Major report on Climate Change exposes Republican lies on Global Warming

[Gordon Gekko]

Draft of upcoming U.N. climate report raises the bar to 'very likely'

MSNBC News Services

Updated: 10:01 a.m. ET Jan 23, 2007

WASHINGTON - Signals that humans are the main factor behind recent global warming are stronger than ever, an authoritative global scientific report will warn when it is released next week.

A draft of the United Nations report by 600 scientists says it is "very likely" that human activities are the main cause of warming in the past 50 years, strengthening a conclusion in their last study in 2001 that the human link was "likely".

"It is very likely that ... greenhouse gas increases (from human activities) caused most of the globally average temperature increases since the mid-20th century," one source who had seen the draft quoted it as saying.

The 2001 report defined "very likely" as a 90-99 percent probability and "likely" as a 66-90 percent chance.

The new report means narrower ground for skeptics to argue that natural variations, such as in the sun's output, are to blame rather than emissions from burning oil, coal and gas.

Extremes narrowed
The draft does have some good news in that improved computer modeling allowed scientists to narrow the scenarios for projected future temperature and sea level rise.

The draft projects that world temperatures are likely to rise by 3.6-8.1 Fahrenheit by 2100 unless the world manages drastic cuts in greenhouse gas emissions from factories, cars and power plants.

The 2001 report had projected a wider possible range of between 2.5-10.4 F.

Sources said the new report would also narrow both ends of the band of projected sea level rises, projected in the 2001 report at between 3.5-35 inches by 2100. Details of the new figures were not available.

"There's good news that the top extremes for temperature and sea level rises have been cut," one source said. "But anyone hoping that the rise will be at the bottom end of the range will be disappointed."

Many scientists also stress that sea level rise beyond 2100 could be catastrophic if the ice sheets in Antarctica and Greenland start to lose significant mass.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16760730/

[Booker Floyd]

Perhaps you should keep all of your anti-Republican posts in one thread.

[Gordon Gekko]

Perhaps you should keep all of your anti-Republican posts in one thread.

We have a thread on one of the most, if not the most important scientific reports in history, and you prefer to pick a fight?

Why talk about issues when you can just post stupid shit instead?

[Booker Floyd]

We have a thread on one of the most, if not the most important scientific reports in history, and you prefer to pick a fight?

Why talk about issues when you can just post stupid shit instead?

The issue itself is fine enough to talk about (although theres a few threads about it already), its the childish way you present it, and everything else for that matter, that could lead to another ban on politics on this board, especially if its spread over multiple threads. 

[Gordon Gekko]

I don't care what you think.

[Danny Top Hat]

Stop squabbling.



OT: Climate change is baaaaaaad.

[Drew]

I don't consider much of what the U.N. says or does is very reputable.

And coming from MSNBC isn't saying much either. So I'll wait for further details.

[zman]

the one thing i think is amazing or scary is how the ice caps on Killamanjarro ( don't know how to spell it )
have melted in the past 50 years.

[Booker Floyd]

And coming from MSNBC isn't saying much either.

Why?  What in the report would you possibly question?

[Drew]

Why?  What in the report would you possibly question?

Today's media is just very unreliable when it comes to factual information.

[Evil Ash]

It's just a fact that this is happening and that we are causing it...

I don't know how so many people can be sceptical and ignore basic science, we are destroying the earth!

But I think the earth will rebound after that, it first has to destroy the cause of it's damnation (humans!)


If you look at china which is exploding into the new mass market with a lot of extra fuel usage, I dunno, doesn't seem to be anything that can be done against global warming unless we have a good plan in which every country participates...

[pilferk]

Why?  What in the report would you possibly question?

Today's media is just very unreliable when it comes to factual information.

Right.....lets bury our heads in the sand and ignore any pieces of information we find might invade our comfort zone or make us question our belief set.

I mean, if it IS a problem, it'll probably just go away.

 

How you can question a study released by the UN, which happens to be reported on MSNBC, is beyond me.  This certainly  isn't anything like a study commissioned by the Tobacco Industry to support smoking......you can disagree (if you can find scientific evidence) with the findings if you like...but disagreeing because you don't find the UN reputable (   ) or think MSNBC isn't reputable (Fox News fan, are you?) is ludicrous.  Largely because those opinions aren't born out by anything close to reality.....unless your reality is colored by an adoption of conservative spin.  Just because O'Reilly says MSNBC isn't reputalbe (*cough* Oberman sour grapes *cough*) doesn't make it so.

On topic:  The study is disturbing, because it's grounded in some pretty good science.  It's not a study commissioned by an envirmonmental group OR a bankrolled by a corporation with a vested interest in the results....  I'd say, as studies go, this is a pretty good one, and I think the science behind it is relatively compelling (it's an extension of the '01 study)....which is not a good thing for us homosapiens.

[wink]

are Americans (most not all) the only ones on the planet that don't belive global warming is happening?

http://www.breathingearth.net/

[Axlfreek]

are Americans (most not all) the only ones on the planet that don't belive global warming is happening?

http://www.breathingearth.net/

Global warming was always a fairy tell my parents told me before bed, i never took it seriously.

[Surfrider]

Why?? What in the report would you possibly question?

Today's media is just very unreliable when it comes to factual information.

Right.....lets bury our heads in the sand and ignore any pieces of information we find might invade our comfort zone or make us question our belief set.

I mean, if it IS a problem, it'll probably just go away.

 

How you can question a study released by the UN, which happens to be reported on MSNBC, is beyond me.? This certainly? isn't anything like a study commissioned by the Tobacco Industry to support smoking......you can disagree (if you can find scientific evidence) with the findings if you like...but disagreeing because you don't find the UN reputable ( ? ) or think MSNBC isn't reputable (Fox News fan, are you?) is ludicrous.? Largely because those opinions aren't born out by anything close to reality.....unless your reality is colored by an adoption of conservative spin.? Just because O'Reilly says MSNBC isn't reputalbe (*cough* Oberman sour grapes *cough*) doesn't make it so.

On topic:? The study is disturbing, because it's grounded in some pretty good science.? It's not a study commissioned by an envirmonmental group OR a bankrolled by a corporation with a vested interest in the results....? I'd say, as studies go, this is a pretty good one, and I think the science behind it is relatively compelling (it's an extension of the '01 study)....which is not a good thing for us homosapiens.

MSNBC is simply reporting the story; I don't see a problem with their reporting of the "story."? However, I do share Drew's skepticism from anything that comes from the UN.? It is a self-serving body that clearly possesses its own agendas on many issues - most of which tend to be left-wing issues.? The UN has not proven to be a competent body in my opinion.? Hopefully, that will now change with the change of the Secretary General.? With that said, I will look at the report with skepticism, but I will not completely discredit its findings until there is evidence or a basis to do so.?

[pilferk]

Berk,

In all seriousness...can you point to any scientific study, commissioned by the UN, that has been discredited and would call into account their reliability or penchant for influencing scientific outcomes.

I can understand (but don't agree) the assertions that the UN is politically ineffective.

But I can't even understand an assertion, based on past events, that would lead someone to be "skeptical" of a SCIENTIFIC study commissioned by that organization.  If you have evidence to the contrary, I'd love to see it....I'm not opposed to broadening my viewpoint, obviously.

[Surfrider]

Berk,

In all seriousness...can you point to any scientific study, commissioned by the UN, that has been discredited and would call into account their reliability or penchant for influencing scientific outcomes.

I can understand (but don't agree) the assertions that the UN is politically ineffective.

But I can't even understand an assertion, based on past events, that would lead someone to be "skeptical" of a SCIENTIFIC study commissioned by that organization.? If you have evidence to the contrary, I'd love to see it....I'm not opposed to broadening my viewpoint, obviously.

The UN is a politically motivated organization that certainly has its own agenda in many areas.  Whether that is the case in the scientific realm, I cannot speak one way or another.  However, prudence leads me to be skeptical.  I am sure you would say same, as would I, if the White House released a scientific report on the same subject.

[Drew]

The UN is a politically motivated organization that certainly has its own agenda in many areas.  Whether that is the case in the scientific realm, I cannot speak one way or another.  However, prudence leads me to be skeptical.  I am sure you would say same, as would I, if the White House released a scientific report on the same subject.

Thank you Berkley Riot.

Pilferk, No, I don't think MSNBC or any news outlet is truely reputable.  And the U.N. is so deep in lies and corruption it's insane. The U.N. screws up more than they'll ever be able to accomplish. Kofi Annan should have been gone long ago. He was a fuck up from the beginning and disgrace.

[polluxlm]

There is no global warming, and the government isn't lying to us

The fact that we are experiencing global warming as we speak shouldn't even be debated. It's a solid fact supported by all serious scientists. The exceptions are, well, the oil industry and those benefitting from it. I just don't know who to believe

You liked the record warm summer we just had? You enjoy the snowfree winter? There's your answer right there.


Jesus, we're risking everything and still people stand around questioning it. Soon it'll be too late.

[Drew]

You liked the record warm summer we just had? You enjoy the snowfree winter? There's your answer right there.

Snowfree?