Global Warming & Climate Change: The Phenomenon

[Mungoman]

Thank you E.G., And P.B. - I understand better now.

From what i have learnt, CO2 is of significance in Climate Change because of its qualities, vis-à-vis long wave absorption, and the resulting scattering, and, due to Industry constantly increasing the amount in our atmosphere.

OK.

But all water, whether vapour or solid state, will absorb this scattered long wave IR and scatter it too, won't it?

And the amount of water on our planet is massive...I think that while we are worrying about the increasing CO2 of our atmosphere, we should also spare a thought about water.

Would my concern be needless then E.G.?

 

[EnolaGaia]

Mungoman: I'm not sure which 'concern' you're pointing to ... A concern that H2O should be a source of worry? If so ...

It is. Yes, water vapor is involved in the absorption and re-radiation of longer-wavelength (e.g., near-infrared and infrared) radiation both incoming from the sun and outgoing from the earth's surface. As the relative proportion of water vapor varies, its prominence and its effects will also vary.

However ... (In reference to PeteByrdie's point ... ) the fact that water vapor's effects will vary in a feedback fashion does not mean it will vary so as to settle at a given temperature value (or range of values) no matter what. Phrased another way - variation in water vapor (and surface water) effects will exhibit short-term 'regulation' in the sense of local / transient trends, but it need not and probably cannot exhibit long-term 'regulation' at or around a given stable optimum.

Increased water vapor (e.g., clouds) in the atmosphere will increase albedo in the visible range, as PB mentioned. However, that same water vapor will be absorbing and re-radiating (to some extent downward) the infrared component(s) of the incoming solar radiation. In other words, a complete cloud cover wouldn't be opaque (i.e., 100% reflecting) to all incoming heating energy. It would be more analogous to being translucent.

Another thing to consider is that under a complete cloud cover even more heat coming off the earth's surface (some of which is generated by surface activity rather than solar radiation) would be re-radiated back downward as it attempts to escape into space (so to speak).

 

[Mythopoeika]

Thank you E.G., And P.B. - I understand better now.

From what i have learnt, CO2 is of significance in Climate Change because of its qualities, vis-à-vis long wave absorption, and the resulting scattering, and, due to Industry constantly increasing the amount in our atmosphere.

OK.

But all water, whether vapour or solid state, will absorb this scattered long wave IR and scatter it too, won't it?

And the amount of water on our planet is massive...I think that while we are worrying about the increasing CO2 of our atmosphere, we should also spare a thought about water.

Would my concern be needless then E.G.?

Maybe CO2 is the only thing on the list that greenies think they can do anything about?
Because if we tried to do anything about water vapour or methane, all life would cease to exist.
Maybe there needs to be an acknowledgement that nothing can be done... because it's happening anyway.

 

[PeteByrdie]

Well water vapour is fairly self regulating in that it's part of the water cycle. All other things remaining in balance, water in the atmosphere should have a continuous effect without significant highs or lows. The Earth has a natural greenhouse effect without human intervention. There's little we can do about water vapour and we don't want to, but we can control our carbon output.

 

[Mungoman]

My concern E.G. is that carbon, or CO2, is a means for taxing - a nice little earner for some, whereas H2O and water vapour isn't...because water/vapour is a natural part of the many cycles on this planet.

When it comes to aberant weather, the majority of climatic patterns are produced by our oceans and seas, reacting with land masses. The warmer the oceans, the more violent it becomes. I have noticed where I live that cloudy nights will increase the night temperature by 6 degrees Celsius, conversely, cloudless nights are cooler and dryer. The further inland from the Tasman sea, the more variable the temperature, whereas, within the greater Sydney region- the less.

With oceans between the tropics of cancer/capricorn warming by a degree or two - if not more, then increased sublimation will happen, more water vapour indicating that less energy is radiating back out into 'space'...which increases the ambient temperature within the tropical atmosphere, which will increase the ocean temperatures, and with the Northern and Southern Gyres travelling further north and south - that will further destabilise the climate

Us humans are responsible for consumption, which is why myself and many millions try to do our best by discriminating and choosing that which is less harmful in the unneccesary utilisation of raw ingredients. I don't need a new television every 5 years. I don't need a new phone with every generation - I don't need a new computer with every increase in RAM or Drive.

I do not trust Corporations, Governments and other Non government organisations. Not one bit. And I have an inclination that there is an easier way to reduce the release of carbon into our atmosphera and that is with our Governments not encouraging the rabid production and consumption of manufactured goods.

I know...it's the economy...

 

[Mungoman]

Well water vapour is fairly self regulating in that it's part of the water cycle. All other things remaining in balance, water in the atmosphere should have a continuous effect without significant highs or lows. The Earth has a natural greenhouse effect without human intervention. There's little we can do about water vapour and we don't want to, but we can control our carbon output.

How much carbon are you releasing P.B - and I'm not talking about the carbon released by the production of concrete, glass or the steel in the building where you live or in your chosen method of transport. I would imagine that it would be very little, and the only way we can be measured for our profligacy is by what we consume...meaning those products which are endlessly created by corporations that reap billions and billions from us due to clever advertising. Who really pays for the carbon produced when these Corporations pay miniscule tax, and are able to write it off anyway. I would suggest Muggins does.

Where I live the sky is clear for a minimum of 175 days annually but the use of domestic solar panels isn't really encouraged - not really - as for storage batteries...fergedabowdit.

Instead.

The government is talking about building more coal fired generating plants instead.

Callooh Cafuckingllay...

 

[EnolaGaia]

I hear what you're saying, but ...

As PB and I have both pointed out, there's basically nothing we can do to manipulate the water / water vapor portion of the atmospheric heating problem.

We're essentially limited to trying to reduce the effects of the other exacerbating substances on the offender list - i.e., C02, methane, etc.

It will take a lot of effort and arm-twisting - even more than had to be done with the campaign against Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC's), which is still ongoing after 40 years.

This infographic, based on 2010 data:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas#/media/File:Greenhouse_Gas_by_Sector.png

... shows the estimated proportions of annual greenhouse gas production attributable to different sectors.

The top 2 sources - electric power stations (#1) and industrial processes (#2) - account for circa 41.5%, with transportation contributing another 13.2%.

It will certainly require global action within all sectors, with the primary targets being the ones most resistant to change - i.e., institutionalized public / private power generation and industry.

 

[PeteByrdie]

Where I live the sky is clear for a minimum of 175 days annually but the use of domestic solar panels isn't really encouraged - not really - as for storage batteries...fergedabowdit.

Instead.

The government is talking about building more coal fired generating plants instead.

Callooh Cafuckingllay...

Well I'm sorry to hear that renewables are not being embraced in your area so much. It's a couple of years or so since I was heavily into news about climate science and renewables, but from what I remember the main drive of the coal industry in Australia was export to China's growing economy, an economy which itself is trying to 'future proof' itself by developing its renewables market as much as possible, due not to environmental concerns but because its economy is growing so quickly it didn't want to be reliant on coal imports. I've also recently seen a video, admittedly from a biased source, which claims that local authorities in Australia are often increasing their exploitation of renewable resources in spite of the government's drive towards conventional power sources:

At about 2 minutes, 20 seconds in. If that's inaccurate according to your first hand knowledge, I'd be interested to hear about it buddy.

 

[SkepticalX]

Areas with a lot of buildings and asphalt form absorb and retain more heat than undeveloped areas. I live outside a large city in the Midwestern US and notice that there can be significant differences from the central city to the suburbs (in some cases, 5-8 degrees F). I wonder if our statistics on average temperatures are being somewhat skewed because so many of the reporting stations are located in these artificial heat islands.

Also, does rainfall wash CO2 out of the atmosphere? Could increased rainfall due to greater evaporation be part of a feedback loop to keep CO2 in check?

I'm no scientist so please excuse me if I'm misunderstanding something.

 

[PeteByrdie]

Areas with a lot of buildings and asphalt form absorb and retain more heat than undeveloped areas. I live outside a large city in the Midwestern US and notice that there can be significant differences from the central city to the suburbs (in some cases, 5-8 degrees F). I wonder if our statistics on average temperatures are being somewhat skewed because so many of the reporting stations are located in these artificial heat islands.

I've not heard of this suggestion before but I'd be very surprised if trained scientists were so astoundingly remiss as to place so many sensors in such poorly studied locations. If this were to be used as an argument against global warming, it would be akin to the still frequently made statement that 'the Earth's climate has changed in the past, this is just a natural cycle' (another of my favourites from my climate denial days), in that it's pitched at those ignorant of the extent of work done by scientists, such as studies of actual natural cycles over periods of time. However, satellites are primarily used to study the Earth's temperature these days, not thermometers sitting on asphalt in the desert.

Also, does rainfall wash CO2 out of the atmosphere? Could increased rainfall due to greater evaporation be part of a feedback loop to keep CO2 in check?

I'm no scientist so please excuse me if I'm misunderstanding something.

No, this is a good question. Rainfall doesn't so much 'wash CO2 out of the atmosphere' as it might, say, dust particles, as CO2 dissolves in rain, to a degree dependant on temperature, but only really in the lower atmosphere. These things have values of course, which I can't remember and am too knackered to look up, but it's all available online for anyone willing to follow the numbers.

And that was the realisation which ultimately killed my climate scepticism; these things are not just words that convince the average Joe, they have values which are studied and which interconnect with each other. Yes more heat means more clouds which increases the Earth's albedo, but by a value. Yes the CO2 content of the Earth's atmosphere is tiny, but it has a usual natural level that has been measured, and properties that can be measured, and the increase over time can be measured, and the climates in the past and currently can be measured; these things have values. Any idiot can string words together to make a case against any scientific pursuit, but the science has to be dealt with for anyone to really have a case. Otherwise we may as well join the flat earth, young earth creationists.

 

[Mungoman]

Well I'm sorry to hear that renewables are not being embraced in your area so much. It's a couple of years or so since I was heavily into news about climate science and renewables, but from what I remember the main drive of the coal industry in Australia was export to China's growing economy, an economy which itself is trying to 'future proof' itself by developing its renewables market as much as possible, due not to environmental concerns but because its economy is growing so quickly it didn't want to be reliant on coal imports. I've also recently seen a video, admittedly from a biased source, which claims that local authorities in Australia are often increasing their exploitation of renewable resources in spite of the government's drive towards conventional power sources:

At about 2 minutes, 20 seconds in. If that's inaccurate according to your first hand knowledge, I'd be interested to hear about it buddy.

There is bugger-all Federal Government support or encouragement concerning alternative energy sources P.B.. Like many Governments, they can't be arsed because their mates in the coal and power generating business really don't like it.

South Australia had a cyclone come through in 2016 which toppled 23 massive pylons, causing a blackout which was statewide, and of some endurance.

Some in the Government blamed the outcome on South Australia's ever growing dependance of renewable energy...rather than the 1 in 50 year storm.

The only push for renewable energy is from the private sector.

It's wearying, and at the same time galling to see the obvious bias that Governments are showing toward non renewable power sources, and the negative comments being directed at the renewable power sources.

Solar energy is so obvious for this country - and as for coal?

.This used to be prime farming land in the Hunter valley, and this is one of many.

When the seams are coming to the end of their lives the company declares bankruptcy, leaving this obscenity for the taxpayer to remedy.

 

[Mungoman]

Areas with a lot of buildings and asphalt form absorb and retain more heat than undeveloped areas. I live outside a large city in the Midwestern US and notice that there can be significant differences from the central city to the suburbs (in some cases, 5-8 degrees F). I wonder if our statistics on average temperatures are being somewhat skewed because so many of the reporting stations are located in these artificial heat islands.

Also, does rainfall wash CO2 out of the atmosphere? Could increased rainfall due to greater evaporation be part of a feedback loop to keep CO2 in check?

I'm no scientist so please excuse me if I'm misunderstanding something.

G'day ScepX. most, if not all of the weather recording stations in Australia have been taken from the Post Offices, where they used to be, and have been installed at Airports, plus the old weather records here are being altered. I know that it's the Guardian but still.https://www.theguardian.com/environ...conspiracy-in-australias-record-breaking-heat


With manipulation of records it is all rather Interesting, eh...

 

[Swifty]

I'd not heard of a climate group calling themselves 'Extinction Rebellion' until today, I walked into town with a friend and someone's put loads of their posters up. Activists have stripped off today in the house of commons so I'll be nipping back down town to pinch some of the posters tonight before the council remove them. They might be collectable in a few years time.

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...-of-commons/ar-BBVuXn9?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=TSHDHP

 

[Cochise]

Quite so. One would have expected them to pick some place with a bit of elevation..

But I suppose that when they were planning the sites the threat of sea level rise wasn't part of the consideration.

The UK design of nuclear power station has a 'doomsday switch' whereby hitting a button will deluge the reactor in neutral material. It will kill the reactor for ever but it will prevent meltdown a la Chernobyl/Fukushima. But alas all the expertise that design those reactors is retired or emigrated - we will never have such safe reactors again.

 

[INT21]

Conversation in the department for British nuclear reactors.

Oh dear, Simpson, nip over and tell Prof that he'll have to use that kill button he built in to the design'

Knock, knock.

Ah yes, Simpson. what did he say ?

He says he thought you were going to do fit it.

 

[Sid]

Talking of Global Warming: I came across an article about a month or so ago, which showed how the Earth's magnetic field continually and regularly shift's it's position year on year... except, that the latest measurement was showing that the field has for-whatever-reason, sped-up, travelling a greater distance in the same amount of time (in the course of the year measurement).
Wonder what part that 'natural,' or unnatural fact might play in the overall global warming/cooling processes?

 

[INT21]

Talking of Global Warming: I came across an article about a month or so ago, which showed how the Earth's magnetic field continually and regularly shift's it's position year on year... except, that the latest measurement was showing that the field has for-whatever-reason, sped-up, travelling a greater distance in the same amount of time (in the course of the year measurement).
Wonder what part that 'natural,' or unnatural fact might play in the overall global warming/cooling processes?

I mentioned this a while back. Apparently the North Pole is shifting towards Russia.

I has been suggested that we may end up with more than one set of poles.

May be time to re-learn your Astro navigation and break out the sextant.

 

[Swifty]

An Extinction Rebellion spokesman being mocked on the news the other day, over three hundred of them were arrested a couple of days ago over protests in London which is what they actually want, suffragette style .. I've managed to get my hands on a few of their posters although I won't be marching to get arrested ..

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...-standstill/ar-BBW2iR6?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=TSHDHP

Officers told off for raving with protestors (video in link) .. it's not the first time and it won't be the last

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...-on-streets/ar-BBW3TkH?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=TSHDHP

 

[Cochise]

Quite so. One would have expected them to pick some place with a bit of elevation..

But I suppose that when they were planning the sites the threat of sea level rise wasn't part of the consideration.

They need access to water for cooling.

 

[Cochise]

I mentioned this a while back. Apparently the North Pole is shifting towards Russia.

I has been suggested that we may end up with more than one set of poles.

May be time to re-learn your Astro navigation and break out the sextant.

Or the magnetic poles may be beginning the process of flipping, which is a thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_reversal

 

[Coal]

They need access to water for cooling.

Plus, if there is an accident, it's far better to flush with sea water than release to the air. Some might say.

 

[Swifty]

Don't get me wrong, I'm into Extinction Rebellion's aims, they might actually make some kind of difference as this seems to be mostly middle to upper class people volunteering to be arrested. Working class people protesting usually get rougher treatment (or they're busy trying to find money to survive instead) ..

Dame Emma Thompson flies into London from Los Angeles to help Extinction Rebellion who are planning to disrupt Heathrow airport. I'm sure I'm not the only one here who sees the hypocrisy here (she would have come sooner to save the planet only it was her 60th) .. she reminds me of Modern Parents in Viz:

"SAVE THE PLANET! ... except I still get to fly because I'm famous like Bono out of U2." :rofl2:

Dame Emma bravely sticking it to the man yesterday

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...row-airport/ar-BBW5pi1?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=TSHDHP

 

[maximus otter]

Guy News spoke with Robin Boardman-Pattison about his plans to shut down Heathrow, and and what he wants the Government to do. Boardman-Pattison told ‘Extinction Rebellion’ members about plans to shut down Heathrow this afternoon…

Extinction Rebellion leader, Robin Boardman-Pattison who confirmed that the group will attempt to act to disrupt tens of thousands going on their Easter Holidays on one of the busiest travel days of the year.

“Tomorrow we raise the bar. We are going to shut down Heathrow. ​

We wanted to tell you about a large action that has grown out of our escalation strategy. To reiterate, this is a self-organising movement and you should all feel empowered to plan and organise your own actions so long as they comply with our values and principles. Many of you have expressed a desire to disrupt Heathrow — and so we wanted to share this action with you. ​

For the Bank Holiday, we are halting swarming disruption and turning our focus onto the aviation industry.”​

​

Robin Boardman-Pattison told Guy News that “Extinction Rebellion is organising disruption at Heathrow Airport tomorrow… it will disrupt the travel for lots of people, yeah, that disruption is totally necessary given the emergency we’re in…”

https://order-order.com/2019/04/18/exclusive-interview-extinction-rebellion-shut-heathrow-tomorrow/

Guido’s favourite posh eco-loon, Robin Boardman-Pattison, took pains to tell Adam Boulton this morning that people should not take foreign holidays. But his Instagram tells a different story, showing luxurious foreign holidays awash with palm trees, ski slopes, and historic landmarks. Posh Boardman-Pattison even boasted of being a guest at Buckingham Palace…

https://order-order.com/2019/04/17/posh-eco-loon-no-holidays-except/

The eco-protesters dog in the manger attitude to life isn’t just limited to their luxury foreign holidays. The ‘Extinction Rebellion’ mobs have left an enormous mess on the roads and pavements, expecting other people to clear up their own rubbish. As Gandhi once said “Be the change you want to see” swampies…

"Never mind, Cressida, some oiks from the council will clear it up while we're in the Bentley back to Esher".

maximus otter

 

[Naughty_Felid]

lol, how many hangups do you have?

 

[Swifty]

lol, how many hangups do you have?

Loads but there's always room for more.

 

[Ladyloafer]

Guy News spoke with Robin Boardman-Pattison about his plans to shut down Heathrow, and and what he wants the Government to do. Boardman-Pattison told ‘Extinction Rebellion’ members about plans to shut down Heathrow this afternoon…

Extinction Rebellion leader, Robin Boardman-Pattison who confirmed that the group will attempt to act to disrupt tens of thousands going on their Easter Holidays on one of the busiest travel days of the year.

“Tomorrow we raise the bar. We are going to shut down Heathrow. ​

We wanted to tell you about a large action that has grown out of our escalation strategy. To reiterate, this is a self-organising movement and you should all feel empowered to plan and organise your own actions so long as they comply with our values and principles. Many of you have expressed a desire to disrupt Heathrow — and so we wanted to share this action with you. ​

For the Bank Holiday, we are halting swarming disruption and turning our focus onto the aviation industry.”​

​

Robin Boardman-Pattison told Guy News that “Extinction Rebellion is organising disruption at Heathrow Airport tomorrow… it will disrupt the travel for lots of people, yeah, that disruption is totally necessary given the emergency we’re in…”

https://order-order.com/2019/04/18/exclusive-interview-extinction-rebellion-shut-heathrow-tomorrow/

Guido’s favourite posh eco-loon, Robin Boardman-Pattison, took pains to tell Adam Boulton this morning that people should not take foreign holidays. But his Instagram tells a different story, showing luxurious foreign holidays awash with palm trees, ski slopes, and historic landmarks. Posh Boardman-Pattison even boasted of being a guest at Buckingham Palace…

https://order-order.com/2019/04/17/posh-eco-loon-no-holidays-except/

The eco-protesters dog in the manger attitude to life isn’t just limited to their luxury foreign holidays. The ‘Extinction Rebellion’ mobs have left an enormous mess on the roads and pavements, expecting other people to clear up their own rubbish. As Gandhi once said “Be the change you want to see” swampies…

"Never mind, Cressida, some oiks from the council will clear it up while we're in the Bentley back to Esher".

maximus otter

see this sort of thing does a cause no bloody good at all. ok its possible this twat has seen the eco light and has started treading lightly, but still...grr.

its an important cause. i support the goal. reduce carbon emissions everywhere to reduce climate change and make life nicer for all, but you know that ghandi quote is everything.

 

[Mungoman]

Or the magnetic poles may be beginning the process of flipping, which is a thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_reversal

I have need to use topographical maps now and again, and am aware that magnetic north does go wandering. i do need to buy new maps every ten years, or so, (if they survive that long!) to keep up with it's wandering.

In 2010, magnetic north was 11.7 degrees east of Grid north, and true north was 0.7 degrees east of Grid north....So, just in case you're interested.


True North

True north is measured in relation to the geographic North Pole and is generated as the earth rotates on its axis. The direction is marked in our skies by the North Celestial Pole. The direction is within 1° of the placement of Polaris, making the stars trace a trace a small circle in the sky every sidereal day. The True north is seen to rotate in an arc in relation to stars for about 25,000 years to complete. Astronomers estimate that the Polaris will be closest to the Celestial North Pole around the years 2100-02. According to maps from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the US Armed Forces, the true north is indicated by a line that ends in a five-pointed star.

Grid North

Grid north is a navigational phrase used to refer to the northward on a grid lines in a map projection. Grid north contrasts the true north and the magnetic north in that it is aligned to grid lines and always points upwards on a map. According to ordnance survey maps, the grid lines from the grid north sub divides the UK into squares of one kilometer, east of Atlantic Ocean’s imaginary point. The lines point towards the Grid North and have a slight variation from the True North. The variation is slightest along the central meridian of the map and greatest towards the edges of the map. Some navigators ignore the difference between grid north and true north due to their slight difference.

Magnetic North

A compass needle will always point towards the Magnetic north pole. The pole may not be the exact point since the compass aligns itself to the local geomagnetic field which varies constantly. The pole is the wandering point in the Northern Hemisphere where the magnetic field points vertically downwards. If a magnetic compass needle is suspended horizontally on an axis it will point straight downwards. The specific point where this occurs is the Geomagnetic North pole. The Position of the North Magnetic pole moves continually northwestward due to adjustments in the magnetic field in the core of the Earth. In the year 2001, the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) determined that the magnetic north was at the west of Ellesmere Island in Canada. In 2009, the magnetic north was still in Canada within the Arctic Territorial region but was in motion towards Russia at a speed of 55 to 60 kilometers per annum.

The Relationship Between The Norths

The three norths are important to map readers and navigators in making them understand topography. The difference between the magnetic north and the true north is the angle of inclination on a horizontal plane mostly referred to as magnetic variation or declination. Each region has a unique declination and it should be accounted for when reading and analyzing a map. A few degrees can be either added or subtracted to get the specific north one is looking for.

 

[Mungoman]

see this sort of thing does a cause no bloody good at all. ok its possible this twat has seen the eco light and has started treading lightly, but still...grr.

its an important cause. i support the goal. reduce carbon emissions everywhere to reduce climate change and make life nicer for all, but you know that ghandi quote is everything.

I don't see that Carbon emissions are any where near the problem LL, the reason being that it is not carbon that causes our aberrant weather.

What will cause our climate instability is in the origins of our weather, which is our oceans and seas. Our oceans and seas are warming to the tune of 0.13C every decade since sea temperatures have been collated - which has been the last 100 years. This increase in surface temperature increases atmospheric volatility

We have the northern and southern Equatorial currents which circulates the increasingly warmer currents further north and further south each year, altering local climate. This is verified by the El Niño/La Niña, Southern Oscillation Index, and its effects which it has on our climate down here in Australia

https://public.wmo.int/en/our-mandate/climate/el-niñola-niña-update .

Carbon is 0.04 percent of the atmosphere, and is increasing due to Industry and the use of HydroCarbons - but - ocean and sea temperatures are having a more robust effect on our cyclone/hurricane/monsoon/typhoon seasons...which will travel further north/south I reckon.

I will be extremely cynical here and say that the reason that carbon was chosen as the canary in the pit, was because carbon is, at present, a definite indicator of consumption...which is taxable.

Your opinion may vary, just as this opinion of mine differs from the established theory. Peace.

 

[Comfortably Numb]

I have, somewhere (!) on video tape, a documentary from circa 12-15 years ago (?).

It was most certainly around the time when the, 'global warming' debate became, 'newsworthy'.

The documentary features a plethora of foremost scientists, from related spheres, who comprehensively dismiss the entire notion.

I wondered if any of them have changed their mind and if so, why?

To be a convincing argument for the affirmative, how are these contrary points otherwised evidenced?

https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

 

[Sharon Hill]

Climate modeling is simple - said no one, ever.

Therefore, it is also really difficult to explain, so people tend to try to oversimplify it and it fails. There is a disconnect between science and what the average person can comprehend. (For this topic, it even strains understanding from scientists in closely related fields.) There is a degree of trust we must hold in expert opinion. And, as is clear, that trust is lacking. But to portray the climate question/solution as a conspiracy is an illogical and vicious view of science and humanity.