APS and the Global Warming Scam

[Brant Gaede]

Is? Was? This story and its data seems old.

[Selene]

This individual is seriously delusional...
 

 
 

 
 
http://www.c-span.org/video/?326155-2/president-obama-commencement-address-us-coast-guard-academy

He starts at about 35:00 into the video.

 

 

 

And this brings me to the challenge I want to focus on today -- one where our Coast Guardsmen are already on the front lines, and that, perhaps more than any other, will shape your entire careers -- and that's the urgent need to combat and adapt to climate change.

 

 

 

Now, I know there are still some folks back in Washington who refuse to admit that climate change is real. And on a day like today, it's hard to get too worried about it. There are folks who will equivocate. They'll say, "You know, I'm not a scientist." Well, I'm not either. But the best scientists in the world know that climate change is happening. Our analysts in the intelligence community know climate change is happening. Our military leaders -- generals and admirals, active duty and retired -- know it's happening. Our homeland security professionals know it is happening. And our Coast Guard knows it's happening.

 

 

 

Cadets, the threat of a changing climate cuts to the very core of your service. You've been drawn to water -- like the poet who wrote, "the heart of the great ocean sends a thrilling pulse through me." You know the beauty of the sea, but you also know its unforgiving power.

 

 

 

Here at the Academy, climate change -- understanding the science and the consequences -- is part of the curriculum, and rightly so, because it will affect everything that you do in your careers. Some of you have already served in Alaska and aboard icebreakers, and you know the effects. As America's Maritime Guardian, you've pledged to remain always ready -- Semper Paratus -- ready for all threats. And climate change is one of those most severe threats.

 

 

 

And this is not just a problem for countries on the coasts, or for certain regions of the world. Climate change will impact every country on the planet. No nation is immune. So I'm here today to say that climate change constitutes a serious threat to global security, an immediate risk to our national security. And make no mistake, it will impact how our military defends our country. And so we need to act -- and we need to act now.

 

 

 

After all, isn't that the true hallmark of leadership? When you're on deck, standing your watch, you stay vigilant. You plan for every contingency. And if you see storm clouds gathering, or dangerous shoals ahead, you don't sit back and do nothing. You take action -- to protect your ship, to keep your crew safe. Anything less is negligence. It is a dereliction of duty. And so, too, with climate change. Denying it, or refusing to deal with it endangers our national security. It undermines the readiness of our forces.

 

 

 

It's been said of life on the sea -- "the pessimist complains about the wind, the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails." Cadets, like you, I reject pessimism. We know what we as Americans can achieve when we set ourselves to great endeavors. We are, by nature, optimists -- but we're not blind optimists. We know that wishful thinking in the face of all evidence to the contrary would set us on a course for disaster. If we are to meet this threat of climate change, we must be realists. We have to readjust the sails.

 

 

 

That's why confronting climate change is now a key pillar of American global leadership. When I meet with leaders around the world, it's often at the top of our agenda -- a core element of our diplomacy. And you are part of the first generation of officers to begin your service in a world where the effects of climate change are so clearly upon us. It will shape how every one of our services plan, operate, train, equip, and protect their infrastructure, their capabilities, today and for the long term. So let me be specific on how your generation will have to lead the way to both prepare ourselves and how to prevent the worst effects in the future.

 

 

 

Around the world, climate change increases the risk of instability and conflict. Rising seas are already swallowing low-lying lands, from Bangladesh to Pacific islands, forcing people from their homes. Caribbean islands and Central American coasts are vulnerable, as well. Globally, we could see a rise in climate change refugees. And I guarantee you the Coast Guard will have to respond. Elsewhere, more intense droughts will exacerbate shortages of water and food, increase competition for resources, and create the potential for mass migrations and new tensions. All of which is why the Pentagon calls climate change a "threat multiplier."

 

 

 

Understand, climate change did not cause the conflicts we see around the world. Yet what we also know is that severe drought helped to create the instability in Nigeria that was exploited by the terrorist group Boko Haram. It's now believed that drought and crop failures and high food prices helped fuel the early unrest in Syria, which descended into civil war in the heart of the Middle East. So, increasingly, our military and our combatant commands, our services -- including the Coast Guard -- will need to factor climate change into plans and operations, because you need to be ready.

 

 

 

Around the world, climate change will mean more extreme storms. No single weather event can be blamed solely on climate change. But Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines gave us a possible glimpse of things to come -- one of the worst cyclones ever recorded; thousands killed, many more displaced, billions of dollars in damage, and a massive international relief effort that included the United States military and its Coast Guard. So more extreme storms will mean more humanitarian missions to deliver lifesaving help. Our forces will have to be ready.

 

 

 

As Admiral Zukunft already mentioned, climate change means Arctic sea ice is vanishing faster than ever. By the middle of this century, Arctic summers could be essentially ice free. We're witnessing the birth of a new ocean -- new sea lanes, more shipping, more exploration, more competition for the vast natural resources below.

 

 

 

Climate change, and especially rising seas, is a threat to our homeland security, our economic infrastructure, the safety and health of the American people. Already, today, in Miami and Charleston, streets now flood at high tide. Along our coasts, thousands of miles of highways and roads, railways, energy facilities are all vulnerable. It's estimated that a further increase in sea level of just one foot by the end of this century could cost our nation $200 billion.

 

 

 

Climate change poses a threat to the readiness of our forces. Many of our military installations are on the coast, including, of course, our Coast Guard stations. Around Norfolk, high tides and storms increasingly flood parts of our Navy base and an airbase. In Alaska, thawing permafrost is damaging military facilities. Out West, deeper droughts and longer wildfires could threaten training areas our troops depend on.

 

 

 

So politicians who say they care about military readiness ought to care about this, as well. Just as we're helping American communities prepare to deal with the impacts of climate change, we have to help our bases and ports, as well. Not just with stronger seawalls and natural barriers, but with smarter, more resilient infrastructure -- because when the seas rise and storms come, we all have to be ready.

 

 

 

Now, everything I've discussed with you so far is about preparing for the impacts of climate change. But we need to be honest -- such preparation and adaptation alone will not be enough. As men and women in uniform, you know that it can be just as important, if not more important, to prevent threats before they can cause catastrophic harm. And only way -- the only way -- the world is going to prevent the worst effects of climate change is to slow down the warming of the planet.

 

 

 

Across our military, our bases and ports are using more solar and wind, which helps save money that we can use to improve readiness. The Army is pursuing new, lighter, more fuel-efficient vehicles. The Air Force F-22 broke the sound barrier using biofuels. And the Navy runs an entire carrier strike group -- the Green Fleet -- with biofuels. Our Marines have deployed to Afghanistan with portable solar panels, lightening their load and reducing dangerous resupply missions. So fighting climate change and using energy wisely also makes our forces more nimble and more ready. And that's something that should unite us as Americans. This cannot be subject to the usual politics and the usual rhetoric. When storms gather, we get ready.

 

A...

[Backlighting]

This individual is seriously delusional...

He starts at about 35:00 into the video.

http://www.c-span.org/video/?326155-2/president-obama-commencement-address-us-coast-guard-academy

All that coke he did (does?) surely fried whatever brain cells he had.

-J

[Selene]

The definitive refutation on the conceptual base of "climate change."

 

[BaalChatzaf]

The Sun has been unusually quiet for some time. The peak of its last cycle was flat. Winters have been progressively longer with record braking bitter cold in the higher latitudes. There's record breaking drought in the lower latitudes.

Looks to me like there's another cooling cycle well in progress.

Greg

I agree. I think the next Big Climate Shift will be another freeze. We can survive that. The human race survived the last Great Ice Age with only a fraction of the technology we have now.

[BaalChatzaf]

I can think of a perfectly good and sane reason for cutting back on the CO2 burden of the atmosphere.

People are cutting down trees at a furious pace so the only place the CO2 can be sequestered is in crop plants and in the oceans of the world. Unfortunately the produces a weak carbolic acid (CO2).(H2O) in the world's seas which is playing hob with some of the fish people need for protein. We have a world population of 7.25 billion and it will get larger still -- it may one day grow to 11 billion. That last thing we want to do is promote starvation because that will lead to war. I want the seas to be a fertile place for life to grow, not only fish but all the other wonderful stuff that flourishes under the waves (coral, for example).

While it is not clear that CO2 is the driver for the current warming trend the rising of the acid level in the oceans is a matter of observed fact.

What we need to do is plant trees on every available inch of ground not otherwise used, plant grasses in the near desert regions to turn them around. The extra plant life will sop of the CO2 and cutting back on CO2 emission will help keep the seas a lively place. Life originated in the sea. It should not end there.

[Selene]

What we need to do is plant trees on every available inch of ground not otherwise used, plant grasses in the near desert regions to turn them around. The extra plant life will sop of the CO2 and cutting back on CO2 emission will help keep the seas a lively place. Life originated in the sea. It should not end there.

Nature, the magazine, seems to have different data Bob...

Nature has just published a new scientific paper showing that there has been a huge expansion in global biomass. After a decade or two of de-forestation and a net loss of biomass the world has recovered and is now expanding its forests, shrubbery, fields etc. A paper – ‘A Recent Reversal in Terrestrial Global Biomass’ by Yi Y Liu, Albert van Dijk, R de Jeu, J G Canadell, M McCabe, J Evans and G Wang has shown an appreciable increase in green cover both in extent and depth.

This is of note for two reasons. The more extreme Greens and their tame politicians bang on about de-forestation and its contribution to global warming only to be proved wrong again by the facts. Reality is we are getting greener.

Perhaps of greater interest is the priming of vegetation by the higher levels of CO2. Far from being the enemy and demonised by the ‘warmists’ rising CO2 is doing us a great favour. Waste land and desert is being restored, crops are booming, grass and meadow is flourishing, trees are maturing more quickly – all very positive outcomes that deserve our applause..

http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2015/04/guest-post-what-happened-to-de-forestation/

[moralist]

We experience this greening effect on a micro scale...

The trees that grow around us create their own cool shady climate zone. This is because leaves absorb the heat energy of the Sun and use it for photosynthesis, they also transpire water vapor like tiny swamp coolers.

There are real world solutions around everyone literally within arms reach.

Greg

[BaalChatzaf]

What we need to do is plant trees on every available inch of ground not otherwise used, plant grasses in the near desert regions to turn them around. The extra plant life will sop of the CO2 and cutting back on CO2 emission will help keep the seas a lively place. Life originated in the sea. It should not end there.

Nature, the magazine, seems to have different data Bob...

Nature has just published a new scientific paper showing that there has been a huge expansion in global biomass. After a decade or two of de-forestation and a net loss of biomass the world has recovered and is now expanding its forests, shrubbery, fields etc. A paper – ‘A Recent Reversal in Terrestrial Global Biomass’ by Yi Y Liu, Albert van Dijk, R de Jeu, J G Canadell, M McCabe, J Evans and G Wang has shown an appreciable increase in green cover both in extent and depth.

This is of note for two reasons. The more extreme Greens and their tame politicians bang on about de-forestation and its contribution to global warming only to be proved wrong again by the facts. Reality is we are getting greener.

Perhaps of greater interest is the priming of vegetation by the higher levels of CO2. Far from being the enemy and demonised by the ‘warmists’ rising CO2 is doing us a great favour. Waste land and desert is being restored, crops are booming, grass and meadow is flourishing, trees are maturing more quickly – all very positive outcomes that deserve our applause..

http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2015/04/guest-post-what-happened-to-de-forestation/

We should perhaps breed trees that will sop up even more CO2. The more we feed the trees plant food (CO2) the more O2 they give us in return.

The real problem is de-forestration. The Amazon Rain Forest is being destroyed at a pace. If we do not have the Rain Forest to sop up the CO2 more will dissolved into the ocean and raise the PH. That is bad for the sea life which feeds a good part of the world. There is an old saying: Do not pee in the water you are standing in, you might have to drink it some day.

[Selene]

Do you think this has happened before Bob?

If not, do you think that this massive global ecosystem with all it's elements has a way to absorb this trend?

A...

[moralist]

There's no other way to say this... feminized leftists are insane.

Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is not evil. Without it all plant life on the Earth would die.

Greg

[moralist]

We should perhaps breed trees that will sop up even more CO2. The more we feed the trees plant food (CO2) the more O2 they give us in return.

The beneficial process of reforestation is already occurring, Bob.

Greg

[BaalChatzaf]

Here is an article showing that deforestration is the biggest anthropic activity contributing to the carbon burden in the Atmosphere

http://deforestation.geologist-1011.net/

We have to stop cutting down trees faster than they can grow or re-grow and sop up the CO2 which otherwise goes into the ocean.

Also reforestration will slow down the rate of desert formation. This is a problem for China which has the world's largest population and is losing arable land to desert because is has mismanaged the use of the land. Of the nearly 1.4 billion Chinese about 900,000,000 are living and working a diminishing quantity of arable land. The last thing we want are hungry Chinese folk worry about where their next meal is coming from. Such a situation is not conducive to world peace.

There is an old Jewish saying (no kidding) that if the Messiah comes while you are planting a tree, finish planting the tree then run to greet the Messiah.

[Brant Gaede]

Even worse is China's lack of water, potable or otherwise.

--Brant

[Peter]

There is an old Jewish saying (no kidding) that if the Messiah comes while you are planting a tree, finish planting the tree then run to greet the Messiah.
end quote

As I have mentioned I have contributed to funding tree planting in Israel as did my grandfather before me. I like the pictures of the Mediterranean climate there with people in coffee shops sipping drinks though I am sure a lot of Israel is still quite dry. Does anyone know if our efforts are paying off with a greener Israel? If anyone could turn a desert green it would be them.

[Brant Gaede]

We want the CO2 in the trees.

--Brant

[Brant Gaede]

I've read Israel does not have a water problem.

--Brant

[moralist]

There are more trees in the US now than there were 100 years ago.

In the United States, which contains 8 percent of the world's forests, there are more trees than there were 100 years ago. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), "Forest growth nationally has exceeded harvest since the 1940s. By 1997, forest growth exceeded harvest by 42 percent and the volume of forest growth was 380 percent greater than it had been in 1920." The greatest gains have been seen on the East Coast (with average volumes of wood per acre almost doubling since the '50s) which was the area most heavily logged by European settlers beginning in the 1600s, soon after their arrival.

Read more: http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/more-trees-than-there-were-100-years-ago-its-true#ixzz3dY6yyYKW

...so quit your bitchin', Bob... get up off your ass and go plant a damn tree!

Greg

[Selene]

During my tenure at the Transportation Department of NY City we wrote into each roadway contract that 2 1/2 sapling inches of trees would have to be planted along the routes for each inch of trees that had to be removed by the construction.

Charity begins at home...

[BaalChatzaf]

There are more trees in the US now than there were 100 years ago.

In the United States, which contains 8 percent of the world's forests, there are more trees than there were 100 years ago. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), "Forest growth nationally has exceeded harvest since the 1940s. By 1997, forest growth exceeded harvest by 42 percent and the volume of forest growth was 380 percent greater than it had been in 1920." The greatest gains have been seen on the East Coast (with average volumes of wood per acre almost doubling since the '50s) which was the area most heavily logged by European settlers beginning in the 1600s, soon after their arrival.

Read more: http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/more-trees-than-there-were-100-years-ago-its-true#ixzz3dY6yyYKW

...so quit your bitchin', Bob... get up off your ass and go plant a damn tree!

Greg

I have paid for 100 trees to be planted in the name of my departed relatives. I did plant one sapling with my bare hands back in Massachussets. My son got it when he graduate from Rutgers. I sold the house in 2005 by the tree was tall and strong when I ldeft it.

[BaalChatzaf]

We want the CO2 in the trees.

--Brant

CO2 is plant food. You feed the plants, photosynthesis makes the protein for the true and its fruit and O2 comes out for us to breath. It is a great system all driven by the Sun.

[BaalChatzaf]

There is an old Jewish saying (no kidding) that if the Messiah comes while you are planting a tree, finish planting the tree then run to greet the Messiah.

end quote

As I have mentioned I have contributed to funding tree planting in Israel as did my grandfather before me. I like the pictures of the Mediterranean climate there with people in coffee shops sipping drinks though I am sure a lot of Israel is still quite dry. Does anyone know if our efforts are paying off with a greener Israel? If anyone could turn a desert green it would be them.

Look at an areal; photo of the area. The green is Israel. The brown is Jordan, Syria and Gaza. Israel has perfected drip irrigation and get the most of the least use of water.

Israel's main exports are agricultural products (mostly fruit) and concepts. Israel has no oil. but it does have good soil which produces if irrigated. It also has one of the smartest populations in the world. Israel has the highest per capita prduction of patents of any nation in the world, with the exception of Taiwan. They are a little ahead.

[Selene]

Look at an areal; photo of the area. The green is Israel. The brown is Jordan, Syria and Gaza. Israel has perfected drip irrigation and get the most of the least use of water.

Maybe the asshole marxist who is running California into the ground might hire the Israelis to solve the drought.

[Brant Gaede]

We want the CO2 in the trees.

--Brant

A mistake by me. Horrors.

We (oops!) want the CO2 in the trees put into the air for the general benefit of plant life which benefits animal life.

--Brant

[william.scherk]

Ellen featured an open letter to the APS Council (full text with initial signatory names here. I have removed internal quotes from her posting):

Regarding the National Policy Statement on Climate Change of the APS Council:

As physicists who are familiar with the science issues, and as current and past members of the American Physical Society, we the undersigned urge the Council to revise its current statement* on climate change as follows, so as to more accurately represent the current state of the science:

Greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, accompany human industrial and agricultural activity. While substantial concern has been expressed that emissions may cause significant climate change, measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20th 21st century changes are neither exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today. In addition, there is an extensive scientific literature that examines beneficial effects of increased levels of carbon dioxide for both plants and animals.

Studies of a variety of natural processes, including ocean cycles and solar variability, indicate that they can account for variations in the Earth’s climate on the time scale of decades and centuries. Current climate models appear insufficiently reliable to properly account for natural and anthropogenic contributions to past climate change, much less project future climate.

The APS supports an objective scientific effort to understand the effects of all processes – natural and human –on the Earth’s climate and the biosphere’s response to climate change, and promotes technological options for meeting challenges of future climate changes, regardless of cause.

As current and past members of the American Physical Society, we the undersigned petition the APS Council to commission an independent, objective study and assessment of the science relating to the question of anthropogenic global warming. The assessment should consider findings representing the full scope of available scientific sources. The assessment is to be used as a basis for a new Statement on Climate Change that reflects the current state of scientific knowledge and its uncertainties. This Petition is to be provided to the membership for comment prior to action by the Council.

This is the current statement published in 2007, with its later commentary, from the APS website (see also its FAQ on the revision process):

(Adopted by Council on November 18, 2007)

Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring.

If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms. The APS also urges governments, universities, national laboratories and its membership to support policies and actions that will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.

Climate Change Commentary

(adopted by Council on April 18, 2010)

There is a substantial body of peer reviewed scientific research to support the technical aspects of the 2007 APS statement. The purpose of the following commentary is to provide clarification and additional details.

The first sentence of the APS statement is broadly supported by observational data, physical principles, and global climate models. Greenhouse gas emissions are changing the Earth's energy balance on a planetary scale in ways that affect the climate over long periods of time (~100 years). Historical records indicate that the Earth’s climate is sensitive to energy changes, both external (the sun’s radiative output, changes in Earth’s orbit, etc.) and internal. Internal to our global system, it is not just the atmosphere, but also the oceans and land that are involved in the complex dynamics that result in global climate. Aerosols and particulates resulting from human and natural sources also play roles that can either offset or reinforce greenhouse gas effects. While there are factors driving the natural variability of climate (e.g., volcanoes, solar variability, oceanic oscillations), no known natural mechanisms have been proposed that explain all of the observed warming in the past century. Warming is observed in land-surface temperatures, sea-surface temperatures, and for the last 30 years, lower-atmosphere temperatures measured by satellite. The second sentence is a definition that should explicitly include water vapor. The third sentence notes various examples of human contributions to greenhouses gases. There are, of course, natural sources as well.

The evidence for global temperature rise over the last century is compelling. However, the word "incontrovertible" in the first sentence of the second paragraph of the 2007 APS statement is rarely used in science because by its very nature science questions prevailing ideas. The observational data indicate a global surface warming of 0.74 °C (+/- 0.18 °C) since the late 19th century. (Source:http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html)

The first sentence in the third paragraph states that without mitigating actions significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and health are likely. Such predicted disruptions are based on direct measurements (e.g., ocean acidification, rising sea levels, etc.), on the study of past climate change phenomena, and on climate models. Climate models calculate the effects of natural and anthropogenic changes on the ecosphere, such as doubling of the CO₂-equivalent [1] concentration relative to its pre-industrial value by the year 2100. These models have uncertainties associated with radiative response functions, especially clouds and water vapor. However, the models show that water vapor has a net positive feedback effect (in addition to CO₂ and other gases) on global temperatures. The impact of clouds is less certain because of their dual role as scatterers of incoming solar radiation and as greenhouse contributors. The uncertainty in the net effect of human activity on climate is reflected in the broad distribution of the predicted magnitude of the consequence of doubling of the CO₂-equivalent concentration. The uncertainty in the estimates from various climate models for doubling CO₂-equivalent concentration is in the range of 1°C to 3°C with the probability distributions having long tails out to much larger temperature changes.

The second sentence in the third paragraph articulates an immediate policy action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to deal with the possible catastrophic outcomes that could accompany large global temperature increases. Even with the uncertainties in the models, it is increasingly difficult to rule out that non-negligible increases in global temperature are a consequence of rising anthropogenic CO₂. Thus given the significant risks associated with global climate change, prudent steps should be taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions now while continuing to improve the observational data and the model predictions.

The fourth paragraph, first sentence, recommends an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on Earth's climate. This sentence should be interpreted broadly and more specifically: an enhanced effort is needed to understand both anthropogenic processes and the natural cycles that affect the Earth's climate. Improving the scientific understanding of all climate feedbacks is critical to reducing the uncertainty in modeling the consequences of doubling the CO₂-equivalent concentration. In addition, more extensive and more accurate scientific measurements are needed to test the validity of climate models to increase confidence in their projections.

With regard to the last sentence of the APS statement, the role of physicists is not just "...to support policies and actions..." but also to participate actively in the research itself. Physicists can contribute in significant ways to understanding the physical processes underlying climate and to developing technological options for addressing and mitigating climate change.*

[1] The concentration of CO₂ that would give the same amount of radiative impact as a given mixture of CO₂ and other greenhouse gases (methane, nitrous oxide, etc.). The models sum the radiative effects of all trace gases and treat the total as if it comes from an "equivalent" CO₂ concentration. The calculation for all gases other than CO₂ takes into account only increments relative to their pre-industrial values, so that the pre-industrial effect for CO₂ and CO₂-equivalent are the same.

* In February 2012, per normal APS process, the Panel on Public Affairs recommended four minor copy edits so that the identification of sentences and paragraphs correspond to the 2007 APS Climate Change Statement above. View the copy edits.

Here is the 'draft' revised statement (this was made available to APS members, some of whom leaked the contents on Reddit and elsewhere. This copy is taken from Judith Curry's blog Climate Etc):

On Climate Change:

Earth’s changing climate is a critical issue that poses the risk of significant disruption around the globe. While natural sources of climate variability are significant, multiple lines of evidence indicate that human influences have had an increasingly dominant effect on the climate warming observed since the mid-twentieth century. Although the magnitudes of future effects are uncertain, human influences on the climate are growing. The potential consequences of climate change are great and the policies of the next few decades will determine human influences on the climate for centuries.

On Climate Science:

As summarized in the 2013 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), there continues to be significant progress in climate science. In particular, the connection between rising concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases and the increased warming of the global climate system is more certain than ever. Nevertheless, as recognized by Working Group 1 of the IPCC, scientific challenges remain to our abilities to observe, interpret, and project climate changes. To better inform societal choices, the APS urges sustained research in climate science.

On Climate Action:

The APS reiterates its 2007 call to support actions that will reduce the emissions, and ultimately the concentration, of greenhouse gases, as well as increase the resilience of society to a changing climate. Because physics and its techniques are fundamental elements of climate science, the APS further urges physicists to collaborate with colleagues across disciplines in climate research and to contribute to the public dialogue.

Edited June 20, 2015 by william.scherk