LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Dear Editor: The Second Quarter 2019 of TPG (pg.
13) contains a letter by Peter Dohms , CPG-07141 that presents a graph of the average near-surface temperatures of the northern hemisphere during the past 11,000 years that references two studies dated 1969 and 1995. If he wants others to appreciate his degree of skepticism concerning recent climate changes it would be more forceful that he present an updated version of this graph.
I present a figure with Information published since 2004 that comes from 18 different peer reviewed studies. This graph shows with a high degree of certitude that the average Northern Hemisphere temperature has risen rap- idly to unusually high temperatures since the 19th century.
Peter Dohms’ observations of beach
strand lines indicating extensive chang- es in sea level in the recent past – changes that relate to his figure - are interesting. Again he should cite some peer reviewed articles concerning these observations if he wants others to fully understand and accept his level of skep- ticism concerning climate change and the possible related effects.
Sincerely, Frederick E. (Gene) Simms Ph.D. CPG-10292
Graphic from the International Panel on Climate Change Report as presented by the National Centers for Environmental Information. Greyscale reconstructions that are indi- rectly determined are “proxy” data from tree rings, ice cores, fossil pollen, ocean sediments, corals and historical data. Recent actual temperature measurements are in black. Data
sources are presented at the National Centers for Environmental Information web site. Dear Editor:
Please pass my congratulations to David Abbott. Also send my thanks to Peter Dohms for a thoughtful response to climate
change hysteria. Joe Wojcik, CPG-07776
Reconstructed Northern Hemisphere Annual
Temperature during the last 2000 years (
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/global-warming/last-2000-years Accessed 2019/05/31)
Dear Editor:
Response to Comments The purpose of my Letter to the
Editor in the Jan-Mar 2019 issue of the TPG was to spur discussion on the role geoscientists should play in mitigat- ing the impacts of climate change and not to open a debate on its causes. Unfortunately, comments to my letter were presented in the Apr-Jun issue of the TPG that ignored my request, and opened a debate on anthropogenic causes of global warming. This does not serve the profession or the community at large.
Most members of AIPG are adept in
their specialized areas of expertise, but it is not unusual for many (especially more senior geologists) to reflect on the history of the earth with a certain degree of naivety. We have a tendency to blow-off climate concerns as fleeting events in the normal course of Earth’s vast geologic
8 TPG •
Jul.Aug.Sep 2019
history, and we support our pre-existing beliefs with confirmation bias.
Here are the facts. Earth’s climate
is changing rapidly, and the physics of the causes are well tested, well docu- mented in peer-reviewed journals, and well-recorded in the geologic record. These causes are now also “publicly” acknowledged by major oil companies. There is no debate on the causal issues within the climate science community; all other major science organizations recognize climate change as a settled science. As for the claim that the current warming appears to be “nothing special,” proxy data from 21st century research not only show that global temperatures are already close to levels never experi- enced by man, but require us to travel back millions of years to the Pliocene. If we continue burning fossil fuels at the
current rate, we will reach CO2 levels as high as the Eocene when earth was
www.aipg.org
in a “hot house” climate state, sea level was much higher, and billions of humans had not yet evolved to live near the sea.
We cannot remain blind to the impacts
that we are already experiencing. As long as we continue to focus on debat- ing the science, rather than accepting the impacts and preparing earth science professionals to deal with those impacts (as highlighted in red my earlier letter), then I question the viability of AIPG’s future in the scientific community.
Drew Diefendorf, CPG-3598
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64
