Climate ‘Tipping Points’ May Arrive Without Warning, Says Top Forecaster
From a UC Davis press release
A new University of California, Davis, study by a top ecological forecaster says it is harder than experts thought to predict when sudden shifts in Earth’s natural systems will occur — a worrisome finding for scientists trying to identify the tipping points that could push climate change into an irreparable global disaster.
“Many scientists are looking for the warning signs that herald sudden changes in natural systems, in hopes of forestalling those changes, or improving our preparations for them,” said UC Davis theoretical ecologist Alan Hastings. “Our new study found, unfortunately, that regime shifts with potentially large consequences can happen without warning — systems can ‘tip’ precipitously.
“This means that some effects of global climate change on ecosystems can be seen only once the effects are dramatic. By that point returning the system to a desirable state will be difficult, if not impossible.”
The current study focuses on models from ecology, but its findings may be applicable to other complex systems, especially ones involving human dynamics such as harvesting of fish stocks or financial markets.
Hastings, a professor in the UC Davis Department of Environmental Science and Policy, is one of the world’s top experts in using mathematical models (sets of equations) to understand natural systems. His current studies range from researching the dynamics of salmon and cod populations to modeling plant and animal species’ response to global climate change.
In 2006, Hastings received the Robert H. MacArthur Award, the highest honor given by the Ecological Society of America.
Hastings’ collaborator and co-author on the new study, Derin Wysham, was previously a postdoctoral scholar at UC Davis and is now a research scientist in the Department of Computational and Systems Biology at the John Innes Center in Norwich, England.
Scientists widely agree that global climate change is already causing major environmental effects, such as changes in the frequency and intensity of precipitation, droughts, heat waves and wildfires; rising sea level; water shortages in arid regions; new and larger pest outbreaks afflicting crops and forests; and expanding ranges for tropical pathogens that cause human illness.
And they fear that worse is in store. As U.S. presidential science adviser John Holdren (not an author of the new UC Davis study) recently told a congressional committee: “Climate scientists worry about ‘tipping points’ … thresholds beyond which a small additional increase in average temperature or some associated climate variable results in major changes to the affected system.”
Among the tipping points Holdren listed were: the complete disappearance of Arctic sea ice in summer, leading to drastic changes in ocean circulation and climate patterns across the whole Northern Hemisphere; acceleration of ice loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, driving rates of sea-level increase to 6 feet or more per century; and ocean acidification from carbon dioxide absorption, causing massive disruption in ocean food webs.
The new UC Davis study, “Regime shifts in ecological systems can occur with no warning,” was supported by the Advancing Theory in Biology program at the U.S. National Science Foundation and was published online today by the journal Ecology Letters, in its Early View feature: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123276879/abstract.
======================
FYI The image is by Anthony, and of course, it’s a spoof.
How about this?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7111879176615246491#
It is one year old by now. You hear at once the voice of a scaremonger, don’t you?
This time it will be colder. It could have been space invaders too, no matter what.
In academia, “climate science” or “climatology” is generally grouped with the discipline of geography. I’m not aware of any reputable institution of higher education that offers a masters or a doctorate in either “climate science” or “climatology”. So my take is there’s nothing exquisitely cerebral about the field.
Furthermore, this would indicate that none of the supposed “experts” in climate science has even a masters in the field. Now I could be wrong, but that’s what my research into the subject has found.
I know, I know, it’s really hard to predict what the universe is going to do to earth next.
If the Dust Bowl event were to occur today instead of 80 years ago, think of the panic it would cause in the AGW community. Human psychology really is the controlling factor in mankind’s destiny.
Reading between the lines, the author is saying that he can’t see any solid evidence of global warming.
@Tom in Florida (05:56:47) :
‘“returning the system to a desirable state”
Desirable state according to whom? Mine would be daily high temps around 88 F, low temps 75 F with Gulf of Mexico water temps 86 F every day, every year. A polar bear, on the other hand, might want it a tad bit cooler; as does my brother in Connecticut.’
I think “desirable state” is probably one where nobody disagrees or asks serious questions about the evidence.
Don’t you understand? The fact that the world has, thus far, escaped an endogenously created tipping point just makes it more likely that one is around the corner. Our good luck just can’t last -especially as mankind doesn’t deserve that it should. (I jest).
When did “tipping points” transform from new-age pop sociology to science?
Is Malcom Gladwell now a “scientist?”
Does UC Davis allow pop sociology research to be promulgated in its classrooms?
What the heck is a “theoretical ecologist?”
It’s amazing how cynical people have become — they dismiss a scholarly article when “the proof of the pudding” is well documented in British Literature. I wish I had time to read the article myself as I am certain that I could add to my knowledge of mathematics and learn about tipping points — however I must shovel more snow and it takes time to dress for the bitter cold that exists here in the backwaters north of Toronto.
However, more to the point, there is well documented evidence of tipping points all around you — I remind you that “All the King’s horses and all the King’s men couldn’t put Humpty together again.” Think on that– next time you want to push a climate sooth-sayer over the wall! Hah!
Looks like doom and gloom global warming fever has morphed into the tipping point syndrome . It really is unhealthy to be a climate scientists.
Nigel S (01:28:48) : says: “Speaking of backing the wrong horse Gandhi hoped the Japanese army would ‘liberate’ India during WW2. Luckily for us (and him) Field Marshal Viscount Slim had a better idea.”
Quite a few decades back when daily cartoon shows still aired some of the WWII cartoons that contained nationalist propaganda, I had a childhood “Ah ha!” moment. I was watching a cartoon that included caricatures of three enemies of America. They were of Hitler, Tojo, and… (drum roll)…(No. Not Mussolini.)…. GANDHI! Yes, poor skinny, loin clothed Gandhi, that dangerous viper who dared to stir up trouble for our valiant British allies!
In some ways, it really was an important thing for me to see. In elementary class we were being taught (early 1960s) that Gandhi was a hero, a pacifist supporter of human self-determination, and yet here was clear evidence that just not-so-very-long before he had been ranked with Hitler! It made me start to wonder how much of what I was being taught was not true.
I still wonder about the same question.
Steve Goddard (06:19:22) : “Reading between the lines, the author is saying that he can’t see any solid evidence of global warming.”
Solid evidence as in … “what did the actress say to the global warmer who tried to hide their decline?”
Better get it checked out at Climaxic Research Unit!
the fact that we are still here after about 4.5 billion years and life on this planet of ours is flourishing strongly suggests that climate systems are generally insensitive and the system self regulatory. As such it is extremely doubtful that there are tipping points beyond which there is no return.
Funny!
Climate astrologist seems to be everywere!
Walt Stone (05:59:56) :
If you can’t tell us if we’ve gone past a tipping point, then you obviously can’t tell us if we’ve pulled back from a tipping point.
Brilliant!
—————–
Reply:
Furthermore, wouldn’t that negate the very existence of “tipping points” in the general scheme of climate? Perhaps what we’re seeing isn’t the result of any particular tipping point, but the collective results of all forces acting on a very complex system.
“irreparable global disaster.”
Hmm, since life has been here the past 500+ million years seems to me such events have never happened. The planet has always recovered and repaired itself from punctutation events of the past.
I know how to keep the oceans from absorbing too much CO2. Heat them up.
“And they fear that worse is in store. As U.S. presidential science adviser John Holdren (not an author of the new UC Davis study) recently told a congressional committee: “Climate scientists worry about ‘tipping points’ … thresholds beyond which a small additional increase in average temperature or some associated climate variable results in major changes to the affected system.”
___________
Here the “affected system” is AGW. I believe these people are absolutely correct, and truly have very much to be worried about; especially their future employment and income, not to mention mortgage payments and medical insurance for their families. Life is full of tipping points. You win some, you lose some. The poor people on the Titanic likewise didn’t know they’d bought a half-way ticket to nowhere. Tip..
The big question is … do these folks actually believe their own BS?
If they do … what does that say about our education system.
Seagull (01:10:53) :
In due course, this lead to the rejection of previous opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull, because of his subservience to the AGW/ETS push. A “tipping point”
I wonder why a merchant banker would be so keen on an Emissions Trading Scheme?
in Oz politics perhaps, but one giant leap for the sanity of politics.
Whether Tony Abbott wins or loses, I think Turnbull will experience another tipping point. I don’t think any Liberal will want him in the party.
Kevin Rudd (prime minister) is about to try and introduce a government controlled internet filter. It’s a very nasty piece of legislation. I’m sure when the younger folk get wind of what that control freak is up to he can wave bye bye to the yoof vote.
I have sent my study of the ecological affects on climate change to Penthouse. After many hours dedicated to research and experimental design, it was deduced that climate change is already producing drastic behavioral changes in the lesser redheaded and greater bearded mattress thrashers. Such that it has been behaviorally modeled (I did that one and sure enough, it could do that) that a massive population explosion, detrimental to natural resources, is predicted for the East Coast.
Bottoms up.
Jason Calley (06:38:13),
From your comment I see that Gandhi was no pacifist. He was merely content to let other do the fighting for him. Had he been a true pacifist he would have condemned the Japanese.
So I guess you were doubly misinformed.
Feel a little uncomfortable bringing this up but I’m an ecology graduate. Contrary to general belief, it’s not some pseudo-science, tree-hugging, pot-smoking discipline. It’s actually all about how members of a species interact with each other, with other species and their habitat. It’s about population dynamics, predator-prey interactions, sexual selection, in fact it’s about lots of things to do with biology, the mechanics of populations and mathematics. It has very little to do with all that hippy spiritual Gaia BS. The only thing it has in common with climate science is that modelling is very predominant. Unlike climate science however, models can easily be evaluated alongside ‘real’ observations and measurement.
Feel much better now…
“theoretical” is a fancy word for BS.
I can do dat.
I have “theoretical” proof I can fly by flapping my arms.
But I propose others jump off the cliff while I get paid to further study the theory.
Really this is an act of embellishment to inflate the importance and urgency of the “theoretical ecologist’s” work.
Better give them more money and invite them to speak to congress? Right
David Ball (05:53:35) :
David and EM….thanks for the chuckle this morning