找回密码
 立即注册
搜索
总共850条微博

动态微博

查看: 4314|回复: 1
打印 上一主题 下一主题
收起左侧

在碳减排主流话语之外,哥本哈根会合谈判之前(图)

[复制链接]

84

主题

2814

帖子

2万

积分

跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2009-11-30 14:28:42 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式

其实IPCC在其评估报告中也承认,对于气候变化的起因,人类活动的作用占多大比例,尚存在相当不确定性。其实早有学者从不同学科角度对气候变暖,特别是人类排放的温室气体引起气候变暖这一理论提出质疑,但是在近年来日益高涨的减排话语下,这些声音逐渐被主流话语淹没。这些质疑很多,以下仅转贴一位学者近期作的分析。文章比较长,有兴趣的不妨耐心看完,大家讨论。www.ddhw.com
文章最早见于科学网https://www.mscience.org/htmlnews/2009/8/222326.shtm,但是该文的网络版版式有问题,不方便阅读。这里转贴另一个论坛的版本。有兴趣的可以点击文章的原出处查阅。
 www.ddhw.com

气候变化问题的非主流思考www.ddhw.com

--事实与逻辑

 www.ddhw.com

颠倒:因与果... 1www.ddhw.com

遗漏:宇宙射线. 2www.ddhw.com

自信:数学模型... 2www.ddhw.com

视野:超越“球膜”... 2www.ddhw.com

利弊:考诸史实... 2www.ddhw.com

立场:理性与忽悠... 2www.ddhw.com

 www.ddhw.com

2007IPCC(联合国政府间气候变化专门委员会)第四次评估报告公布以来,在气候变化问题上,一种主流理论就获得了“政治正确性”的地位,它由3个主要环节组成:www.ddhw.com

1、大气CO2浓度从工业革命前的280ppmv升至450--550ppmv后,全球平均气温可能将上升2℃~3℃;www.ddhw.com

2、若全球平均气温上升2℃以上,将可能给人类带来重大影响,突出地表现为海平面上升、物种灭绝、极端天气事件频率增加、热带传染病北上、全球粮食短缺、水资源供应不足,地区冲突增加等;www.ddhw.com

3、世界各主要国家必须立即采取各种行动,减缓全球变暖,使2050CO2排放量降低到l990年排放水平的50%,且越早采取行动损失越小。www.ddhw.com

事实上学术界对这个理论的质疑之声从来就没有中断过,但是这种质疑之声很少为公众知晓。2007IPCC获得诺贝尔和平奖,主流理论事实上已经被视为近乎真理,进而成为政治家们在国际政治、外交博弈中的工具。www.ddhw.com

使公众能均衡地了解各方的见解,是社会理性的基础。20072IPCC第四次评估报告第一工作组报告正式发布后不久,笔者曾撰文正面介绍了主流理论(见《从气候变化到环境伦理》科学时报2007319日 五、八版)。现在,主流理论如日中天,一些势力正有组织地大力渲染主流理论,笔者认为有必要客观介绍学术界的质疑。www.ddhw.com

颠倒:因与果

主流理论能被广泛接受,有两个非常扎实的论据:20世纪,尤其是后半叶,大气中温室气体的浓度明显增加和气温明显升高。对这两个论据,质疑者甚少,几乎可以视为定论(对“气温明显升高”的判断,仍有少数学者持有异议)。www.ddhw.com

IPCC第四次评估报告第一工作组报告中,真正打动笔者的是覆盖65万年的南极冰芯资料(见图一)。www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

图一:南极冰芯资料,覆盖65万年。其中:

δD为氘的变化,代表局地温度。www.ddhw.com

大气温室气体包含:www.ddhw.com

二氧化碳(CO2)、甲烷 (CH4)和氧化亚氮(N2O)

阴影带状区域表示当前和以前的间冰期暖期。www.ddhw.com

数据显示,过去的65万年中,地球经过了几次冰河期与冰间期的交替。冰河期温室气体浓度下降,而冰间期温室气体浓度上升。但整个波动被控制在一定的范围之内。(以CO2为例,图中蓝色横线标出了65万年来的波动范围)而今温室气体浓度远超出历史上任何一次间冰期的水平,大自然控制温室气体浓度的稳定机制被打破。这无疑是对主流理论最有力的支持。www.ddhw.com

图中δD为氘的变化,代表局地温度。它与各温室气体的浓度显示出相同的走势。然而,如果是温室气体浓度的变化导致的气温的变化,那温室气体浓度的变化应先于气温的变化,至少不应滞后于气温的变化。而有细心的学者发现,情况可能相反。www.ddhw.com

笔者在图一中从δD曲线的主要局部极值点引出了一些纵线,借以比较各曲线的相位。容易看出,在很多情况下δD曲线的转向早于、快于温室气体浓度。这是否意味着是气候变化驱动了温室气体浓度的变化?因果关系的这一颠倒,对主流理论是颠覆性的,它至少表明,温室气体浓度变化导致气温变化,这一判断值得商榷。www.ddhw.com

上引IPCC第四次评估报告第一工作组报告是20072月正式发布的,然而,2008IPCC出版的《气候变化2007综合报告》中引用的是仅覆盖1万年的冰芯资料(见图二),而非上述覆盖65万年资料,图二中没有了表征温度的资料,读者无法进行比较以探究因果关系。

为什么?www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

 www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

 www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

图二:2005年以前一万年(大图)

和自1750年以来(嵌入图),大气二氧化碳、www.ddhw.com

甲烷和氧化亚氮浓度的变化。www.ddhw.com

图中所示测量值分别取自冰芯www.ddhw.com

(不同颜色的符号表示不同的研究结果)和大气样本(红线)

相对于1750年的辐射强迫值见大图右侧的纵坐标。www.ddhw.com

图二中的左侧纵坐标为温室气体浓度,右侧纵坐标为辐射强迫。其隐含的假设是:温室气体浓度与辐射强迫线性正相关,这意味着温室气体浓度与温度线性正相关。www.ddhw.com

主流理论认为:大气CO2浓度增加1倍后,全球平均气温将上升2-3℃。但这只是一个模拟值,它由不同的数值模式计算后平均得出,不同模式输出的增温值差异甚大,从1℃左右到6℃以上,数值模式是否已成熟到能够准确评价全球平均气温与大气CO2浓度的关系?www.ddhw.com

观察图一可以发现两者的关系其实是高度非线性的。这意味着主流理论用大气CO2浓度估算的未来气温有相当的不确定性。www.ddhw.com

遗漏:无法忽视的因素

一般来说,地球从太阳吸收的辐射主要集中在地球表面,然后这种能量又通过大气和海洋环流重新分布,并且以长波方式辐射回太空。把地球作为一个整体来考察,进入的太阳辐射能量和出去的太阳辐射大致平衡,而失衡的部分即为地球—大气系统获得/失去的净辐射能量,学者们定义其为辐射强迫。在IPCC的评估报告中,辐射强迫被进一步定义为相对于1750年的变化,除非另有说明,辐射强迫是指全球年平均值。www.ddhw.com

任何改变、接受、失去太阳辐射到太空的因子,或改变大气、陆地与海洋中能量重新分配的因子,都会影响气候。对此,IPCC的第一工作组技术报告作出了逐项分析(见图三),其结论是:人类排放的CO2是最强的增温因素,而云反射是最强的降温因素,各项因素的综合作用导致1.6w/m2的全球平均辐射强迫。www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

图三:全球平均辐射强迫www.ddhw.com

对图三列举的“辐射强迫”诸因素,有学者质疑,认为可能遗漏了重要的因素--宇宙射线。中国科学院理论物理研究所庆承瑞在《一个可能影响全球变暖的重要因素宇宙线和气候的关联—介绍CERNCLOUD实验》(高科技与产业化20086月)一文中,介绍了欧洲学者们的一项工作:www.ddhw.com

1997年,SvensmarkFriis-Christensen发现,宇宙线强度的变化和地球大气层中的云量覆盖厚度的变化有关联(见图四)。www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

图四:宇宙射线和全球云量的关联的变化www.ddhw.com

(H.svensmarkPhys.Rev.Lett.81(1998)5O27)www.ddhw.com

图四中“虚线”为太阳1O.7cm射电波辐射(注:这是太阳辐射频谱中穿透本领较大,可直达地面的波段)的变化曲线;“实线”表示的宇宙线的数据取自美国climax中子测量数据。而方格为全球海洋上空平均云量的相对变化。www.ddhw.com

数据显示:云量的变化和宇宙线的变化高度“同步”,呈显出正关联。如果此图上所显示的关联是真实的,一种可能的解释是:宇宙线的增强导致云量的增加,而云量的增加会屏蔽太阳辐射,最终使气温下降。www.ddhw.com

如果真是如此,从上述强关联,人们曾估算出:太阳黑子一个周期的变化能使辐射强迫增加约1.2w/m2,而如上所述,上世纪由CO2产生的辐射强迫是1.6w/m2。这表明这一“效应”,绝不可忽视,因为1.2w/m21.6w/m275%www.ddhw.com

10Be浓度和太阳日冕磁力线密度数据推断的宇宙线变化,表明自1990年以来,宇宙射线波动着减弱的大趋势,这与20世纪气候变暖的趋势一致。(见图五)这对20世纪气候变暖提供了另一个可能的解释。www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

图五:1860-2000年间宇宙线变化趋势www.ddhw.com

虚线: 从格陵兰冰芯冰芯10Be丰度变化推算www.ddhw.com

实线:从太阳日冕磁力线密度推算www.ddhw.com

据此,欧洲日内瓦高能物理研究中心实验室CERN,于2000年正式提出一项实验建议,研究宇宙线和大气中凝聚水滴形成的关系,全名是“cosmic Leaing 0ut door Droplets”,简称“CLOUD)”的研究项目。2O06年,CL0UD实验被批准,已分别在2007年和2008年发布了工作进展报告。www.ddhw.com

可见,虽然在气象界多数人士认为,气温上升的原因,有超过90%以上的概率是人类社会大量排放温室气体,主要是排放C02的结果。但这并非气象界和气象界以外学者们的共识。www.ddhw.com

地球气候系统高度复杂,认识影响其变化的因素和可能须经历多次反复,将现有的认识视为确论,可能过于自信。例如,过去大多数人一直认为地球上最大的一个南极臭氧洞是人类活动造成的。但南极人口及工业极少,人口主要在北半球。俄罗斯学者塞瓦洛特金研究结果表明,这是由围绕南极洲的大洋底裂谷向大气圈排放还原气(H2CH4)造成的。(杜乐天《地球排气作用的重大意义及研究进展》地质论评第51卷第2 20053月)www.ddhw.com

“模式”:自信的来源?

对于未来气候的走势,主流理论主要依靠气象数学模型预测。在气象学界内,数学模型被称为“模式”。用于气象预测的称为“天气预报模式”,用于气候预测的称为“气候模式”。根据复杂程度不同,气候模式可分为简单气候模式、耦合气候系统模式以及中等复杂程度的地球系统模式。IPCC历次报告主要采用耦合气候模式结果评估气候变化。www.ddhw.com

在基本模式相同的前提下,不同的研究者采用了不同的技术处理,导致不同的模拟结果,气象学界普遍认为,不同的模拟误差相互独立,多模式集成能够减少不确定性,改善气候预估效果。www.ddhw.com

IPCC第四次报告中,循这样的思路,对19062005年期间的年代际观测平均值,作了模拟对比,一是只考虑自然因素(包括太阳活动和火山的原因),二是再加上人为因素(即温室气体排放),其结果见图六。www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

www.ddhw.com

 www.ddhw.com

 www.ddhw.com

图六:观测到的全球地表温度的变化与模拟结果比较www.ddhw.com

黑线为19062005年期间的年代际观测平均值,www.ddhw.com

阴影区为气候模式模拟的5%95%的范围

蓝色阴影区仅使用自然强迫的模式模拟,共用5个气候模式19次模拟。www.ddhw.com

红色阴影区同时使用自然强迫和人为强迫,共用14个气候模式58次模拟www.ddhw.com

(取自IPCC第四次报告第一工作组技术报告)www.ddhw.com

图六显示,1950年代之后,考虑温室气体排放等人为因素的模拟结果明显优于不考虑此因素的结果。这为主流学者提供了信心,将自己的判断从“可能”(>66%)升格到“很可能”(>90%):www.ddhw.com

20世纪中叶以来,大部分已观测到的全球平均温度的升高很可能是由于观测到的人为温室气体浓度增加所导致的。这是一个进步,因为《第三次评估报告》的结论是‘过去50年观测到的大部分变暖可能是由于温室气体浓度增加’”(IPCC《气候变化2007综合报告》 www.ddhw.com

然而,观察图八可以发现,在二十世纪1020年和40年代,观测数据都落在两类气候模式模拟的5%95%的范围之外,尤其是40年代,更是远离这个范围。这意味着存在现有模式尚未考虑到的因素。www.ddhw.com

用于检验模式的时间区间为100年,据此就作出100年甚至以上的外推,风险甚大。地球气候系统不是一个“孤立体”,它受到各种外部因素的作用。如果其中某个因素在这一百年内变化明显,它可能被观察到,并反映在气候模式中;反之如果它在这一百年内相对沉寂,气候模式就不可能包含它。www.ddhw.com

事实上,IPCC第四次报告主要采用“耦合气候模式”结果评估气候变化。耦合气候系统模式包括大气模式、海洋模式、陆面模式、海冰、碳循环等模块。站在气象学的立场,视野已经大大的扩展,它带来的工作量已经极为繁重。www.ddhw.com

然而,所有这些都是地球表层系统。对流层高约10公里,平流层高50公里,海洋最深处是太平洋西侧马里亚纳海沟的查林杰深渊,深11公里。可见被“耦合气候模式”当作“孤立体”研究的是一层平均半径3671公里、而厚仅60公里的“球膜”。而地壳、地幔、地核占地球系统总质量的99.9%,很难想象它不会影响这“球膜”的行为。www.ddhw.com

太阳是地球最大的外来能量提供者,它又带着地球在银河系中巡游,一次次穿越银河系的旋臂,很难想象这些巨大的外部因素不会影响这“球膜”的行为。www.ddhw.com

视野:超越“球膜”

由此,地球物理学家从更广阔的视角看待影响“球膜”的因素,其一是地球内部的能量释放;其二是外部能量辐射。www.ddhw.com

关于于地球内部的能量释放,杜乐天就用地球排气作用来解释诸多异常气候现象,如海底高热盐海流、黑潮以及厄尔尼诺等,而这些现象都影响到“球膜”的行为。杜乐天还指出:www.ddhw.com

白垩纪大气中大规模CO2增长、气温升高2.87.7℃,海水增温4.8℃以及恐龙绝灭,正好和玄武岩喷溢、地球大规模排气、陆上、海底热液活动强烈相对应,这是一整套相互关联的现象。”(杜乐天《地壳流体与地幔流体间的关系》地学前缘(中国地质大学,北京) 3卷第34199610月)www.ddhw.com

杜乐天还直接主张:www.ddhw.com

古气候变动、冰期交替的主导因素根源也在于地球排气作用的气象效应。”(杜乐天《地球排气作用——建立整体地球科学的一条统纲》地学前缘(中国地质大学北京)第7卷第220044月)www.ddhw.com

关于外部能量辐射,学者们注意到冰期旋回与天文周期的关系。www.ddhw.com

地球运动存在如下轨道周期:岁差周期:2.3万年的;地球自转轴倾斜变化周期:大约4.1万年;地球轨道偏心率变化周期:大约10万年。地球温度变化同样存在这些周期。

回复

使用道具 举报

84

主题

2814

帖子

2万

积分

沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2009-11-30 18:14:19 | 只看该作者

近日发生的climate research email泄露事件(USA Today英文报道)(图)


原报道见https://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2009-11-30-warming30_ST_N.htm

 

Climate research e-mail controversy simmerswww.ddhw.com

Updated 5h 33m ago | Comments 106  | Recommend 4 E-mail | Save | Print | Reprints & Permissions |
www.ddhw.com
 EnlargeBy Torsten Blackwood, AFP/Getty Images
Cold, hard facts, scientists say: An iceberg breaks off the Knox Coast in the Australian Antarctic. Melting polar ice is frequently cited as proof of climate change.
www.ddhw.com
 EXPERT PERSPECTIVE

USA TODAY asked the University of Michigan's Nicholas Steneck, author of the federal Office of Research Integrity's "Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research" report, to comment on the climate researchers' emails stolen from the United Kingdom's University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU) this month:

"The faults, if there are any, are in my view much broader than CRU and its researchers. Scientists/researchers have not thought through and provided guidance on how they should act in situations such as this and how the behavior of scientists should be assessed when problems arise. This is why there is no agreement now even on who should look into the situation. www.ddhw.com

Society needs good, reliable scientific advice to make informed decisions about public policy.  Scientist should not be put in a situation where they are too intimidated by anyone who disagrees to provide that advice.  Scientific freedom must be protected.  But scientists also need to be provided with appropriate guidance and training on public debate and advocacy.  It would be a sad day for society if some ill-chosen words in private emails distracted the important discussions that need to take place about how best to control our insatiable need for energy and its impact on our environment."www.ddhw.com

var storyURL = "https://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2009-11-30-warming30_ST_N.htm"; var storyTitle = "Climate research e-mail controversy simmers";var articleSummary = "The scientific conduct of climate researchers has come under increasing heat in a sprawling online debate over leaked e-mails from climate researchers.";
www.ddhw.com
www.ddhw.com
if (typeof(articleSummary) == 'undefined'){ var articleSummary =""; } var articleSource = "USATODAY.com"; var yahooBuzzArticleId = 'usatoday:'+storyURL+'?csp=34'; var yahooBuzzBadgeType = 'text'; var twtUrl = 'https://usat.me/?'+tagID+''; var maxLength = 140 - (twtUrl.length + 1); var twtSource = 'RT @USATODAY' if (storyTitle.length > maxLength) { storyTitle = storyTitle.substr(0, (maxLength - 5))+'...'; } var twtLink = 'https://twitter.com/home?status='+encodeURIComponent( twtSource + ' ' + storyTitle + ' ' + twtUrl ); function GetThis(T, C, U, L) { var targetUrl = 'https://www.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=postto&' + 't=' + encodeURIComponent(T) + '&c=' + encodeURIComponent(C) + '&u=' + encodeURIComponent(U) + '&l=' + L; window.open(targetUrl); } var sclListTop = ""; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +=' '; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
    '; sclListTop +='
  • More'; sclListTop +=' '; sclListTop +=' '; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; jQuery("#topSocialButtons").append(sclListTop); jQuery(".share-nav").treeview({control: ".treecontrol",animated: "medium",collapsed: true});jQuery(function { jQuery.ajax({ type: "GET", url: "/marketing/rss/settings.xml", dataType: "xml", success: BuildSubscribeButtons });});function BuildSubscribeButtons(xml) { // Build SSTS array var url = document.location.toString; var urlArray = url.split("/") var nurl = ""; for (i = 3; i < urlArray.length - 1; i++) { if(i0) { idx = nurl.indexOf('|'); jQuery(xml).find('add').each(function{ if (jQuery(this).attr('key') == nurl) { feedid = jQuery(this).attr('value'); } }); if (feedid == "") { nurl = nurl.replace(/(.*)\|(.*)/,"$1"); } } jQuery(xml).find('add').each(function{ if (jQuery(this).attr('key') == feedid) { feedname = jQuery(this).attr('value'); } }); if (feedname == "") feedname = "usatoday-NewsTopStories.xml"; var sclListTop = ""; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
    '; sclListTop +='
  • Subscribe'; sclListTop +='
  •  myYahoo'; sclListTop +='
  •  iGoogle'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
    '; sclListTop +='
  • More'; sclListTop +='
      '; sclListTop +='
    •  Netvibes'; sclListTop +='
    •  myAOL'; sclListTop +='
    '; sclListTop +=' '; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
    '; sclListTop +='
  • '; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; jQuery("#topSocialButtons").append(sclListTop); jQuery(".subscribe-nav").treeview({control: ".treecontrol",animated: "medium",collapsed: true});}
By Dan Vergano, USA TODAY
The scientific conduct of climate researchers has come under increasing heat in a sprawling online debate over leaked e-mails that, critics say, raise questions about the arguments that global warming threatens the world.www.ddhw.com

The fight comes as leaders of 192 nations prepare to meet Dec. 7-18 in Copenhagen to craft an agreement to stem the heat-trapping "greenhouse" gases that feed temperature rise.www.ddhw.com

Unknown hackers this month stole thousands of e-mails and documents, dating from 1996 to 2009, from the United Kingdom's University of East Anglia. The university's Climate Research Center has played a key role in advancing the case that the planet is steadily getting warmer.www.ddhw.com

In the e-mails, researchers led by the climate center's Phil Jones discuss problems with data, models and outside critics of their research. The conclusion of some who have looked at the e-mails, including Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., is that the scientists are ignoring data that question whether global warming is real and that they have conspired to disparage those who question their work.

'E-mails do not read well' www.ddhw.com

The controversy gained new momentum last week as Inhofe and others called for investigations and the University of East Anglia announced an "independent review."www.ddhw.com

George Monbiot, a well-known environmentalist who writes for the United Kingdom's newspaper The Guardian, called for re-examination of all the data discussed in the stolen notes and said Jones "should now resign" because of a message saying he would keep climate skeptics' papers out of the benchmark 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. Jones vows in the e-mail to "keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"

Says Monbiot: "His message looks awful."www.ddhw.com

Critics view the temperature record maintained at the East Anglia climate center as a backbone of warnings that surface temperatures are going up with statistical certainty worldwide as predicted by greenhouse gas measurements. Misconduct there exposes climate change as a lie, they say. Inhofe, for instance, says the e-mails show researchers "cooked the books" to make the case for global warming.www.ddhw.com

"My colleagues and I accept that some of the published e-mails do not read well," Jones said in a statement. "Some were clearly written in the heat of the moment; others use colloquialisms frequently used between close colleagues."

On Saturday, East Anglia official Trevor Davies said 95% of the worldwide weather station data backing the climate center's temperature record are publicly available. "The university will make all the data accessible as soon as they are released from a range of non-publication agreements," he said in a statement.www.ddhw.com

But Jones and others note that the center's surface temperature reconstructions also have been independently mirrored by the National Climatic Data Center of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, showing rising global temperatures from records dating back to 1880.

Scientists: Look at the facts

The case for global warming rests on "all kinds of evidence," says climate scientist Don Wuebbles of the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign. "Look at what's happening to ice in the Arctic. Explain that as 'no global warming.' It doesn't take a genius to see, obviously, warming is happening, e-mails or not."www.ddhw.com

Further, notes IPCC chief Rajendra Pachauri, the evidence for warming in the 2007 IPCC report comes from multiple lines of evidence besides surface temperatures, such as ocean heat, atmospheric water vapor and sea ice. The 2007 report found man-made gases have raised average atmospheric temperatures about 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit since 1905 and probably will raise them 3 to 7 degrees by 2100, depending on future emission cuts.www.ddhw.com

"The East Anglia temperature records aren't the core problem," says climatologist Patrick Michaels of the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., which advocates for limited regulation.www.ddhw.com

Michaels, a skeptic of the worst implications of a warming climate, comes under criticism in the e-mails for a 2007 Journal of Geophysical Research paper he co-wrote. The paper said that industry and urban heat explain half of the temperature rise seen over land. "Attempts to influence editors not to publish papers you don't like: That's the real issue," Michaels says.

"The problem seems to be the circling-of-the-wagons strategy developed by small groups of climate researchers in response to the politically motivated attacks against climate science," says climate researcher Judith Curry of Georgia Tech, writing on the ClimateAudit website.www.ddhw.com

But Pachauri says small groups of researchers "have no ability" to decide what gets in or out of the IPCC reports, given their four layers of independent review by hundreds of people. "The entire report-writing process of the IPCC is subjected to extensive and repeated review by experts as well as governments," he says.www.ddhw.com

Scientists have not had any guidance on how they should act in the midst of a scientific controversy like global warming, says science-misconduct expert Nicholas Steneck of the University of Michigan, by e-mail. "I believe what the CRU e-mails will show when carefully studied is a group of professionals struggling with the (climate) dilemma."www.ddhw.com

var OutbrainPermaLink=storyURL; var OB_Template = "usatoday"; var OB_demoMode = false; var OBITm = "1241731960421"; var OB_langJS ='https://widgets.outbrain.com/lang_en.js'; if ( typeof(OB_Script)!='undefined' ) OutbrainStart; else { var OB_Script = true; var str = '<\/script>'; document.write(str); }



 

www.ddhw.org---

据说这世界是彩色的?

 

回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

24小时热帖
    一周热门
      原创摄影
        美食美文
          您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

          本版积分规则

          Archiver|手机版|珍珠湾ART

          Powered by Discuz! X3 © 2001-2013 All Rights Reserved