How We Know Today's Climate Change Is Not Natural

by |April 4, 2017
Scientists studying glaciers in Glacier National Park. Photo: GlacierNPS

Scientists studying glaciers in Glacier National Park. Photo: GlacierNPS

Last week, the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, chaired by climate contrarian Lamar Smith, R-Texas, held a hearing on climate science. The hearing featured three scientists who are dubious about the conclusions of the majority of climate scientists, and climate scientist Michael Mann, best known for his “hockey stick graph” of temperatures over the last thousand years illustrating the impact of humans on global warming.

This week, Scott Pruitt, Environmental Protection Agency administrator, who had said that human activity was not the primary contributor to global warming, acknowledged that it plays a role—but stressed the need to figure out exactly how much of one.

Despite the many climate “skeptics” in key positions of power today, 97 percent of working climate scientists agree that the warming of Earth’s climate over the last 100 years is mainly due to human activity that has increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Why are they so sure?

Earth’s climate has changed naturally over the past 650,000 years, moving in and out of ice ages and warm periods. Changes in climate occur because of alterations in Earth’s energy balance, which result from some kind of external factor or “forcing”—an environmental factor that influences the climate. The ice ages and shifting climate were caused by a combination of changes in solar output, Earth’s orbit, ocean circulation, albedo (the reflectivity of the Earth’s surface) and makeup of the atmosphere (the amounts of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases such as water vapor, methane, nitrous oxide and ozone that are present).

Ice core in West Antarctic Photo: Oregon State University

Ice core from West Antarctic Photo: Oregon State University

Scientists can track these earlier natural changes in climate by examining ice cores drilled from Greenland and Antarctica, which provide evidence about conditions as far back as 800,000 years ago. The ice cores have shown that rising CO2 levels and rising temperatures are closely linked.

Scientists also study tree rings, glaciers, pollen remains, ocean sediments, and changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun to get a picture of Earth’s climate going back hundreds of thousands of years or more.

Today, CO2 levels are 40 percent higher than they were before the Industrial Revolution began; they have risen from 280 parts per million in the 18th century to over 400 ppm in 2015 and are on track to reach 410 ppm this spring.

In addition, there is much more methane (a greenhouse gas 84 times more potent than CO2 in the short term) in the atmosphere than at any time in the past 800,000 years—two and a half times as much as before the Industrial Revolution. While some methane is emitted naturally from wetlands, sediments, volcanoes and wildfires, the majority of methane emissions come from oil and gas production, livestock farming and landfills.

Warming of the North Pole and thinning ice Photo:WasifMalik

Warming of the North Pole and thinning ice Photo: WasifMalik

Global temperatures have risen an average of 1.4˚ F since 1880. Sea ice in the Arctic has thinned and decreased in the last few decades; the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are decreasing in mass. The North and South Poles are warming faster than anywhere else on Earth. Glaciers are retreating on mountains all over the world. Spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the last 50 years.

Southern California heat wave. Photo: Ann Frye

Southern California heat wave. Photo: Ann Frye

The number of record-breaking hot temperatures in the U.S. is on the rise. Oceans are the warmest they have been in a half-century; the top layer is warming about 0.2˚F per decade. The oceans are also 30 percent more acidic than they were at the start of the Industrial Revolution because they are absorbing more CO2. Global sea levels rose an average of 6.7 inches in the last century, and in the last 10 years, have risen almost twice as fast.

Here is how scientists know that the climate change we are experiencing is mainly due to human activity and not a result of natural phenomenon.

Gavin Schmidt, director of National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said that scientists look at a lot of different things at once.

“We have a very, very clear understanding that the amount of heat in the ocean is increasing—the ocean heat content is going up by a lot,” said Schmidt. “That implies that there must be an external change in the radiation budget of the earth—more energy has to be going in than leaving.

“There are a number of ways that can happen, but each of them has a different fingerprint. If the sun were brighter, we would see warming all the way up through the atmosphere from the surface to the stratosphere to the mesosphere. We don’t see this. We see instead warming at the surface, cooling in the stratosphere, cooling in the mesosphere. And that’s a signature of greenhouse gas forcing, it’s not a signature of solar forcing. So we know it’s not solar.”

Moreover, according to the World Radiation Center, the sun’s radiation has not increased since at least 1978 (when satellite monitoring began) though global temperatures over the last 30 years have continued to rise.

In addition, the lower atmosphere (troposphere), which is absorbing the CO2 and expanding as it gets warmer, is pushing the boundary between the troposphere and the stratosphere upwards. If the sun’s radiation were the main factor responsible for Earth’s warming, both atmosphere layers would likely be warming and this would not occur.

Scientists also can distinguish between CO2 molecules that are emitted naturally by plants and animals and those that result from the burning of fossil fuels. Carbon molecules from different sources have different numbers of neutrons in their nuclei; these different versions of molecules are called isotopes. Carbon isotopes derived from burning fossil fuels and deforestation are lighter than those from other sources. Scientists measuring carbon in the atmosphere can see that lighter carbon molecules are increasing, corresponding to the rise in fossil fuel emissions.

Peter de Menocal, dean of science at Columbia University and founding director of Columbia’s Center for Climate and Life, studies deep-sea sediments to understand past climate change.

Ocean sediment cores from the West Atlantic

Ocean sediment cores from the West Atlantic

“Ocean sediments provide a longer term baseline [tens of millions of years] that allows you to compare the past with the present, giving you an idea of how variable ocean temperatures have been before we had thermometers,” said de Menocal. “Over the last 2,000 years, there have been natural climate variations, but they were not especially large…the Medieval Warm period around 1,000 years ago, and the little ice age which was three separate cooling periods lasting a few decades each, beginning around 1300 to around the 1850s. It’s the warming after the 1850s that’s been really remarkable and unique over the last couple of millennia—you can see that in the sediment cores.”

Photo: unlu1

Photo: unlu1

Evidence from ocean sediments, ice cores, tree rings, sedimentary rocks and coral reefs show that the current warming is occurring 10 times faster than it did in the past when Earth emerged from the ice ages, at a rate unprecedented in the last 1,300 years.

To understand this rapid change in climate, scientists look at data sets and climate models to try to reproduce the changes that have already been observed. When scientists input only natural phenomena such as the sun’s intensity, changes in the Earth’s orbit and ocean circulation, the models cannot reproduce the changes that have occurred so far.

“We have independent evidence that says when you put in greenhouse gases, you get the changes that we see,” said Schmidt. “If you don’t put in greenhouse gases, you don’t. And if you put in all the other things people think about—the changes in the earth’s orbit, the ocean circulation changes, El Niño, land use changes, air pollution, smog, ozone depletion—all of those things, none of them actually produce the changes that we see in multiple data sets across multiple areas of the system, all of which have been independently replicated.” In other words, only when the emissions from human activity are included, are the models and data sets able to accurately reproduce the warming in the ocean and the atmosphere that is occurring.

“Today, almost 100 percent [plus or minus 20 percent] of the unusual warmth that we’ve experienced in the last decade is due to greenhouse gas emissions,” said de Menocal.

Record shattering heat in 2015 Photo: NASA

Record shattering heat in 2015 Photo: NASA

Findings from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies show clearly how much natural and manmade factors contribute to global warming.

Climate deniers offer a variety of bases for their skepticism without providing scientific evidence. The most effective thing that the climate denier community has done, however, is to spread the notion of uncertainty about climate change, and use it as an excuse not to take any action.

“It’s been a very effective tactic,” said de Menocal, “in part because the scientific community spends a tremendous amount of effort quantifying that uncertainty. And so we make it plain as day that there are things we’re certain about, and things we’re uncertain about. There are places of debate that exist in the community. That’s the scientific process. … The deniers are not selling a new way of looking at the problem, they’re selling doubt, and it’s very easy to manufacture doubt.”

“They are in total denial of the evidence that there is,” said Schmidt. “When I challenge them to produce evidence for their attributions, all I get is crickets. There’s no actual quantitative evidence that demonstrates anything. … Show me the data, show me your analysis.”

“There are lot of things that we’re absolutely certain about,” said de Menocal. “We’re absolutely certain carbon dioxide is rising in the atmosphere. We’re absolutely certain it’s warming the planet and we’re absolutely certain that it’s acidifying the oceans.”

Save

Get our newsletter

I'd like to get more stories like this.
Email address
Secure and Spam free...

18
Leave a Reply

avatar
14 Comment threads
4 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
17 Comment authors
Merle MarieLeonRobin HaywoodRandomer47Scott Simpson Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
John Barltrop
Guest
John Barltrop

I am quite surprised that members of “the flat earth society” have not made any comment on this article……..as yet.
Thank you for the informative article, that clearly shows, that Climate Change, which our “spaceship” earth is undergoing is not natural………in fact far from it. As pointed out the proof is a scientific fact………and is certainly backed up, for example, by NASA’s “Operation Ice Bridge” and other scientific bodies and scientists involved in their specific areas of expertise.

Robin Haywood
Guest
Robin Haywood

This is an old post now but the findings were current then. Firstly the figures in this article are correct and climate change is accelerating unnaturally, I do not deny this as possibly now more than ever human intervention is changing natural circumstances. This said there have been massive swings in tempretature in the planets history which is evidenced in the core samples mentioned in this article and many more since also. This means that swings will come and go in the planets future, we may survive and other animals to but we can’t save it all, the earths biosphere… Read more »

Bernard J.
Guest
Bernard J.

Bloomberg has a series of global temperature graphics that nicely illustrates the relative contributions of the various forcings:

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/

It’s not been updated to cover the last two years, unfortunately, but the human component is clear to see.

Kurlis
Guest
Kurlis

“Earth’s climate has changed naturally over the past 650,000 years, moving in and out of ice ages and warm periods. Changes in climate occur because of alterations in Earth’s energy balance, which result from some kind of external factor or “forcing”—an environmental factor that influences the climate.”

Some kind of external factor? This doesn’t sound definitive.

Macro
Guest
Macro

@Kurlis I don’t think this article is trying to be definitive about natural causes of climate change in the past. The rest of that paragraph does go on to list them, but they’re not the main focus. The author is just making the point that we know quite a lot about them now, so we understand that their role in the present climate change is fairly small. By far the greatest part of what we are experiencing now is human-induced.

Suyeon
Guest
Suyeon

Thank you for your amazing article 🙂

Peccatori
Guest
Peccatori

I just can’t bring myself to trust people this much. Science is always right…until they discover something new and realize they were wrong the whole time. It took 200 years to graduate from Newton’s Law to Einstein. Everyone used to believe that the world was flat…. and they were wrong. Just one or two incorrect interpretations, lead the whole theory off course. I do not know. I guess the science community better hurry up and figure out how to create affordable sustainable energy and figure out how to create animals that won’t poop or we’ll all be dead in a… Read more »

Tommy
Guest
Tommy

Newton’s law is not incorrect, it just cannot cover things Newton cannot observer at his times, or simply beyond his comprehension. It does not mean it’s wrong under his model. In other word, Newton’s theory explain how the stuff(gravity) is working. Einstein’s theory helps to understand, why the stuff (gravity again).. is working. The article stated that created models that simulate the current earth climate, and find that man-made, or man emissioned carbon contribute to the current warmer climate, and the result can be duplicated. It means in the current model is correct under these conditions, and that green house… Read more »

Chris Knorr
Guest
Chris Knorr

“Today, almost 100 percent [plus or minus 20 percent] of the unusual warmth that we’ve experienced in the last decade is due to greenhouse gas emissions,” said de Menocal.

…smh

Timmy
Guest
Timmy

I’m still waiting to read the part that proves it’s not natural. Aren’t these the same climate scientists that were warning me that we were headed for an ice age when I was 12?

comment image?resize=509%2C340

Sarah Fecht
Editor

Hi Timmy,

You’re right, the Earth is actually supposed to be in a cooling phase, because the sun is getting slightly weaker. But the Earth isn’t cooling, and that’s one of the ways scientists know we’re causing the Earth to warm. Here’s a good podcast if you’d like to find out more: https://player.fm/series/heres-the-thing-with-alec-baldwin/climate-science-explained

Merle Marie
Guest
Merle Marie

Did you know the impact of unnatural climate change do and will differ in both magnitude and rate of change depending on the continent, country, and region. Hence the impact and affects does not only mean global warming,but severe and more frequent hurricanes, cyclones, typhoons, droughts, floods, rain and snow, increase in ocean levels and acidification, melting of the poles, changes in ecosystems,desertification, extinction of non-human animals species, increase in disease,starvation and even death for humans.

mike tobey
Guest
mike tobey

Can anyone direct me to an official site where
I can find out how much money the US government and the IPCC grants scientists who study climate change from natural causes?

Robin Haywood
Guest
Robin Haywood

I think you’ll find out that’s 0 dollars joking

I can’t find out either

Charles Jack
Guest
Charles Jack

The average lay person like myself can only listen to both sides and rightly conclude that one side is wrong. I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that the wise choice would be with those whos business is scientifically studying and analizing climatology. Seems that if they have it all wrong, we’re still OK. If the deniers are proven to be off base (wrong), we’ll only be left with the small comfort of saying “I told you so.”

Scott Simpson
Guest
Scott Simpson

The question I have always had is how accurate are the measurements. Just during my lifetime I have seen tremendous advancements in technology. Then I read how data has to be adjusted to account for these changes. So my big concern is the margin of error in these estimates because we are not taking about huge variations. 1.4 degrees increase since 1880. If the margin of error is .5 degrees then the fluctuation could be 1 degree and we are only talking about 1.4 degrees. Same with sea level rises. How is that measured and does it take into account… Read more »

Randomer47
Guest
Randomer47

Ok i get that it is accelerated 10x by human factors but surely all this is confirms thats it is natural???
The real question is why does nobody seem to be planning for the consequences of this climate change especially as the deadline to respond has been shortened by 10x
This includes planning evacuations of low lying countries or building giant flood walls, attempting to combat desertification in any way possible and other areas of possible future disasters
Instead all the focus is on slowing down something that as far as i can tell is inevitable

Leon
Guest
Leon

“97 percent of working climate scientists ” Hahaha…

Did you find out how they get this number ??? If you take the time to find out how they get this number you will not use it anymore…If you are a serious person .