The goal of this blog is to create a long list of facts that are important, not trivia, and that are known to be true yet are either disputed by large segments of the public or highly surprising or misunderstood by many.
The goal of this blog is to create a list of what I call super facts. Important facts that are known to be true and yet they are surprising, shocking or disputed among non-experts. In a sense it is myth busting. However, it is not the only type of posts I do. This is a review for a popular book on Astrophysics called “Astrophysics for People in a Hurry” by Neil De Grasse Tyson. It is a New York Times best seller and the #1 best seller in Astronomy & Astrophysics on Amazon. It has almost 37,000 ratings/reviews on Amazon and more 194,000 reviews/ratings on Goodreads.
Below is a list of the four formats in which it comes on Amazon.
Hardcover – Publisher : W. W. Norton & Company; First Edition (May 2, 2017), ASIN : 0393609391, ISBN-10 : 9780393609394, ISBN-13 : 978-0393609394, 224 pages, item weight : 2.31 pounds, dimensions : 7.3 x 4.8 x 0.9 inches, it costs $6.21 – $13.26 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
Kindle – Publisher – W. W. Norton & Company (May 2, 2017), ASIN : B01MAWT2MO, 222 pages, it costs $9.00 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
Audiobook – Publisher : Blackstone Audio Inc (May 2, 2017), ASIN : B06XB2PX7G, it costs $10.20 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
Audio CD – Publisher : Blackstone Publishing; Unabridged edition (May 2, 2017), ISBN-10 : 1538408015, ISBN-13 : 978-1538408018, it costs $24.95 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
Front cover of the book Astrophysics for People in a Hurry. Click on the image to go to the Amazon page for the hardcover version of the book.
Amazon’s Description of Astrophysics for People in a Hurry
Over a year on the New York Times bestseller list and more than a million copies sold.
The essential universe, from our most celebrated and beloved astrophysicist.
What is the nature of space and time? How do we fit within the universe? How does the universe fit within us? There’s no better guide through these mind-expanding questions than acclaimed astrophysicist and best-selling author Neil deGrasse Tyson.
But today, few of us have time to contemplate the cosmos. So Tyson brings the universe down to Earth succinctly and clearly, with sparkling wit, in tasty chapters consumable anytime and anywhere in your busy day.
While you wait for your morning coffee to brew, for the bus, the train, or a plane to arrive, Astrophysics for People in a Hurry will reveal just what you need to be fluent and ready for the next cosmic headlines: from the Big Bang to black holes, from quarks to quantum mechanics, and from the search for planets to the search for life in the universe.
This is my four-star review for Astrophysics for People in a Hurry
The reason I gave the book four stars instead of five is because I felt that if you have an interest in the topic, you will have heard it all before. However, in retrospect that might not be a good reason to deduct a star. After all, the book seems to be targeting people who do not know much about the subject and thus will not have heard it all before.
Quick and Entertaining Overview of Astrophysics
I’ve read a number of Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s books and I love them. This book is a compressed version of what he has been explaining in other books. If you’ve already read a number of Neil De Grasse books, or perhaps other popular science Astrophysics books such as those by Stephen Hawking, you will not find much new in this book. However, I think it is a brief but good summary of Astrophysics written for a layman. It is 208 pages, each page having about half as much text per page as a typical popular science book. It is an easy and fairly quick read.
He briefly explains the Big Bang, physical laws, spectra, nebulae, the speed of light, very briefly relativity and quantum physics, the cosmic background radiation, galaxies, gravitational lensing, dark matter, dark energy, neutron stars, the composition of the solar system and exoplanets. He covers a lot of ground quickly and he makes it easy to understand without simplifying so much that it becomes misleading. This book is exactly what the title says. However, as I mentioned, if you’ve read a lot on the topic already, especially if it is Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s books, you’ve seen it before. I still think it was very enjoyable though and I still learned something new. He is a very entertaining author.
Front cover of the book Astrophysics for People in a Hurry. Click on the image to go to the Amazon page for the hardcover version of the book.
Super fact 28: That Earth is round, or spherical (or closely spherical) had been known for at least a couple of thousand years by the time Columbus set sail. Columbus did not set sail to prove that earth was round, and he knew it was round.
The ancient Greeks, particularly philosophers like Pythagoras and Aristotle knew that earth was round from observing how ships disappeared over the horizon hull first, while their masts were still visible. They noticed the earth’s round shadow cast on the moon during lunar eclipses.
If earth was flat, earth’s shadow would not appear round, especially not all the time. They also noticed that different constellations were visible depending on the location (on earth). So, noticing that earth was round was a simple and obvious observation that easily could be made thousands of years ago.
Earth is a sphere, or closely spherical. Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com.
Columbus thought that the earth’s circumference was smaller than what Eratosthenes calculation had shown because he relied on maps created by Ptolemy instead of the calculations made by Eratosthenes. When he landed in the New World it seemed like Columbus had been vindicated but that did not last long. Essentially, Columbus sailed west and discovered America because he miscalculated the earth’s circumference.
Columbus thought earth was smaller. He did not know about the Pacific Ocean. Earth Pacific Ocean view Stock Illustration ID: 1617553012 by Matis75
It should be noted that even though the earth is very close to being a sphere, it is more correctly an ellipsoid because it is slightly bulging at the equator due to centrifugal forces. You sometimes hear people say that Copernicus or Galileo proposed that earth was round. This is of course false.
Copernicus’s theory of the solar system, the heliocentric model, proposed that the Sun is at the center of the solar system and the Earth, along with other planets, revolve around it. This was not a well-known fact at the time, unlike the fact that the earth is round. Galileo defended Copernicus theory. The famous alleged quote “And yet it moves” / “E pur si muove” is said to have originated from his argument with the church (however, this is not certain).
So, we know that people knew that earth was round thousands of years before Columbus, and thousands of years before the renaissance, and we know that Columbus did not sail west to prove that earth was round, and he certainly did not prove it. Yet I’ve heard this claim quite often, which is why I consider that earth being round being well known long before Columbus a super fact. Too few people believe earth to be flat like a pancake for me to consider earth being round a super fact.
Eratosthenes Calculates the Circumference of Earth
Around 500 BC (2,500 years ago) most Greeks believed that the Earth was round, but they did not know how big it was. The Greek philosopher and mathematician Eratosthenes devised a clever method of estimating its circumference and he got very close. He had heard from travelers about a well in Syene (now Aswan) that at noon on the summer solstice, about June 21 every year, the sun illuminated the entire bottom of a well, without casting any shadows, indicating that the sun was directly overhead. He had also heard that perfectly vertical poles had no shadows at this time.
The reason for this was that Syene/Aswan is located very close to the tropic of Cancer (23.5 degrees versus 24 degrees, or about 60 miles).
In Alexandria, north of Syene, the sun was not directly overhead on the summer solstice. Eratosthenes measured the angle of a shadow cast by a stick at noon on the summer solstice in Alexandria and found it to be 7.2 degrees. Using the distance from Alexandria to Syene and this angle Eratosthenes calculated earth’s circumference to be between 40,250 to 45,900 kilometers. Earth’s circumference is 40,075 kilometers.
Illustration of the measurement of the Earth circumference by Eratosthenes. On June 21st there is no shadow in Syene/Aswan but there is one in Alexandria. Asset id: 2319651251 by Javier Jaime
Resurgence in Flat Earth Beliefs
While very few people believed the Earth was flat 50 years ago, there has been a recent rise in Flat Earth conspiracy theories, largely fueled by online misinformation. Now a day 2% of Americans aged 18-24 years old firmly believe it is flat. That is despite the fact that it is easy to directly observe earth’s round shape. That is a small minority but why would anyone believe such a thing today.
For example, on a flat Earth, a Sun that shines in all directions would illuminate the entire surface at the same time, and all places would experience sunrise and sunset at the horizon at about the same time. With a spherical Earth, half the planet is in daylight at any given time and the other half experiences nighttime. Well just give someone overseas a phone call and you’ll see what the case is. In addition, different places have different amounts of daylight at the same time, which wouldn’t happen with a flat earth.
You can observe the round shape from an airplane. If you stand on a hill by the coast, you can see ships disappearing over the horizon hull first, and you can see earth’s round shadow cast on the moon during lunar eclipses. If you travel far, you can see the constellations and the stars being in different positions in the sky. The southern and northern hemisphere have completely different constellations.
Never mind Eratosthenes, gravity, the Coriolis force, other celestial bodies being round, eyewitness accounts by astronauts, ring-laser gyroscopes, and Foucault pendulums. The moon shows the same face to everyone on earth, which would not be possible if earth was flat. Also never mind NASA photos and the fact that no one has found the earth’s edge.
Below is a youTube video showing an animation composed of actual satellite photos by NASA. Earth is obviously round in this video.
In this video the near side of the moon is dark and what you see is the far side. The far side looks a little bit different from the near side of the moon. It is a new moon and the people on earth don’t see the moon. The sun is behind us and lights up both earth and the far side of the moon (this side people on earth do not see). Also, since there is daylight, the camera does not capture faint objects such as stars.
Superfact 26: The disputed Hockey Stick Graph showing that recent global warming is unprecedented in the context of the past thousand years has been shown to be correct.
Initially some scientists criticized it for being wrong, and the rightwing media and think tanks, and especially politicians criticized the graph and even attacked the scientists involved accusing them of being frauds. Al Gore was harshly criticized for using the hockey stick in his documentary “an inconvenient truth”. There were congressional hearings, politicians intimidating scientists, fake scandals, threats, and lawsuits.
The propaganda campaign against the hockey stick graph succeeded in winning over the public and that included me. I was for the longest time convinced that the hockey stick graph was wrong and perhaps a fraud. I was wrong. I had been bamboozled just like large segments of the American public.
The scandal around the hockey stick curve and the related climate-gate (fake scandal) was used to question the entire concept of global warming / climate change. As you may know, the evidence clearly shows that global warming is happening and is caused by us.
It should be noted that the way Mann, Bradley, and Hughes implemented their statistical analysis was not 100% correct, but the discrepancy was very small and did not make a big difference. However, this discrepancy was very useful for their detractors.
The controversy led to an investigation resulting in the so-called North Report. The 2006 North Report published by the United States National Academy of Sciences endorsed the MBH studies with a few reservations.
Subsequent research has resulted in more than two dozen reconstructions, using various refined statistical methods and combinations of proxy records. They are not identical to the original hockey-stick graph but closely resemble it and consistently show a slow long-term cooling trend changing into relatively rapid warming in the 20th century.
Since there is now a scientific consensus supporting the hockey stick graph, it is important news, and a lot of people still have not gotten the memo or are refusing to believe it, I consider it a super fact.
Before The Hockey Stick Graph
Before the hockey stick curve there was a lot of talk about the medieval warm period and the little ice age. Many people used these periods to cast doubt on global warming claims by scientists. I should say that the climate scientists claim about global warming was not based on the temperature record for the last 1,000 years. It was because the observed recent uptick in average global temperatures was not expected naturally.
Their worries were based on the fact that our greenhouse gas emissions could explain the uptick whilst there was no climate cycle or natural phenomenon that could explain it. That combined with the fact that the manner in which the warming was happening (it’s fingerprint if you will) showed that it was our greenhouse gases causing it.
So, the comparably high temperatures during the medieval warm period and the very cold temperatures during the little ice age should not have mattered much. But as you can see in the graph below, the old temperature graphs could be used by global warming skeptics.
It should be noted that previous estimates for the temperatures during the medieval warm period and the little ice age were based insufficient data and guesstimates.
The graph below from the 1990 IPCC report shows three curves, a red, a blue and a black one, and a green extension to the blue from 1998 to 2007. The red graph shows a large bulge corresponding to the medieval warm period, a significant drop corresponding to the little ice age, and a minor uptick in recent temperatures. The blue curve shows a flattened medieval warm period with only a minor little ice age and sharper uptick in recent temperatures. The green extension stretching from 1998 to 2007 shows a significantly sharper uptick in temperatures. The black curve is an alternative temperature curve by Moberg.
As you can see the estimates for the average global temperatures during the medieval warm period and little ice age were too large. When the hockey stick curve came along (next graph), a propaganda tool was diminished, which led to the media storm.
The red line is from the 1990 IPCC report and shows what was believed at the time about temperatures during the last 1,000 years. The blue line is the (MBH) hockey stick graph from 1998. Graph taken from this page. William M. Connolley derivative work: Dave souza, CC BY-SA 3.0 <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/>, via Wikimedia CommonsThe so-called hockey stick curve depicting the last 1,000 years. The blue line is the first hockey stick curve ever created (by Michael Mann). He used proxy measurements such as tree rings, green-dots 30-year average, red temperature measurements. Wikimedia commons <<https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en>>. This graph is taken from this page.
Multiple Hockey Stick Graphs
As mentioned, various refined statistical methods and combinations of proxy records, has resulted in another couple of dozen hockey stick curves that largely agree with the original MBH hockey curve. Below are a few examples taken from various sources. The first two graphs below are taken from the real climate website, a website created by climate scientists.
IPCC 3rd Assessment Report
Side-by-side comparison of the (left) original Mann et al (1999) “Hockey Stick” reconstruction as featured in the Summary for Policy Makers of the IPCC 3rd Assessment report (2001) and the (right) longer, sharper “Hockey Stick” as featured in the Summary for Policy Makers of the IPCC 6th Assessment report (2021).
Eight Hockey Sticks by New Scientist
The graphics below are focused on the northern hemisphere. The top graph shows the 2001 IPCC hockey stick curve with data from thermometers (in red). Below that graph are eight more hockey stick curves plus a red dotted line corresponding to the instrumental record. This was compiled for New Scientist by Rob Wilson of the University of Edinburgh, UK.
The top graph shows the 2001 IPCC version of the hockey stick curve stretching back 1,000 years. The error bars (in grey) show the 95% confidence range. The blue line is from tree rings, corals, ice cores and historical records. All curves correspond to the departures in temperatures in centigrade from the 1961 to the 1990 average.
The Hockey Stick Wars
I also wanted to add a few examples related to the propaganda wars against the first hockey stick graph and its author Dr. Michael Mann and climate science in general. If you haven’t followed this topic, I can add that it did get intense.
On April 23, 2010, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli issued a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) to the University of Virginia (UVA). The CID demanded that UVA provide every email, record, or document it had related to Dr. Mann from his time there from 1999 to 2005. This resulted in a strong reaction from the scientific community.
On 2 March 2012 the Supreme Court ruled that Cuccinelli as Attorney General had no legal authority to demand the records from the university. Dr. Mann was also severely harassed and received chilling death threats against himself as well as his family, as documented in his book “The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines”.
In February 2024, Michael Mann won a defamation lawsuit against conservative writers Rand Simberg and Mark Steyn (Mann v. Competitive Enterprise Institute). The jury awarded Mann $1 million in punitive damages and $1 in compensatory damages. The lawsuit was over blog posts written by Simberg and Steyn that accused Mann of manipulating data in his famous “hockey stick” graph. It was not so much about questioning the science but rather about the fact that they intentionally tried to ruin his reputation using false information.
For example, they were comparing him to the infamous pedophile Jerry Sandusky. Jerry Sandusky was a football coach at Penn State University and Dr. Michael Mann is a distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science at Penn State.
Superfact 25: Global warming or if you call it Climate Change or Climate Disruption is happening, and it is happening very fast, and we also know that it is caused by us primarily as a result of our burning of fossil fuels. There is a long-standing scientific consensus on these two facts because the evidence is conclusive. Check the evidence below.
This is a long post. However, I summarized this somewhat complex issue in a post I hope is both comprehensive and easy to read at the same time. I believe you can learn a lot from reading it. Note in this post I will use the terms climate change, climate disruption and global warming interchangeably, or nearly interchangeably. I am doing that on purpose.
This is a good summary from NASA. We know it’s true, it is important, yet disputed, which makes it a super fact in my opinion. Below I created a top 10 list of evidence for the fact that climate change / global warming is happening as well as a top 10 list of evidence for the fact that we are the cause for it, primarily because of our burning of fossil fuels.
Evidence that Global Warning is Happening
(1) The temperature records collected by numerous organizations show that global warming is happening. Organizations such as NASA, NOAA, the Hadley Centre, the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, the Japanese Meteorological Agency, the World Meteorological Organization, and many more, use data from land-based weather stations, ocean buoys, satellite measurements, and other sources to monitor Earth’s climate. Comparison with the palaeoclimatological record shows that the rise in average global temperatures is extremely fast. This is the smoking gun. However, for those who question the data from all of these organizations there are other simpler types of evidence (see below).
(2) Global sea levels has increased by 20–25 cm (8–10 in) since 1900, with half of that increase occurring since 1980. Sea level rise occurs from a combination of thermal expansion and the melting of land ice, both which happen as a result of warming. This sea level rise has been the fastest in “at least the last 3000 years”.
(5) The Antarctic ice sheet is losing ice at a rate of about 100–200 billion tons per year, which has increased in the past two decades.
(6) Eco zones are generally shifting northward and to higher elevations, meaning that plant and animal habitats are moving towards cooler regions as temperatures rise in previously suitable areas.
(8) Extreme events are increasing in frequency showing that climate is changing
(9) After extensive research and scientific debates in the past there is now a long-standing scientific consensus that Global Warming is happening. This is not physical evidence itself, but it does not an appeal to authority fallacy either. Think about it in terms of probability.
(10) Old guys originating from northern climates like me, have noticed that the seasons are changing. Even if you dismiss all the evidence from NASA, NOAA, IPCC, and all the world’s meteorological institutions, and you claim that all the world’s climate scientists are all in a massive conspiracy, you cannot convince me of something that is contrary to what I can see with my own eyes.
Graphs and Videos Showing Global Warming
To see the NASA web page from where the YouTube video of the shrinking arctic ice is taken click here .Temperature anomaly graphs from NASA, Hedley Center, Japan Meteorological Agency, NOAA, and Berkley. Wikimedia commons << https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en>>.The so-called hockey stick curve depicting the last 1,000 years. The blue line is the first hockey stick curve ever created (by Michael Mann). He used proxy measurements such as tree rings, green-dots 30-year average, red temperature measurements. Wikimedia commons <<https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en>>. This graph is taken from this pageTemperature record for the last 150,000 years. Notice the sharp uptick towards the end. This picture is taken from this article.
Confusion About Climate Change
Before continuing I would like to address a couple of issues that sometimes trip up people and prevent them from learning about this topic.
The question “climate has always been changing, why would we be the cause now?”, is a good question if asked honestly. However, it is a bad question if it is asked like a gotcha or a dismissive statement. In this case it is a bad question because the paleoclimatologists and the climate scientists, in other words the experts on past climate, are the ones telling us that the current climate change / global warming is caused by us, it is not “natural”. They obviously say that because they know something that the dismissive laymen don’t. All everyone needs is a tiny bit of reflection to realize that you’ve got something to learn from them.
Sometimes you come across people who have a hangup over the fact that we use a few different terms interchangeably, global warming, climate change, climate disruption, inadvertent climate modification, etc. The people who have a hangup about this jump to the incorrect conclusion that there is some sort of deception or backtrack going on. If I talk about my dog and my mini-Australian Shepherd, I am not confused or deceptive or backtracking anything. It is the same family member. Whether you call it global warming or climate change or something else is a distracting non-issue, a red herring if you will.
To add some information about it. Climate change has become the more popular term recently, but the terms climate change and inadvertent climate modification predates the term global warming, which became popular in the 1980’s largely because climate scientist James Hansen likes to use it. Climate change is a broader term since it could include global warming and global cooling, but in the current context, global warming is a good term as well since that is what is happening now.
One advantage of the term climate change is that the average warming trend is in itself not the major issue. The effects on the overall climate that warming has is the more important issue. You could say that you want some global warming when the weather is cold and it would make sense, but you don’t want the destruction of eco systems, oceanic and atmospheric circulation changes, sea level rise, worse storms, draughts, floods, wildfires, etc., that it causes.
Natural Causes of Climate Change
There are many different kinds of natural causes of climate change. Two billion years ago cyanobacteria developed a form of photosynthesis that absorbed carbon dioxide and emitted oxygen, as well as a way of extracting nitrogen using a process called nitrogen fixation. This made cyanobacteria extremely successful. One consequence of this was that the carbon dioxide was largely removed from the atmosphere, and the earth got very cold, but the oxygen that was now present in the atmosphere paved the way for the existence of multicellular life and animals. To find out more about this, read this book.
The planet changed but it took millions of years. The emergence of land plants did something similar. Examples of other slow-moving drivers of climate change are continental drift and the fact that the light from the sun has gotten 6% stronger over the last one billion years (0.006% per million years).
Cyanobacteria caused a global cooling two billion years ago while paving the way for the existence of multicellular life and animals. Stock Photo ID: 2197045895 by Andre Engelhardt.
65 million years ago an asteroid struck earth, which caused earth’s climate to change, which is probably what killed the non-avian dinosaurs. Another example of a past climate change driver is unusual volcanic activity. Volcanoes emit greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO₂) and water vapor, during eruptions.
However, their contribution to the total CO₂ emissions in modern times is very small compared to human activities. Annual volcanic CO₂ emissions are estimated to be around 200-500 million tons while humans add 37-40 billion tons, or 100 times as much. Therefore, it is unlikely that volcanoes contribute much to the current warming, but the fine sulfate aerosols emitted by volcanoes can cause a significant cooling effect for a few years.
Dinosaur and asteroids during extinction day Stock Illustration ID: 1438260563 by serpebluVolcano – An active volcano that erupts lava. Stock Illustration ID: 2497156167 by MERT1995
One type of important type of climate forcing that’s been the cause behind the multiple ice ages that we’ve had over the last two million years are earth’s orbital cycles, or the Milankovitch cycles. There are three of them, orbital eccentricity, change in axial tilt, and axial precession. Could they explain the current warming? No, they can’t because we are currently in a cycle that should be cooling the planet, and it was until now. Below I have included a video from PBS that explains these orbital cycles.
Illustration of Milankovitch cycles from MIT’s Climate Primer.<< Link-22>>.
From PBS explanation and overview of earth’s three orbital cycles.
There are also short-term solar irradiance cycles. There is an 11-year cycle and an 80-year cycle, but these correspond to small changes. The 11-year cycle corresponds to a temperature change of 0.05 degrees Celsius.
In addition, the Sun’s irradiance has been slightly decreasing over the past few decades. Changes in the sun’s irradiance cannot explain the sharp warming we are witnessing. As you’ve seen above, neither can volcanic activity nor any known orbital cycles, slow moving climate drivers such as continental drift cannot explain it and we did not get hit by an asteroid recently. However, what fits the bill almost perfectly is our greenhouse gas emissions.
Unlike weather, the climate is not particularly sensitive to initial conditions (chaos). For example, we can be pretty certain that July will be warmer than January in Minnesota. We use climate models to try to predict future climate. All climate models rely on the laws of thermodynamics, but they vary in regard to the different understandings of the best ways to incorporate those laws in a representation of all of Earth. They do not come up with identical results, but they all get the average temperature of each region of the world right.
In addition, the various old climate models from the 1990’s do a very good job of what has happened during the last 30 years. They aren’t perfect but they are useful and more importantly for our context they serve as powerful evidence that the current warming is caused by our emissions. You remove our emissions from the models and none of what we measure will happen. Climate models are therefore the smoking gun with respect to what is causing global warming, just like the temperature record is for the fact that it is happening in the first place.
Unfortunately, the climate models have been maligned and misrepresented by those who wish that the public do not pay attention to them. That’s why we need to mention additional types of evidence (see below).
Evidence that Global Warming is Caused by US
(1) Climate models – as we have seen above, climate models are the smoking gun evidence that we humans are causing global warming / climate change. In addition, both simplistic and complex climate models show that 100% of global warming is caused by humans.
(3) The upper troposphere is cooling, which shows that the heating is from greenhouse gases and not the sun or orbital cycles. To understand how the lower atmosphere is warming while the upper is cooling, think of the greenhouse gases as a blanket.
(4) winters and nights are generally warming faster than other seasons and times of day due to the increased presence of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, which trap heat more effectively during colder periods. This is considered a key indicator of human-induced climate change.
(5) The speed of the warming, 0.31 degrees Fahrenheit per decade, or 0.17 degrees Celsius per decade is extremely fast. Known natural climate forcing tends to be slower.
(6) Human activities is the only known explanation for the current global warming. One way that we know that the current warming is caused by human activity is because we are currently in a cycle that should be cooling the planet. The same is true for the sun’s irradiance. It is not volcanoes or any other known cause. See the section above called “Natural Causes of Climate Change”.
(7) Isotope studies show that the origin of the greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere are from burning fossil fuels. This is referred to as the isotopic footprint.
(8) The observed temperature rise mirrors industrialization.
(9) More than 90% of excess heat from global warming is absorbed by the oceans, causing significant increases in ocean temperatures. Oceans absorb about a quarter of human CO₂ emissions, leading to lower pH levels. This is unprecedented in at least 26,000 years and is directly linked to anthropogenic CO₂. These effects have been carefully studied and observed.
This is a short one-minute overview of the causes behind global warming.
This video from NASA is a bit longer, 13 minutes. Click here to see the page this is coming fromNatural causes for global warming / climate change would have cooled the planet, not warm it. Click here to visit this NASA web page regarding the causes behind global warming.<<Link-31>>The carbon dioxide concentration measurements began in 1958 at the Mauna Loa Observatory on the island of Hawaii. Since then, several other ways of measuring carbon dioxide concentration have been added.From Scripps institute. Keep two things in mind. First the warming from CO2 is delayed and may result in positive feedback that can manifest decades and centuries later. Secondly, human civilization developed during a period of stable climate. That CO2 levels and temperatures were higher millions of years ago is not much comfort.Going back 800,000 years. From Scripps institute.A Global Warming protest. It’s their future. Stock Photo ID: 1427361263 by manpeppe
Superfact 24: Smallpox killed 300 million people in the 20th century. However, there have been no naturally occurring cases of smallpox since 1977, and the world was declared free of smallpox on May 8, 1980, by the 33rd World Health Assembly.
Smallpox vaccine Stock Illustration ID: 1782022109 by Novikov Aleksey
300 million people is an astonishing number. It is six times the 50 million people who died from the Spanish flu. It is about four times as many people as the 70 to 85 million people who died in World War II. It is close to the entire current population of the United States. That’s how many people died from this very dangerous disease. It was eradicated by a vaccination campaign.
I think this fact qualify as a super-fact, first of all because of the astonishingly huge number of deaths but also for the fact that it is gone. It is hard to believe that this happened. It is hard to believe that the world has changed so drastically for the better. It is a shocking but true fact. Thanks to the vaccination campaign we are living in a much better world.
This world map shows when smallpox was eradicated from different countries. The source is Our World in Data, originally Fenner et al. at CDC.
What is Smallpox?
Smallpox is an infectious disease caused by the variola virus<<Link-1>>. The last naturally occurring case was diagnosed in October 1977, and the World Health Organization (WHO) certified the global eradication of the disease in 1980. The disease begins with fever and vomiting followed by the formation of ulcers in the mouth and a skin rash that later turns into fluid filled blisters with a dent in the middle. These blisters get scabbed and leave scars. The death rate was about 30%.
Child with smallpox in Bangladesh 1975. Wikimedia commons photo by CDC/James Hicks.
The Eradication of Smallpox and Vaccines
The smallpox vaccine has a long history that begin in China where smallpox inoculation had existed long before it did in Europe. In 1796 the English physician Edward Jenner demonstrated the effectiveness of cowpox to protect humans from smallpox. Soon after several countries enacted mandatory vaccinations.
In 1807, Bavaria became the first country in the world to introduce compulsory vaccinations. In 1958 the World Health Assembly was called upon to eradicate smallpox. At this point 2 million people still died from smallpox every year. In 1967 the World Health Organization intensified the global smallpox eradication. As mentioned, smallpox was eradicated at the end of the 1970’s.
In 1998 & 2002 vaccination was dealt a blow by the Wakefield studies claiming that the MMR vaccine caused autism. Even though the studies were debunked, and several later studies showed no link between the MMR vaccines and autism, the fear of vaccines began to spread.
For example, in 2024 the American Veterinary Medical Association reported 37% of the dog owners surveyed believe canine vaccination could cause autism in their dogs. Not only is there no link between vaccines and autism, but technically speaking, dogs cannot be autistic as the condition is unique to humans. Unfortunately, the unnecessary fear of vaccines causing autism seems to only be getting worse.
Newstrade