Summer has come and gone and the air has a certain crispness to it, indicating that autumn is near. Another round of warmth followed by a round of cooling—the normal seasonal change that we New Yorkers have come to know and love (or hate). Sure, we had a few really hot days, but those moments are just blips in our memories. Should we truly note the feeling as if we were in an outdoor sauna as unusual? In fact, have we been witnessing a substantial climate change without even realizing it? Unless you are a hermit, you are probably aware of the climate debate raging between scientists and politicians. However, a majority of us are not atmospheric physicists and our attempts to dive into the literature written by climate scientists can often prove to be quite difficult given the amount of technical jargon associated with such reports. Therefore, in honor of Climate Week NYC 2010 (September 20 to 26), I have resorted to the next best thing: interpretations of these studies by scientists communicated to the general public via the world wide web. Yes, folks, I am talking about blogging.

A common misconception about climate change is that some believe the debate is over whether warming is actually happening. But, virtually all scientists believe that warming is occurring. Where the debate truly arises is over the issue of greenhouse gases, namely carbon dioxide (CO2). A large majority of the scientific community feels that the current climate phenomenon is anthropogenic global warming (AGW), a concept that, if fully embraced by the government, could have substantial impacts on global policy as it relates to greenhouse gases. However, there is a scientific minority that does not feel the data presented by the pro-AGW camp is of the best quality. Additionally, these scientists have presented a re-evaluation of the raw data used by their foes and have generated alternate datasets using different proxies (i.e. isotope measurements as opposed to tree rings). Here, I will present two blogs discussing climate change, with one representing each viewpoint.

The majority view is that human-induced CO2 production is the major factor behind global warming (97% of climate scientists agree with this). This is based on the relationship between increases in CO2 and the subsequent increases in temperatures. One of the most well-written blogs in support of this theory is “Skeptical Science,” authored primarily by John Cook, who, although he studied physics in college and graduate school, is not a climate scientist. In fact, he is not associated with any climate institution and does not get paid to keep up his blog. He sifts through the peer-reviewed literature and presents it to us, the public, in a language that can be readily understood. As it says on his site, “Skeptical Science” is “strictly a labor of love.” The site is maintained nearly everyday, with posts such as “Newcomers start here” and “Of satellites and temperatures.” However, the most relevant section to this particular discussion on CO2 is named simply “Arguments.” In this section, Cook lists 119 arguments presented by non-AGW scientists and provides apparent counterevidence for each argument, including data extracted from peer-reviewed articles. Given the recent Rockefeller University lecture given by Dr. Fred Singer, atmospheric physicist and leader of the non-AGW movement, who stated that cosmic rays are the ultimate cause of global warming, I clicked on argument number 14 against AGW: “It’s cosmic rays.” What I found was a summary of several journal articles which all concluded that the link between cosmic rays and increased global temperatures was not clear; in fact, it is stated that increased cosmic rays would impose a cooling effect, assuming this was directly correlated to increased cloud cover. For more information on this topic and to read this blog. A few other noteworthy pro-AGW blogs: Alden Griffith’s “Fool Me Once” and Joseph Romm’s Climate Progress.

Conversely, there are a number of climate blogs that promote an alternate message: that the warming of the earth is a result of natural cycling. I recently stumbled on “Watts up with that?” a climate blog primarily authored by Anthony Watts, a former television meteorologist with a passion for weather measurement and weather presentation technology. He states that, due to his auditory condition (he suffered an injury during his childhood which left his hearing at 15% of normal levels), blogging is a natural forum to discuss his favorite topic. Although he considers himself to be a global warming “skeptic,” Anthony Watts considers himself to be “green.” He drives an electric car and promotes the idea of alternate energy. As this article is being written, the headlining post on this site describes a new paper whereby the original “hockey stick” graph, which depicts a sharp increase in temperature correlating with the beginning of the industrial revolution, is reconstructed using alternative proxies and more stringent statistical filters. These new findings suggest that warming has occurred over the last century. However, the slope of the new graph is much more gradual. An additional point of this paper proposes that climate scientists have severely underestimated the uncertainty associated with proxy-based temperature reconstruction. Another interesting project to which Anthony Watts his time is called “Surface Stations,” a venture started in June 2007 that is designed to photographically record each of the 1221 weather stations in the United States considered to be “of high quality.” This project, which can be found under the “Projects” tab on Anthony Watts’ blog or can be accessed through www.surfacestations.org, is intended to highlight that the placement of thermometers can have a major effect on temperature readings and may skew national temperature averages. For example, there is a picture of a weather station surrounded by asphalt, a cell phone tower, and several air conditioning exhaust units, all emitting heat and contributing to an artificially increased temperature reading. Anthony Watts hopes to promote awareness of this situation so that these micro-site effects are taken into consideration when these temperature readings are analyzed.

Interestingly, both Anthony Watts and John Cook have managed to get iPhone apps for their respective websites. Perhaps I will get both for my iPhone so that I can keep up with the times. Given the magnitude of the climate debate, it might prove to be quite useful when trying to decipher the new climate findings. Additionally, I can comfortably predict that climate change will be a major issue surrounding the next presidential election. It might be in all of our best interests to keep up on the most current viewpoints, so that we can cast our votes for the candidate whose ideals are more aligned with our own. It is becoming increasingly difficult for me to separate climate science from climate politics. However, I will refrain from discussing this as it probably can initiate a whole other article (or even series). If you would like to hear more about the global warming debate or if you want to initiate a local discussion on this topic, please check out my column on The Incubator.