This story is archived
Millions to go hungry, waterless: climate report »
Posted by: MyWayOnNow 2 years, 9 months agoRising temperatures will leave millions more people hungry by 2080 and cause critical water shortages in China and Australia, as well as parts of Europe and the United States, according to a new global climate report.
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com »
Who Also Submitted:
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 299
-
colcam
Jan. 30, 2007, 9:46 a.m.Gloom and Doom!
One thing for the reader to consider: Every prediction of gloom and doom in the past has explained just how bad things were going to be based on nothing new happening and no change in technology.
In the late 1800's it was the massive increase of horse manure that would strangle us. We needed X number of horses per group of Y number of people, and as population grew the resultant growth in the number of horses, the amount of food they would eat, and the staggering levels of manure they would produce-- that would destroy us!
Apparently the horse manure is still piling up.
.
-
TwiztidToker
Jan. 30, 2007, 9:50 a.m.The Sky Is Falling Huh?...i dont think it is possible to accuratley predict what is going to happen in 70 years. The local wheather man cant even accuratley predict what the whather is going to be like in 5 days. Now if the ice caps were melting wouldnt that make alot more water????
-
-
lovermanComment has been removed: User banned.
-
ningyo
Jan. 30, 2007, 10:17 a.m.on the other hand the weather change in the south of france has become perfect year after year for the grape orchards--that means every year will be a bumper crop--cheap vintage wine--isnt the welfare of the french whats really important to the new congress? --the people have spoken
-
whatever2000
Jan. 30, 2007, 10:21 a.m.It's folly to try to predict these things accurately. Regional weather patterns are very difficult to predict even 1- 2 weeks ahead of time. Weather system and climate prediction models are very complex and there is a lot of relationships and interdependence between what on the surface appear to be unrelated phenomena. With every year of observation, these models need to be corrected to the latest data. Using the same argument regarding the complexity of climate/ weather systems, it would be arrogance on our part to assume that we had no effect on global climate as a result of greenhouse emissions. It just makes good sense to me to find other cleaner sources of energy from an environmental as well as a political perspective.
-
IAmMine
Jan. 30, 2007, 10:23 a.m.The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in 1988 by two United Nations organizations, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to assess the "risk of human-induced climate change". The Panel is open to all members of the WMO and UNEP. IPCC reports are widely cited in almost any debate related to climate change.[1][2] National and international responses to climate change generally regard the UN climate panel as authoritative.
A small minority (under 1.5%) of the scientists involved with the report have accused the IPCC of bias.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Pan
But somehow some of you think that just by having internet access makes you experts and more intelligent than them.
-
edromar2
Jan. 30, 2007, 10:25 a.m.second chance, Indeed this government report, like all put out by this administration is gloom and doom for dummies who buy the claim that they have not to worry until 2077 CE.
The fact is that these conditions they cite will all take place on the parts of our current land masses that are still above sea level by 2030. Most of the innundation from the melting snow will drown anyone near any current sea shores long before then.
-
TOtheMOON
Jan. 30, 2007, 10:34 a.m.So.. In other words - it's too soon to start stocking up my water supply? That's good because I don't think I have the room for 70 years worth of water. Maybe if I clean out the laundry room.....
-
woodenleg
Jan. 30, 2007, 10:51 a.m.Crapola!.......When I was in high school back in the sixties, the econazis were predicting that there would be mass starvation here in the US by the 1980's. Of course these are the same people who complain that Americans are overweight now.
If you want to have a cynical laugh, go back to the newspapers of those days and read what people were saying on "Earth Day".
-
walden3
Jan. 30, 2007, 11 a.m.wow, so many people doubting science. it makes me think what life during the dark ages must have been like.
-
cliffclark
Jan. 30, 2007, 11:03 a.m.Actually, the Scientists are reporting based on Climate changes, Environmental changes and changes in the Hemosphere that have already occurred.
It might help if you people started actually reading about Global warming instead of assuming it is a falacy.
Moreover, what is particularly signifigant about this study is 500 of the WORLDS top Scientists gathered together and all agreed. That has never happened before. To dismiss what they say simply because you cannot comprehend it, is nothing short of idiocy.
Read people, educate yourselves and maybe one day you'll grow up real smart. *Rolls eyes* Though Lord knows I'm not holding my breath.
One final point, the current U.S Administration had ZERO to do with this Global Study. While yes it preaches gloom and doom, it has long argued that Global warming does not exist, even while it surpressed evidence regularly to the contrary.
-
Abrion
Jan. 30, 2007, 11:05 a.m.In my opinion, the IPCC has lost credibility. It has become so politicized that its mission now is to convince of the global castrophe that will occur because of anthropological induced climate change, whether that is the true reason or not. That is why one of the leading researchers, Christopher Landsea, left the IPCC stating that it wasn't about science anymore, but about politics. This is a very difficult subject to get accurate information about since both sides are cherry picking data to promote their agenda. The IPCC should know better than to promote this gloom and doom. As mentioned in other posts, we have heard the sky is falling and nothing serious happened. The IPCC is stating a worse case scenario. Most likely, the climate change won't be nearly as serious. But then, how will the IPCC continue to get funding if they don't attempt to scare the hell out of us?
-
cliffclark
Jan. 30, 2007, 11:09 a.m."Actually, the Scientists are reporting based on Climate changes, Environmental changes and changes in the Hemosphere that have already occurred."
I should Add, along with what has occurred, their conclusions are based on what has happened, the continued population growth, the continued growth of third world Countries. What they are saying simply is if none of the current factors attributing to Global Warming change, then yes what they predict will likely happen in so said amount of years.
Can things change? Can we come up with technology? Might third World Countries actually adopt environmental standards? Might the Top Countries like China, U.S, England, Russia all lead the way with ground breaking Environmental ideas? Sure. They aren't saying any of that isn't possible. They are merely stating what they have based on changes already occurred and will occurr further IF nothing changes.
-
hecuba
Jan. 30, 2007, 12:11 p.m.You know, being accused of cherry pricking is a bit offensive....Please provide us with those scientific studies which refute all those pollitically motivated scientists who produced this report....
You are right in that this is a THEORY...but it is one based upon the trends which have been studied and are easily verified....So, are you sugggesting we simply continue polluting our planet....until our breathing becomes difficult?
This is tantamout to the ostrich with it's head in the sand.
I for one would like to see what 'your' scientists come up with regarding human pollution of the atmosphere.
-
-
Watchemoket
Jan. 31, 2007, 12:49 a.m.clkbeus99: Sorry - what is the "troofer conspiracy" - I've never heard of it?
-
cliffclark
Jan. 30, 2007, 11:16 a.m.Abrion, while you are right that it "might" not be as serious, their evidence was pretty damning. It's pretty tough to argue with a United Front of 500 Scientists.
Also everything is Political. What about Healthcare, hell the F.D.A? Please. That Organization is so Poitical it's rediculous. That isn't to say sometimes they actually get it right when approving drugs.
To simply discount something because you believe it to be Politically motivated, is also wrong. Instead read up on their findings. Weigh them versus other Scientific fings. Honestly Global Warming is a fact. It's the degree to it's seriousness people have always debated.
But maybe it isn't Doom and Gloom. Let's say you are right. There is still a clear shift in our Environment based on clear factors which aren't improving. That can't really be good, can it?
-
cliffclark
Jan. 30, 2007, 11:20 a.m.Yes but all Scientific truths start with Theories.
The Earth revolving around the Sun was at one time a Theory.
Their being more planets in our Solar System was at one time a Theory.
Ever hear of the Theory of Relativity? The Theory of Evolution?
Just because it's a Theory, does not make it any less signifigant.
-
cantfoolme
Jan. 30, 2007, 11:33 a.m.I think the cynics among you have a point in that it is not an exact science to be able to predict a totally accurate outcome of man made global warming. However, to bury your heads in the sand and to ignore what is happening before your very eyes is foolish. Fact, the ice caps are melting. Fact, the seasons in Europe are haywire with nature getting confused. Fact, the sea level has already risen to cause certain Pacific Islanders to leave their homes which they have lived in since known history. It is not good enough to say that changes happen naturally. Of course they do but gradually over thousands of years. Man has pumped so much crap into the atmosphere that the change is being effected very quickly and the outcome is very difficult to predict but i bet it won't be good news.
-
JohnnyB
Jan. 30, 2007, 11:48 a.m.OMGGG RUN FOR THE HILLS OR KILL YOURSELF, NO ONE READING THIS WILL BE ALIVE IN 2080 SO EVEN IF THIS WERE TRUE WHO CARES
-
smokensqueal
Jan. 30, 2007, 12:29 p.m.wasn't the middle east once a lush green land? Places change water comes and goes. Are we polluting where we live? Are we doing harm to the earth? SURE but are we to "blame" for everything changing? No way. Aren't we coming out of an "Ice Age"?
-
Countryhick
Jan. 30, 2007, 12:31 p.m.The Sky is Falling , The Sky is Falling , Wolf , Wolf , ring a bell .
Stop NASA and the likes with their Rockets and Global Warming will slow to a crawl .
-
Bkumm
Jan. 30, 2007, 12:36 p.m.The astronomical evidence (Malankovich cycles) suggest that Earth should be entering a period of moderate cooling. This is obviously not true.
Humans are having an impact on the atmosphere of the planet. This is not a theory it is a fact based on hard data over the last 60 years or so.
The planet is getting warmer.
Also, I have seen posted here several times that the Antarctic ice is increasing. I would like more information on that please.
Global climate change is real. Humans are having an impact.
-
EDWARDIII
Jan. 30, 2007, 1:22 p.m.No one can accurately predict the flip of a coin. Take everything into account-- temperature, humidity, whatever; it still can't be done.
Flip the coin a thousand times and we all know the outcome: 50% heads. Every kid knows that.
It is no surprise that we can predict massive trends in the weather without being able to give a forcast for next Sunday.
The first 215 comments are shown. Show all 299 comments »
Submit a Story
Advertisement
