There are no longer any rational reasons to be sceeptical. While scepticism is a very good modus operandi in science, we can all say that sustained sceptecism in the face of mounting evidence is nothing but stubbornness or political ratbaggery.With that, we find this report:
PARIS, Feb. 2 — In a grim and powerful assessment of the future of the planet, the leading international network of climate scientists has concluded for the first time that global warming is “unequivocal” and that human activity is the main driver, “very likely” causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950.You'd better believe it.
They said the world was in for centuries of climbing temperatures, rising seas and shifting weather patterns — unavoidable results of the buildup of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere.
But their report, released here on Friday by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said warming and its harmful consequences could be substantially blunted by prompt action.
While the report provided scant new evidence of a climate apocalypse now, and while it expressly avoided recommending courses of action, officials from the United Nations agencies that created the panel in 1988 said it spoke of the urgent need to limit looming and momentous risks.
“In our daily lives we all respond urgently to dangers that are much less likely than climate change to affect the future of our children,” said Achim Steiner, executive director of the United Nations Environment Program, which administers the panel along with the World Meteorological Organization.
“Feb. 2 will be remembered as the date when uncertainty was removed as to whether humans had anything to do with climate change on this planet,” he went on. “The evidence is on the table.”
2 comments:
Might be worthwhile having a look at http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse
Yep. Had a look.
Still feel unchanged in my position.
The guy who publishes it is listed here:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Junkscience.com
"Although Milloy frequently represent himself as an expert on scientific matters, he is not a scientist himself. He holds a bachelor's degree in Natural Sciences, a law degree and a master's degree in biostatistics. He has never published original research in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Moreover, he has made scientific claims himself that have no basis in actual research. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, for example, he claimed that greater use of asbestos insulation in the World Trade Towers would have delayed their collapse "by up to four hours." In reality, there is no scientific basis for claiming that asbestos would have delayed their collapse by even a second, let alone four hours."
That's pretty fucked, don't you think?
Seems ot me he's another one off these scientists in the pay of oil money wanting to create chaos and confusion.
Post a Comment