While doing my rounds of various news sites during a quiet spot earlier, I came across an article called Study Predicts Effect of Global Warming on Spring Flowers, on NASA’s Earth Observatory site.
The study in question was carried out by British and Australian academics & investigated the likely effects of global warming on flowers, and other plant species. My first reaction was actually pedantic rage brought on by NASA’s use of the phrase “Global Warming“. All too often this term is used incorrectly as a synonym for climate change, and it’s one of my pet hates, since the label “global warming” implies that climate change will lead to warmer weather globally; whereas the reality of climate change is that some places will get hotter while others get colder, or that specific locations will become hotter in the summers but get colder winters than they’ve previously experienced.
In short, climate change comes down to much more than the idea that everythings going to get warmer, & I believe imprecise use of the term “global warming”, when one is talking about climate change as a whole, only adds confusion to a debate which is already bogged down in misunderstanding, statistical chicanery, &, at times, downright dishonesty.
For a start it implies that everywhere is going to get warmer, which makes some people wonder “What’s the problem, hotter summers would be nice!”, but it also gives especially ignorant anthropogenic climate change sceptics an excuse to crow on about how “global warming” is a myth, whenever it snows badly, or there’s a cold snap. Of course, what the poor fools are missing is that climate change could very well lead to much hotter, wetter summers for us in the UK, but leave us (in worse case scenarios) with winters they’d be more familar with in Moscow; London’s only a few degrees of latitude south of Moscow, and if the Gulf Stream &/or Jet stream were to pack up it’s likely that the UK would become a good deal colder!
In anycase misuse of “global warming” to mean “climate change” it’s one of my pet hates, and it especially grates when a source which should know better does it, hence my initial reaction to the piece. However, on reading through it I discovered that I had perhaps been too hasty, as the piece in question appears to be looking at a “global warming” scenario, rather than climate change as a whole; Of course how much validity there is in a study which is predicting an overall warming pattern, rather than considering the possibility that weather will become more extreme, and erractic, all round is another question entirely, and one which I’ll maybe rant about another day.
Think of the flowers! won't somebody please think of the flowers?
Near the start of the article it’s stated that flowers could be appearing “as much as 50 days” earlier, than they currently do, by 2080, but, cynic that I am, I assume this figure is based on more extreme climate change predictions, in order to produce an eye-catching headline.
“So what’s the problem?” you may be asking; how do flowers appearing earlier in the year have a negative impact on anyone, except for possibly shops which sell flowers losing sales around Valentine’s day. The answer is that, most likely, there wouldn’t be any direct negative effects for humans, but when one thinks about the numbers of other species, particularly insects, whose life cycles rely in some way on flowers, and other species who, in turn, rely on those species, it’s clear that ecologically this could be a pretty big deal.
A great deal of effort is spent on highlighting how climate change might end up directly effecting humans, and while that is definitely a worthy goal, I think that too often it’s wider ecological effects are only vaguely touched upon. The stark truth is that, despite all of our scientific advances, humanity’s welfare is still, very much, tied to the ecosphere which we inhabit, and if other species which play important roles in the ecosystem start to fail then the overall impact of climate change could be far greater than many realise.
Tags: Environment, Science
“the reality of climate change is that some places will get hotter while others get colder”
ok so let me get this straight. Some places will get warmer but other will get colder? So the net global temperature will actually remain the same? Are you saying that the arctic might actually become colder than it has been? …But that goes against the arctic/antarctic thawing threat which says that the world will drown under 40 feet of sea level rise. You’re saying that we’ll have more exteme weather, but not global warming.
I am complely confused, I have no idea what to beleive anymore. Now the planet is not warming, it’s just going to get stormier? Then what about the polar bears that have no ice, the eskimos with nowhere to live, and the images of New York city underwater. I guess I’d like to hear some truth sometime. Would be nice.
Sorry for the confusion Karen, thanks for taking the time to comment
The point I was making is that climate change doesn’t mean that everywhere’s going to be warmer all of the time, it’s not that cut and dried, and while the predictions show that tangible climate change is now likely, they are only predictions, and can’t give anything better than probabilities that the weather will end up in a particular state.
In general it looks like things will warm up, & in some cases far more than is comfortable for the local wildlife, e.g. the icecaps, but there are instances where we could see things getting colder over all, e.g. the UK already benefits from the warming effects of the Jet stream and gulf stream, however climate change could cause these to move, or pack up entirely, leaving the UK much colder than it currently is.
I share your sentiments about wanting some truthful information on the subject; As I see it this is a debate which has been muddied from both sides; You have scientists trying to carve out a name for themselves as pioneering discoverers, & those who’s objectiveity has to be questioned due to the source of their funding. You also have the problem that climate change is all about prediction; even if a model says there’s a 70% chance that climate will change in a particular way, that still leaves a 30% chance that it will change in a more, or less, extreme manner. Even though a 70% chance could be said to be pretty likely to occur, the levels of uncertainty involved make Govts nervous about commiting too much cash. Sadly this has lead to some pro-climate change scientists fudging their figures to try and get more concrete action from Govts; while I believe their motives are probably good on the whole, (trying to stop what they see as a great threat to humanity and life in general,) it just adds to the confusion that the average person in the street often feels about the subject.
Ultimately, if one isn’t a climate change scientist, or statistician, it’s hard to know what to think. The best advice I can give is to be wary of the sources of information you trust on climate change; ask yourself what the commentators agenda might be, &, if they’re not a respectable source, consider their position but don’t take it as gospel.
I found the following introduction to climate change, from The New Scientist to be a pretty good basic guide on the subject, but then I consider The NS to be a respectable source, a judgement which you’ll have to make for yourself.
ok Ive heard the theory about the greenhouse effect and how it will make the earth hotter. what´s your theory of how for stating that “the reality of climate change is that some places will get hotter while others get colder”
how could that be? the greenhouse effect contradicts that…
what should I believe in?
Hello from Russia!
Can I quote a post in your blog with the link to you?
@Thais Magalhaes
Thanks for the comment, and I’m sorry if I’ve caused you any confusion. Since your question is pretty much the same as the first comment posted on this article I hope you won’t mind if I’m lazy and refer you to the reply I gave just above your question.
@Polprav
Sure mate, as long as I’m credited use what you want.
I never comment on blogs, but your awsome content have forced me to to leave some positive feedback
I just want to tell you that your blog is very interesting, bookmarked