World has five years to avoid severe warming: IEA

Nov 09, 2011 by Marlowe Hood
The Belchatow power plant is seen in September 2011 in Poland. The world has just five years to avoid being trapped in a scenario of perilous climate change and extreme weather events, the International Energy Agency (IEA) warned on Wednesday.

The world has just five years to avoid being trapped in a scenario of perilous climate change and extreme weather events, the International Energy Agency (IEA) warned on Wednesday.

On current trends, "rising use will lead to irreversible and potentially catastrophic climate change," the IEA concluded in its annual World Energy Outlook report.

"The door to 2.0 C is closing," it said, referring to the 2.0 Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) cap on global warming widely accepted by scientists and governments as the ceiling for averting unmanageable climate damage.

Without further action, by 2017 the total compatible with the 2.0 C goal will be "locked in" by , factories and other carbon-emitting sources either built or planned, the IEA said.

Global infrastructure already accounts for more than 75 percent of that limit.

To meet energy needs while still averting climate catastrophe, governments must engineer a shift away from carbon-intensive fossil fuels, the agency said bluntly.

Traffic is seen amid floodwaters in Bangkok. Scientists who have modelled the impacts on biodiversity, agriculture and human settlement say the world would be close to unlivable due to violent extremes of drought, flooding, heatwaves and storms.

"As each year passes without clear signals to drive investment in clean energy, the 'lock-in' of high-carbon infrastructure is making it harder and more expensive to meet our and climate goals," said IEA chief economist Fatih Birol.

The report outlines two scenarios for consumption and emissions of .

A "new policies" scenario incorporates existing government promises into a projection up to 2035.

A "450 scenario" lays out a timetable for curbing so that of CO2 stays under 450 parts per million (ppm), roughly equivalent to the 2.0 C target.

The current level is about 390 ppm.

A woman wears a mask as she rides a bicycle in Beijing in October 2011.

Even taking into account current commitments, CO2 emitted over the next 25 years will amount to three-quarters of the total emitted since 1900, leading to a 3.5 C (6.3 F) average increase in temperature since that date.

Business-as-usual emissions would put the world "on an even more dangerous track toward an increase of 6.0 C (10.8 F)," the report says.

Scientists who have modelled the impacts on biodiversity, agriculture and human settlement say a 6 C world would be close to unlivable due to violent extremes of drought, flooding, heatwaves and storms.

The planet's average temperature has risen by about 1.0 C (1.8 F) over the last century, with forecasts for future warming ranging from an additional 1.0 C to 5.0 C (9.0 F) by 2100.

The report forecasts a one-third jump in primary energy demand by 2035, with 90 percent of this growth in developing economies.

Half of that demand will likely be met by increased use of coal, the most carbon-intensive of all major fossil fuels.

China -- already the world's top coal consumer -- is on track to use nearly 70 percent more energy than the United States by that date, it says.

Even under the "new policies" scenario progress toward a low-carbon economy will be halting.

The share of fossil fuels in global primary falls from around 81 percent today to 75 percent in 2035, while renewables increase from 13 percent of the mix today to 18 percent.

This scenario already assumes a huge boost in subsidies for renewables, from $64 billion today to $250 billion in 2035.

"One wonders how many more worrying figures the world needs," commented Connie Hedegaard, the European Union's climate commissioner.

The report "shows that the world is heading for a fossil-fuel lock-in. This is another urgent call to move to a low-carbon economy," she said in a statement.

Setting a global price on carbon, slashing fossil fuel subsidies, boosting renewable energy and energy efficiency and revised tax codes are all tools for achieving that end, she added.

Explore further: US delays decision on Keystone pipeline project

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Global oil demand 'to rise 14% by 2035': IEA

Nov 09, 2011

Global oil demand is set to grow by 14.0 percent by 2035, pulled by China and emerging economies and the price could reach 120 dollars per barrel, the IEA said in its annual report on Wednesday.

Change needed to avoid 'dire' energy future: IEA

Oct 19, 2011

The world faces a "dire" future unless a complete change of course is made to deal with the huge problem of surging energy demand, the International Energy Agency warned on Wednesday.

IEA calls for scrapping $312 bln in fuel subsidies

Apr 06, 2011

The International Energy Agency is calling for 312 billion dollars in fuel subsidies to be scrapped in a bid to promote clean energy sources, according to a report presented in Abu Dhabi on Wednesday.

Carbon emissions at record high: report

May 30, 2011

Carbon emissions are at their highest ever levels, stoking fears of a global temperature rise over the "dangerous" two degrees Celsius threshold, according to data cited by the Guardian newspaper.

'Radical' clean energy shift could save 4 tn euros: WWF

Feb 03, 2011

The environmental group WWF argued on Thursday that a radical, near total global shift to clean fuels within 40 years could yield savings of four trillion euros ($5.4 trillion) a year as well as tackle climate ...

EU carbon emissions 'plummeted in 2009'

May 31, 2011

Greenhouse-gas emissions by the 27 members of the European Union fell by 7.1 percent in 2009 over 2008, driven by economic recession but also a switch to renewable energy, the European Environment Agency (EAA) ...

Recommended for you

US delays decision on Keystone pipeline project

Apr 18, 2014

The United States announced Friday a fresh delay on a final decision regarding a controversial Canada to US oil pipeline, saying more time was needed to carry out a review.

New research on Earth's carbon budget

Apr 18, 2014

(Phys.org) —Results from a research project involving scientists from the Desert Research Institute have generated new findings surrounding some of the unknowns of changes in climate and the degree to which ...

User comments : 62

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

hush1
1.6 / 5 (13) Nov 09, 2011
A dare to support belligerence. Perfect! Well played!
kaasinees
1.4 / 5 (20) Nov 09, 2011
stop consuming crap. Christmas is coming people are buying their crap. Christmas is evil, Christianity is evil.
hush1
1.4 / 5 (11) Nov 09, 2011
The message is buy before too late, silly. All evil aside.
daqman
3.8 / 5 (12) Nov 09, 2011
Sadly I think the human race is headed for hard times. I can't see China slowing down, the US seems to be filled with denialist propaganda and Europe is dumping nuclear power in favour of fossil fuel.

Nerdyguy
2.7 / 5 (17) Nov 09, 2011
It's a bit irresponsible for the IEA to release this kind of alarmist rhetoric. I have no problem with the basic premise that the climate is changing. Or even that we may be playing a role in it. Beyond that, though, so little is well understood and there's a whole lot of gray area that makes up the details.

The problem with drawing this kind of line on the calendar is twofold: first, you could be off, even significantly, and the denier types will use that for fuel. Second and, more importantly, the average person on the street who does not understand the issue will view this type of message as ideological, alarmist and "radical", and get very little further useful information from it.
SamB
2.6 / 5 (18) Nov 09, 2011
Thank God we only have to listen to 'The sky is falling' for 5 more years. By then the world will have ended.. (or not)
hush1
1.5 / 5 (8) Nov 09, 2011
Spammers come here to advertise. Now you know why. With only five years to go, the playing field is level for everyone, including all conspirators. Buy now or forever hold your peace.
Shakescene21
3.6 / 5 (10) Nov 09, 2011
The Earth's 7 billion people will not agree to any realistic plans to slow AGW in the next 5 years. These international Climate Change conventions have been jokes.
In my opinion the only viable solution is massive improvement in the technology and cost-effectiveness of non-fossil-fuel energy. As Google puts it: "Make a kwh from solar cheaper than a kwh from coal". It will happen eventually, but not in 5 years. However, the new era could be brought in much faster by heavy investment in research, development, and demonstration.
rwinners
2.2 / 5 (12) Nov 09, 2011
Might be true, might be very overstated, but in any case, it is pointless propaganda. Nothing is going to change.
Good luck to us!
hippieland_net
4 / 5 (10) Nov 10, 2011
Sorry. Its to late to stop global climate change. Were just going to have to learn to adapt.
hush1
2.8 / 5 (9) Nov 10, 2011
lol
The liberty to adapt. That will not go over well for Americans.
Cave_Man
2.9 / 5 (7) Nov 10, 2011

In my opinion the only viable solution is massive improvement in the technology and cost-effectiveness of non-fossil-fuel energy. As Google puts it: "Make a kwh from solar cheaper than a kwh from coal".

Well, at least some people are smart enough to understand the reality.

It sure seems like if everyone pulled their heads out of the sand (their asses) for a minute we could earmark a few trillion dollars into SPECIFIC and PROVEN tech like solar concentrating plants and the newest solar PV and wind power. However we'd need to be realistic about the commissioning of such large scale changes. Think AHEAD and realize we may need to remove such infrastructure in the near future and reprocess the materials. Especially since tech efficacy seems to be exponential.
Shootist
1.9 / 5 (17) Nov 10, 2011
The IEA? No one takes the UN, or any of its offices, seriously.

Solar is nice, if the sun would shine 24/7. The storage costs more than the generation facility. More unicorn farts and pixie dust.

"The polar bears (continue) to be fine." -Freeman Dyson.
Ojorf
5 / 5 (1) Nov 10, 2011
Could be true, could be overstated, could be understated, things aren't 100% sure, but whichever way it goes it's bad news, it's just the projected timescale that differs.
Moebius
2.2 / 5 (10) Nov 10, 2011
Read it and weep or deny. Environmental disaster is imminent and unavoidable. The skeptics will deny the scientists to the last and they will win. The skeptics will get their wish and they will choke on it with the rest of us. It's human nature to react, not pro-act. It's our greatest strength and our Achille's heel.
Nerdyguy
3.5 / 5 (6) Nov 10, 2011
Read it and weep or deny. Environmental disaster is imminent and unavoidable. The skeptics will deny the scientists to the last and they will win. The skeptics will get their wish and they will choke on it with the rest of us. It's human nature to react, not pro-act. It's our greatest strength and our Achille's heel.


Shall we all just commit Sepukku right away?
hush1
not rated yet Nov 10, 2011
No. Wait till Rossi gives his word that he will follow suit. Then set the example.
jsdarkdestruction
3 / 5 (4) Nov 10, 2011
Oliver Manuel's recent efforts to plaster Physorg.com and other public news sites with his theories and personal URLs are a bit puzzling, as scientists have a variety of publications available to communicate directly to each other in. My best guess is that he is desperately trying to prop up his legacy in light of his arrest in his university office on 7 charges of rape and sodomy based on allegations by 4 of his own children. The charges have been reduced to one count of felony attempted sodomy, not necessarily because of his innocence, but because of the statute of limitations. One can only guess how the recent charges and decades of family strife have affected his ability to reason rationally and to remain objective while defending his unpopular theories.

http://www.homefa...uel.html

http://mominer.ms...hildren/

Nerdyguy
3 / 5 (4) Nov 10, 2011
Oliver Manuel's recent efforts to plaster Physorg.com and other public news sites with his theories and personal URLs are a bit puzzling, as scientists have a variety of publications available to communicate directly to each other in. My best guess is that he is desperately trying to prop up his legacy in light of his arrest in his university office on 7 charges of rape and sodomy based on allegations by 4 of his own children. The charges have been reduced to one count of felony attempted sodomy, not necessarily because of his innocence, but because of the statute of limitations. One can only guess how the recent charges and decades of family strife have affected his ability to reason rationally and to remain objective while defending his unpopular theories.

http://www.homefa...uel.html



Haha, cut-and-paste! But I don't blame you. His stuff is mostly cut-and-paste.
hush1
not rated yet Nov 10, 2011
jsdestruction
Perhaps justice will be serve only if Judge William Adams presides over the final proceedings.
Osiris1
2 / 5 (5) Nov 11, 2011
Lotsa comments...all over the map. Think it is inappropriate to discredit someone publicly like that in order to make whatever point. Sadly think the Dagman is the most correct of all here however. China 'could' reduce its consumption but only by military occupation, and no country or combination of same can come up with two hundred million troops and pay for it, so China will drive us not only to 'six' degrees, but further to maybe '20' degrees. The 'we will sell you slave labor' model is an irresistible attraction to greedy business cartels worldwide; and with more energy bought with blood money, the model will 'improve'. And they are gonna control space too. They got the money....your money every time you go to Wal-Mart cuz they are '.."bringin it home to America!"! And like another said, unwise nuclear shutdowns will accelerate the warming..and further dependence on fossil fuels and political instability. That fosters demagogues!
Osiris1
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 11, 2011
If that were not enough, here is a little MORE craziness. Riverside County California, which if one reads the Inland-Empire newspapers is corrupt in every community with one city there prosecuting a heavy majority of its own city council for all kinds of fraud and graft, just passed a confiscatory tax on new solar projects in the county. Six hundred and forty bucks per acre of solar project per year in a county that is over 97% desert, gila monsters, sidewinders and scorpions. Some of those scorpions wear french cuffs, Gucci shoes and Armani suits. Other counties in immigrant welfare driven revenue short California are watching and ready to pile on to the now under siege solar industry in the state. Only a short while ago they sounded like master practitioners of the 'oldest profession' in order to lure them to California. Having got the contracts, now they show their true colors. So add economic sabotage of the people's health to the world's problems.
deatopmg
2.9 / 5 (11) Nov 11, 2011
Heard all the same kind of impending environmental disaster crap in the 60's from the darlings of the educated w/o any life experience (including me) Paul and Ann Ehrlich. Children: This is just more doomster cult nonsense used by the greedy to take your money to get rich and of course "save" the world. Eventually, the vast majority of you will grow up and wake up.
BenjaminButton
2.8 / 5 (9) Nov 12, 2011
Propaganda rubbish!
toyo
2.3 / 5 (3) Nov 12, 2011
Dr. Fatih is just doing his job people - nothing new and certainly nothing to worry about.
Being an economist, the "Climate Change" part of his portfolio does not include questioning anything the IPCC says.
It in fact depends on their (the IPCC's) continued alarmism.
Otherwise that part of his portfolio would disappear.
axemaster
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 12, 2011
It's a bit irresponsible for the IEA to release this kind of alarmist rhetoric.

Perhaps they are releasing alarmist rhetoric because they are themselves alarmed? They have to live on Earth with the rest of us, so I imagine they are pretty much crapping themselves with fear right now.
axemaster
1 / 5 (1) Nov 12, 2011
Wow, I just started watching the IEA press conference. I was right - they are scared. Seriously scared. I'm just about to graduate from college, and I find it beyond my ability to understand how people (the AGW denialists in particular) could be so careless, so NEGLIGENT. It literally makes me feel physically ill.

Here's a link to the video. I suggest you watch it:

http://www.iea.or...B43C.flv
ralbol
2 / 5 (1) Nov 12, 2011
Now, we all know why SETI never found anything.

Intelligence is just degraded instinct.

Follows entropy.

Instinct was before intelligence, so intelligence is DEGRADED instinct.

As a species we're stupid, and our collective suicide has, is, and will be repeated in the Universe for as long as it exists.

Illumination...
Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (3) Nov 12, 2011
"Christmas is coming people are buying their crap." - Kaas

Celebrate the winter Solstice. Take back what Christianity has stolen.

axemaster
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 12, 2011
As a species we're stupid, and our collective suicide has, is, and will be repeated in the Universe for as long as it exists.

You speak as if you're just going to watch it happen. But guess what, you're going down with the rest of us.

People act like this is an argument they can win or lose. Global warming is not just some topic for intellectual debate, it's a real disaster, and it's on it's way RIGHT NOW.

If someone was pointing a gun at your child, would you start a debate about whether the gun was real or not? Ok, the gunman shoots the floor and it leaves a crater. The gun is clearly real. THAT is the level of evidence we now have that anthropogenic global warming is happening.

Now realize that YOU are pointing that gun at your own child. Because by refusing to accept the evidence, which has been accepted by 98% of scientists, you are putting your kids in danger. It's that simple.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.6 / 5 (5) Nov 12, 2011
"Being an economist, the "Climate Change" part of his portfolio does not include questioning anything the IPCC says." - Tovo

Given that the result Denialist Koch Brothers funded (BEST) global temperature analysis has found the IPCC analysis to represent "excellent" science, on what basis should anyone have to suspect that the IPCC the NOAA, NASA, or any other agency who has reported nearly identical findings, being wrong?

All the Denialists have left are lies and their faith in Conservative Political Ideology.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (3) Nov 12, 2011
"China will drive us not only to 'six' degrees, but further to maybe '20' degrees." - Osisis

Not possible. The people of China would be extinct at that point, as well as everyone else not living at the north and south polls.

Vendicar_Decarian
2.8 / 5 (9) Nov 12, 2011
"Shall we all just commit Sepukku right away?" - NerdGuy

Conservatives might Consider it. The alternative is to be part of the hunt for them and the bloody retribution that follows once they are caught and punished for their crimes against nature and man.

It is only a few years away, and I have my list ready.
Vendicar_Decarian
1.8 / 5 (5) Nov 12, 2011
It is time to get the U.N. out of the U.S. and the U.S. out of existence.

"No one takes the UN, or any of its offices, seriously." - Shootist
Vendicar_Decarian
2.5 / 5 (8) Nov 12, 2011
"Thank God we only have to listen to 'The sky is falling' for 5 more years." - SamB

Yes. By then you will have either changed your opinion or will be in hiding out of fear of bloody retribution for your criminal level of stupidity.

I look forward to the improvements in the gene pool.

ralbol
5 / 5 (2) Nov 12, 2011
@ axemaster

- «You speak as if you're just going to watch it happen. But guess what, you're going down with the rest of us.»

Nope.

I know bloody well I'm gonna be part of it.

I'm just stating facts.

As individuals, we can have Genius. As a species, we just can't. As a species we're dumb as a doorknob.

So we are committing collective suicide for little green papers that have no real existence outside our deluded small, very small intellects.

And hoping that the vast herds of semi-concious apes that make the bulk of humanity, will somehow become sufficiently intelligent, in time to avoid extinction, is, frankly... wishful thinking.

We will kill ourselves trying to keep alive an economic system we created, and refuse to question or change.

That's it.
Vendicar_Decarian
3 / 5 (6) Nov 12, 2011
"It's a bit irresponsible for the IEA to release this kind of alarmist rhetoric." - NerdGuy

Translation - There is no such thing as global warming.

Criminality has consequences. Treason has consequences.

The consequences of your denialism will be death.

ralbol
5 / 5 (2) Nov 12, 2011
Oh, and about intelligence being degraded instinct...

Dinosaurs lasted 165 million years on instinct.

Humans, with their "superior" intelligence, will be lucky to last 200,000 years.

And besides our fossils, we'll leave A LOT of garbage...
Au-Pu
1 / 5 (3) Nov 13, 2011
The Earth oscillates between tropical periods and glacial periods.
It has been doing so for many millions of years.
It is actually similar to our spring, summer,autumn and winter except that it is on a much larger time scale
Presently we are in the spring of this process and have yet to enter its summer.
So whether we humans exist or don't exist the climate will continue to warm until it reaches its summer maximum.
The questions scientists should be asking are a) is human activity adding to the speed of the warming process?, b)can we halt our input?, c) are we able to remove any input we have added to this process?
I suspect that the answers will be a) Yes, b) Yes and c) NO
I suspect that whatever we add to the speed of this process can never be removed, it simply has to wait until it reaches its maximum or its tipping point and it will then start to cool and the cooling process will continue until we have a full ice age then the global warming process will recommence.
Skepticus
1 / 5 (2) Nov 13, 2011
@Au-Pu
so, you and your kind are the ones who shrug and wait patiently for the climate to right itself because your kind have nothing to do with it, and it will right itself. Riight. Your kind will stick by your principles and do nothing when the whole planet heats up? I don't see your kind sit in Zen-like repose when the temperature hit 110 without turning the AC on...and complained when the grid gave up by overloads.
IlliterateGraduate
not rated yet Nov 13, 2011
What about molten salt reactors? Safer than your average nuclear plant, much more powerful than solar.

Thorium is a pretty common material, and it's safer than burning fossil fuels. MOREOVER, the US has tonnes of it, and its refining comes with production of rare-earths (it'd be nice to break the Chinese monopoly on those).

IlliterateGraduate
5 / 5 (2) Nov 13, 2011
What about molten salt reactors? Safer than your average nuclear plant, much more powerful than solar.

Thorium is a pretty common material, and it's safer than burning fossil fuels. MOREOVER, the US has tonnes of it, and its refining comes with production of rare-earths (it'd be nice to break the Chinese monopoly on those).
bmerc
1 / 5 (2) Nov 13, 2011
As they say "Deeds speak loader than words" and I am as worried over this as the darlings of the global warming scam are. Al Gore who is given awards and is making bundles of dollars a year preaching this scam to people who eat it up and line up to his book signings owns several mansions and flies around in private jets while he says I must change my life style to save the earth. The U.N. has conferences to discuss this issue and instead of having them at the U.N. headquarters where a good many of the people attending it are already are and the rest could teleconference in and not produce as much carbon if for no other reason than to lead by example they have to take private jets to some exotic location but then they couldn't be drinking some frozen concoction on the beach at Cancun on their expense account.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.6 / 5 (5) Nov 13, 2011
"Deeds speak loader than words" and I am as worried over this as the darlings of the global warming scam are. Al Gore" - bmerc

Gore has done a great job investing in the things he correctly believes in and profiting from those investments.

Jealousy will get you no where.

Now if Gore didn't invest his own money in these projects you would be whining about him not believing in the science because he wasn't willing to put his money where his mouth is.

So Gore just makes for a convenient excuse for your ignorant denialist whining.

bmerc
1 / 5 (2) Nov 13, 2011
Yeah he invests in those technologies that wouldn't stand a chance if it wasn't also for government grants to help develop them and even then would need government incentives so people could purchase them. So while he is investing in these projects he also calls on government to secure his investment so he doesn't lose money and so in effect is having the taxpayer underwrite and guarantee his investment.

But that still doesn't address the fact that many of those calling for the others to change their life style to reduce carbon emissions are living very high on the hog and contributing much more than the others they are complaining about. If Gore and others certainly believe in the message they were prophesying they wouldn't be flying around in private jets or as with John Kerry when he was running for president be driving around in so gas guzzler that he claims he didn't own and be preaching to me that I am ruining the environment by not driving a more fuel efficient car.
bmerc
5 / 5 (1) Nov 13, 2011
There is very little I agree with Ralph Nader about but at least he isn't a hypocrite about what he says and he lives a simple life instead of like Gore who preaches much loader about the issue and lives much more extravagant.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.6 / 5 (5) Nov 13, 2011
"Yeah he invests in those technologies that wouldn't stand a chance if it wasn't also for government grants" - bmerc

And you can invest in them too. You are just too stupid to do so. Hence your whining at Gore's great success.

"he also calls on government to secure his investment" - bmerc

Which investments are those. Be specific in your accusations lest you be pegged as a liar.

"many of those calling for the others to change their life style to reduce carbon emissions are living very high on the hog" - bmerc

Gore sits on the board of directors of Apple computer, and is involved in the operations of at least a dozen businesses. He is active politically, and in the campaign to change the worlds energy supply and consumptive habits.

He lives a pretty active life compared to a petty wage slave like yourself. I grant him permission to consume more than you on that basis.

Vendicar_Decarian
2 / 5 (4) Nov 13, 2011
"If Gore and others certainly believe in the message they were prophesying they wouldn't be flying around in private jets " - bmerc

Sorry Tard Boy. But your whining makes little sense. Gore has already changed the course of history for the better, and has prompted millions of people to reduce their consumption. On that basis alone, he has more than offset his own consumption.

If you can suggest a more energy efficient way to get the same results, then suggest it now.

We are waiting...

Somehow I don't think that if Gore were to spend his days sitting on the couch doing nothing would get anything accomplished.

Just look at the vast amount of nothing you have done with your life.

Callippo
1 / 5 (2) Nov 13, 2011
I do believe, everyone understands clearly, the people can do nothing against global warming and the increasing consumption of fossil fuels in next five years. If the things will do extraordinarily well, then the cold fusion could replace one promile of fossil fuel consumption during next five years. But I would expect, this finding will rather decrease the price of oil at markets, which will increase its consumption even more - at least temporarily.
bmerc
4 / 5 (4) Nov 13, 2011
Wow you certainly show typical liberal behavior, don't agree with your social agenda and you go off and have to start childish personal attacks that sound like they were coming from 12 year old girls. And the supporters of this global warming sham complain that there cannot be a discussion of this issue without it degrading into an meaningless argument when they are usually the first to start acting like you as soon as someone has anything to say against it. If the facts were so on your side you wouldn't always need to start acting like a little sassy girl who's mad because she can't go see Justin Bieber.
ZachB
not rated yet Nov 13, 2011
Attention humans: Plant some more trees and get a good nights sleep. In the morning you have to start fussing about the chemical and nuclear waste that is wrecking your gene pool.
Dummy
1.3 / 5 (3) Nov 13, 2011
The science is now all-but-settled on global warming. Convincing new evidence demonstrates cosmic rays and the sun not human activities as the dominant controller of climate on Earth. The research, published with little fanfare in the prestigious journal Nature, comes from über-prestigious CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research. They demonstrate that cosmic rays promote the formation of molecules that in Earths atmosphere can grow and seed clouds, the cloudier and thus cooler it will be. Because the suns magnetic field controls how many cosmic rays reach Earths atmosphere (the stronger the suns magnetic field, the more it shields Earth from incoming cosmic rays from space), the sun determines the temperature on Earth.

For an entertaining and devastating critique of the alleged science behind the AGW argument, check out this video:

http://blog.ameri...science/

flashgordon
1 / 5 (2) Nov 13, 2011
http://www.youtub...jy5FORbo

James Burke's "After the Warming"
Vendicar_Decarian
1.7 / 5 (6) Nov 13, 2011
"Convincing new evidence demonstrates cosmic rays and the sun not human activities as the dominant controller of climate on Earth." - Dummy

Your convincing new evidence isn't even convincing to the researchers produced it as they claimed that their results say Nothing about cloud formation. The particle sizes they produced were far too small to act as nucleation sites for the growth of clouds.

You have been lied to by your source. Only a Dummy would believe a liar.
omatumr
1 / 5 (3) Nov 13, 2011
According to this press release, some members of Congress will have a hearing tomorrow on the End of Climate Change Skepticism:

http://democrats....162.html

Professor Curry's blog has comments from readers:

http://judithcurr...t-137664

Since the end of skepticism is the end of the scientific method, as one of the early commenters notes, this Congressional hearing may simply confirm that AGW is more politics than science.

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://myprofile....anuelo09
unknownorgin
2 / 5 (4) Nov 14, 2011
I have come to a conclution also that IEA has an important sounding title to give themselves credibilty so they can scare people with thier doom and gloom predictions and I predict that five years from now they will be totaly forgotten about.
insignificant_fish
not rated yet Nov 14, 2011
Solar is nice, if the sun would shine 24/7.


:face palm:
Vendicar_Decarian
1.7 / 5 (6) Nov 14, 2011
"I have come to a conclution also that IEA has an important sounding title" - unknown

I have come to the conclusion that American Republicans are examples of perfect ignorance and perfect corruption, and nothing but death will alter that fact.

Dummy
2.6 / 5 (5) Nov 14, 2011
"Convincing new evidence demonstrates cosmic rays and the sun not human activities as the dominant controller of climate on Earth." - Dummy

Your convincing new evidence isn't even convincing to the researchers produced it as they claimed that their results say Nothing about cloud formation. The particle sizes they produced were far too small to act as nucleation sites for the growth of clouds.

You have been lied to by your source. Only a Dummy would believe a liar.


You keep buying the BS, pal.
Nerdyguy
1 / 5 (1) Nov 15, 2011
Hey all, just wanted to say how much I learned from this display of calm, rational thought and well-considered public discourse. Score for the radicals!

You do realize you're all on the same team, yes?
Dummy
2.3 / 5 (3) Nov 15, 2011
Carbon dioxide, considered the main vector for human-caused global warming, is 0.039% of the atmosphere- a trace gas. Water vapor varies, but averages around 1%, and is about ten times more effective a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. So water vapor is about 25 times more prevalent and ten times more effective; that makes it 250 times more important to the greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide. The TOTAL contribution of carbon dioxide to the greenhouse effect is therefore about 0.004%. The total human contribution to carbon dioxide since the start of the industrial revolution has been estimated at about 25%. So human greenhouse effect is a quarter of 0.00%, works out to about 0.001%. Since TOTAL greenhouse effect on temperature is estimated at around 63 degrees Fahrenheit, that would come to human-caused warming of about 0.063 degrees Fahrenheit.
Nerdyguy
3 / 5 (2) Nov 15, 2011
"It's a bit irresponsible for the IEA to release this kind of alarmist rhetoric." - NerdGuy

Translation - There is no such thing as global warming.

Criminality has consequences. Treason has consequences.

The consequences of your denialism will be death.



Do you ever stop for just a half second and think of writing something that is logical, to-the-point, factual, organized, non-emotional, and non-hateful? Oh, wait....guess not.

Anyway, it was really funny how you removed the part of my post where I said I don't have any problem with the IEA premise, and then you just put the part where I said I disagreed with how they released their findings.

See, this makes you an angry little man, whose goal in life is to get a few uber-geeks on a science website to pay attention to you, regardless of the truth or factual content of whatever you say!

I've said it before Vendicar, but they make pills for your condition, and behavior therapy would be appropriate.

More news stories

China says massive area of its soil polluted

A huge area of China's soil covering more than twice the size of Spain is estimated to be polluted, the government said Thursday, announcing findings of a survey previously kept secret.

UN weather agency warns of 'El Nino' this year

The UN weather agency Tuesday warned there was a good chance of an "El Nino" climate phenomenon in the Pacific Ocean this year, bringing droughts and heavy rainfall to the rest of the world.