| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| specfiction |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 16:08:29
Perhaps the greatest misinformation campaign of all time has been waged on the legitamacy of Global Warming--that it is real, that it is in large part man-made, and that there is a point of no return.
Every reputable scientific group in the World has determined: that it is real, that it is in large part man-made, including NAS, NASA, NOAA, Scripps, IPCC and many more. In general the following sums up the situation:
quote:
The scientific consensus is clearly expressed in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environmental Programme, IPCC's purpose is to evaluate the state of climate science as a basis for informed policy action, primarily on the basis of peer-reviewed and published scientific literature (3). In its most recent assessment, IPCC states unequivocally that the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities: "Human activities ... are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents ... that absorb or scatter radiant energy. ... [M]ost of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations" [p. 21 in (4)].
IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. For example, the National Academy of Sciences report, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions, begins: "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise" [p. 1 in (5)]. The report explicitly asks whether the IPCC assessment is a fair summary of professional scientific thinking, and answers yes: "The IPCC's conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue" [p. 3 in (5)].
Others agree. The American Meteorological Society (6), the American Geophysical Union (7), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling (8).
What comes to mind is this, by the late Kurt Vonnegut: "There is no doubt man is a bad animal and the Earth's immune system is trying to fix the problem."
____________
Specfiction |
| 2 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| specfiction |
Posted - 06/27/2007 : 09:10:17
For those who have read "State Of Fear" by Michael Crichton and have wondered about the popularity and truthfulness of Crichton's case, check out RealClimate, Climate Science by Climate Scientists:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=74
By comparison, here's what climate scientists have to say about Al Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2006-06-27-gore-science-truth_x.htm
____________
Specfiction |
| specfiction |
Posted - 04/16/2007 : 09:26:05
The good news is that we're having a lively debate--apparently people are concerned and that's good. The bad news is the whole global warming--energy crisis--and I should add water crisis (the lack of fresh water will join the other two big problems to form the perfect storm in the next few decades) have become so divisive because of the money at stake that the internet has become a machine of propaganda for various interest groups. It's much the same as talk radio in the US has driven the oil war in Iraq.
Here are some realities we will be forced to face--rhetoric can get you just so far:
1) Global Warming is real and will cause massive disruptions if we don't act soon.
2) Nuclear Power is NOT a viable energy source, not because we can't build safe reactors--we can, but because we can never get rid of the lethal poison they produce. There is no way to get rid of nuclear waste. It will eventually show up in ground water, then in the air no matter what we do. If you factor in the price of containing these poisons, even temporarily, which is all we can do, the price of nuclear power is prohibitive.
3) A combination of approaches, including conservation, world wide planned parenthood, and recycling can lead to a solution.
I think we'll probably see a world-wide catastrophe in our lifetimes--famine, war, ecologic collapse, vast extinctions. People, as a group, are too susceptible to manipulation to act on a problem of this complexity, stretching over decades, effectively. It will be sad to see the finger pointing when we’re about to go over the edge—someone should hold up a mirror.
Even the military gets it, they're going to have to clean it up:
Global Warming--a Military point of view
But we can always hope.
____________
Specfiction |
|
|
