MokshithSai15/ClimeAI huggingface dataset:
Claim: 'On June 23, 1988, NASA scientist James Hansen testified before the House of Representatives that there was a strong "cause and effect relationship" between observed temperatures and human emissions into the atmosphere.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- James Hansen: Hansen was invited by Rafe Pomerance to testify before the United States Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on June 23, 1988. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: Hansen testified that "Global warming has reached a level such that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause and effect relationship between the greenhouse effect and observed warming...It is already happening now" and "The greenhouse effect has been detected and it is changing our climate now...We already reached the point where the greenhouse effect is important." [SUPPORTS]
- James Hansen: Hansen said that NASA was 99% confident that the warming was caused by the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and not a random fluctuation. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: During a senate meeting on June 23, 1988, Hansen reported that he was ninety-nine percent certain the earth was warmer then than it had ever been measured to be, there was a clear cause and effect relationship with the greenhouse effect and lastly that due to global warming, the likelihood of freak weather was steadily increasing. [SUPPORTS]
- James Hansen: ...Dr. James E. Hansen of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration told a Congressional committee that it was 99 percent certain that the warming trend was not a natural variation but was caused by a buildup of carbon dioxide and other artificial gases in the atmosphere. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: At that time, Hansen also produced a model of the future behavior of the globe’s temperature, which he had turned into a video movie that was heavily shopped in Congress.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- James Hansen: The first climate prediction computed from a general circulation model that was published by Hansen was in 1988, the same year as his well-known Senate testimony. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: The second generation of the GISS model was used to estimate the change in mean surface temperature based on a variety of scenarios of future greenhouse gas emissions. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: Hansen concluded that global warming would be evident within the next few decades, and that it would result in temperatures at least as high as during the Eemian. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: Hansen compared the corrected troposphere temperatures with the results of the published GISS model, and concluded that the model is in good agreement with the observations, noting that the satellite temperature data had been the last holdout of global warming denialists, and that the correction of the data would result in a change from discussing whether global warming is occurring to what is the rate of global warming, and what should be done about it. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: ...Dr. James E. Hansen of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration told a Congressional committee that it was 99 percent certain that the warming trend was not a natural variation but was caused by a buildup of carbon dioxide and other artificial gases in the atmosphere. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: That model predicted that global temperature between 1988 and 1997 would rise by 0.45°C (Figure 1).
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- General circulation model: Over the same time period, the "likely" range (greater than 66% probability, based on expert judgement) for these scenarios was for a global mean temperature increase of 1.1 to 6.4 °C. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- General circulation model: In a scenario where global emissions start to decrease by 2010 and then declined at a sustained rate of 3% per year, the likely global average temperature increase was predicted to be 1.7 °C above pre-industrial levels by 2050, rising to around 2 °C by 2100. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- General circulation model: In a projection designed to simulate a future where no efforts are made to reduce global emissions, the likely rise in global average temperature was predicted to be 5.5 °C by 2100. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- General circulation model: Under the same emissions scenario but with a different model, the predicted median warming was 4.1 °C. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: Currently, surface temperatures are rising by about 0.2 °C per decade. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: But his results are evidence that the actual climate sensitivity is about 3°C for a doubling of atmospheric CO2.
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- Global warming: Arrhenius calculated the temperature increase expected from doubling CO 2 to be around 5-6 °C. [REFUTES]
- Richard Lindzen: Lindzen has stated that due to the non-linear effects of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, CO2 levels are now around 30% higher than pre-industrial levels but temperatures have responded by about 75% 0.6 °C (1.08 °F) of the expected value for a doubling of CO2. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Richard Lindzen: The IPCC (2007) estimates that the expected rise in temperature due to a doubling of CO2 to be about 3 °C (5.4 °F), ± 1.5°. [SUPPORTS]
- Richard Lindzen: Lindzen has given estimates of the Earth's climate sensitivity to be 0.5 °C based on ERBE data. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Svante Arrhenius: On the other hand, any doubling of the percentage of carbon dioxide in the air would raise the temperature of the earth's surface by 4°; and if the carbon dioxide were increased fourfold, the temperature would rise by 8°." [SUPPORTS]
Claim: Had he used the currently accepted value of approximately 3°C warming for a doubling of atmospheric CO2, Hansen would have correctly projected the ensuing global warming.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Greenhouse effect: The effect was more fully quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896, who made the first quantitative prediction of global warming due to a hypothetical doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: He argued that if the temperature rose 0.4 °C above the 1950–1980 mean for a few years, it would be the "smoking gun" pointing to human-caused global warming. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: Decades ago, they correctly predicted how much Earth's temperature would rise due to increasing atmospheric CO2. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: In 2000, Hansen advanced an alternative view of global warming over the last 100 years, arguing that during that time frame the negative forcing via aerosols and the positive forcing via carbon dioxide (CO 2) largely balanced each other out, and that the 0.74±0.18 °C net rise in average global temperatures could mostly be explained by greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide, such as methane and chlorofluorocarbons. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- James Hansen: An alternate scenario would keep the warming to below this if climate sensitivity were below 3 °C for doubled CO 2. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: Global brightening is caused by changes in cloud cover, reflective aerosols and absorbing aerosols.
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- Black carbon: In addition to black carbon, fossil fuel and biofuel soot contain aerosols and particulate matter that cool the planet by reflecting the sun's radiation away from the Earth. [SUPPORTS]
- Black carbon: A purely scattering aerosol will reflect energy that would normally be absorbed by the earth-atmosphere system back to space and leads to a cooling effect. [SUPPORTS]
- Global dimming: Aerosols and other particulates absorb solar energy and reflect sunlight back into space. [SUPPORTS]
- Global dimming: The particles reflect and absorb sunlight, less sun rays reach Earth surface layers, thus resulting in cooler water and land surface temperatures, and also less cloud formation, subsequently dampening the development of hurricanes. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: Solid and liquid particles known as aerosols – from volcanoes, plankton, and human-made pollutants – reflect incoming sunlight, cooling the climate. [REFUTES]
Claim: While changes in cloud cover & aerosols lead to more sunlight hitting the surface, this can be compensated by the cooling effect on the atmosphere due to fewer clouds trapping less warmth and fewer absorbing aerosols absorbing less sunlight.
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- Climate system: Some primarily scatter sunlight and thereby cool the planet, while others absorb sunlight and warm the atmosphere. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global dimming: The particles reflect and absorb sunlight, less sun rays reach Earth surface layers, thus resulting in cooler water and land surface temperatures, and also less cloud formation, subsequently dampening the development of hurricanes. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: If cloud cover increases, more sunlight will be reflected back into space, cooling the planet. [REFUTES]
- Global warming: For instance, the change from a dark forest to grassland makes the surface lighter, causing it to reflect more sunlight. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Particulates: For instance, if absorbing aerosols are present in a layer aloft in the atmosphere, they can heat surrounding air which inhibits the condensation of water vapour, resulting in less cloud formation. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: satellites confirmed measurements from ground stations show a considerable, and naturally-occurring, global brightening from 1983-2001 (Pinker et al., 2005).
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Global dimming: There was solar brightening beyond 2000 at numerous stations in Europe, the United States, and Korea. [SUPPORTS]
- Global dimming: Wild et al., using measurements over land, report brightening since 1990, and Pinker et al. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: "A Revisit of Global Dimming and Brightening Based on the Sunshine Duration". [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: From 1961 to 1990, a gradual reduction in the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth's surface was observed, a phenomenon popularly known as global dimming, typically attributed to aerosols from biofuel and fossil fuel burning. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe: The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), originally known as the Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP), was a spacecraft operating from 2001 to 2010 which measured temperature differences across the sky in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) – the radiant heat remaining from the Big Bang. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Elementary radiative-transfer calculations demonstrate that a natural surface global brightening amounting to ~1.9 Wm–2 over the 18-year period of study would be expected – using the IPCC’s own methodology – to have caused a transient warming of 1 K (1.8 F°).
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- Climate sensitivity: The global temperature increase since the beginning of the industrial period (taken as 1750) is about 0.8 °C (1.4 °F), and the radiative forcing due to CO 2 and other long-lived greenhouse gases – mainly methane, nitrous oxide, and chlorofluorocarbons – emitted since that time is about 2.6 W/m2. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climate sensitivity: Taking planetary heat uptake rate as the rate of ocean heat uptake estimated by the IPCC AR4 as 0.2 W/m2, yields a value for S of 2.1 °C (3.8 °F). [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Climate sensitivity: Solar irradiance is about 0.9 W/m2 brighter during solar maximum than during solar minimum, which correlated in measured average global temperature over the period 1959-2004. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: They judge that global mean surface air temperature has increased by 0.3 to 0.6 °C over the last 100 years, broadly consistent with prediction of climate models, but also of the same magnitude as natural climate variability. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Paleocene: The Paleocene–Eocene thermal maximum was an approximate 200,000 year long event where the global average temperature rose by some 5 to 8 °C (9 to 14 °F), and mid-latitude and polar areas may have exceeded modern tropical temperatures of 24–29 °C (75–84 °F). [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: When we do the calculations and include all radiative forcings and the amount of heat being absorbed by the oceans, it shows that the Earth has warmed almost exactly as much as we would expect.
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- Earth's energy budget: The net heat flux is buffered primarily by becoming part of the ocean's heat content, until a new equilibrium state is established between radiative forcings and the climate response. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Earth: This effect is much less significant than the total energy change due to the axial tilt, and most of the excess energy is absorbed by the higher proportion of water in the Southern Hemisphere. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: Although the most common measure of global warming is the increase in the near-surface atmospheric temperature, over 90% of the additional energy stored in the climate system over the last 50 years has warmed ocean water. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Greenhouse effect: Most of this thermal radiation is absorbed by the atmosphere and warms it. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Greenhouse effect: Earth's surface, warmed to an "effective temperature" around −18 °C (0 °F), radiates long-wavelength, infrared heat in the range of 4–100 μm. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: Arctic sea ice loss is three times greater than Antarctic sea ice gain, and the amount of solar energy absorbed by the Earth is increasing as a result.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Earth: The amount of solar energy reaching Earth's surface decreases with increasing latitude. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Earth: This effect is much less significant than the total energy change due to the axial tilt, and most of the excess energy is absorbed by the higher proportion of water in the Southern Hemisphere. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: More of the Sun's energy is now absorbed in these regions, contributing to Arctic amplification, which has caused Arctic temperatures to increase at more than twice the rate of the rest of the world. [SUPPORTS]
- Sea ice: As the sea ice melts, its surface area shrinks, diminishing the size of the reflective surface and therefore causing the earth to absorb more of the sun's heat. [SUPPORTS]
- Sea ice: As the ice melts it lowers the albedo thus causing more heat to be absorbed by the Earth and further increase the amount of melting ice. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: When the internal variability is removed from the temperature record, what we find is nearly monotonic, accelerating warming throughout the 20th Century.
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- 20th century: One argument is that of global warming occurring due to human-caused emission of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide produced by the burning of fossil fuels. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Instrumental temperature record: The global average and combined land and ocean surface temperature, show a warming of 0.85 [0.65 to 1.06] °C, in the period 1880 to 2012, based on multiple independently produced datasets. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Instrumental temperature record: This view ignores the presence of internal climate variability. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Paleoclimatology: The geological record, however, shows a continually relatively warm surface during the complete early temperature record of Earth with the exception of one cold glacial phase about 2.4 billion years ago. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Temperature: For a body that is not in its own state of internal thermodynamic equilibrium, different thermometers can record different temperatures, depending respectively on the mechanisms of operation of the thermometers. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: The motions of the massive oceans where heat is moved between deep layers and the surface provides variability on time scales from years to centuries.
Verdict: SUPPORTS
Evidence:
- Atlantic Ocean: Surface water temperatures, which vary with latitude, current systems, and season and reflect the latitudinal distribution of solar energy, range from below −2 °C (28 °F) to over 30 °C (86 °F). [SUPPORTS]
- Climate variability: These fluctuations in atmospheric temperature, sea surface temperature, precipitation or other parameters can be quasi-periodic, often occurring on inter-annual, multi-annual, decadal, multidecadal, century-wide, millennial or longer timescales. [SUPPORTS]
- Climate variability: El Niño and La Niña are important temperature fluctuations in surface waters of the tropical Eastern Pacific Ocean. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: By itself, the climate system experiences various cycles which can last for years (such as the El Niño–Southern Oscillation) to decades or centuries. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Meteorology: Significant movement of heat, matter, or momentum on time scales of less than a day are caused by turbulent motions. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: In fact, the authors go on to estimate climate sensitivity from their findings, calculate a value between 2.3 to 4.1°C.
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- Climate sensitivity: The IPCC literature assessment estimates that TCR likely lies between 1 °C and 2.5 °C. [REFUTES]
- Climate sensitivity: For constant humidity they computed a climate sensitivity of 2.3 °C per doubling of CO2 (which they rounded to 2, the value most often quoted from their work, in the abstract of the paper). [SUPPORTS]
- Climate sensitivity: The 1990 IPCC First Assessment Report estimated that equilibrium climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO 2 lay between 1.5 and 4.5 °C (2.7 and 8.1 °F), with a "best guess in the light of current knowledge" of 2.5 °C (4.5 °F). [SUPPORTS]
- Climate sensitivity: IPCC authors concluded ECS is very likely to be greater than 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) and likely to lie in the range 2 to 4.5 °C (4 to 8.1 °F), with a most likely value of about 3 °C (5 °F). [SUPPORTS]
- Climate sensitivity: The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report reverted to the earlier range of 1.5 to 4.5 °C (2.7 to 8.1 °F) (high confidence) because some estimates using industrial-age data came out low. [SUPPORTS]
Claim: A new peer-reviewed study on Surface Warming and the Solar Cycle found that times of high solar activity are on average 0.2°C warmer than times of low solar activity, and that there is a polar amplification of the warming.
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- Climate change in the Arctic: According to a 2015 study, reductions in black carbon emissions and other minor greenhouse gases, by roughly 60 percent, could cool the Arctic up to 0.2 °C by 2050. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Global warming: This is much colder than the conditions that actually exist at the Earth's surface (the global mean surface temperature is about 14 °C). [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Warming in the last 100 years has caused about a 0.74 °C increase in global average temperature. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate sensitivity is defined as the amount of global average surface warming following a doubling of carbon dioxide concentrations. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Solar cycle: Also, average solar activity in the 2010s was no higher than in the 1950s (see above), whereas average global temperatures had risen markedly over that period. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: The Petition Project features over 31,000 scientists signing the petition stating "there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide will, in the forseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere".
Verdict: DISPUTED
Evidence:
- Climate change denial: There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. [SUPPORTS]
- Global warming: In November 2017, a second warning to humanity signed by 15,364 scientists from 184 countries stated that "the current trajectory of potentially catastrophic climate change due to rising greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels, deforestation, and agricultural production – particularly from farming ruminants for meat consumption" is "especially troubling". [REFUTES]
- Scientific consensus on climate change: Evidence from the geological record is consistent with the physics that shows that adding large amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere warms the world and may lead to: higher sea levels and flooding of low-lying coasts; greatly changed patterns of rainfall; increased acidity of the oceans; and decreased oxygen levels in seawater. [REFUTES]
- Scientific consensus on climate change: 7–10 "There is now convincing evidence that since the industrial revolution, human activities, resulting in increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases have become a major agent of climate change. [REFUTES]
- Scientific consensus on climate change: Human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas), and secondarily the clearing of land, have increased the concentration of carbon dioxide, methane, and other heat-trapping ("greenhouse") gases in the atmosphere...There is international scientific consensus that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities. [REFUTES]
Claim: The 30,000 scientists and science graduates listed on the OISM petition represent a tiny fraction (0.3%) of all science graduates.
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- Art Robinson: The OISM website states that "several members of the Institute's staff are also well known for their work on the Petition Project", and that the petition has "more than 31,000" signatures by scientists. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Art Robinson: Robinson asserted in 2008 that the petition has over 31,000 signatories, with 9,000 of these holding a PhD degree. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Doctor of Philosophy: The number of PhD graduates has grown substantially in many countries since 2000, PhD Graduates still represent a relatively small, elite group within most countries — around 1.1% of adults among OECD countries. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Oregon Petition: As of 2013, the petition's website states, "The current list of 31,487 petition signers includes 9,029 PhD; 7,157 MS; 2,586 MD and DVM; and 12,715 BS or equivalent academic degrees. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: The total fresh STEM graduates were 2.6 million in 2016. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
Claim: More importantly, the OISM list only contains 39 scientists who specialise in climate science.
Verdict: NOT_ENOUGH_INFO
Evidence:
- Antarctica: Ongoing experiments are conducted by more than 4,000 scientists from many nations. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Botany: A botanist, plant scientist or phytologist is a scientist who specialises in this field. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- List of climate scientists: The list includes scientists from several specialities or disciplines. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Oregon Petition: In 2001, Scientific American took a random sample "of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a Ph.D. in a climate-related science." [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]
- Oregon Petition: Crudely extrapolating, the petition supporters include a core of about 200 climate researchers – a respectable number, though rather a small fraction of the climatological community. [NOT_ENOUGH_INFO]