Why was 2023 the warmest year in 130,000 years? Do you agree with the thesis, confirmed by the results of many scientific studies, that 2023 was the warmest year on record due to the accelerating process of global warming, still civilization's high greenhouse gas emissions and, in addition, the impact of the El Ninio phenomenon?
Why are the results of scientific studies confirming the thesis that it is the man-made combustion economy based on coal-fired power generation and the burning of other fossil fuels as well, that is the main source of greenhouse gas emissions, the accelerating process of global warming and the climate and environmental crisis worsening year after year, still being questioned by some representatives of the scientific world?
In Spain, in mid-December, wintertime temps on the Iberian Peninsula, Mediterranean coasts were recorded at around 30 degrees C, or temperatures that were once considered typically summer in Europe for many years are now occurring in winter. But this is just one of the last recorded numerous occurrences of record-high, historically highest levels of the planet's atmospheric temperature in 2023. Never before have such high, record-breaking atmospheric temperatures been recorded so often and in so many parts of the world during the summer heat and beyond.
That the companies and enterprises of the combustion, dirty energy sector, lobbyists and others acting on their behalf, for the interests, business of the companies and enterprises of the combustion energy sector is a matter of course. The driving force behind the development of business operating in the dirty combustion energy sector is dominated by selfishness, greed and lack of looking to the future, ignoring the future of the climate, the biosphere, the biodiversity of the planet's natural ecosystems and the future of future generations of people. Greed and selfishness, lack of social, climate and environmental responsibility, including ignoring the issue of responsibility for the future of the next generations of people, dominate. As early as the 1970s, some leading oil companies commissioned and financed scientific studies, or should we say pseudo-scientific studies with a predetermined informal result of these pseudo-studies on climate change and the role of human activity in these changes with a predetermined confirmation of the thesis that it is not the burning of fossil fuels that is responsible for the progressive warming of the climate. Through these actions, humanity has lost half a century of time. If a few decades ago the companies of the fossil fuel extraction and energy sector had not covered up the actual results of the studies carried out, if they had not swept the problem of global warming under the rug, if they had not financed fictitious studies that had the predetermined goal of questioning the role of fossil fuel combustion as the main factor generating the process of global warming, then the process of green transformation of the economy, including the green transformation of the energy sector, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, counteracting and reducing the scale of the greenhouse effect could have been started half a century earlier. Half a century of time is precisely the time that will be sorely lacking in the 21st century, because the process of global warming is accelerating and what has been done so far in terms of the green transformation of the economy, including the green transformation of the energy sector is still far from sufficient. For wasting half a century of time on this issue, humanity owes it to the deliberately unethical, anti-social, anti-climate and anti-environmental activities of companies and enterprises operating in the fossil fuel extraction, processing and combustion sector. It is these companies and enterprises that bear the main responsibility for the lost time of the mid-century. Time that is now in short supply. Time that may be missing to prevent the critical level of the amount of CO2 and other greenhouse gases emitted into the planet's atmosphere from occurring in a few years or so, after which the process of global warming will further accelerate and enter a path of irreversible process which may then inevitably lead to the occurrence of a global climate catastrophe already in the second half of the 21st century. The result of this catastrophe will be a much greater degradation of the climate, biosphere and biodiversity of the planet's natural ecosystems to a much greater extent than has occurred to date. This will lead to most land areas experiencing permanent heat, droughts, forest fires, tornadoes, violent storms. The climate and nature will be destroyed to such an extent that there will be no living conditions for humans in most land areas of the planet. For all this, the full responsibility lies mainly with the companies and enterprises that continue to extract, process and burn fossil fuels and have knowingly for at least half a century, since the 1970s or even before, knowingly misled the public by claiming that humans are not responsible for global warming despite the fact that they themselves knew that this was not true, that it is their activities that are generating high greenhouse gas emissions to a key degree, which results in the planet's greenhouse effect and the global warming process proceeding ever faster.
Unfortunately, it is still the case that not only in the business community, but also in the political and scientific community, there are still a few representatives of the position of questioning the results of many scientific studies confirming the thesis that it is the man-built combustion economy that is the main source of the accelerating process of global warming and the growing risk of a global climate and environmental catastrophe in the perspective of the next few decades. In fact, this is an obvious point, and the question should be: Why is this still being questioned?
In view of the above, 2023 was the warmest year in 130,000 years. It was another year in a row with historically high temperatures of the planet's atmosphere recorded in various parts of the world during the summer and non-summer recurrent seasons. Researchers and scientists operating in various parts of the world, on the basis of their research work, conclude that it is the civilizational activity of humans within the framework of the development of the combustion emission economy that is the source of climate change, the working greenhouse effect, the accelerating process of global warming and the ever-increasing risk of a global climate catastrophe in the current 21st century. In 2023-2024, the cyclical El Ninio effect is also an additional factor in the increase in the average temperature of the planet's atmosphere. If you disagree with the above thesis, with which about 99 percent of researchers and scientists around the world agree, then give your scientific arguments.
A lot of data on the planet's climate, including the results of studies of long-term climate change indicate that the current year 2024 will also be another year of record high temperatures of the planet's atmosphere and the scale of weather anomalies and climate disasters may increase again.
I am conducting research on this issue. I have described the key aspects of the above issue in the article: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY DEVELOPMENT AS A KEY ELEMENT OF THE PRO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE ECONOMY TOWARDS GREEN ECONOMY AND CIRCULAR ECONOMY
Article IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY DEVE...
I invite you to scientific cooperation in this problematic,
In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:
Why was 2023 the warmest year in 130,000 years? Do you agree with the thesis, confirmed by the results of many scientific studies, that 2023 was the warmest year on record due to the accelerating process of global warming, still civilization's high greenhouse gas emissions and, in addition, the impact of the El Ninio phenomenon?
Why are the results of scientific studies confirming the thesis that it is the man-made combustion economy based on coal-fired power generation and the burning of other fossil fuels as well, that is the main source of greenhouse gas emissions, the accelerating process of global warming and the climate and environmental crisis that is worsening every year, still being questioned by some representatives of the scientific world?
Why was 2023 the warmest year in 130,000 years? Why are there still people who question scientific findings?
What do you think about this topic?
What is your opinion on this issue?
Please answer,
I invite everyone to join the discussion,
Thank you very much,
Best wishes,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
The above text is entirely my own work written by me on the basis of my research.
In writing this text I did not use other sources or automatic text generation systems.
Copyright by Dariusz Prokopowicz
Hi Dariusz,
Thanks for sharing and the effort, 130,000 years seems too long ago to be this accurate about; what's the scientific method to get to this data and consider 2023 the warmest year in the last 130,000 years?
But about those who don't accept global warming, I think that the most important reason is that some people are benefiting from the current lifestyle of humans and also this lifestyle is much easier and cheaper (in short-term basis) for all humans.
And always I do consider that every species on this planet are invasive if they find a real suitable situation, invasive for the whole ecosystem, and over-grow until their own death.
wish Homo sapiens be wiser than other species.
Regards,
Vahid Shoaleh
Dear Prof. Prokopowicz!
You raised a crucial point to consider - how to convince people about the negative effects related to climate change:
1) Ettinger, J., McGivern, A., Spiegel, M.P. et al. Breaking the climate spiral of silence: lessons from a COP26 climate conversations campaign. Climatic Change 176, 22 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03493-5, Open access: Article Breaking the climate spiral of silence: lessons from a COP26...
2) Falkenberg, M., Galeazzi, A., Torricelli, M. et al. Growing polarization around climate change on social media. Nat. Clim. Chang. 12, 1114–1121 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01527-x, Open access: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01527-x
3) Andreotta, M., Boschetti, F., Farrell, S. et al. Evidence for three distinct climate change audience segments with varying belief-updating tendencies: implications for climate change communication. Climatic Change 174, 32 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-022-03437-5, Open access: Article Evidence for three distinct climate change audience segments...
Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely
Hello Dariusz
It was only a matter of time that one year would become the warmest year since XXXXXX(X) years. Svante Arrhenius has published a paper about warming already in the year 1896, and his results are in fact still in the range of error of modern calculations. As long as we do not take action in sufficient ways we will see more such records in the near future. Beside several greenhouse active trace gases which originate from human activity there are natural factors contributing to theenergy balance of the earth. There are patterns in distribution of energy, like ENSO (just now contributing to more heat in the atmosphere), volcanic activity which is able to reflect energy input from the sun or solar activity which is on top just now with its roughly 11 year cycle.
So, for the question why the temp. is high there is a combination of several factors, high content of greenhouse trace gases, normal to low volcanic activity and high solar activity, positive ENSO and so on. We will see it go down slightly after we reached a transitional top in this year, just to see new records later.
The second part of your question is much more difficult to answer. It has to do with peoples perception of science, psychology and communication in public media.
Humans tend to be lazy, esp. they do not want to think themselves and they want to remain in safe zones, mentally. Climate change, or changes in general need individuals and populations to leave this zone of comfort. Our lazyness as species may be a source of denial.
I you look at different subgroups of the population you will see that there are different perceptions of climate change. Religious groups in USA for example are often in denial for dogmatic reasons. You see a function of growing acceptance proportional to growing level of education, reaching 97-99% acceptance of climate change and the necessity of action in the group of researchers who really work inside the topic.
There is a part of confirmation bias in every individual which seemingly deminishes the more we know about any topic, not only regarding climate change. I see exactly the same denialism in my own field of work, which sometimes can be very funny (or not funny) when people are convinced we have great tools and decision support systems, when in fact they did not accomplish anything the last 30 years. It is much more comfortable for these people, or a part of population, a working group or whatever, to continue in old tracks than to admit failing. I am only a little geoscientist, but to explain and adress this you have to ask psychologists.
INRE:"Why was 2023 the warmest year in 130,000 years? Why are the results of scientific studies confirming ... still being questioned by some representatives of the scientific world?"
130,000 years. You can do a quick surf through all the proxy records and check the ranges and distributions for yourself and get a qualitative sense of the data available, and whether such a 'global' claim could be for a single 'year' ( https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/how-proxy-data-reveals-climate-of-earths-distant-past/ and https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/100/12/bams-d-19-0040.1.xml ). The single greatest input to the global energy budgets and consequent surface temperature is Total Solar Irradiance, and so just how complete is that record? See "Changes in the Total Solar Irradiance and climatic effects" https://www.swsc-journal.org/articles/swsc/full_html/2021/01/swsc200108/swsc200108.html
"The current knowledge is summarized by three statements:
- During the minima periods in the 13th, 15/16th, 17th, and 19th centuries the terrestrial climate was colder by 0.5–1.5 °C;
- Indirect Top-down and Bottom-up mechanisms do not amplify direct forcing by a large amount, i.e. indirect solar forcing is of the same magnitude (or smaller) as direct solar forcing;
- The radiative output of the Sun cannot be lower by more than 2 Wm−2 below the measured present-day TSI value during solar cycle minimum.
These three statements contradict each other and it is concluded that at least one is not correct. Which one is a wrong statement is presently not known conclusively."
With that in mind about the primary input, and with that uncertainty, a claim about a single years in the past 130,000 years, considering the error bars in both historical records and proxy measures, and then assigning cause and effect to it is specious. It has only been in the past decade that there has been a unified set of globally distributed observations of surface and atmospheric column.
All research changes all the time, see Sabine Hossenfelder https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4S9sDyooxf4
We don't need to convince everyone around.
It is amazing how different some people are as far as thinking simple things.
We realized that during the covid 19 affair. Some "educated" people still going around wearing masks!
Some scientists are paid to spread false information.
All we need to do is educate our children and grandchildren
Dr Dariusz Prokopowicz
Really interesting question. I'm always at a loss when I read that someone is disbelieving the changes. I just hope something can be done globally before too much damage is caused.
For the sake of all animals and plants. It is through human activity that all this is happening.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals