 |
| What was and what is. |
The Jamaica damage assessments from on the ground are little to none so far.
Those from the air are unbelievable:
"Black River on Wednesday was unrecognizable to people there: The coastline was strewed with massive boulders, and a cellphone tower had twisted into a semicircle.
Only places that have four concrete walls are still standing, and usually their roofs are gone,” said Amiri Bradley, who frequently visits the port town."
(NY Times). Meanwhile there are several meteorologists who are saying, on TV broadcasts, that the storm was greater than a "185", it was a "200" plus ... (partially because the instruments dropped at or about landfall registered sustained winds in the 200 mph area with gusts up to 250 mph).
Lots to think about:
"The forest of climate science includes other areas – besides climate sensitivity and climate forcings – that are also important. For example, potential impacts of climate change include shutdown of the overturning ocean circulation and large sea level rise,33 which may be the most important of all the climate issues. These climate impacts depend on the magnitude of global warming, which is a reason to first consider climate sensitivity and climate forcings." - p4
"GCM modeling focuses on the past century for reason: the goal of interpreting ongoing climate change and projecting future change. Observed global surface temperature change (Fig. 2a) and sea surface temperature change (Fig. 2b) warrant comment." - p6
"The forest of climate science includes other areas – besides climate sensitivity and climate forcings – that are also important. For example, potential impacts of climate change include shutdown of the overturning ocean circulation and large sea level rise,33 which may be the most important of all the climate issues. These climate impacts depend on the magnitude of global warming, which is a reason to first consider climate sensitivity and climate forcings." - p8
"In our present communication, we criticize IPCC’s science analysis. However, despite the flaws that we note, IPCC is doing what they were asked to do. Their reports contain authoritative information painstakingly written by experts in their fields. The reports are useful references, but governments and the public need more to properly inform their decision-making. When we presented our most recent paper,2 responses in the media by other scientists consisted of ad hominem attacks on the first author, e.g., “Hansen exaggerates,” “Hansen makes lots of mistakes,” “Hansen is not collegial,” and comments that our analysis was “too simple” and our conclusions were “outside the mainstream.” None of the comments addressed the climate science in our paper, which we have summarized here. Yet these few articles in the media, appearing on the day that our paper came out, were sufficient to shut down public discussion of our paper. Issues raised in our paper are relevant to understanding the course of climate change. So, how is it that a small (all-male)34 clique is able to control the climate research conversation? At least they spurred the first author to move back to Columbia University (see End of an Era),35 where it may be possible to work more with young people, and hopefully communicate more effectively." - p8
"Within that part of the climate science forest, many uncertainties remain. For example, how does the cloud feedback work? Tselioudis et al.32 suggest that it is mainly from a poleward shifting of climate zones, as opposed to an effect of global warming on cloud microphysics. It is important to understand such issues, as the correct explanation may affect continuing climate change." - p8
"6. International Court of Justice Let’s end on a bright, scintillating, note: the recent ruling by the International Court of Justice in the Hague on global climate change, which deserves far more attention than it has received. It is the first time that the ICJ has taken up climate change. In a unanimous decision the Court determined that:". . . customary international law sets forth obligations for States to ensure the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment from anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. These obligations include the following: (a) States have a duty to prevent significant harm to the environment by acting with due diligence and to use all means at their disposal to prevent activities carried out within their jurisdiction or control from causing significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment, in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities; (b) States have a duty to co-operate with each other in good faith to prevent significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment, which requires sustained and continuous forms of co-operation by States when taking measures to prevent such harm. . . ."Philippe Sands, legal scholar, author, and leader in getting the case before the Court and arguing the case, was thrilled that the Court’s ruling was even stronger than he had hoped. Over time, this ruling surely will be used extensively and affect courts globally, even within the United States, despite the fact that such ICJ decisions are advisory." - p9
(Hansen, Columbia). Ain't no nothin' when "mother earth" is gone.
The previous post in this series is here.