”
“This climate change challenge is certainly one of the most interdisciplinary problems that society has ever faced in the way it links and requires understandings from science, from engineering, from economics, from policy analysis, from politics, in order to understand both what is needed and how to get there.”
Hopes are high for an Obama-led climate strategy, but when it comes to true details there are still more questions than answers. Andrew C. Revkin has stationed himself at the intersection of science, technology, and policy for two decades, watching closely and writing like a madman…
…According to Larry Lohmann, a researcher with the U.K.-based nonprofit the Corner House and editor of a book criticizing the carbon trade, “Even here in Europe, we’re nowhere near being in possession of the technology and enforcement we would need to run a respectable cap-and-trade program, which we’re already supposedly running. The margin of error for what’s coming out of the stacks is way too wide to say whether emitters are in compliance with regulations. And when it’s left up to the companies to do the reporting, they have a huge amount of discretion in saying how much they’re emitting.”