This is a Leonberger blog but sometimes I post about other topics that interest me. This post is about five facts about Climate Change that I think everyone should know. It is also an opportunity for me to bring attention to my new blog. I should say that I am posting this on this blog because my Leonberger blog is the one that gets the most attention.
Climate Change, or if you call it Global Warming, is a huge problem that has been getting a lot of attention, but despite this fact a lot of people don’t understand the simple basics. The confusion and misinformation are especially widespread here in the US. You can thank the fossil fuel industry propaganda and right wing think tanks for that. I was bamboozled and misled myself until I took a deep dive into the subject and learned what the facts were. It helped me a bit that I have a strong science background. The five facts I have in mind are:
- (1) We know that climate change is happening
- (2) We know that we humans are the cause
- (3) Nearly 100 percent of climate scientists agree that we are the cause
- (4) Climate change has always been around but that does not change the facts above
- (5) It is not important whether you call it Global Warming or Climate Change
We Know that Climate Change is Happening
The evidence that Global Warming (or Climate Change) is happening is overwhelming, in fact conclusive. It includes the temperature records collected by numerous organizations, NOAA, NASA, the Hadley Centre, the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, the Japanese Meteorological Agency, the World Meteorological Organization, and many more. These organizations collect data from land-based weather stations, ocean buoys, satellite measurements, and other sources to monitor Earth’s climate. Comparison with the palaeoclimatological record shows that the rise in average global temperatures is extremely fast.
Other evidence is the measurements of global sea levels, the fact that glaciers are retreating, that the arctic ice is melting, that the Antarctic ice sheet is losing ice, that eco zones are generally shifting northward, that the climate is changing, and that snow seasons are getting shorter, something that is directly visible to old guys from northern climates like me. You can read more about this evidence by clicking here. Below are two 45 second videos from NASA illustrating global warming.
We Know that we Humans are the Cause
Climate scientists have done thorough studies of atmospheric physics, paleoclimatology (past climate), oceanography, geology, and biology related to climate change, as well as climate modeling, and have produced tens of thousands of research papers in the process. The evidence they have collected points to us as the culprit behind the recent rapid rise in overall global temperatures and other climate change.
The evidence that we are the cause behind climate change includes the climate models, which have gotten extremely good. What we see is pretty much exactly what you expect from our fossil fuel emissions. The upper troposphere is cooling, which shows that the global heating is from greenhouse gases and not from the sun or from earth’s orbital cycles. To understand how the lower atmosphere is warming while the upper is cooling, think of the greenhouse gases as a blanket. The fact that winters and nights are generally warming faster is another indicator that the cause for the warming is greenhouse gases. The speed of the warming is so fast that there is no known natural forcing that could cause it. Isotope studies show that the origin of the greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere are from burning fossil fuels. To read more about this evidence click here.
Nearly 100 Percent of Climate Scientists Agree that we are the Cause
Climate Scientists agree that Global Warming or if you call it Climate Change is happening, and that it is caused by us primarily because of our burning of fossil fuels. There is a long-standing scientific consensus on these two facts because the evidence is conclusive. Typically, studies show an agreement of at least 97% or 98% among climate scientists. To read more about this topic click here.
Climate Change Has Always Been Around But that does not Change the Facts Above
Climate has changed for natural reasons, for as long as our planet has been around (pun not intended). The sun’s irradiance has changed, life evolving effect climate, especially microbe evolution, crashing asteroids can affect climate, earth has three orbital cycles, orbital eccentricity, change in axial tilt, and axial precession, and volcanoes spew out carbon dioxide and aerosols. However, past climate change is not a reason to dismiss human caused climate change. First, our scientific organizations keep track of natural causes and if you remove our greenhouse gas emissions from the equation it should not be getting warmer right now. Second, the different causes of climate change have different effects, different fingerprints if you will, and the way climate change is happening is pointing to human greenhouse gas emissions (a fingerprint match), not anything else.
A very common objection to human-caused climate change is that climate has always changed, it’s been warmer before, a 100 million years ago it was much warmer, carbon dioxide levels were much higher before, etc. This is a very bad objection that reveals the ignorance of the objector on this topic, as well as him/her not thinking through what they are saying. Think about it, the experts on past climate are the ones telling us that climate change is not natural this time. If you use this objection, you should ask yourself, maybe there is something you are missing.
This is how the well-known Climate Scientist Katherine Hayhoe introduces herself: “Hi, I’m a climate scientist. You may know me from my greatest hits including, “No, it’s not a natural cycle,” “Yes, I know it’s been warmer before (and the only reason YOU know is because we scientists told you so),”
In my post “Global Warming is Happening and is Caused by us” I wrote a lot about natural causes behind past climate change. To read more click here.
It is not Important Whether you call it Global Warming or Climate Change
Finally, I have come across a lot of people who instantly object if you use both the phrase Global Warming and Climate Change. They think it is proof that there is something sinister going on. A conspiracy. We used to have a big dog, a Leonberger called Bronco. Just because I just called him “a big dog” instead of a Leonberger does not mean that I am lying about having a Leonberger. It is just two descriptions for the same dog. Actually, one time I called him Henry by mistake. There is still no conspiracy.
Climate Change is a broader term. The average global temperature is rising but there are a lot of other things going on as well, weather patterns are changing, some places are getting dryer, some wetter, the carbon emissions are causing ocean acidification, etc. However, both Global Warming and Climate Change are acceptable terms. Whether you use the phrases Global Warming, Climate Change, Climate Disruption, Global Heating, is a personal preference. The popularity of the different monikers has changed with culture, and not just because of popularity among scientists. Implying conspiracies or dishonesty because of different monikers is a popular thing to do but it is silly.
Leonberger Life 
Additionally many people simply refuse to believe it or to even consider it as a possibility. They see “climate change” as left wing propaganda.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes you are right. This topic has unfortunately become political but thermometers don’t have political parties. A lot of people rather believe their favorite politicians than their scientists. It is a much bigger problem in the US than in my native country Sweden where climate change and the fact that we are the cause of it is widely accepted among both the left and the right. It is changing though here in the US too but very slowly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m in Canada where climate change is treated and accepted as a fact. There are some here however who think it’s propaganda – these are the same people who also think Trump has good economic ideas. 😉
LikeLiked by 2 people
It is more obvious in the arctic and more difficult to deny. There are always those who will deny reality for political purposes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not only insightful but also a call for action. Of course, weather has always been changing, but definitely man is intensifying it immensely. Thanks for this share, Thomas. Important given the global situation. I will check on Super Facts too; lately, your posts there are not showing on my feed. Light and blessings your way 🙏✨
LikeLiked by 1 person
You are right. The temperature would be going down, just a little, if we only consider natural causes, but we are heating it. However, it is the rapid change that is most noticeable in how in changes weather and climate around the world. It is so much that it is a little warmer on average that is the problem. It is the speed of change and everything that it effects. Thank you so much Susana and light and blessings your way too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like the way you’ve looked at the difference between global warming and climate change, as this has always confused me! What an illuminating and interesting post. 🌏🦋
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you very much for your very kind words Introverted Bookworm.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is a comprehensive explanation about climate change. I wish everyone would read this because it might change minds.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you so much Kymber. I tried to be informative but changing minds is difficult.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes I agree with you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I always enjoy reading your data, Thomas, as well as “the other side”. There is a strongly-held opinion on the opposite (like this https://climate-science.press/2024/05/12/the-great-global-warming-swindle-and-climate-the-movie-the-cold-truth/). It’s hard to tell where truth falls.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you so much Jacqui. I remember that movie. I am not sure whether I watched part of it or the whole of it, but I am certainly familiar with the arguments of the contrarian scientists in the movie. I’ve read their books and publications. I fell for those arguments at first, but this is not an honest movie. To quote my friend Larry Howe, a fellow Electrical Engineer, who watched the movie with a friend and fell for it at first but decided to take a deep dive into the subject : “Over time, the more I researched, the more I discovered most everything claimed in “The Great Global Warming Swindle” was misleading and false”. Our climate is not okay.” This is towards the bottom of my first link above. It is an old post of mine.
But claims that are nonsense can be made to sound serious and scientific with the help of a small group of contrarian scientists. That is why I also was bamboozled by creationists claiming to have scientific proof that the Earth was only 6,000 years old, and that Neanderthals never existed. Neanderthals was just a fairy tale created by biased atheist scientists and they had proof. It was misrepresented evidence, of course, but how was I supposed to know? The type of arguments in both cases are similar in a lot of regards. It sounds scientific, they claim a widespread conspiracy or bias, but a lot of information is left out and a lot of information presented is outright false, and people believe it because it is convincing.
This is different from the simplistic argument that climate always changed… that I mentioned above, and therefore it is harder to see through. I think we’ve all been there. But for starters you can always ask yourself whether it is likely that NASA, NOAA, all the world’s meteorological institutions and science academies, the universities and most scientists around the world really would swindle the world because of some sort of climate change gravy train (that does not exist) rather than it could be a group of agenda driven contrarians misrepresenting the topic and misrepresenting the scientists.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I look back in the 1970’s when scientists warmed incessantly of ‘global cooling’. The older I get, the less I believe of what I read, instead, do the research myself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My memory from that time is a bit fuzzy. Climate science as we know it today did not exist in the 1960s and 1970s. However, a climate scientist friend of mine, Dana Nuccitelli, told me that most climate scientists back then warned about global warming even though some were talking about global cooling (due to aerosols and recent temperature swings down). A survey of research papers from that time shows that Global Warming, not cooling, was what most climate scientists warned about, but there was no consensus, not yet. One paper that got a lot of attention was that of American climate scientist Wallace Broecker who in 1975 published a paper called “Climate Change: Are we on the Brink of a pronounced Global Warming”. He is widely credited with coining the term “Global Warming”. The important thing to note is that climate science has learned a lot since then and that a consensus has formed since then. This is an article from the American Meteorological society on the topic of global cooling.
I really wanted to know, so I researched the evidence. I did not research opinions and youTube videos, I had enough of that, but I researched actual evidence, and when doing so it is important to be skeptical of your own position, not just that of others. This is a lot of work that most people don’t have time for, but respecting the conclusions of scientific organizations and the scientific consensus is a short cut, and that is not the “appealing to authority fallacy” but a matter of what is likely/probable to be true.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well-explained–and much-needed–Thomas!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you so much Mitch
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for bringing attention to climate change. I feel like that conversation has fallen off course lately… I can see why with the current administration removing websites and censoring information.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes you are right, there’s been some censorship and removal of documentation and graphs from government websites. In Texas where I live the term “climate change” is avoided and discouraged in official documentation. Thank you for your comment thebpdcrisis.
LikeLike
Thank you for this post, Thomas. The amazing thing is that people without any qualifications somehow think they know more than the science community. How does everything become a political issue? Can we agree on anything?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes you are right. Every now and then you see people who nothing about the subject lecturing climate scientists. Especially on social media. It is silly. This should not be a political issue but that’s how it has become. Thank you for your comment Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The reason they stopped using the term “Global Warming,” although it’s accurate, is that the phrase didn’t match what people were seeing in real life, thereby causing confusion and skepticism. From what I’ve learned, warmer, drier conditions in one area can lead to colder, wetter, more unstable conditions in other areas. The changes are not consistent around the world. Maybe that’s changed now, or maybe it’s just a messaging issue. As I’ve pointed out before, the messaging about climate change has been skewed for 50 years, so yes, I do believe that how the message is delivered is crucial to its success. I’ve personally witnessed the changes, so I’m a believer. But I’ve been appalled by the inconsistent and obviously politicized messaging from politicians and activists alike, both on the right AND THE LEFT. Both sides are to blame for the hysteria and denial that we’ve seen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes you are right Dawn. The warming varies from place to place. The arctic is heating faster. There are even some places getting cooler such as the north Atlantic. The biggest differences are not in temperature but in worse drought or wetter conditions (depending on where you live). So climate change is more descriptive yet global warming is good moniker too. Like you say there’s both denial and doomism, and both are wrong. Thank you for your comment Dawn.
LikeLike
It really is so silly to argue about what it’s called when there’s so much evidence that it’s happening. You don’t even have to look at the scientific evidence, just look around and there’s plenty of evidence of climate change.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes you are right. In northern Sweden it is very obvious. Unfortunately, that usage of two terms would indicate fraud is a very common argument. You use the term global warming and then you use the term climate change, and people say: did you notice how changed the term? It clearly shows you are dishonest! It doesn’t at all, but it has happened to me quite often. It is like I am talking about our dog Rollo. I say that he is mini-Australian Shepherd and then I call him a dog, but no one draws the conclusion that I am lying and don’t have a dog. It is a silly argument that many people still think is some sort of big gotcha.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thankfully, I haven’t experienced that when talking to people about climate change but I’m not surprised. People sort of turn everything into weird conspiracies instead of just doing basic research into the topic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes you are right and it is worse is some places. In Sweden I don’t think hardly ever happens. Here in Texas it is more common, well and on social media. I wish people would questions conspiracies a little bit more and question scientists a little bit less.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, social media gets really crazy with these sort of debates. I wish that too especially if you’re not in the science field because it takes a certain level of expertise to understand a lot of that stuff. Lots of people question scientists but don’t understand the responses.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is an important post on a crucial topic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you so much for your kind words Mary
LikeLike
I find it terrible how people are doing this to the planet😠🌎 I do all I can to stop it🛍🍾🍃
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for doing that Mallory and I agree with you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Java Bean: “Ayyy, that’s an important point about calling things different things! One time our Dada’s Mama called either him or his brother ‘Buffy’ which was their dog’s name when they were little, but it doesn’t mean either one of them was actually a dog.”Lulu: “Do we know which one it was?”Java Bean: “No, Dada doesn’t remember and his Mama won’t tell.”Lulu: “Well, I bet Dada wouldn’t mind being a dog. It is a pretty sweet gig if you can find the right spot.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is a Swedish saying, “what it is loved has many names”. That may not be true, but some things have many names, and sometimes people use the wrong word. I’ve called my daughter Rollo a few times. I love them both very much.
LikeLike