4 February 2, 2011+ Over the Edge The Human Fingerpring on Climate Change Why climate change skepticism is illogical THOMAS CHENEY CONTRIBUTOR Since the so-called climate gate scandal in late 2009 during the prelude to the Copenhagen climate change conference, the science of climate change has been under heavy media and political scrutiny. In particular, the authors of several climate change papers were accused of committing academic misdemeanors involving allegations of manipulating data. The authors of those scientific papers were found to be innocent, after an extensive review at the University of East Anglia. Despite the extensive review, social attitudes in North America have shifted away from perceiving climate change as a significant problem to many considering it to be a non- existent. Meanwhile, the overlying basic physical processes that govern the global climate have not changed. The goal of this article is to examine some the skeptical arguments and examine if they fit the evidence. Although the science behind climate change has been branded by skeptics as being ‘junk science’, the evidence supports the anthropogenic climate change theory. It is not a left-wing conspiracy to create a rating of global government and subjugate people to the will of a “New World Order”. In fact, | believe that if we take proper action on climate change, future generations will be able to live lives not too different to how we live now. And although arguments have been made, that global warming stopped in 1998, the temperature has continued to rise with 2005 being one of the warmest years on record. The theories advanced by climate skeptics, however do not fit the characteristics of the climate changes that we have been witnessing. Furthermore, the probability that climate change is being caused by a phenomenon other than carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is very slim. Due to the distinct physical properties of the warming, the probability that the sun or other natural phenomenon is responsible for climate change is extremely unlikely based on our current evidence. However, prior to the discussion, reasons why humans likely cause climate change are important to gain an accurate understanding of the global temperature record. In particular, skeptics of anthropogenic influence on climate change often suggest that the climate gone through warming cycles before. In particular skeptics assert that climate change in the recent period is nothing unusual, citing 1932 as the hottest year on record. However, such a statement is inaccurate as the 1932 record only applies to the continental United States where the global temperature record suggests that the warmest year recorded is 2005. Furthermore, researchers have a fairly accurate temperature record that goes back at least 100 years. Although global cooling was suggested as a possible effect of industrial pollution in the 1970s, a review found that there were actually more articles suggesting that a change based on a global increase in average temperature was more likely during the same period when there was the supposed consensus on global cooling claimed by climate change skeptics. Furthermore, the reduction in global average temperatures has a rational explanation as carbon dioxide lasts long time. Sulfur aerosols, the primary cooling forcing on the atmosphere has a much shorter lifetime well short- lived aerosols emissions from sulfur were being reduced through modern pollution control. Until the 1970s with the emergence of modern pollution controls, the atmosphere experienced significant pollution from sulfur, which led to a reduction in global temperature by blocking the sun. Meanwhile, carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere increased due to the buildup of emissions levels over the past century through the Industrial Revolution and can last decades to centuries in the atmosphere. Pretending that the atmosphere is a pot on the stove, sulfur aerosols would be like ice cubes being continuously brought into to it. The warming from carbon dioxide is like slowly increasing the temperature setting on the stove. At first the temperature on the stove is quite low like carbon dioxide concentrations. However, when the temperature of the stove is gradually increased the ice cubes melting is not enough to offset the heat gain from the increased stove setting. Combine that with the reduced rate of ice cubes falling into the pot, it is very clear that the temperature of the water would increase even if it initially cooled because the heat balance for the falling ice cubes was greater than the heat coming from the stove. The global atmosphere operates in a similar way being influenced by both cooling and warming factors, what we have done is to reduce the amount of sulfur emissions in the atmosphere while increasing the amount of heat trapping carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere. That is like turning the stove up while stopping putting ice cubes into it, it is obvious that the temperature would rise. As the global cooling ‘scare’ in the 1970s can easily be explained without contradicting the theory that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are the dominant climate forcing now causing global warming. However, another reason that | previously mentioned for an anthropogenic theory of climate change relates to the specific characteristics of the climate change that has been observed. Among these characteristics is the fact that the upper atmosphere is cooling of well the lower atmosphere is warming. Other telltale that humans are too blame for recent changes in the climate change include reductions in the differences in day and night temperatures. The first telltale sign of human influence on the global climate change is the fact that the troposphere is warming while the higher atmosphere, the stratosphere is cooling, which is an indicative human fingerprint. If the sun were causing global warming we would see the atmosphere warms throughout not just warming in the lower atmosphere. The reason for this is that carbon dioxide absorbs heat in the long wave, infrared and of the electromagnetic spectrum. Long wave radiation is emitted relatively cool services such as the surface of the year, while short wave radiation generally comes from warm surfaces such as the Sun. If the sun were the cause of global warming in the current era, the increased radiation would lead to warming in the upper atmosphere. However, as Carbon dioxide mainly absorbs WIKIMEDIA OMMONS long wave radiation more heat has been captured in the troposphere and less radiates out into the upper atmosphere. This observation has been confirmed by satellite readings, which has observed reduced radiation in the wavelengths of infrared radiation in the bands that are generally absorbed by carbon dioxide. Furthermore while the sun has been in the cooling trend we have seen an increase in long wave radiation has occurred as the surface, which again is strongly suggestive of an anthropogenic climate effect. There are a wide variety of other reasons why a natural climate forcing cannot explain the global warming since the 1970s. The fact that there is less temperature just between day and night is another reason why climate change is likely caused by carbon dioxide. If the sun was the dominant cause of climate change, we would see a much larger increased daytime temperatures well seen a smaller change nighttime temperatures. However, the night temperatures are increasing WIKIMEDIA COMMONS faster than they temperatures. There are a variety of other arguments that have been advanced as rejecting the hypothesis of global climate change being caused by people. However, when such theories are scrutinized, so far all of them have fallen apart leaving the anthropogenic theory of climate change as the most likely scenario. The fact is, that over 90% of climate scientists, which are currently publishing, believe that humans are the cause of climate change. While there are alternative explanations, most of them a peer as logical as so-called “creation science” and require fantastical explanations.