Hansen Is Wrong
Our mission is to educate the public on the positive effects of additional atmospheric CO2 and help prevent the inadvertent negative impact to human, plant and animal life if we reduce CO2
 
Home
 
    
Why CO2 is Good
 
    
Climate Change
 
    
Politics are Not Green
 
    
News & Media
 
    
Stay Informed
 
    
About Us
 
    
 
 
In the news
  Posted on: Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Print  Print     Email  Email    RSS Feed  RSS Feed
  Facebook   Share link on Twitter Tweet  
Hansen Is Wrong
Source: World Climate Report

In his recent press blitz, NASA's James Hansen tries to tie extreme weather events, such the current drought affecting much of the central U.S., to anthropogenic global warming. But the real world argues otherwise.

Hansen is quite adept at timing global warming pronouncements with extreme weather events. Recall that it was during a similar hot, dry period back in the summer of 1988 that Hansen first testified to Congress that global warming from human greenhouse gas emissions was impacting current weather events-testimony which many credit as giving rise to the global-warming-is-going-to-be-bad movement. But then, as now, the tie-in between weather events and human changes to the atmospheric greenhouse effect is tenuous at best, and tie-ins to specific events are ill-supported and ill-advised. In the best case, the anthropogenic emissions-driven rise in global temperatures has a small ancillary impact on a specific extreme weather event, but in the vast majority of the cases, its role is nugatory and undetectable.

Such is the case with the impact of global warming on U.S. drought.

In his recent op-ed and article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (recall that the peer review process at PNAS is more like watered down "pal review") Hansen clearly states that U.S. droughts are being enhanced by global warming.

Hansen has a lot of weight in his corner on this one, because the standard measure of drought-the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI)-has temperature incorporated into its equation. The higher the temperature, the greater the potential evaporation term, and thus the tendency towards drier conditions. But (obviously) precipitation amount is also included in the calculation of the PDSI. More precipitation pushes the index away from drought conditions. So just because temperature is on the rise does not mean that droughts must become more frequent-changes in precipitation could intervene and counteract the influence of a temperature increase.


Click here for the full article
Post a comment
Name/Nickname:
(required)
Email Address: (must be a valid address)
(will not be published or shared)
Comments: (plain text only)
 
Recent Articles:
8/14/12   Hansen Is Wrong
7/24/12   Illiteracy at NASA
6/29/12   NRC Sea Level Rise Scare: Losing Sight of the Science
6/22/12   Not So Hot in East China
6/18/12   NASA Must Stop Global Warming Alarmism (570 News Radio)
6/4/12   Historical Imagery of Greenland Glaciers Lessens Sea Level Rise Alarm
5/18/12   CO2 Not to Blame for Southwest Droughts?
5/14/12   Future Southwest Drought in Doubt?
5/9/12   No sea level rise catastrophe?
5/3/12   Antarctica's ice is melting from warm water below
5/2/12   Plant life changes 'underestimated'
5/1/12   Global What?
4/27/12   EPA’S Toxic Science
4/20/12   For Wheat and Rice, CO2 is Nice
4/10/12   Former NASA scientists, astronauts admonish agency on climate change position
4/10/12   Former NASA Scientists and Astronauts Blast Agency for Disregarding Climate Change Evidence
3/29/12   Acclimation to Ocean Acidification: Give It Some Time
3/26/12   Is this finally proof we're NOT causing global warming?
3/22/12   Tropical Forests Rejoice!
2/27/12   Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, and High Climate Sensitivity
2/21/12   Concerned Scientists Reply on Global Warming
2/17/12   STEWARD: Voodoo Environomics
2/15/12   Flowers Love CO2
2/6/12   The Sun: O Inconstant Star!
1/29/12   Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
Search Archives:
Print  Print    Email  Email    RSS Feed  RSS Feed
  Facebook   Share link on Twitter Tweet  

** For additional peer-reviewed scientific references and an in-depth discussion of the science supporting our position, please visit Climate Change Reconsidered: The Report of the Nongovernmental Planel on Climate Change (www.climatechangereconsidered.org), or CO2 Science (www.co2science.org).