Global warming has been topic of debates and discussions for decades now. Recently a study has started making news as it comes from a reputable institution and its conclusion goes counter to the much talked-of role of carbon emissions in raising global temperatures.
The study “Rethinking the lower bound on aerosol radiative forcing” by Bjorn Stevens of Max Planck Institute for Meteorology has been published in the recent issue of the Journal of Climate by the American Meteorological Society. The abstract of the paper reads: “… none of the approximately 0.3 K temperature rise between 1850 and 1950 can be attributed to northern-hemispheric forcing.”
Commentary on the study’s findings is calling it a big setback to claims of global warming and the frequently claimed role of carbon emissions in causing global warming. The analysis of the study put in perspective says that the new study from Max Planck essentially eliminate the possibility of “catastrophic climate change”.
In recent years, the generally acknowledged hiatus in global warming became the topic of worldwide debate and discussion among scientists and analysts. A blogger on Scientific American “explained” that global temperature is still rising but at a lower rate than the past 10 to 15 years. But if the temperature rise has slowed down, does that not imply global cooling compared to the last 10 to 15 years? After all, warming and cooling are relative terms – you call something warmer than something else or cooler than some other thing or place.
Unlike vaccination “science”, the mechanism of greenhouse effect is quite scientific and makes sense. But the devil is in the stats. Some studies point to grater temperature rise and more intense effect of carbon emissions on the global temperature while others counter those claims. So the jury is out.