This story is archived
UN dossier 'ends all climate-change doubt' »
Posted by: jovial 2 years, 9 months agoCLIMATE change is real and set to cause dramatic temperature rises in the coming century, according to a leaked draft of a major United Nations report.
Read Full Story at news.scotsman.com »
Submitted By:
jovial
Grew up In Brooklyn. Joined the Navy in 1976 stayed in 10 years. Aircraft Electronics tech. Worked for Major Govt. contractor then settled in California ...
Who Also Submitted:
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 51
-
Spadecaller
Jan. 26, 2007, 11:59 a.m.Excellent post, Jovial. Now if we can get some of our corporate owned leaders to get their oily fingers out of their ears and start doing something about it, we "might" have enough time to avert some of the trouble awaiting us.
-
jovial
Jan. 26, 2007, 12:16 p.m.More than 90% chance that climate change caused by humans.
Report predicts sea levels may rise less than previously thought by 2100.
If immediate action is taken, temperature rises may also be curtailed.
So all you naysayers wake up and see that this is real. Scientists confirm it. Limbaugh's deny it. Who do you want to believe?
-
Virginia
Jan. 26, 2007, 2:32 p.m.From the article: "Twenty-first century anthropogenic (human-caused) carbon-dioxide emissions will contribute to warming and sea-level rise for more than a millennium, due to the timescales required for removal of this gas," sources quoted the report as saying." A thousand years of warming not a hundred that they are measuring in the inches given in the article. No information about Greenland ice shelf melting that is a much bigger concern than Artic ice melting. I think this is a very conservative report as all have to agree to outcomes as the article states.
-
cleare
Jan. 26, 2007, 4:17 p.m.you are confusing "weather" with "climate"...
and while everything does change, those changes aren't always good for humanity. any study of history will demonstrate the horrendous costs to human civilizations from even a minor and temporary "climate change".
finally, if the climate scientists are wrong in 20 or 30 years, i give you permission to laugh your butt off, but if you are wrong, and you could have done something, anything to ameliorate the situation...don't you think you'll feel badly.
that's the problem with this debate. if the scientists are wrong all we get is egg on our face, but if you are wrong and we take your advice and do nothing, all life on the planet may suffer horribly. are you really willing to take that chance?
-
cantfoolme
Jan. 27, 2007, 4:05 a.m.I think you should realise that climate and weather are two different things. Weather is localised whereas climate is more on a global scale. Localised weather has always been difficult to predict and always will be. Climate has always been steady and consistent only changing at such a slow rate that no one single generation would even notice ...... until now.
-
doppich
Jan. 26, 2007, 5:40 p.m.Except that the snow and ice pack at the poles is FRESH water. Fresh water is not as dense as salt water, and has greater volume than an equivalent weight of salt water. So the melted water has a greater volume than the salt water it displaces.
-
cantfoolme
Jan. 27, 2007, 4:14 a.m.Oh dear, oh dear. If you want to perform a more relevant experiment, then fill a glass with water to the brim. Now add two blocks of ice. The water will overflow just as you would expect and that my friend is the same effect of global warming. The seas will not significantly rise because of melting ice bergs that are already in the water but will rise because of the melting glaciers that are "calving" which is adding to the water .... "Eureka" as Archimededs said. Of course, the truth is that it has already happening with certain Pacific Islands already being abandoned.
-
Amazing1
Jan. 26, 2007, 4:17 p.m.This is a subject of prime importance to all of mankind. Thank you for posting the information for the rest of us. We should all do whatever we can to make changes that help soften the footprint of mankind on planet earth.
-
angiehawkins12
Jan. 26, 2007, 5:19 p.m.Well since the UN told us, it must be true. I would like to see the actual documentation and proof. It's important to not promote coincidence as fact. We do know that everyone that ate carrots that was born before 1890 is dead, therefore carrots are deadly.
I do think it would do all of us a lot of good to have cleaner air. I would definitely like to see some changes so we can breathe better.
-
Countryhick
Jan. 26, 2007, 8:46 p.m.Stop Space Exploration and it will Stop the Global Warming .
We caused it letting NASA just keep firing off those Rockets .
What happened to the Ozone Layer propaganda , GW replaced OL .
-
THOMNH62
Jan. 26, 2007, 9:46 p.m.global warming is a myth, try global climate change, it is a fact that history shows guniune fluctuations in climate, not caused by man, caused by co2, which is released into the atmoshpere in greater amounts by plants than by man. Mans contribution of Co2 is less than 0.5%, how can reducing our emmisions have a total effect on the other 99.5%, come on people, why aren't we covered with ice by now as predicted by the same scientists in the 70's.
-
cantfoolme
Jan. 27, 2007, 4:21 a.m.Global cooling is alive and well for your information. Without it the effect of global warming would be even worse. A very dangerous game to play in deed. Wake up to the FACTS.
-
pazuita
Jan. 26, 2007, 10:59 p.m.the final nail in the coffin for "climate-change deniers"
They seem to forget that we live in a country where we still have a segment, of the population, a rapidly shrinking segment, that still believes the earth is flat, and only 8,000 years old.
They will continue to deny that 6 billion people can have an effect on the environment, good or bad.
Every rational scientist on the planet that is not on the payroll of the energy industry, or it's subsidiary political party agrees that global warming is real, and threatening. About the only thing they disagree on is how long it will be before the damage becomes irreversible.
Better to err on the side of caution. If we start now to clean up the environment, and restrict "greenhouse gases", future generations won't have to agrue about who was right or wrong.
If we don't, there may not be anyone around to care.
-
rufous
Jan. 27, 2007, 2:15 a.m.This is a finding by a committee of 2500 people. Does a large flock of chickens act in a more rational manner than a single hen? Are we seriously suggesting that such a group can 'erase all doubt'? Where are the dissenting voices? Does consensus reached by calling anyone who disagrees a 'flat earther' eliminate doubt, or does it just eliminate dissent? No one disagrees that we should take better care of this planet, but the 'green' movement has shown itself to be an idealogical group that is capable of any misrepresentation that will help them in their cause, and it's statements should not be trusted.
How about presenting the facts accurately without undue claims of certainty? How about allowing both sides of the argument to have a voice? Then we might be in a position to better understand the situation and make our own assessment. We may be responsible for climate change, or maybe it's a bit of arrogance on our part to think that we can control even the climate.
-
structurechaos
Jan. 27, 2007, 2:29 a.m.Screw it, we lost our battle against ourselves, a few thousand years down the road and we will travel with the dinosaurs before us. Why would we sacrafice all our comforts for a longer and potentially less satisfactory experience of life? Like a heroine addict we should realize a life without a needle pierced vein, is in fact, pointless anyhoo. Guzzle the bounty before you, what the hell, suck on the nipple of Earth until it falls off. Perhaps the next dominant species on Earth won't be so, well human. Another creature another problem until there are no problems left and then comes utopia and then the problem is boredom, damn, the worst problem of all... there is nothing to solve or complain about and we have all the time in the world to nothing but contemplate what the point of conciousness is, and of course get nowhere, and rinse wash, repeat, and so the universe goes.
-
mr-thoughtful
Jan. 27, 2007, 6:14 a.m.I fear that what will lead to the undoing of the United States is that when we teach people that that they are free, they feel they have the right to be ignorant. When thousands of scientists have spent dozens of years, using technologies that compare climate now to that of hundreds of thousands of years ago, tell us conclusively that we're doing something wrong, it is ignorant to brush them off like they haven't thought of something like natural fluxuations in weather.
Americans, it seems, take a perverse pleasure in being wrong-headed.
-
1-2-Oscar
Jan. 27, 2007, 9:06 a.m.Data carefully selected to support a predetermined conclusion.
To a great extent, this is a product of the mentality which requires that the United States be blamed for everything bad, modified only to include other highly industrialized nations.
The purpose behind this article is purely political. According to its authors, the US MUST submit to international controls.
-
slate
Jan. 27, 2007, 9:06 a.m.Global warming is the kind of science where you come up with a conclusion then look for evidence to support your pre determined conclusions as to who or what is the cause.
-
slate
Jan. 27, 2007, 9:11 a.m.LOL well I didn't read your post before I wrote mine. Glad to see someone else can see through the BS of why things are changing. Things are no doubt getting warmer, hell in the 70s it snowed here in Houston 3 years in a row thus the Ice age talk then,,,,,,, then the talk about dead oceans in 20 years,,, now it's 36 years and I'm still eating seafood.
How bout let's call the science,(let's have a cleaner place to live it's just healthier?) now I can stand behind that,,, when the same groups that were lead by hippies in the 60s that still hate corps and the gov say ot's known fact that man is the problem I tend to not go to their side
-
patchett
Jan. 27, 2007, 9:53 a.m.nostradomus
WE ARE BETTER THAN CHINA. I've been to China and India. I've seen it first hand. We may not be perfect, but our enviroment is hundreds of times better than these countries. You want to see enviromental pollution go to China, they are still in the stone age when it comes to clean air and water.
-
slate
Jan. 27, 2007, 10:32 a.m.Gloom Despair and Agony on Me!
Man does have an effect on the planet true. To what extent can the planet absorb our effect and how long before that effect affects the planets ecological system?
Science claims they know with the utmost conclusiveness what the details are, but do they really?
In the 70s they were saying global cooling was a forgone conclusion without any doubt.
Now they are saying Global warming will be the death of the planet in x numbers of years, when they can't tell me what the weather will be 5 Tuesdays from now. (continued)
-
slate
Jan. 27, 2007, 10:32 a.m.During the 1st Gulf war they warned us of an eminent nuclear winter would befall us if Saddam set the oil fields on fire. He did so, where is the nuclear winter? Ah, the planet sucked up the emissions just as it does when one of the hundreds of volcanoes erupts around the globe.
We should always be as clean as possible, it just makes sense to be so, but I'm not convinced that the scientific community is as infallible as they want us to think when it comes to their so called indisputable conclusions.
-
slate
Jan. 27, 2007, 11:40 a.m.Keep eatin that seafood slate, you'll be alll set.
Thanks Nostradumbass I think I will ;)
-
gfunk
Jan. 27, 2007, 11:47 a.m.Wow!!! The UN said it so thats it. It was nice blogging with you all.
-
slate
Jan. 27, 2007, 11:57 a.m.LOL
Yeah that about puts an end to the debate once the UN has it's say
The first 44 comments are shown. Show all 51 comments »
Submit a Story
Advertisement
