{"id":21940,"date":"2018-10-26T06:48:36","date_gmt":"2018-10-26T11:48:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.realclimate.org\/?p=21940"},"modified":"2018-10-26T06:48:36","modified_gmt":"2018-10-26T11:48:36","slug":"cracking-the-climate-change-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.realclimate.org\/index.php\/archives\/2018\/10\/cracking-the-climate-change-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Cracking the Climate Change Case"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

I have an op-ed in the New York Times this week:<\/p>\n

How Scientists Cracked the Climate Change Case<\/a>
\nThe biggest crime scene on the planet is the planet. We know the earth is warming, but who or what is causing it?<\/i>
\n\"Emilia<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Many of you will recognise the metaphor from previous Realclimate pieces (this is earliest one<\/a> I think, from 2007), and indeed, the working title was “CSI: Planet Earth”. The process description and conclusions are drawn from multiple sources on the attribution of recent climate trends (here<\/a>, here<\/a> etc.), as well the data visualization for surface temperature trends at Bloomberg News<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

There have been many comments about this on Twitter – most appreciative, some expected, and a few interesting. The expected criticisms come from people who mostly appear not to have read the piece at all (“Climate has changed before!” – a claim that no-one disputes), and a lot of pointless counter-arguments by assertion. Of the more interesting comment threads, was one started by Ted Nordhaus who asked <\/p>\n

\n

I wonder who exactly the audience for this sort of thing is at this point… https:\/\/t.co\/m977McdHZC<\/a><\/p>\n

— Ted Nordhaus (@TedNordhaus) October 25, 2018<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n