
Image credit: Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Words are not really necessary to accompany this image but, if you want some, feel free to go and read
‘The Last Time CO2 Was This High Humans Did Not Exist” by Andrew Freedman on the
Climate Central website. However, what I would really like to know is how anyone could possibly think that, since the Industrial Revolution, the Earth’s climate would
not have been impacted by: – a sevenfold increase in the the human population; – a similar increase in the number of methane-producing livestock; – a super-exponential increase in the burning of fossil fuels. Therefore, those who still dispute the reality of anthropogenic climate disruption have not only picked a fight with history; they have picked a fight with science –
the Laws of Conservation of Energy and Mass and
the concept of Entropy in particular. Defeat is therefore inevitable.
The only question that remains is how bad do things have to get before they are willing to admit they are wrong? I am afraid this may be the last post on this blog for a while because – what with the all the willful blindness and ideological prejudice that seems to stop people from recognising what an Eff-ing mess humanity is in – and my as yet unresolved employment situation – I am feeling somewhat emotionally drained. However, please don’t cancel your subscription (as who knows how quickly I may recover). ————
Addendum (10:00 hrs BST 4 May 2013) I would also recommend that reader take a look at this excellent post,
‘The “hockey stick” slaps back’, on the
Skepticblog website. This takes readers on a journey back in time, looking at all the palaeoclimatic reconstructions that have been done for the last million years. Somehow, I managed to be the first person to post a comment on this piece, which reads as follows:
Why not go back even further by looking at sea floor sediments too? As in, for example, Zachos et al. (2001), ‘Trends, Rhythms, and Aberrations in Global Climate 65 Ma to Present’, Science 292: 686-93. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/292/5517/686.abstract
For those that are really interested, you can get a PDF of the whole paper here. It includes many fascinating diagrams, but one of the more complicated ones has been helpfully simplified by James Hansen in his book, Storms of my Grandchildren. All the figures from the book are available here but, with regard to Zachos et al (2001), Figure 18 is the one to which I refer. This too needs few words to convey its importance: 
Like this:
Like Loading...
About Rick Altman
Possibly just another 'Climate Cassandra' crying 'Wolf' in cyberspace. However, the moral of the old children's story is that the Wolf eventually turned up!
Rick, great post. But you are correct to focus on maintaining the best perspective for your immediate and near-term needs. Paul
LikeLike
Thanks Paul, I hope you will return to see the important addendum I have just added. Apart from that, I will be focusing on tackling the problem that is fully within my own power to solve…
LikeLike
Pingback: Climate change | Neil's Commonplace Book
“I am afraid this may be the last post on this blog for a while because – what with the all the willful blindness and ideological prejudice that seems to stop people from recognising what an Eff-ing mess humanity is in – and my as yet unresolved employment situation – I am feeling somewhat emotionally drained.” Understandable, it’s a little like telling the tide to turn around. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cnut_the_Great#Ruler_of_the_waves Good luck on the employment front.
LikeLike
Thanks for the moral support. However, the person I most identify with is Cassandra of Troy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra_(metaphor)
LikeLike
No, no, no, no, no: Cnut didn’t try to stop the sea; he was a very wise man who tried to demonstrate to his subjects that he could do no such thing. Another famous reality inversion. PS @Rick: I know how you feel on the emotionally drained front. 400ppm, for me, is a sign that homo fatuus brutus is incapable of admitting it’s wrong.
LikeLike
The comparison with Cnut was actually intended to carry a vaguely complimentary spin. I thought the Wikipedia link made it clear that he himself didn’t suffer from the delusion that he could command the waves. 🙂
LikeLike
Ah, I see you’re right: but you’d phrased the introduction to the link in such a way as to reinforce the myth for those (like me) who didn’t follow it.
LikeLike
Human incapacity for admitting error is a sign of arrogance not ignorance!
LikeLike
The one leads inexorably to the other. If one cannot admit to error, one remains ignorant.
LikeLike
Veni, vidi, neglexi.
LikeLike
BTW, Rick, Cheer up! I obeyed you, me the fierce one, and put a little essay out on plutocracy, as NWO. http://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2013/05/04/plutocracy-new-world-order/ I have more coming up my sleeve. Thanks for latest hockey stick, I had one on my site a few months ago, not as spectacular! I think plutocrats and their lackeys have picked up a fight with the future! Once again, this is not because of a lack of understanding, but because of deliberate malfeasance. Explaining to them what they can see as well as we do will not stop them feeling they should stop splurging! PA
LikeLike
Thanks Patrice. Will take a look at your latest offering right now.
LikeLike
Pingback: The counter-intuitive aspect of liberty. | Learning from Dogs
Reblogged this on A Little Bit Greener and commented: It is pretty discouraging. I talk to people all the time–family included–who turn willfully blind eyes to the situation. It’s sad, really. But I don’t intend to give up the fight.
LikeLike
Thanks Tamara. I know how you feel. My Mum says I am obsessed with climate change and have made myself unemployable.
LikeLike
Pingback: Exploring the certainty of AGW! | Learning from Dogs
Pingback: AGW certainty, Part Two | Learning from Dogs