Waiting on climate is 'escapism': top UN scientist
December 8, 2011 by Jerome Cartillier
Leaders who wait for further evidence about the perils of greenhouse gases are flirting with escapism, the head of the UN's Nobel-winning climate scientists says.
"You cannot possibly keep waiting forever for new evidence of global warming to act," Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said on the sidelines of the UN climate talks in Durban.
The 12-day marathon, ending on Friday, seeks to limit warming to 2.0 Celsius (3.6 degree Fahrenheit), a commonly-accepted danger threshold.
Underpinning this goal is a raft of scientific evidence -- the IPCC's 2007 4th Assessment Report among them -- which says the data for dangerous, man-made global warming is unequivocal.
On current trajectories, according to an assessment by German academics released on Monday, Earth is headed for a sizzling increase of 3.5 degrees Celsius (6.3 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial times.
Previously published research says this scenario is a near-guarantee of disaster-inducing storms, droughts and floods across swathes of the globe.
But major actors in the climate drama -- China, India, the United States to name three -- have said during the talks that some key decisions should be postponed until after the IPCC's multi-volume 5th assessment report, due out in 2013-2014.
The IPCC produces every five to six years the definitive reference guide for policy makers on global warming and its impacts.
"The (2007) 4th assessment report has enough substance which provides the basis for taking action," Pachauri told AFP in the interview on Wednesday.
"If the world accepts this scientific reality, then surely they should do something about it.
"Certainly, the next report might close a few gaps, make a few refinements. But to say that we will wait for the next report seems like escapism," he said.
Pachauri applauded South African President Jacob Zuma for underscoring in his keynote address the importance of chaining action on greenhouse-gas emissions "to the demands of science."
In a Special Report released in November, the IPCC warned that climate change was on track to, in effect, create weather on steroids, boosting the intensity or frequency of extreme events ranging from heatwaves to hurricanes to diluvian downpours.
Pachauri refused to assess the state of play in the talks, where negotiations can get bogged down in mind-numbing details.
But he suggested that they lacked an appropriate "sense of urgency."
"Personally, I think it would be very helpful during the negotiations if each day started with a presentation on some aspect of science," he said, betraying a hint of frustration.
"That, perhaps, would at least remind people of the realities."
Despite the evident gap between politics and science, Pachauri remained guardedly optimistic.
"Hopefully, human beings -- being rational as they are supposed to be -- will probably decide collectively, in some form or the other, to take action," he said.
He pointed to the Montreal Protocol, the global pact that banned the chemicals ripping a hole in the atmosphere's protective ozone layer, as proof that the world's nations can pull together to solve a global problem.
"This of course is a much larger challenge. But I expect that, as a rational species, we'll do something about it."
(c) 2011 AFP
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
32 comments
-
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments,
3 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
42 comments
-
Climate scientists say they have solved riddle of rising sea,
31 comments
-
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say (Update),
4 comments
-
Hypothetical desert earth
22 hours ago
-
More human population = greater mass?
May 25, 2012
-
Conversion from aircraft bearing to normal degrees
May 23, 2012
-
Interpretation/Analysis of the Lab results(HEPA filter)
May 22, 2012
-
Has anyone here attended the The Urbino Summer School in Paleoclimatology?
May 22, 2012
-
Earthquakes: Mag 6 N. Italy and Mag 5.6 W. Bulgaria
May 21, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - Earth
More news stories
Land and sea species differ in climate change response: study
(Phys.org) -- Marine and terrestrial species will likely differ in their responses to climate warming, new research by Simon Fraser University and Australia’s University of Tasmania has found.
5 hours ago |
3.7 / 5 (3) |
5
|
Yale study concludes public apathy over climate change unrelated to science literacy
Are members of the public divided about climate change because they don't understand the science behind it? If Americans knew more basic science and were more proficient in technical reasoning, would public consensus match ...
7 hours ago |
4.8 / 5 (5) |
19
|
10 million years needed to recover from mass extinction
It took some 10 million years for Earth to recover from the greatest mass extinction of all time, latest research has revealed.
Space & Earth / Earth Sciences
7 hours ago |
4 / 5 (4) |
1
|
Sophisticated simulations predict future warming
The chances of our planet being hit by a global warming of 3 degrees Celsius by 2050 is as likely as it being hit by an increase of 1.4 degrees, new research shows. Presented in the journal Nature Geoscience, the British study ...
Space & Earth / Earth Sciences
May 22, 2012 |
4.1 / 5 (10) |
51
Aliens don't want to eat us, says former SETI director
Alien life probably isnt interested in having us for dinner, enslaving us or laying eggs in our bellies, according to a recent statement by former SETI director Jill Tarter.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
May 25, 2012 |
4.4 / 5 (15) |
41
Stunning image of smallest possible five-ringed structure
Scientists have created and imaged the smallest possible five-ringed structure about 100,000 times thinner than a human hair and you'll probably recognise its shape.
'Unzipped' carbon nanotubes could help energize fuel cells, batteries
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes riddled with defects and impurities on the outside could replace some of the expensive platinum catalysts used in fuel cells and metal-air batteries, according to scientists at ...
Change in developmental timing was crucial in the evolutionary shift from dinosaurs to birds: study
At first glance, it's hard to see how a common house sparrow and a Tyrannosaurus Rex might have anything in common. After all, one is a bird that weighs less than an ounce, and the other is a dinosaur that ...
Computer model used to pinpoint prime materials for efficient carbon capture
When power plants begin capturing their carbon emissions to reduce greenhouse gases and to most in the electric power industry, it's a question of when, not if it will be an expensive undertaking.
T cells 'hunt' parasites like animal predators seek prey, study shows
By pairing an intimate knowledge of immune-system function with a deep understanding of statistical physics, a cross-disciplinary team at the University of Pennsylvania has arrived at a surprising finding: T cells use a movement ...
Scientists develop ultra-sensitive test that detects diseases in their earliest stages
Scientists have developed an ultra-sensitive test that should enable them to detect signs of a disease in its earliest stages, in research published today in the journal Nature Materials.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
If my theory is correct, 2013 and 2014 should be extreme scorchers world wide, so if it comes out in 2013 or early 2014, they probably won't have time to include the data from 2014 certainly, and maybe not even part of 2013.
2014 is the first year that the keeling curve's seasonal minimum will be higher than 2011's seasonal maximum.
2013 should be the year the current solar cycle will hit it's maximum heat output, with 2012 and 2014 being roughly tied for runner's up.
So that means either 2013 or 2014 will be GLOBALLY the hottest year in human history, maybe they'll end up as 1 and 2, and will likely keep the title for maybe 5 years or so thereafter, excluding volcanism.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
Clearly, 2013 and 2014 should be exceptionally hot, since CO2 will be 4PPM and 6 PPM worse those years, and coincide with the worst part of the solar cycle.
By 2024 and 2025, a further 11 years out, the CO2 will be a further 22PPM worse and I wonder how much hotter it will be at the solar maximum?
By 2025, all ten of the ten hottest years on record will likely have been AFTER 2011...
Now if you have a VEI6 eruption that would give you a slight reset for maybe a year or two, and could throw this alignment off, but that can't be known from any science we have, so for the purpose of this theory, I ignore it.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Most people in authority are old (and rich). They can afford not to act. Who cares about future generations?
Let's see. Your ad-hoc linear extrapolation vs. decades of painstaking data gathering and simulation?
Hmm. Nope. Not convinced.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 1.7 / 5 (6)
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
No.
I developed the extrapolation as a pure thought experiment independent of the data.
Then I discovered the data matched the extrapolation within margin of error.
That website is not mine, clearly. I used it as a reference to support what I was saying.
That growth rate in melting has recently been uncovered in Greenland by at least two other groups who also discovered it is melting twice as fast every 5 years compared to the previous 5 years.
Again, this is not a coincidence, and is exactly what was predicted by my thought experiment using simple geometry.
EVERY DOUBTER read this article, but keep in mind it's already two years old.
grinzo.com/energy/2009/09/02/how-fast-is-greenland-melting/
And this one:
spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,661192,00.html
Now see next post...
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
i.e. 20 is a round number near 15.
100, 120, 140, etc.
these are round numbers close to 100, 115, 132, 150, etc.
Now' there's a trick fo radding up sums.
N(N 1)/2 = sum of first N integers.
And if you multiplied that by 20, it would be sum of a cumulative loss for N years, where 20 is the number you are accumulating by.
If you divide the approximate volume of the ice sheet by 20, you get 142,500.
If you then take the square root of this number, you get an approximate number of years to total greenland meltdown, assuming a linear increase in the rate of melting being accumalted at 20...
Or 377.5 years.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (6)
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (6)
Perhaps you should read the ARTICLES I LINKED TO, MORON.
They show the evidence exactly matches what I said.
hell, they even call it an EXPONENTIAL CURVE, WHICH THEY PLOT FOR ALL THE DATA.
YOU IDIOT, QUIT HARRASSING ME AND READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE.
neven1.typepad.com/blog/2011/10/piomas-september-2011-volume-record-lower-still.html
I reported you for abuse because of your LIBEL which you continue to perpetuate against me.
Unlike you, I actually back up my claims by LINKING TO DATA from the experts to show it actually agrees precisely with me.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
The flat number of 20 was an approximation using round numbers, because it fits the data roughly, but the real curve is an exponential.
And I quote, from about 45% down the page:
"We can clearly see 2011 has set a new record. Here's Wipneus' graph that shows the monthly average with EXPONENTIAL trend." - Emphasis mine.
And they even have a color coded graph so as to help your small mind comprehend that, Ghost.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Consider that the learned scientists who are actually involved in the research would have already considered simplistic notions such as yours, or had known enough not to pursue them. Because they are TRAINED in the discipline and have the EXPERIENCE in it which you do not.
Right? This is not conjecture on my part. Your track record of fail after fail after fail can attest to this.I suppose I could link to all the many previous threads which demonstrate your magnificent self-delusion but that would be a pain.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 1.1 / 5 (54)
LMAO!
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
I and others only cite your many delusions which consistantly turn out to be exactly that. We point out your inability to recognize them as such, and to continue posting new ones because you seem to think that whatever occurs to you must be of extraordinary value.
And, like dry ice in the antarctic, it doesnt occur to you to check to see if these things have been considered before. Because, after all, you are a freeking genius fapfap and so they couldnt possibly have occurred to anyone else.
You have been cited for abuse many times for your flooding. How many posts today? Trying to cut back are we?
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (8)
Manipulating global temperature data is fraudulent science [1-4]
1. Climategate Time-line
http://joannenova...imeline/
2. The BBC and climate change: A triple betrayal
http://thegwpf.or...-bbc.pdf
3. Deep roots of the global climate scandal (1971-2011)
http://dl.dropbox...oots.pdf
4. The 1975 Endangered Atmosphere Conference, 21st Century Science & Technology (2007)
www.21stcenturysc...Born.pdf
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://www.omatumr.com
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
The politics won't likely come around until things get bad enough for the populace to vehemently overrule the incumbents in this global drama. We tend to change only after hitting walls unfortunately.
Dec 09, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (4)
Dec 09, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (6)
Fortunately the Great Reality that surrounds and sustains life on Earth is benevolent and far beyond the control of politicians.
That is the video message of Hope that friends will try to communicate to a world in despair this Holiday Season, as Earths seasonal climate changes accompany the turning of the calender pages of life from 2011 to 2012.
http://judithcurr...t-148248
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://www.omatumr.com/
Dec 09, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (7)
Today I saw two paragraphs of the video script and the first two references:
"The force that sustains life, powers the Sun and causes changes in Earths climate has been revealed over recorded history to prophets of all religions and scientists guided by observation, contemplation, and meditation on Reality, rather than by politically-correct consensus models of Reality."
"We live today because the force that sustains life as a part of our dynamic cosmos is benevolent, powerful and beyond the control of world leaders and their army of publically funded scientists."
1. A. Einstein, Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Korper, Annalen der Physik 17, 891 (1905)
2. A. Einstein, Ist die Trägheit eines Körpers von seinem Energie-gehalt abhängig?, Annalen der Physik 18, 639 (1905)
Dec 10, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (8)
My ancestors followed the retreating glaciers to settle in Norway.
Later, they followed the melting ice to settle in Greenland and Iceland and even tried to settle in North America.
Dec 10, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
Oh, if we say we aren't waiting we'll be able to magically control the entire thermal and atmospheric system that wraps around the Earth? Probably more like, lets everyone go back to living in mud huts so we don't hurt Mother Earth any more.
Sounds more like human hubris raising it's head along with a healthy does of environmentalists trying to shove their agenda in to, "Man must be responsible for changing the entire Earth's Weather and Climate, we're so darn important and powerful in the Universe."
Dec 10, 2011
Rank: 1.6 / 5 (7)
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
I think you mean the media, not science.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.5 / 5 (26)
"Perhaps I am mistaken but isn't "the top UN Scientist" actually a railway engineer?"
Is Gregor ever mistaken?
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.5 / 5 (26)
Perhaps you are foncusing fantasy with science because you are incapable of evaluating the validity of your sources.
"I am just tired of scientists telling us one thing for years which is unrefutable, then they turn around and say the exact opposite." - Morit
As an example... OmaTard is not a reliable source. Nature is.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.5 / 5 (26)
You have to reduce your carbon footprint by 80 percent.
In general this means reducing your energy consumption by that amount. Move to CF lighting, improve the insulation of your home. Drive less, Drive slower, Move closer to work, Take a bus, ride share, drive a bike, walk, eat less meat, install passive heating/cooling systems, purchase more efficient appliances. Unplug those wall warts, wash in cold, install a white roof, etc. etc. etc.
It isn't rocket science.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.5 / 5 (26)
Then your numbers will be reduced by that atmospheric system that will turn your wheat belt to desert, and bring instability to the rest of your agriculture.
Mother nature really doesn't care about you.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.5 / 5 (26)
Sounds like you are a spectacularly ignorant fool who thinks that the world is so big there is nothing man can do to change it.
Science is telling you a dramatically different story, and you have chosen to be willfully ignorant of it.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (4)
The media makes up the science they report on? If so, where are the professional science organizations issuing press releases to refute false media reporting?
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
No. I don't.
Absolutely, and she also doesn't care about carbon footprints, and making everyone cut back due to climate hysteria. I'll use that line the next time someone tells me I am hurting the planet. Dude. Nature doesn't care about you and your climate agenda.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Or perhaps people are under the mistaken assumption that just because the weather has been mild enough for humans to advance to where we are today in relative comfort, that this is the normal condition of the planets ecosystem. It could just as easily be that the normal climate on this planet is incredibly hot or incredibly cold.
I remember that over 90% of all the species that ever existed are extinct now, and it certainly didn't all happen in the last 2,000 years when all the climate environmentalists started their campaign to bring us back to where we were 2,000 years ago.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
The problem is that you (should) care.
Natuer doesn't care whether you live or die. But I bet YOU do.
So if self preservation is an instinct you posess then all should be clear.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
But there are other scientists who say that it isn't settled science. Of course you are going to say YOUR scientists are the ones I should listen to. I don't have the money to give to everyone with a different "version" of the science.
To me, listening to you all go at it, it's like watching a debate on god vs Big Bag, or Evolution vs Intelligent Design. Except from where I sit, it's turned around, the science people here are doing the same things as the religious people usually do. Calling names, saying the science is absolute like the bible claims. If its so settled why are these articles so full of posts?
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
To a man these aren't climate scientists. Those who do the actual work all are convinced. Actually they don't need to be convinced - the data is there for all to see. If you go look at the data then there is really no argument. only if you continually refuse to do so and continue to confuse "climate" with "weather" then you coul, conceivably, if you really want to be massively obtuse, create a scenario where a tiny smidheon of doubt remains.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.3 / 5 (24)
All you have to do is watch an hour of Faux news to draw that conclusion - at least about that lying infotainment outlet.
As for the other news services, they generally get things right, or approximately right. At least as correct as the budget that is set by their Conservative owners.
"If so, where are the professional science organizations issuing press releases to refute false media reporting?" - RyggTard
Pretty much everywhere.
Here is one.
http://www.aip.or...014.html
Here is another..
http://www.ncdc.n...2010.php
And yet another...
http://climate.na.../causes/
And still another....
http://www.metoff...evidence
And still another...
http://www.ipcc.c...ts.shtml
Get back to us when you read these reports....
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.3 / 5 (24)
Mostly what you are hearing from the denialist side is Alzheimers.
Just look at OmaTard who posts here. He was a real scientist until his mental illness became obvious.
He believes that the sun is a neutron star made from iron.
He also maintains that his 4 children are lying in their charges of sexual molestation against him.
The other denialists have similar dysfunctional mental states for the most part.
"No, if that were the case why is there a constants supply of scientists to support either side of any discussion?" - MiriTard
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.3 / 5 (24)
Correct, so your political objection to the laws of physics just doesn't fly does it?
Nature will respond as nature will. And in this case Nature will respond by converting most of the central and southern U.S. into a desert within your children's lifetime.
Which is why, out of self interest, they should put a bullet in your minute brain.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.3 / 5 (24)
There was no personal attack. You are a spectacularly ignorant fool. Your comments prove it.
You see... In science, this is what we call classification, categorization, and labeling.
If you find it insulting to be a fool, then stop being a fool. You have only yourself to blame.
"Hey, if you got it all figured out, give us a plan right now that is guaranteed to bring the Earth back to how it was a million years ago." - Morit
There you go again. Proving yourself to be a fool.
You do a remarkably good job of it. It is one of the things that fools excel at.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.3 / 5 (24)
Which you apparently are.
You remind me of a denialist fool who proclaimed that because he couldn't predict next years global temperature that there was a 50% chance that it would be warmer and a 50% chance it would be colder and on that basis concluded that in 100 years the odds were the same.
Sorry. He wasn't a fool. He was a moron.
".. that this is the normal condition of the planets ecosystem. It could just as easily be that the normal climate on this planet is incredibly hot or incredibly cold." - Morit
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.3 / 5 (24)
I see, so you can't be morally responsible for extinctions because there have been extinctions in the past.
With that logic I must conclude that if your are murdered, then your murderer can't be morally responsible for your death since there have been deaths in the past.
Such is the result of Conservative Logic.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.3 / 5 (24)
Those who question why they should care about the fate of nature or mankind are those who need to have their throats slit for practicing existence without a license.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.3 / 5 (24)
Absolutely.. The sun is a neutron star made from Iron.
You are a butterfly dreaming that you are a man.
Gawad put dinosaur fossils in the ground to test your faith.
Sorry Tard Boy.... The science is settled, and has been for almost 150 years.
What remains are simply the details.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 0.3 / 5 (24)
Have you noticed that you aren't arguing science?
Nope. You are far too much of a fool to notice that.