Slashdot Mirror
UN Climate Change Panel: It's Happening, and It's Almost Entirely Man's Fault
iONiUM writes The UN released a new climate change report which concludes that it is indeed happening, and it's almost entirely man's fault. From the article: "The IPCC was set up in 1988 to assess global warming and its impacts. The report released Sunday caps its latest assessment, a mega-review of 30,000 climate change studies that establishes with 95-percent certainty that nearly all warming seen since the 1950s is man-made." However, the report isn't entirely dire. It goes on to say: "To get a good chance of staying below 2C, the report's scenarios show that world emissions would have to fall by between 40 and 70 percent by 2050 from current levels and to 'near zero or below in 2100.'" Below zero of course means mining existing CO2 out of the atmopshere somehow.
Class warfare has nothing to do with it, you thick shit. The wealthy run the large companies, which in turn own the governments (at least in the US), who make the decisions not to do anything about climate change, and also to spew utter horseshit like, "There's nothing we can do." Regular people aren't the ones clamoring to do nothing about climate change.
I don't respond to AC's.
Good science isn't political at all; it merely describes reality. Climatology, as groups like the IPCC present it, isn't good science. It's a bunch of fudge-factor-laced models and ignored observations tightly wound around a political agenda. Basically, ignore what you can't explain, place assumptions anywhere the data is incomplete, draw conclusions that don't match up to reality, and pretend it all makes sense because you have "consensus".
This.
I like science as much as anyone but the IPCC's actual predictive track record leaves me fairly underwhelmed.
The problem is that we need better data collection, more data collection, and a lot more work put into understanding the underlying mechanics of the system as a whole before we start drawing wide-reaching conclusions about the drivers of the whole thing
Yup. I've noted in my work that engineers tend to be more skeptical as a group in general. This probably sums up why;
http://judithcurry.com/2014/10... (long read but well worth it).
Basically the whole process is fixated on CO2 to basically the exclusion of all else. Suggesting anything else generally gets you ostracized. Oceans have only really entered the discussion recently and only because the models have been so bad. That's not the science I grew up with.