Conference on societies, climate change and natural hazards, Merida, Mexico

The Sixth European Geosciences Union Alexander von Humboldt International Conference on Climate Change, Natural Hazards and Societies will be held in Merida, Mexico from 14 to 19 March 2010.

Climate changes are thought to have contributed to the decline of ancient civilisations such as those of the Maya in southeastern Mexico and Central America or Pueblo Indians in North America. An eruption buried ancient Akrotiri on the island of Santorini and may have even accelerated the decline of the Minoan culture. Today, societies remain vulnerable to climate changes, rising sea levels, and natural disasters. 


This interdisciplinary conference aims at fostering understanding of the impact of climate change and natural disasters on past and present societies, with an emphasis on anthropogenic impacts in increasingly complex systems.

Topics

• 'The Cretaceous/Tertiary Boundary and the Chicxulub Impact Crater';
• 'Climate and Environmental Change and Early Civilizations';
• 'Volcanism and Earthquakes';
• 'Abrupt Climate Changes';
• 'Global Warming: The next 100 years';
• 'Megacities and Natural Hazards';
• 'Ecological Effects of Global Change';
• 'Geo-Hydrology'; 
- 'Complex Systems in Geosciences';
• 'Uncertainty Management in Geosciences';
• 'Planetary Engineering'. 


Keynote Speakers (confirmed)

• Mario Molina (CMM Mexico)
• Gerald Haug (ETHZ Switzerland)
• Rafael Navarro Gonzalez (UNAM Mexico)
• Matt Larsen (USGS USA)
• Carlos Gay (UNAM Mexico)
• Annette Menzel (TUM Germany)
• Felipe Arreguin (CONAGUA Mexico)/Luis Marin (UNAM Mexico)
• Jan Smit (VU Amsterdam, NL)
  

The event is sponsored by the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Centro de Investigacion Cientifica de Yucatan and the European Geosciences Union.

For further information, please download second circular  


Conference homepage

Sunspots do not cause climate change, say scientists. Key claim of global warming sceptics debunked. By Steve Connor, Science Editor, Independent. Monday, 14 December 2009.

Leading scientists, including a Nobel Prize-winner, have rounded on studies used by climate sceptics to show that global warming is a natural phenomenon connected with sunspots, rather than the result of the man-made emissions of carbon dioxide. The researchers – all experts in climate or solar science – have told The Independent that the scientific evidence continually cited by sceptics to promote the idea of sunspots being the cause of global warming is deeply flawed.

Studies published in 1991 and 1998 claimed to establish a link between global temperatures and solar activity – sunspots – and continue to be cited by climate sceptics, including those who attended an "alternative" climate conference in Copenhagen last week.

>>more

Copenhagen climate conference: sunspot theory for global warming attacked. The theory that signs of global warming could be the result of sunspots rather than carbon dioxide emissions caused by humans has come under attack from climate scientists. By John Bingham, Telegraph. Published: 9:08AM GMT 14 Dec 2009

Sceptics about man-made climate change frequently cite research apparently linking natural variations in solar activity with fluctuations in temperatures on Earth. The alternative explanation was the centrepiece of The Great Global Warming Swindle, a 2007 Channel 4 documentary which provoked fierce argument. It is based on the work of Prof Eigil Friis-Christensen and Henrik Svensmark of the of the Danish National Space Centre, who both published studies in the 1990s appearing to show a remarkable link between solar activity and variations in the climate.

But a group of scientists now says that the research was flawed and that when "flaws" in the analysis are removed the apparent correlation disappears. It follows work by Peter Laut, a former adviser to the Danish Energy Agency, who pinpointed what he said were flaws in the research. André Berger, honorary president of the European Geosciences Union, told The Independent: "Their controversial papers must be retracted or at least that there will be an official statement by them acknowledging their mistake." Prof Stefan Rahmstorf, of Potsdam University, added: "I've looked into this quite closely and I'm on Laut's side in terms of his analysis of the data." >>more