Greenhouse Emissions of Agriculture

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 6:25 AM GMT on July 27, 2013

Share this Blog
24
+

Greenhouse Emissions of Agriculture

In the last blog there was a comment by peregrinepickle on the emissions from agriculture. It started:

“It sounds like they may be putting the cart before the workhorse with this study. A 2010 survey of the literature found that too few studies on GHG emissions and the impact of various alternative farming practices have been done in US agricultural regions, including the Great plains Ironically, more research is being done in this vein in China. So it seems premature to appeal to US farmers re: willingness to adopt certain practices before knowing exactly where you are going with it.

Agriculture, compared to other sources, is not a huge contributor to GHGs, relative to the contributions by industry, transportation, and utilities. In the US farming is responsible for 6% of the overall emissions of the six major GHGs. However, farming does contribute about 25% of all CH4 emissions in the US, which is major, as this gas is 21-33 times more potent in warming potential than CO2.”

Back in April and May I wrote two entries on the emissions from agriculture (first entry, second entry). These two entries highlighted both the complexity of calculating the greenhouse emissions related to agriculture as well as suggested some of the controversy associated with the calculation. The controversy is especially high in the calculation associated with livestock.

The amount of direct fossil fuel emissions from use of fuels in machinery and pumps for agriculture is modest, as stated in peregrinepickle’s comment. Those numbers are based on a 2010 inventory by the Environmental Protection Agency. Here is a link to the chapter that details the agricultural inventory. The greenhouse gas emissions compiled in the chapter on agriculture are for greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide, especially methane and nitrous oxide. For the EPA inventory, the carbon dioxide associated with agriculture is accounted for in the energy inventory. Additional emissions and removal of greenhouse gasses are calculated with land use, land change and forestry. The national forests are part of the Department of Agriculture.

The accounting with soils and forests influences, greatly, the budget of emissions associated with agriculture. Based on soil management agriculture can remove and store substantial amounts of greenhouse gases. In the U.S. agriculture is a mature and extensive enterprise, and we are not aggressively converting forest to agricultural land. In fact, the amount of forest is increasing and, therefore, can be accounted as an agricultural removal of carbon dioxide. This fact of increasing forest land is not the case in much of the world. World-wide, deforestation as forest is converted to agricultural use, especially rangeland, accounts for much of the carbon footprint of agriculture. Phil Robertson in an article to appear in the Encyclopedia of Agriculture estimates the total greenhouse gas footprint of agriculture is between 26 and 36 percent (thank you Professor Robertson). This range seems soundly based in the synthesis of research, and the number I would quote based on the current state of knowledge.

As detailed in Livestock’s Long Shadow and stated in the entirety of peregrinepickle’s comment, the impact of agriculture reaches far beyond the relevance to climate change. Notably there are impacts on water quality and land quality, and, in my opinion, the impact of nitrogen (fertilizer) pollution is one of the most under appreciated sources of environmental degradation. Management of this whole portfolio of environmental impacts is one of the special challenges of the agricultural sector of human activities.

The mix of greenhouse gas emissions, the details of the practice of land use, the role of biological processes, and the potential to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and store them in soil and biomass characterize the climate impact of agriculture. Agriculture is also vulnerable to climate change. Since agriculture is a highly competitive, market-dependent undertaking, market response to weather and climate can amplify weather-related impacts. Agriculture becomes more entangled with the climate problem, when we consider the possibility of biofuels to replace some of our fossil fuels. This complexity complicates the accounting of climate impacts, but also offers some of our best opportunities to improve our management of the environment. Agriculture is no doubt an important player in our management of climate change, and notably absent in President Obama recent speech on climate change.

A primary source of agricultural information is Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. An often cited document is the 2006 documentLivestock’s Long Shadow. There has been much criticism of this report, especially in its calculation of the emissions of the transportation sector. The original authors did modify their specific statements about transportation. As noted in an earlier blog in this series, there is substantial controversy about the impact of agriculture. Therefore, I end here with a set of reference materials that I have used.

EPA National Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data

PDF of Agriculture Chapter of EPA Inventory of Emissions

Agriculture’s Role in Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Chapter 8: Working Group 3: IPCC 2007

Energy Efficiency of Conventional, Organic and Alternative Cropping …

Livestock and Climate Change

and to appear

Soil Greenhouse Gas Emissions and their Mitigation, G. Philip Robertson, W.K. Kellogg Biological Station and the Department of Plant, Soil and Microbial Sciences, Michigan State University, Hickory Corners, MI 49060

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 963 - 913

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24Blog Index

963. yoboi
Quoting 962. LAbonbon:


I'm sure he does. My question was actually rhetorical, and sorry, a bit sarcastic.

What really gets me about these guys, is this. He is a legitimate scientist. He's gone all the way through to a Ph.D. He has, apparently, a load of experience. He went into the private sector, had his own company, etc. Now he's obviously on one side of the AGW 'debate'. Where is his life's work? Scientists at the Ph.D. level, who are heavily published, consider the body of their publications to be a significant component of their life's work, along with successful projects. He profiles the projects, but where are the papers?

I would actually read any peer-reviewed research he put forth refuting AGW theory. Why? Because he actually has the credentials to back it up. But, based on the language on his website, fraught with disparaging remarks about 'environmentalists', 'ecologists', and fellow scientists, I'm leaning towards skepticism of his science, solely based on his demeanor.

I have no problems with scientists who legitimately disagree w/ AGW, or specific components of it (such as extent, rate, ramifications, etc.). I think some of them have legitimate questions. But scientists typically respectfully disagree, and they do it with research, presentations, and publications.

It's just very odd that he highlights his athletic achievements (kudos to him), but his academic bio is limited. Someone at his level would have several pages of a curriculum vitae. I hazard a guess that if he really wanted to swing scientists to his point of view, he would offer up his science on his website. It seems to me he's not aiming for scientists at all; he's going for popular opinion of the public at large. And that is one of the worst sort of scientist, in my opinion.

Thanks, Yoboi, for asking about this guy. Otherwise I never would have seen his 'bio' (limited as it is).



He claims to have over 40 peer reviewed papers I am trying to find them.....
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1983
Quoting 960. yoboi:



Neap might know more about him....


I'm sure he does. My question was actually rhetorical, and sorry, a bit sarcastic.

What really gets me about these guys, is this. He is a legitimate scientist. He's gone all the way through to a Ph.D. He has, apparently, a load of experience. He went into the private sector, had his own company, etc. Now he's obviously on one side of the AGW 'debate'. Where is his life's work? Scientists at the Ph.D. level, who are heavily published, consider the body of their publications to be a significant component of their life's work, along with successful projects. He profiles the projects, but where are the papers?

I would actually read any peer-reviewed research he put forth refuting AGW theory. Why? Because he actually has the credentials to back it up. But, based on the language on his website, fraught with disparaging remarks about 'environmentalists', 'ecologists', and fellow scientists, I'm leaning towards skepticism of his science, solely based on his demeanor.

I have no problems with scientists who legitimately disagree w/ AGW, or specific components of it (such as extent, rate, ramifications, etc.). I think some of them have legitimate questions. But scientists typically respectfully disagree, and they do it with research, presentations, and publications.

It's just very odd that he highlights his athletic achievements (kudos to him), but his academic bio is limited. Someone at his level would have several pages of a curriculum vitae. I hazard a guess that if he really wanted to swing scientists to his point of view, he would offer up his science on his website. It seems to me he's not aiming for scientists at all; he's going for popular opinion of the public at large. And that is one of the worst sort of scientist, in my opinion.

Thanks, Yoboi, for asking about this guy. Otherwise I never would have seen his 'bio' (limited as it is).
Member Since: Posts: Comments:


Related Paper:

Recent trends of the tropical hydrological cycle inferred from Global Precipitation Climatology Project and International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project data
Abstract

[1] Scores of modeling studies have shown that increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere impact the global hydrologic cycle; however, disagreements on regional scales are large, and thus the simulated trends of such impacts, even for regions as large as the tropics, remain uncertain. The present investigation attempts to examine such trends in the observations using satellite data products comprising Global Precipitation Climatology Project precipitation and International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project cloud and radiation. Specifically, evolving trends of the tropical hydrological cycle over the last 20–30 years were identified and analyzed. The results show (1) intensification of tropical precipitation in the rising regions of the Walker and Hadley circulations and weakening over the sinking regions of the associated overturning circulation; (2) poleward shift of the subtropical dry zones (up to 2° decade−1 in June-July-August (JJA) in the Northern Hemisphere and 0.3–0.7° decade−1 in June-July-August and September-October-November in the Southern Hemisphere) consistent with an overall broadening of the Hadley circulation; and (3) significant poleward migration (0.9–1.7° decade−1) of cloud boundaries of Hadley cell and plausible narrowing of the high cloudiness in the Intertropical Convergence Zone region in some seasons. These results support findings of some of the previous studies that showed strengthening of the tropical hydrological cycle and expansion of the Hadley cell that are potentially related to the recent global warming trends.

Complete Paper(PDF)
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2747
960. yoboi
Quoting 959. LAbonbon:


Never quite seen a bio like that before. Holy bragadocious...and where is his list of publications? They normally are listed somewhere.



Neap might know more about him....
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1983
Quoting 956. yoboi:


I never heard his name brought up here before... thats why I was asking.....I read some stuff on his site he seems more into bragging about how good he is with sailing and running....


Never quite seen a bio like that before. Holy bragadocious...and where is his list of publications? They normally are listed somewhere.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 954. yoboi:
Link



Is Dr Berry respected in the science community?????


This is what Dr. Berry says in the link you provided:

"Yet, today we have global warming alarmists claiming everything that happens — and even some things that don’t happen but which they think should happen — is caused by global warming. This is preposterous. In global warming, we cannot repeat our experiments, we have no control earth with which to compare our experiments, and we cannot do double-blind studies. It is a statistical inference problem that is impossible to solve.

Therefore, many alarmist claims about cause and effect are total junk. Yet they teach this nonsense in our universities and make students pay for their junk classes and they give academic credit for something that should remain in the world of illusion.
"

There may be people making statements that are exaggerated concerning climate change. When he uses the language that he uses he lowered himself to the standards that Rush of Sean would use in their statements of their opinions. Had the Dr. provided links to any actual climatologists making these claims then the Dr. may have a point worth discussing. All he offers us is his own opinion and without the evidence that any climatologists have made these claims.

He is correct that we have no control Earth in which to compare the results. But why is a control Earth required to collect data and make observations? All the Dr. is trying to do is to make an end run around The Laws of Physics, Chemistry and Thermodynamics and not providing the slightest bit of evidence as to how it can be done. He is, essentially, trying to compare the AGWT with String Theory. Unlike String Theory, the AGWT can be tested, retested, data collected and direct observations made. Do we really need a control Earth when we can study planets such as Venus and Mars or our own moon as to how atmospheric chemistry and density plays a part in how the planet retains or loses heat due to its atmosphere, or lack of?
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4728
Comparison of Arctic and Antarctic ice loss from GRACE

Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2747
956. yoboi
Quoting 955. Neapolitan:
No. He's got a well-deserved reputation as a self-aggrandizing, radically-right, pro-Big Energy believer in the denialist darling "Clouds!!!" theory, and a man thoroughly convinced that he and he alone holds The Keys To Ultimate Climate Knowledge that have escaped the grasp of thousands of actual experts in the field. Bonus: he's a Birther, and a staunch proponent of every goofy conservative conspiracy theory known to man.

Yes, a real genius is Dr. Berry...


I never heard his name brought up here before... thats why I was asking.....I read some stuff on his site he seems more into bragging about how good he is with sailing and running....
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1983
Quoting 954. yoboi:
Link



Is Dr Berry respected in the science community?????
No. He's got a well-deserved reputation as a self-aggrandizing, radically-right, pro-Big Energy believer in the denialist darling "Clouds!!!" theory, and a man thoroughly convinced that he and he alone holds The Keys To Ultimate Climate Knowledge that have escaped the grasp of thousands of actual experts in the field. Bonus: he's a Birther, and a staunch proponent of every goofy conservative conspiracy theory known to man.

Yes, a real genius is Dr. Berry...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
954. yoboi
Link



Is Dr Berry respected in the science community?????
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1983
boy, solar irradiance having not gone up at all in the last 30 years sure has melted a lot of ice!

Quoting 952. Birthmark:

Well, if you want to be realistic, this isn't going to be much fun for the denialists. Every time there fails to be a new record, it's a 'recovery.' lol
Member Since: October 18, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 581
Quoting 950. schwankmoe:
5 million^km, that's not good. that's smack in the middle of the going-downward trend line.




Well, if you want to be realistic, this isn't going to be much fun for the denialists. Every time there fails to be a new record, it's a 'recovery.' lol
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5197
951. yoboi
Quoting 940. Snowlover123:
Here are some stats a meteorologist posted on another forum:

"2012: 1.47 million (73k per day)

2011: 1.16 million (58k per day)

2010: 0.88 million (44k per day)

2009: 1.00 million (50k per day)

2008: 1.26 million (63k per day)

2007: 0.86 million (43k per day)

2006: 0.56 million (28k per day)

2005: 0.72 million (36k per day)"


The above values represent the amount of Arctic Sea Ice ice lost from now-September 1st on IJIS JAXA over the last 8 years. For comparison, our current Sea Ice extent in the Arctic is 6.27 million kilometers^2.

In order to start September with an extent lower than 5.0 million kilometers^2, we would need to see huge losses in August like we saw in 2012. Even those losses won't get us that much further below 5.0 million kilometers^2 to start September. I could see the Ice minimum being as low as 4.5 million kilometers^2, but also as high as 5.5 million kilometers^2. Thus, I'm still going with 5.0 million kilometers^2. The 3.95 million kilometers^2 forecast that was forecasted will likely be too low.



what forecast you going by???????
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1983
5 million^km, that's not good. that's smack in the middle of the going-downward trend line.



Quoting 940. Snowlover123:
Here are some stats a meteorologist posted on another forum:

"2012: 1.47 million (73k per day)

2011: 1.16 million (58k per day)

2010: 0.88 million (44k per day)

2009: 1.00 million (50k per day)

2008: 1.26 million (63k per day)

2007: 0.86 million (43k per day)

2006: 0.56 million (28k per day)

2005: 0.72 million (36k per day)"


The above values represent the amount of Arctic Sea Ice ice lost from now-September 1st on IJIS JAXA over the last 8 years. For comparison, our current Sea Ice extent in the Arctic is 6.27 million kilometers^2.

In order to start September with an extent lower than 5.0 million kilometers^2, we would need to see huge losses in August like we saw in 2012. Even those losses won't get us that much further below 5.0 million kilometers^2 to start September. I could see the Ice minimum being as low as 4.5 million kilometers^2, but also as high as 5.5 million kilometers^2. Thus, I'm still going with 5.0 million kilometers^2. The 3.95 million kilometers^2 forecast that was forecasted will likely be too low.
Member Since: October 18, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 581
Quoting 946. LAbonbon:


Was it that, though, his book, being VP to Clinton, the 2000 election, etc? And who started it - Rush, et.al., corporate types, or the original 'Contract w/ America' people? An Inconvenient Truth didn't come out until 2006. I think the disparagement from the right started way before.

Gore did succumb to Bush in a nasty election, but we wouldn't be hearing it so much even now except for Inconvenient Truth.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 882. MisterPerfect:
I am not a denialist. :)

A denialist would actually care about what you say.

As blatant an admission of trolling as I've seen.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 938. pintada:


So, how many dead in China? 1 million?? More?

"government-owned Xinhua news agency : Several have died of heat strokes already, including construction workers, many of whom are migrants with limited health care benefits. The mortality rate for heat strokes could be as high as 50%-70% due to lack of timely treatment."

Its hard (impossible) to tell, do they mean 50-70% of all migrants are dead??

Where did i see where someone had calculated a wet bulb temp of 33C for that area?

If construction workers are dying, then what about the aged, or otherwise weakened?

I'm so glad this is not attributable to anthropogenic global warming, cause then we might try to do something about it. Heck, I might've needed to sell my Hummer.

No climate change deaths here. Move along. Just move along.


Sounds like we need more ice in Arctic to keep things cooler in the Northern hemisphere....
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Quoting 943. bappit:

Well, Gore did make An Inconvenient Truth. If you don't like the message, hate the messenger.


Was it that, though, his book, being VP to Clinton, the 2000 election, etc? And who started it - Rush, et.al., corporate types, or the original 'Contract w/ America' people? An Inconvenient Truth didn't come out until 2006. I think the disparagement from the right started way before.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 934. JohnLonergan:


It could be this guy

Interesting link. Apparently he played the bad-guy role in the ring. From the article:

"Mr. Perfect epitomized everything we wanted to be years before we could put it into words. ... He was the harbinger for a generation of jackassery, of smart-guy sarcasm and holier-than-thou snark. We are the Mr. Perfect generation."
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 937. LAbonbon:


Seriously, I've never understood where all the Al Gore hate came from. I'd really like to know who started it, and when. It seems like the hate and ridicule took on a life of its own. I'd bet a lot of folks spewing it don't really know why either.

Well, Gore did make An Inconvenient Truth. If you don't like the message, hate the messenger.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Guys, this is all fun and games to MrP. He is just trying to get a rise out of somebody, just for yucks. No point in trying to argue with him or educate him. I was going to say "like an annoying teenage boy" but figured I shouldn't insult any teenagers amongst us.


Quoting 882. MisterPerfect:


I am not a denialist. :)

A denialist would actually care about what you say.
Member Since: January 6, 2013 Posts: 3 Comments: 1899
Statement of the Board of Directors of the American Association for the Advancement of Science Regarding Personal Attacks on Climate Scientists

Approved by the AAAS Board of Directors | 28 June 2011

We are deeply concerned by the extent and nature of personal attacks on climate scientists. Reports of harassment, death threats, and legal challenges have created a hostile environment that inhibits the free exchange of scientific findings and ideas and makes it difficult for factual information and scientific analyses to reach policymakers and the public. This both impedes the progress of science and interferes with the application of science to the solution of global problems. AAAS vigorously opposes attacks on researchers that question their personal and professional integrity or threaten their safety based on displeasure with their scientific conclusions. The progress of science and protection of its integrity depend on both full transparency about the details of scientific methodology and the freedom to follow the pursuit of knowledge. The sharing of research data is vastly different from unreasonable, excessive Freedom of Information Act requests for personal information and voluminous data that are then used to harass and intimidate scientists. The latter serve only as a distraction and make no constructive contribution to the public discourse.

Scientists and policymakers may disagree over the scientific conclusions on climate change and other policy-relevant topics. But the scientific community has proven and well-established methods for resolving disagreements about research results. Science advances through a self-correcting system in which research results are shared and critically evaluated by peers and experiments are repeated when necessary. Disagreements about the interpretation of data, the methodology, and findings are part of daily scientific discourse. Scientists should not be subjected to fraud investigations or harassment simply for providing scientific results that are controversial. Most scientific disagreements are unrelated to any kind of fraud and are considered a legitimate and normal part of the scientific process. The scientific community takes seriously its responsibility for policing research misconduct, and extensive procedures exist to protect the rigor of the scientific method and to ensure the credibility of the research enterprise.

While we fully understand that policymakers must integrate the best available scientific data with other factors when developing policies, we think it would be unfortunate if policymakers became the arbiters of scientific information and circumvented the peer-review process. Moreover, we are concerned that establishing a practice of aggressive inquiry into the professional histories of scientists whose findings may bear on policy in ways that some find unpalatable could well have a chilling effect on the willingness of scientists to conduct research that intersects with policy-relevant scientific questions.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Here are some stats a meteorologist posted on another forum:

"2012: 1.47 million (73k per day)

2011: 1.16 million (58k per day)

2010: 0.88 million (44k per day)

2009: 1.00 million (50k per day)

2008: 1.26 million (63k per day)

2007: 0.86 million (43k per day)

2006: 0.56 million (28k per day)

2005: 0.72 million (36k per day)"


The above values represent the amount of Arctic Sea Ice ice lost from now-September 1st on IJIS JAXA over the last 8 years. For comparison, our current Sea Ice extent in the Arctic is 6.27 million kilometers^2.

In order to start September with an extent lower than 5.0 million kilometers^2, we would need to see huge losses in August like we saw in 2012. Even those losses won't get us that much further below 5.0 million kilometers^2 to start September. I could see the Ice minimum being as low as 4.5 million kilometers^2, but also as high as 5.5 million kilometers^2. Thus, I'm still going with 5.0 million kilometers^2. The 3.95 million kilometers^2 forecast that was forecasted will likely be too low.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 931. LAbonbon:


Who knows here his moniker comes from :P



With a handle like that he obviously believes he is Jesus Christ. The drive to evangelize is there but his parables need a lot of work.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 926. Patrap:
Japan Breaks National Heat Record. Chinese Heat Wave Continues
Posted by: Christopher C. Burt, 3:48 PM CDT on August 12, 2013



An all-time national heat record was set in Japan today (August 12th) when the temperature peaked at 41.0°C (105.8°F) at the Ekawasaki site in Shimanto (part of Kochi Prefecture). The previous record of 40.9°C (105.6°F) was recorded at Tajima and Kumagaya on August 16, 2007. Tokyo endured its warmest daily minimum on August 11th with a low of 30.4°C (86.7°F). This was the 2nd warmest minimum on record for Japan following a minimum of 30.8°C (87.4°F) at Itoigawa on August 22, 1990.


So, how many dead in China? 1 million?? More?

"government-owned Xinhua news agency : Several have died of heat strokes already, including construction workers, many of whom are migrants with limited health care benefits. The mortality rate for heat strokes could be as high as 50%-70% due to lack of timely treatment."

Its hard (impossible) to tell, do they mean 50-70% of all migrants are dead??

Where did i see where someone had calculated a wet bulb temp of 33C for that area?

If construction workers are dying, then what about the aged, or otherwise weakened?

I'm so glad this is not attributable to anthropogenic global warming, cause then we might try to do something about it. Heck, I might've needed to sell my Hummer.

No climate change deaths here. Move along. Just move along.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 932. TheDevilsAdvocate:

He's also a good sport and true-to-life science geek as well. I remember being at a scientific meeting back in 1987 where he accepted an invitation to speak. It was a small meeting, maybe 150-200 people and no press involved but a US Senator found the time to come and tell us how important our work was. His reward for all of this was a lab coat with his name on it, which he actually put on and wore while giving his speech.

Good guy that Al Gore.



Seriously, I've never understood where all the Al Gore hate came from. I'd really like to know who started it, and when. It seems like the hate and ridicule took on a life of its own. I'd bet a lot of folks spewing it don't really know why either.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 935. Xandra:
Diagnosing a victim of anti-science syndrome (ASS)

In this post I%u2019m going to present the general diagnosis for %u201Canti-science syndrome%u201D (ASS). Like most syndromes, ASS is a collection of symptoms that individually may not be serious, but taken together can be quite dangerous %u2014 at least it can be dangerous to the health and well-being of humanity if enough people actually believe the victims.

One tell-tale symptom of ASS is that a website or a writer focuses their climate attacks on non-scientists. If that non-scientist is Al Gore, this symptom alone may be definitive.

The other key symptoms involve the repetition of long-debunked denier talking points, commonly without links to supporting material. Such repetition, which can border on the pathological, is a clear warning sign.

Scientists who kept restating and republishing things that had been widely debunked in the scientific literature for many, many years would quickly be diagnosed with ASS. Such people on the web are apparently heroes %u2014 at least to the right wing and/or easily duped (see %u201CThe Deniers are winning, but only with the GOP%u201C).

If you suspect someone of ASS, look for the repeated use of the following phrases:

- Medieval Warm Period
- Hockey Stick
- Michael Mann
- The climate is always changing
- Alarmist
- Hoax
- Temperature rises precede rises in carbon dioxide
- Pacific Decadal Oscillation
- Water vapor
- Sunspots
- Cosmic rays
- Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark
- Ice Age was predicted in the 1970s
- Global cooling

Individually, some of these words and phrases are quite useful and indeed are commonly used by both scientists and non-scientists who are not anti-science. But the use of more than half of these in a single speech or article is pretty much a definitive diagnosis of ASS.

When someone repeats virtually all of those phrases, along with multiple references to Al Gore, they are wholly a victim of ASS %u2014 in scientific circles they are referred to as ASS-wholes.


You can smell those guys coming a mile away...
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20219
Diagnosing a victim of anti-science syndrome (ASS)

In this post I’m going to present the general diagnosis for “anti-science syndrome” (ASS). Like most syndromes, ASS is a collection of symptoms that individually may not be serious, but taken together can be quite dangerous — at least it can be dangerous to the health and well-being of humanity if enough people actually believe the victims.

One tell-tale symptom of ASS is that a website or a writer focuses their climate attacks on non-scientists. If that non-scientist is Al Gore, this symptom alone may be definitive.

The other key symptoms involve the repetition of long-debunked denier talking points, commonly without links to supporting material. Such repetition, which can border on the pathological, is a clear warning sign.

Scientists who kept restating and republishing things that had been widely debunked in the scientific literature for many, many years would quickly be diagnosed with ASS. Such people on the web are apparently heroes — at least to the right wing and/or easily duped (see “The Deniers are winning, but only with the GOP“).

If you suspect someone of ASS, look for the repeated use of the following phrases:

- Medieval Warm Period
- Hockey Stick
- Michael Mann
- The climate is always changing
- Alarmist
- Hoax
- Temperature rises precede rises in carbon dioxide
- Pacific Decadal Oscillation
- Water vapor
- Sunspots
- Cosmic rays
- Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark
- Ice Age was predicted in the 1970s
- Global cooling

Individually, some of these words and phrases are quite useful and indeed are commonly used by both scientists and non-scientists who are not anti-science. But the use of more than half of these in a single speech or article is pretty much a definitive diagnosis of ASS.

When someone repeats virtually all of those phrases, along with multiple references to Al Gore, they are wholly a victim of ASS — in scientific circles they are referred to as ASS-wholes.
Member Since: November 22, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 1225
Quoting 931. LAbonbon:


Who knows here his moniker comes from :P



It could be this guy
Member Since: June 27, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 2747
apparently we all benefit from his childish obsession with gore. who knew?

Quoting 925. TheDevilsAdvocate:

So, posting derisive, Photoshopped images of Al Gore is your idea of candid debate? Seems that sincerity might not be one of your strong suits.

Member Since: October 18, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 581
Quoting 930. Neapolitan:
Methinks someone here has a wee bit of a crush on the good Mr. Gore. Is it the Vice President's dashing good looks? His worldwide stature and global influence? His Nobel Prize? His hard-earned wealth? His massive fame? Who knows? Only his admirers are sure. But the obsessed are fun to watch, aren't they?

(I can get his number for you, if you'd like.)

He's also a good sport and true-to-life science geek as well. I remember being at a scientific meeting back in 1987 where he accepted an invitation to speak. It was a small meeting, maybe 150-200 people and no press involved but a US Senator found the time to come and tell us how important our work was. His reward for all of this was a lab coat with his name on it, which he actually put on and wore while giving his speech.

Good guy that Al Gore.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 930. Neapolitan:
Methinks someone here has a wee bit of a crush on the good Mr. Gore. Is it the Vice President's dashing good looks? His worldwide stature and global influence? His Nobel Prize? His hard-earned wealth? His massive fame? Who knows? Only his admirers are sure. But the obsessed are fun to watch, aren't they?

(I can get his number for you, if you'd like.)


Who knows here his moniker comes from :P

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Methinks someone here has a wee bit of a crush on the good Mr. Gore. Is it the Vice President's dashing good looks? His worldwide stature and global influence? His Nobel Prize? His hard-earned wealth? His massive fame? Who knows? Only his admirers are sure. But the obsessed are fun to watch, aren't they?

(I can get his number for you, if you'd like.)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 927. MisterPerfect:


you be the judge:


Judge of what?

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Interesting article on sea level rise in the NYT -

Timing a Rise in Sea Level.

It really is all in the timing.

On the human time scale, of course, that is all the difference in the world. If sea level is going to rise by, say, 30 feet over several thousand years, that is quite a lot of time to adjust — to pull back from the beaches, to reinforce major cities, and to develop technologies to help us cope.

But if sea level is capable of rising several feet per century, as Dr. O’Leary’s paper would seem to imply and as many other scientists believe, then babies being born now could live to see the early stages of a global calamity.



Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 925. TheDevilsAdvocate:

So, posting derisive, Photoshopped images of Al Gore is your idea of candid debate? Seems that sincerity might not be one of your strong suits.



you be the judge:



Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Japan Breaks National Heat Record. Chinese Heat Wave Continues
Posted by: Christopher C. Burt, 3:48 PM CDT on August 12, 2013



An all-time national heat record was set in Japan today (August 12th) when the temperature peaked at 41.0°C (105.8°F) at the Ekawasaki site in Shimanto (part of Kochi Prefecture). The previous record of 40.9°C (105.6°F) was recorded at Tajima and Kumagaya on August 16, 2007. Tokyo endured its warmest daily minimum on August 11th with a low of 30.4°C (86.7°F). This was the 2nd warmest minimum on record for Japan following a minimum of 30.8°C (87.4°F) at Itoigawa on August 22, 1990.
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 414 Comments: 125575
Quoting 924. MisterPerfect:


I like it so much my wife won't let me drink it. ;)

There are many lifelong friends who choose to be friends with people just to able to debate candidly. To an extent, I value most of the anti-denialists on this blog as such. We all benefit from the exchange, in some way.

But when I post wind shear images on Dr. M's blog its not because Philip Morris and Exxon-Mobil told me to..

Just having fun. I want the world to continue to prove to me this planet is doomed. Keep it coming. A denialist with nothing more to deny is one who accepts.

So, posting derisive, Photoshopped images of Al Gore is your idea of candid debate? Seems that sincerity might not be one of your strong suits.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 921. Naga5000:


No worries. In fact, I'm sure we would get along great in real life. We both like beer, right?


I like it so much my wife won't let me drink it. ;)

There are many lifelong friends who choose to be friends with people just to able to debate candidly. To an extent, I value most of the anti-denialists on this blog as such. We all benefit from the exchange, in some way.

But when I post wind shear images on Dr. M's blog its not because Philip Morris and Exxon-Mobil told me to..

Just having fun. I want the world to continue to prove to me this planet is doomed. Keep it coming. A denialist with nothing more to deny is one who accepts.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 909. yonzabam:


Political and Internet deniers are frequently paid by the oil industry, which makes them a bit lower than mud dwelling pond life, imo.

What's your motivation?


by the way, if any oil company wants to enhance my motivation financially I will humbly accept. I'll be a mud dwelling mercenary for the right price...wait a minute...I think I might be a politician now!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 896. MisterPerfect:


LOL..all is did was google search "global warming alarmists" and that "article" had a recent date on it.

the funniest thing is how bent out of shape you guys get. some phD writes a review of a book and you want to nail him to the cross. take a timeout dude. LOL



This is nice to see; usually the trolls aren't nearly so blatant as to their motives. If only they all would be so open...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 919. MisterPerfect:


hey, I'm not here saying how great groupsnoop is..with all the awards and respect.

I know you're politically biased...don't worry about it. Pretty sure you think the same of me. Who cares. Not me. I still value you as a person. Shake hands. Be free. Buy Exxon. Smoke cigarettes. Vote Palin. Save the whales. Boycott Florida. Hillary 2016.

Don't mean nothing.


No worries. In fact, I'm sure we would get along great in real life. We both like beer, right?
Member Since: June 1, 2010 Posts: 4 Comments: 2687
Quoting 918. schwankmoe:


you're also a master of understatement.


I have 25 awards for that since 2008 :)

take an insult and keep on ticking...i'm just a happy blogger on the road of the rules.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 913. Naga5000:


I'll play, Groupsnoop, your "source" and I use that term loosely, was created by the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR). Do you remember them? I do. They are the organization that got in trouble for illegally distributing money via the direction of Jack Abramoff.


hey, I'm not here saying how great groupsnoop is..with all the awards and respect.

I know you're politically biased...don't worry about it. Pretty sure you think the same of me. Who cares. Not me. I still value you as a person. Shake hands. Be free. Buy Exxon. Smoke cigarettes. Vote Palin. Save the whales. Boycott Florida. Hillary 2016.

Don't mean nothing.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 917. MisterPerfect:


I'm just a low-information independent.


you're also a master of understatement.
Member Since: October 18, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 581
Quoting 914. yonzabam:


Well, since you denigrated Al Gore, I'd assume you're denying anthropogenic global warming.


I'm agnostic.

could be. could not be.

do I really have to pick a side?

I'm just a low-information independent.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
916. yoboi
Quoting 900. TheDevilsAdvocate:

Actually, the URL is http://www.motherjones.com. All I can say is that Mother Jones played a big part in saving us from the Mittster and, for that, I will be eternally grateful.




Who got saved????????? Do you really think the repukes or demrats care about the little guy?????
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1983
Quoting 908. JohnLonergan:


Joe Fone deserves no respect or credence. Below is a link to the kindle version of his book, if you scroll thru his introduction, you'll see that he acknowledges the infuence of Watts, Jonova, Steve McIntire, Tim Ball, Andrew Montford and other well known deniers. Basically the book is garbage.

Just scroll up to the acknowledgements Link


Whoah, never said any such thing. My comment was a little (*sarcasm*) understated. Even without knowing his politics, he's a CAD guy. Nothing wrong with that, they can be invaluable on projects. My point, which I guess I was not clear on, was that he is not a scientist.

To the casual reader, there's a Ph.D (Lehr) advocating a book on GW. Again, the average person wouldn't know the illegitimacy of the book.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 911. MisterPerfect:


I don't understand. What exactly are you saying I am denying?


Well, since you denigrated Al Gore, I'd assume you're denying anthropogenic global warming.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 903. MisterPerfect:


Oh, so we distinguish credibility by awards do we?



well respected...LOL

largest bidder?

Funding

According to Discover the Networks, Mother Jones (through the Foundation for National Progress) has received funding from “the Bill Moyers-run Schumann Center for Media and Democracy, the Arca Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, the Streisand Foundation, the Irving Harris Foundation, Kansas City Community Foundation, the Lannan Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, and the Park Foundation.

Mother Jones


I'll play, Groupsnoop, your "source" and I use that term loosely, was created by the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR). Do you remember them? I do. They are the organization that got in trouble for illegally distributing money via the direction of Jack Abramoff.
Member Since: June 1, 2010 Posts: 4 Comments: 2687

Viewing: 963 - 913

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.