- Michael E. Mann and Jeffrey Park (1999) – Oscillatory Spatiotemporal Signal Detection in Climate Studies: A Multiple-Taper Spectral Domain Approach – Advances in Geophysics 41 – Department of Geosciences, University of Massachusetts; Department of Geology and Geophysics, Yale University – http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/shared/articles/mtmsvd.pdf
“In order to properly assess the potential impact of forcings external to the climate system (e.g., possible anthropogenic enhanced greenhouse forcing), it is essential that we understand the background of natural climate variability on which external influences may be superimposed. Atmosphere-ocean-cryosphere interactions include many feedbacks that have time scales of years and longer. These feedbacks can, in principle, leaded to irregular, but roughly cyclic, low-frequency climate variations (perhaps the most well-known example of which is the El Nino/Southern Oscillation or «ENSO»). If we can separate, in historical and proxy climate data, large-scale oscillatory, interannual and longer-period climate ‘signals’ from the ‘background’ climate variability, (1) it becomes easier to distinguish natural climate fluctuations from presumed anthropogenic or other external (e.g., solar) effects, (2) dynamical mechanisms potentially inferred from these signals provide a means of validating numerical climate models; and (3) these signals can themselves potentially be used for long-range climatic forecasting.” - John Cook – The BEST Summary – Skeptical Science, 12/11/2011 – http://www.skepticalscience.com/best-summary.html
“Unfortunately, so many «skeptics» have devoted so much time and effort into disputing the accuracy of the surface temperature record that the BEST results seem to have short-circuited their collective brains. The schizophrenic «skeptic» reaction has been quite the spectacle to behold. First they attacked the BEST team for purely superficial reasons, including some rather appalling insults. But then they seemed to briefly accept the results, attempting to diminish their impact by claiming they had expected BEST to confirm global warming all along, and then doubling-down on other climate myths. Most recently, these same «skeptics» have attempted to argue that the BEST results show that global warming has stopped, and that their results are still biased high due to the urban heat island (UHI) effect.” - Thomas S. Kuhn (1957) – The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought – Harvard University Press – ISBN-13: 978-0674171039 – 320 págs.
- Heliocentrism – Wikipedia, 16/02/2012 – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism
“In the mid-eighteenth century the Church’s opposition began to fade. An annotated copy of Newton’s Principia was published in 1742 by Fathers le Seur and Jacquier of the Franciscan Minims, two Catholic mathematicians, with a preface stating that the author’s work assumed heliocentrism and could not be explained without the theory. In 1758 the Catholic Church dropped the general prohibition of books advocating heliocentrism from the Index of Forbidden Books.[75] Pope Pius VII approved a decree in 1822 by the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition to allow the printing of heliocentric books in Rome.» - Christine Garwood (2008) – Flat Earth: The History of an Infamous Idea – Thomas Dunne – ISBN-13: 978-0312382087 – 448 págs.
- Jeroen van Dongen (2010) – On Einstein’s opponents, and other crackpots – Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 41:78-80 doi:10.1016/j.shpsb.2009.10.001 – Institute for History and Foundations of Science, Utrecht University – http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1111/1111.2181.pdf – Peer reviewed
“This world is a strange madhouse. Currently, every coachman and every waiter is debating whether relativity theory is correct. Belief in this matter depends on political party affiliation.” - Steven Sherwood (2011) – Science controversies past and present – Physics Today doi:10.1063/PT.3.1295 – Climate Change Research Centre, University of New South Wales – http://physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v64/i10/p39_s1 – Peer reviewed
“Because the contrarian proposals reinforce traditional beliefs, they enjoy a prolonged period of public popularity even as their currency among successive generations of experts approaches zero.” - John Tyndall (1861) – On the Absorption and Radiation of Heat by Gases and Vapors, and on the Physical Connexion of Radiation, Absorption, and Conduction – Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science – FRS, Member of the Academies and Societies of Holland, Geneva, Göttingen, Zürich, Halle, Marburg, Breslau, la Societe Philomatique of Paris, &c.; Professor of Natural Philosophy in the Royal Institution, and in the Government School of Mines – http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~vijay/Papers/Spectroscopy/tyndall-1861.pdf
“The solar heat possesses … the power of crossing an atmosphere; but, when the heat is absorbed by the planet, it is so changed in quality that the rays emanating from the planet cannot get with the same freedom back into space. Thus the atmosphere admits of the entrance of the solar heat, but checks its exit; and the result is a tendency to accumulate heat at the surface of the planet.” - Svante Arrhenius (1896) – On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature on the Ground – Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 22:169-194 – http://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf – Peer reviewed
“To get an increase of 3.4 ºC it will be necessary to alter the quantity of carbonic acid till it reaches a value nearly midway between 2 and 2.5 [its present mean] … A simple calculation shows that the temperature on the Arctic regions would rise about 8º to 9 ºC if the carbonic acid increased to 2,5 or 3 times its present value.” - Charles N. Herrick and Dale Jamieson (2001) – Junk Science and Environmental Policy: Obscuring Public Debate with Misleading Discourse – Philosophy and Public Policy Quarterly 21:11-16 – Stratus Consulting Inc.; Henry R. Luce Professor in Human Dimensions of Global Change, Carleton College, Northfield – http://as.nyu.edu/docs/IO/1192/JunkScienceEnvironmentalPolicy.pdf – Peer reviewed
“The most striking finding of our content analysis is that an overwhelming majority (84%) of the articles contained an anti-regulatory message or admonition, asserting that a particular policy or regulatory perspective or program should be reversed or opposed because it is based on junk science. None of the articles reviewed used the term in conjunction with a pro-regulatory message … Almost none of the articles we reviewed documented scientific analysis conducted in a way that is inadequate or inappropriate. Despite the use of the phrase, ‘junk science,’ most of the articles reviewed were critiques of environmental or public health policies based on politics or values rather than on science.” - William R. L. Anderegg et al (2010) – Expert credibility in climate change – Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences PNAS doi:10.1073/pnas.1003187107 – Published online: 21/06/2010 – Department of Biology, Stanford University – http://www.pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full.pdf+html – Peer reviewed
“But we suggest that our methods and our expertise and prominence criteria provide conservative, robust, and relevant indicators of relative credibility of CE and UE groups of climate researchers … this suggests that not all experts are equal, and top CE researchers have much stronger expertise in climate science than those in the top UE group … We examined the top four most-cited papers for each CE and UE researcher with 20 or more climate publications and found immense disparity in scientific prominence between CE and UE communities … CE researchers’ top papers were cited an average of 172 times, compared with 105 times for UE researchers. Because a single, highly cited paper does not establish a highly credible reputation but might instead reflect the controversial nature of that paper (often called the single-paper effect), we also considered the average the citation count of the second through fourth most-highly cited papers of each researcher. Results were robust when only these papers were considered.” - Kevin Trenberth et al (2012) – Check With Climate Scientists for Views on Climate – The Wall Street Journal – Published online: 01/02/2012 – Climate Analysis Section National Center for Atmospheric Research – http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204740904577193270727472662.html – 36 authors
“Do you consult your dentist about your heart condition? In science, as in any area, reputations are based on knowledge and expertise in a field and on published, peer-reviewed work. If you need surgery, you want a highly experienced expert in the field who has done a large number of the proposed operations.” - Lyndon B. Johnson’s – Special Message to the Congress on Conservation and Restoration of Natural Beauty – 08/02/1965 – http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=27285
“Large-scale pollution of air and waterways is no respecter of political boundaries, and its effects extend far beyond those who cause it. Air pollution is no longer confined to isolated places. This generation has altered the composition of the atmosphere on a global scale through radioactive materials and a steady increase in carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels.” - Roger Revelle and Hans Suess (1957) – Carbon Dioxide Exchange Between Atmosphere and Ocean and the Question of an Increase of Atmospheric CO2 During the Past Decades – Tellus 9:18-27 – http://bit.ly/wnh5FT – Peer reviewed
“Human beings are now carrying out a large scale geophysical experiment of a kind that could not happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future … This experiment, if adequately documented, may yield a far-reaching insight into the processes determining weather and climate.” - A Frank Statement to Cigarrete Smokers- The Wall Street Journal 04/01/1954
- Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway (2010) – Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming – Bloomsbury, New York – Professor of History Science Studies Program University of California; National Aeronautics and Space Administration
- Kevin Phillips (2007) – American Theocracy. The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century – Viking, The Penguin Group – ISBN-13: 978-0143038283 – 512 págs.
“Stark and Finke: Americans who stated some religious adherence 1776 (17%); 1850 (34%); 1890 (45%); 1926 (56%; 1980 (62%); 2000 (63%) … The new figure for 2000 is controversial.” - William C. Martin (1996) – With God on Our Side: The Rise of the Religious Right in America – Broadway Books – ISBN-13: 978-0767922579 – 464 págs.
“It is difficult to assess the influence of Reconstructionist thought with any accuracy. Because it is so genuinely radical, most leaders of the Religious Right are careful to distance themselves from it. At the same time, it clearly holds some appeal for many of them. One undoubtedly spoke for others when he confessed, ‘Though we hide their books under the bed, we read them just the same … several key leaders have acknowledged an intellectual debt to the theonomists. Jerry Falwell and D. James Kennedy have endorsed Reconstructionist books.” - Leslie Kaufman – Behind the Controversy, an Effort to Rewrite Curriculum on Climate Change – Green -The New York Times, 23/02/2012 – http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/behind-the-controversy-an-effort-to-rewrite-curriculum-on-climate-change/
“But climate scientists who looked at Dr. Wojick’s evaluation of the data say that he is willfully misreading the findings. “You have to be specially trained to be so blind,” said Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist with Goddard Institute for Space Studies.” - Peter J. Jacques et al (2008) – The organization of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental scepticism – Environmental Politics 17:349:385 doi:10.1080/09644010802055576 – Department of Political Science, University of Central Florida; Department of Sociology, Oklahoma State University – 3 authors – http://ucf.academia.edu/PeterJacques/Papers/71776/The_Organization_of_Denial_Conservative_Think_Tanks_and_Environmental_Scepticism – Peer reviewed
“We find that over 92 per cent of these books, most published in the US since 1992, are linked to conservative think tanks (CTTs). Further, we analyse CTTs involved with environmental issues and find that 90 per cent of them espouse environmental scepticism.” - Milagros Pérez Oliva – Adiós, y mucha suerte – El País, 26/02/2012 – Defensora del lector – http://elpais.com/elpais/2012/02/25/opinion/1330186967_932761.html
”La verdad no es un compromiso entre sus diferentes versiones. Y, sin embargo, potentes aparatos de influencia saturan el espacio informativo con versiones y contraversiones destinadas a falsear la realidad. Más que informar, lo que hace este tipo de periodismo es desinformar. Porque la falsa neutralidad del periodismo de versiones otorga las mismas oportunidades a quien dice la verdad que a quien miente. Y porque la verdad incómoda tiene más dificultades para imponerse al ruido mediático creado para sepultarla. Piensen en el cambio climático. Piensen en todos esos imputados por corrupción que se presentan como víctimas de una persecución política. Piensen en esos sindicalistas presentados como expoliadores, mientras los expoliadores aparecen como brillantes gestores.” - Veerabhadran Ramanathan and Y. Feng (2008) – On avoiding dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system: Formidable challenges ahead – Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences PNAS 105:14245-14250 doi:10.1073/pnas.0803838105 – Published online: 23/03/2008 – Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California at San Diego – http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/Releases/doc/zpq038084771p.pdf – Peer reviewed
“The estimated warming of 2.4°C is the equilibrium warming above preindustrial temperatures that the world will observe even if GHG concentrations are held fixed at their 2005 concentration levels but without any other anthropogenic forcing such as the cooling effect of aerosols … Lastly, even the most aggressive CO2 mitigation steps as envisioned now can only limit further additions to the committed warming, but not reduce the already committed GHGs warming of 2.4°C.” - Javier Pérez Royo – Crisis política – El País, 17/02/2012 – – http://politica.elpais.com/politica/2012/02/17/actualidad/1329507924_965027.html
“La democracia se está convirtiendo en un envoltorio carente de contenido, que recurre cada vez con más frecuencia, si no a la mentira, a la ocultación de la verdad. Así no se puede seguir.” - P.H. Gleick et al (2010) – Climate Change and the Integrity of Science – Science 328:689-690 doi:10.1126/science.328.5979.689 – Published online: 07/05/2010 – U.S. National Academy of Sciences – http://www.pacinst.org/climate/climate_statement.pdf – 255 authors – Peer reviewed
“For instance, there is compelling scientific evidence that our planet is about 4.5bn years old (the theory of the origin of Earth), that our universe was born from a single event about 14bn years ago (the Big Bang theory), and that today’s organisms evolved from ones living in the past (the theory of evolution). Even as these are overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, fame still awaits anyone who could show these theories to be wrong. Climate change now falls into this category: there is compelling, comprehensive, and consistent objective evidence that humans are changing the climate in ways that threaten our societies and the ecosystems on which we depend. Many recent assaults on climate science and, more disturbingly, on climate scientists by climate change deniers, are typically driven by special interests or dogma, not by an honest effort to provide an alternative theory that credibly satisfies the evidence.” - Hans-Martin Füssel (2009) – An updated assessment of the risks from climate change based on research published since the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report – Climatic Change doi:10.1007/s10584-009-9648-5 – – Peer reviewed
“Taken together, these findings point to an increased urgency of implementing mitigation policies as well as comprehensive and equitable adaptation policies.” - Susan Solomon et al (2008) – Irreversible climate change due to carbon dioxide emissions – Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences PNAS 106:10933-10938 doi:10.1073/pnas.0812721106 – Published online: 28/01/2009 – Chemical Sciences Division, Earth System Research Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – Peer reviewed http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/01/28/0812721106.full.pdf+html – 4 authors “The climate change that takes place due to increases in carbon dioxide concentration is largely irreversible for 1.000 years after emissions stop.”
- William R. Freudenburg (2010) – Use of Scientific Certainty Argumentation Methods in Climate Debates – AAAS 2010 Annual Meeting – University of California, Santa Barbara – http://aaas.confex.com/aaas/2010/webprogram/Paper1639.html
“New scientific findings are found to be more than twenty times as likely to indicate that global climate disruption is «worse than previously expected,» rather than «not as bad as previously expected,» strongly supporting the ASC perspective rather than the usual framing of the issue in the U.S. mass media. The findings add further support to the growing realization that media coverage of supposed debates has been strongly skewed by a tactic so widespread that it has its own name — «Scientific Certainty» Argumentation Methods, or SCAMS. Partly because most citizens expect science to produce black-and-white certainty, rather than cumulative or «normal» improvements in understanding, well-funded special interest groups can exploit mass-media desire for controversy in stories, creating a false impression that «scientists» are still debating consensus findings. Similar SCAMs were used in fights against the regulation of cigarette smoking, asbestos, agricultural chemicals, and even the use of lead in gasoline.”
Apoyos de la comunidad científica al buen hacer de este blog
-
Únete a otros 5.085 suscriptores
Primer premio Fundación Biodiversidad
Els meus tuits
Tuits de FerranPVilarCategorías
Els meus preferits
El imperativo de encontrar respuestas adecuadas
La humanidad se encuentra frente a una de las mayores disyuntivas que cabe imaginar. El sistema climático terrestre parece haber sido definitivamente desestabilizado, mientras la inmensa mayoría de la población vive ajena a un fenómeno llamado a marcar nuestras vidas de forma determinante y abrumadora. Comunidad científica, medios de comunicación y clase política se encuentran aturdidos por el fenómeno y sin respuestas adecuadas a la magnitud del desafío. Cuando las élites fracasan, es la hora de la gente.
'If the people lead, the leaders will follow'
Google translation
Política de comentarios
Contactar con Usted no se lo Cree
Conferencias
Usted no se lo cree 
Comenta cuando quieras