NationStates Jolt Archive

What? You mean we are not having as big an impact as they thought we were? Oh my Lord. The World is ending!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/10/nclimate10.xml

Oh dear, man isn't such a big screaming deal after all.

That still puts man impact on the environment 200% over what the US says it is probably.

What? You mean we are not having as big an impact as they thought we were? Oh my Lord. The World is ending!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/10/nclimate10.xml

no, the world is still ending.......just some will jump on this as an excuse to keep their heads buried in the sand.....

no, the world is still ending.......just some will jump on this as an excuse to keep their heads buried in the sand.....

At the rate things are going, we'll be nuking each other off the map, and nature will recover quite nicely.

At the rate things are going, we'll be nuking each other off the map, and nature will recover quite nicely.

Who exactly are you rooting for? Humanity or Mother Nature?


It'd be nice if they weren't so frequently on opposite teams...

Who exactly are you rooting for? Humanity or Mother Nature?

It'd be nice if they weren't so frequently on opposite teams...


I'm rooting for idiocy and stupidity, which seem to be natural constants which will limit humanity to a few tens of thousands of years on this planet.

That, and it will be proof that intelligence is not necessarily a predicate for long term biological survival.

I'm rooting for idiocy and stupidity, which seem to be natural constants which will limit humanity to a few tens of thousands of years on this planet.

That, and it will be proof that intelligence is not necessarily a predicate for long term biological survival.

Ah.


I often think about how we are so incredibly stupid in such a complex and intelligent way.

What? You mean we are not having as big an impact as they thought we were? Oh my Lord. The World is ending!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/10/nclimate10.xml

And for those that didn't read past the title:
Mankind has had less effect on global warming than previously supposed [by the IPCC], a United Nations report on climate change will claim next year.

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says there can be little doubt that humans are responsible for warming the planet, but the organisation has reduced its overall estimate of this effect by 25 per cent.

In a final draft of its fourth assessment report, to be published in February, the panel reports that the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has accelerated in the past five years. It also predicts that temperatures will rise by up to 4.5 C during the next 100 years, bringing more frequent heat waves and storms.

The panel, however, has lowered predictions of how much sea levels will rise in comparison with its last report in 2001.

Climate change sceptics are expected to seize on the revised figures as evidence that action to combat global warming is less urgent.

Scientists insist that the lower estimates for sea levels and the human impact on global warming are simply a refinement due to better data on how climate works rather than a reduction in the risk posed by global warming.

One leading UK climate scientist, who asked not to be named due to the sensitivity surrounding the report before it is published, said: "The bottom line is that the climate is still warming while our greenhouse gas emissions have accelerated, so we are storing up problems for ourselves in the future."The idea that this somehow proves skeptics right is just plain false.

And for those that didn't read past the title:
The idea that this somehow proves skeptics right is just plain false.

I still think the odds are greater that we'll nuke ourselves in the next 20 years, or unleash a biological weapon that wipes us out.

Better odds than slowly cooking while the seas rise.

I still think the odds are greater that we'll nuke ourselves in the next 20 years, or unleash a biological weapon that wipes us out.

Better odds than slowly cooking while the seas rise.Meh. If I stay in Berlin, I'll have beachfront property soon. :D

And for those that didn't read past the title:
The idea that this somehow proves skeptics right is just plain false.

But they'll still claim it proves them right. I expect they'll start on this thread any second now.

This proves me right.

And, then there's this;

======================
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
Press Release
Release No.: 03-10
For Release: March 31, 2003

20th Century Climate Not So Hot

Cambridge, MA - A review of more than 200 climate studies led by researchers at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics has determined that the 20th century is neither the warmest century nor the century with the most extreme weather of the past 1000 years. The review also confirmed that the Medieval Warm Period of 800 to 1300 A.D. and the Little Ice Age of 1300 to 1900 A.D. were worldwide phenomena not limited to the European and North American continents. While 20th century temperatures are much higher than in the Little Ice Age period, many parts of the world show the medieval warmth to be greater than that of the 20th century.
======================
-- http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/press/pr0310.html

I like hats.

I still think the odds are greater that we'll nuke ourselves in the next 20 years, or unleash a biological weapon that wipes us out.

Better odds than slowly cooking while the seas rise.

geez... in another thread you moaning about there was no longer anyone in the US that had the balls to use nukes and firebombing as tactics on civilians......:rolleyes:

I must say I'm a little disappointed to be honest :(

And, then there's this;

======================
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
Press Release
Release No.: 03-10
For Release: March 31, 2003

20th Century Climate Not So Hot

Cambridge, MA - A review of more than 200 climate studies led by researchers at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics has determined that the 20th century is neither the warmest century nor the century with the most extreme weather of the past 1000 years. The review also confirmed that the Medieval Warm Period of 800 to 1300 A.D. and the Little Ice Age of 1300 to 1900 A.D. were worldwide phenomena not limited to the European and North American continents. While 20th century temperatures are much higher than in the Little Ice Age period, many parts of the world show the medieval warmth to be greater than that of the 20th century.
======================
-- http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/press/pr0310.htmlAnd then there's this:
Two recent (and nearly identical) papers [Soon and Baliunas,2003 and Soon et al., 2003]— henceforth both referred to as “SB03”—challenge this view,and have been used to support the claim that recent hemispheric-scale warmth is not unprecedented in the context of the past millennium (see e.g.,“20th Century Climate Not So Hot,”press release,Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 31 March 2003; http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/press/pr0310.html). Such claims are inconsistent with the preponderance of scientific evidencehttp://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/shared/articles/eos03.pdf

no, the world is still ending.......just some will jump on this as an excuse to keep their heads buried in the sand.....

And to fuck the rest of us while they're at it.