【2010 Archives】

"We test this claim here."

With these words010 Archives climate scientists shot down a dubious claim from the controversial administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Scott Pruitt, in the most methodical way available to them: by publishing a peer-reviewed scientific study in a reputable journal.

The study, published May 24 in the journal Nature Scientific Reports,debunks Pruitt's claim -- made in written responses to senators during his confirmation process -- that satellite data proves temperatures have leveled off in recent decades, rather than continuing to rise in keeping with human-caused global warming.

SEE ALSO: In the U.S., trees are on the move because of climate change

Like many of Pruitt's claims about climate science, this one didn't hold up well to scrutiny.

In the study, scientists led by Benjamin Santer of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory fact-checked Pruitt's claim using six satellite datasets. They found that there is no 20-year period during which satellite-derived temperatures in the lower atmosphere leveled off, though the study did find that "recent 20-year trends are smaller than most of the earlier 20-year trend values."

Original image has been replaced. Credit: Mashable

This is due to a variety of factors, including natural climate variability, that helped slow -- but not halt -- global warming for a period of time.

The study also found that during the full 38-year satellite record from 1979 to 2016, global warming of the lower atmosphere far exceeds what one would've expected to see just from natural variability alone.

Mashable Light Speed Want more out-of-this world tech, space and science stories? Sign up for Mashable's weekly Light Speed newsletter. By clicking Sign Me Up, you confirm you are 16+ and agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Thanks for signing up!

"Our results support and strengthen previous findings of a large human-caused contribution to warming," the study found. "Studies involving patterns of tropospheric temperature change (rather than the global averages considered here) yield even stronger evidence of a human fingerprint in the thermal structure of the atmosphere."

The new work is unique in that it amounts to a rapid response fact-check of a prominent political figure. Pruitt has openly questioned the mainstream scientific conclusions on human-caused global warming.

So, it shouldn't be surprising that Pruitt had a poor understanding of this specific aspect of climate science. This is an official who went on national television in March and denied that human emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are the main cause of global warming.

Via Giphy

In the scientific community, there is no debate about that. For Pruitt, though, there is.

"I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there's tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it's a primary contributor to the global warming that we see," he told CNBC.

"But we don't know that yet, as far as... we need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis," he said. 

Pruitt's comments stood at odds with the findings published on the EPA's own climate change website. That site has since been taken down for edits to better reflect the Trump administration's agenda.

During his short stint at the EPA so far, Pruitt has been steadily rolling back rules limiting the emissions of greenhouse gases, including the Clean Power Plan, which covers coal-fired power plants, and methane rules for natural gas facilities.

---

Featured Video For You

---

Pete Souza's perfectly timed Insta-shade only keeps getting better and better

---

• Tech
• Life
• Science
• Social Good
• Digital Culture
• Shopping
• Entertainment
• Deals

• Best earbuds deal: Save 20% on Soundcore Sport X20 by Anker
• Reading in New York; Reading of London by Lorin Stein
• The Regulars by Josh Dzieza
• White Noir by Jane Yager
• Galaxy S9+ vs Pixel 2 XL Camera
• Staff Picks: Whither the Library, Mafia Men by The Paris Review
• Robert B. Silvers, Super Nanny by Louis Begley
• The Troubadour of Honed Banality by Barry Yourgrau
• Is it 'Thunderbolts*' or *The New Avengers'?
• ‘Bartleby,’ ‘Star Wars,’ and Animal Authors by Sadie Stein

• Wordle today: The answer and hints for January 6
• Apprehending the Light by Scott O’Connor
• Letterboxd announces TV series reviews coming in 2024; apparently regrets saying so
• Male Interiority: An Interview with Emma Cline by Annabel Graham
• Staff Picks: Boats, Brands, and Blasphemy by The Paris Review
• Memory Haunts by Imani Perry
• Redux: Self
• Redux: Leaves Fall Off of the Trees by The Paris Review
• How to enable Link History on Facebook
• Wordle today: The answer and hints for January 5

• The Best Gaming Concept Art of 2016
• Poetic Doubt; Battling Anxiety by Lorin Stein
• Thurber Insults and Library Dreams by Sadie Stein
• Things We Love: Vallejo, Factory Records, and ‘The Lonely Doll’ by The Paris Review
• Skype is finally shutting down
• Something for Nothing by Ian Crouch
• Salter’s Armory by Jenny Hendrix
• An Event in the Stairwell by Clancy Martin
• Asus VivoWatch 6 AERO measures blood pressure and ECG
• Capote’s Typewriter by Sadie Stein

• Robin Triumphant
• Mapping Markson by Sadie Stein
• Hocus Pocus by Margaret Eby
• Dear Don Draper, Relax Already by Adam Wilson
• Gods of War
• Thurber Insults and Library Dreams by Sadie Stein
• Staff Picks: Genet’s Maids, Hockey, and Vivaldi by The Paris Review
• Literary Paint Chips: Gallery 1 by Leanne Shapton and Ben Schott
• 4GHz CPU Battle: AMD 2nd
• The Regulars by Josh Dzieza