Temperatures to rise 0.3-4.8 C this century, UN panel says

Sep 27, 2013
A dead buttonwood tree is seen amid mangroves in Big Pine Key, Florida, after the buttonwood succumbed to salt water incursion, on September 11, 2013

A UN panel said Friday it was more certain than ever that humans were causing global warming and predicted temperatures would rise by 0.3 to 4.8 degrees Celsius (0.5-8.6 degrees Fahrenheit) this century.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) also projected sea levels would rise by between 26 and 82 centimetres (10.4 and 32.8 inches) by 2100, according to a summary of the first volume in a long-awaited review.

The Nobel-winning group said it was "extremely likely," a term meaning it was 95-percent convinced, that humans caused more than half of the warming observed over the past 60 years.

In its last report in 2007, the panel had rated its conviction at 90 percent.

The new document is the first volume in a trilogy seeking to summarise the status of global warming and its impacts.

The IPCC has delivered four previous assessment reports in its 25-year history.

Each edition has pounded out an ever-louder drumbeat to warn that temperatures are rising and the risk to the —in drought, floods, storms and rising seas—is accentuating.

The panel's projections for 2100 are based on computer models of trends in heat-trapping , especially from coal, oil and gas, which provide the backbone of the energy supply today.

Bleaching is seen on a coral reef at Halfway Island in Australia's Great Barrier Reef, in an undated photo received from the Australian Institute of Marine Science on October 2, 2012

The most optimistic of four warming scenarios sees an average of 1.0 C (1.8 F) by 2100 over 2000 levels, ranging from 0.3 to 1.7 C (0.5-3.1 F). This is the only scenario that can safely meet a UN target of 2 C (3.6 F) which also factors in warming from the start of the Industrial Revolution to 2000.

The highest IPCC scenario has an average additional warming this century of 3.7 C (6.7 F), ranging from 2.6 C (4.7 F) to a 4.8 C (8.6 F).

Explore further: UN report to point to mounting climate challenge

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

UN report to point to mounting climate challenge

Sep 21, 2013

Scientists will hike pressure next week on the UN's troubled climate talks as they release a report pointing to the dizzying challenge of meeting the international body's target for global warming.

Recommended for you

'Shocking' underground water loss in US drought

22 hours ago

A major drought across the western United States has sapped underground water resources, posing a greater threat to the water supply than previously understood, scientists said Thursday.

User comments : 49

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Agomemnon
1.8 / 5 (30) Sep 27, 2013
ugh. The IPCC has been reporting for 25 years. For more than 50% of that time there has been no statistical warming of the earth.
Why are we listening to patently obvious polical/ideological motives sans scientific objectivity?
antialias_physorg
3.9 / 5 (22) Sep 27, 2013
The IPCC has been reporting for 25 years. For more than 50% of that time there has been no statistical warming of the earth.
Why are we listening to patently obvious polical/ideological motives sans scientific objectivity?

Because the data spans way more time than those 25 years?
The duration of the existence of the IPCC is in no way correlated to the duration of climate science.

I guess you should not comment on climate science until you understand that people have been measuring temperatures, glaciers, etc. for more than 25 years. Otherwise you run the risk of making a complete fool of yourself.
shavera
3.8 / 5 (21) Sep 27, 2013
Agomemnon has been spouting nonsense for x months. For more than 50% of that time there has been no statistical value in their comments.
Why are we listening to patently obvious political/ideological motives sans scientific objectivity?
Agomemnon
1.9 / 5 (27) Sep 27, 2013
Shavera - quiz time! What is the dominant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere? (hint:its not CO2) and compare it with CO2 by factors.
antialias_physorg
3.7 / 5 (19) Sep 27, 2013
quiz time! What is the dominant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere?

Alright: quiz time. What#s the dominant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere that humans affect?

It doesn't matter what the gas has the most effect (because if there were no greenhouse gases at all the Earth would freeze solid in no time).
What matters is whichchanges in what gas causes the ADDITIONAL effect that is changing the climate.
cantdrive85
1.5 / 5 (26) Sep 27, 2013
and predicted temperatures would rise by 0.3 to 4.8 degrees Celsius (0.5-8.6 degrees Fahrenheit) this century.

That's quite the large dart board they have selected.
VendicarE
3.2 / 5 (13) Sep 27, 2013
1,1,1,1,1,5,5,5,5,5,7,7,7,7,7,9,9,9,9,9,11,11,11,11,11

Oh look, there is change only 20 percent of the time. Agomemnon asserts that there can't be any significant increase for that reason.

He is just back from shopping at the Ignorance Clearing House, where today, all mindless idiocy is 70 percent off the regular price.

VendicarE
3.6 / 5 (17) Sep 27, 2013
"quite the large dart board..." - Can't drive too stupid

And the spread in the error bars is getting a bit wider as the models improve, due to the inclusion of more natural factors.

The primary unknown however is still the extent of your stupidity.

From my vantage point, it appears to be infinite.

Shootist
1.9 / 5 (30) Sep 27, 2013
Hi Kids!

It's time for the Watermelon show! Green on the outside, Red on the inside and dedicated to controlling the means of production at any cost.

"The polar bears will be fine." - Freeman Dyson.
Shootist
1.8 / 5 (29) Sep 27, 2013
Shavera - quiz time! What is the dominant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere? (hint:its not CO2) and compare it with CO2 by factors.


Water vapor, everyone knows that.
Methane is next on the list.
CO2 has little warming effect except at high altitudes and low humidity (otherwise any effect is lost in the noise created by the presence of water vapor).

And the polar bears remain well, as predicted by Professor Dyson.
Howhot
3.4 / 5 (17) Sep 28, 2013
Yeah shootist, your polar bear thing is wearing a little bit thin considering that they are moving more inland and drowning in as the ice pacts melt and thin ice from global warming. In 15-20 years, no I don't think the polar bears will be fine.

Given that you think polar bears will be fine, you must not understand CO2 or methane or how long they will linger in the atmosphere trapping heat. A local 2 degree C average increase will change environments forever. But a 2C globally is an extinction event!


cantdrive85
1.6 / 5 (25) Sep 28, 2013
The sky is falling, the sky is falling!
VendicarE
2.9 / 5 (12) Sep 28, 2013
"The sky is falling, the sky is falling!" - Can't Drive, Too Stupid

Repulblican Retards have been saying that since Kennedy was elected.

It was a lie then, an it remains a lie today.

Sinister1811
2.4 / 5 (17) Sep 28, 2013
"The polar bears will be fine." - Freeman Dyson.


You got it wrong.

"The cockroaches will be fine" ~Freeman Dyson
runrig
3.7 / 5 (12) Sep 28, 2013
CO2 has little warming effect except at high altitudes and low humidity (otherwise any effect is lost in the noise created by the presence of water vapor).

And the polar bears remain well, as predicted by Professor Dyson.


CO2 has a GHG effect at all levels of the atmosphere - just because there is more WV in the lower Trop doesn't mean it is "lost in the noise" - more heat transfer resistance applies at any level of resistance (a 1000ohm resistor resists more electrons than a 999ohm one ). CO2 happens to cool the Stratosphere however because the earth receives a heat budget from the Sun and must return it to space. If the lower Trop is warmer then there must be compensation elsewhere to even out the LW emission.( Laymans explanation - Google for complex radiative physics). BTW that is why we know GHG's are to blame.
Oh, and your inclusion of Mr Dyson on every post is wearing. Perhaps that's the point! Certainly the psuedo-profundity of the man has no being on the science.
antigoracle
1.7 / 5 (24) Sep 28, 2013
The AGW Alarmist Cult will go extinct -- Anyone with a brain.
Neinsense99
2.3 / 5 (18) Sep 28, 2013
The AGW Alarmist Cult will go extinct -- Anyone with a brain.

antigoracle and scientific debate are not well acquainted:
"-- runrigTurd
Now sink back into the darkness, from whence you rose, like a true Turd"
"-- magganusTurd"
"Do you Turds know how to read far less comprehend?"
"And so, the Turd quickly sinks back into the darkness.."
"OK, that one just made you my favorite Turd."
"I believe if I close my eyes and try really...really... hard I may be able to squeeze a small Turd out that falls for that."
"At last, the penny has dropped and stuck in the Turd."
"Turd Stool"
"OMG I can just imagine how fast the GW Alarmist Turds would appear..."
"That's the level I must descend to, so that I may communicate with the GW Alarmist Turds."
"Green, you gotta love green, well.... unless you're a Turd."
"That would just make us deceitful Turds, like you."

Google search: site:phys.org antigoracle + turd (50+ results returned)
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (25) Sep 28, 2013
CO2 has a GHG effect at all levels of the atmosphere

But it only absorbs, and emits, at a very narrow IR band, ~15 um.
VendicarE
3.3 / 5 (11) Sep 29, 2013
"But it only absorbs, and emits, at a very narrow IR band," - RyggTard

Liar, Liar... Pants on Fire...

http://www.john-d...ctra.gif
ubavontuba
1.7 / 5 (23) Sep 29, 2013
Temperatures to rise 0.3-4.8 C this century, UN panel says
Hmm...

http://www.woodfo....6/trend

13.6 years in, and not even a hiccup....

Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (22) Sep 29, 2013
"The polar bears will be fine." - Freeman Dyson.


You got it wrong.

"The cockroaches will be fine" ~Freeman Dyson


It is dishonest to misquote people.

Is this image what causes you to wet the bed at night? How could you still be driving your car and using air conditioning, after seeing this? As you can see there is not much time.
Sinister1811
2.8 / 5 (17) Sep 29, 2013
It is dishonest to misquote people.


Maybe, but since Mr. Dyson is wrong (and I mean seriously wrong about everything), it doesn't matter too much what he said.

Is this image what causes you to wet the bed at night? How could you still be driving your car and using air conditioning, after seeing this? As you can see there is not much time.


FYI the Arctic has melted by half over several decades (and NASA's satellite data proves it). We could argue politics, but at the end of the day, it doesn't have any relevance.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (24) Sep 29, 2013
seriously wrong about everything

Then Princeton University, APS, NAS and the Royal Society are seriously wrong about everything.
"Freeman Dyson is now retired, having been for most of his life a professor of physics at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. "
" Dyson is a fellow of the American Physical Society, a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, and a fellow of the Royal Society of London."
Sinister1811
2.8 / 5 (17) Sep 29, 2013
http://en.wikiped..._warming

Sounds like Dyson contradicts himself a lot.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (26) Sep 29, 2013
"Dyson has said he believes that the truths of science are so profoundly concealed that the only thing we can really be sure of is that much of what we expect to happen won't come to pass. In "Infinite in All Directions," he writes that nature's laws "make the universe as interesting as possible." This also happens to be a fine description of Dyson's own relationship to science. In the words of Avishai Margalit, a philosopher at the Institute for Advanced Study, "He's a consistent reminder of another possibility." When Dyson joins the public conversation about climate change by expressing concern about the "enormous gaps in our knowledge, the sparseness of our observations and the superficiality of our theories," these reservations come from a place of experience. Whatever else he is, Dyson is the good scientist; he asks the hard questions. He could also be a lonely prophet. Or, as he acknowledges, he could be dead wrong. "
http://www.nytime...html?pag
ubavontuba
1.5 / 5 (25) Sep 29, 2013
FYI the Arctic has melted by half over several decades (and NASA's satellite data proves it).
This is a ridiculous claim. The melt which everyone is concerned with is only a brief period in the late Arctic summer. Much of the time it is completely frozen over:

http://igloo.atmo...;sy=2013

And this year's Arctic minimum is 60% larger than last year's record low minimum:

http://igloo.atmo...;sy=2013

So just what are you whining about?

VendicarE
3.9 / 5 (11) Sep 29, 2013
"This is a ridiculous claim. The melt which everyone is concerned with is only a brief period in the late Arctic summer. Much of the time it is completely frozen over." - UbVonTard

As always, UbVonTard is lying, and his lie is very easy to expose with the following graphic...

http://collapseofindustrialcivilization.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/arctic-death-spiral-1979-201303.png

Lying is UbVontards stock and trade
Lying is what he lives for.
Lying is what he does.
Lying is his life.
VendicarE
4 / 5 (10) Sep 29, 2013
"Freeman Dyson is now retired" - RyggTard

At 90 years old, I should hope so.

But he is still vastly smarter than you RyggTard. But then my invisible cat, spot, is more SmarDter dan yooze.
Sinister1811
2.6 / 5 (14) Sep 29, 2013
"Freeman Dyson is now retired, having been for most of his life a professor of physics at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. "


Yeah, that might true. But as a physicist, does that make him an expert on climate and weather? Haha, no it doesn't.
ubavontuba
1.2 / 5 (23) Sep 30, 2013
"This is a ridiculous claim. The melt which everyone is concerned with is only a brief period in the late Arctic summer. Much of the time it is completely frozen over." - Uba

As always, Uba is lying, and his lie is very easy to expose with the following graphic...
As usual, Vendi-chatterbot is lying. It uses outdated data, and its data is based on modeling (not observation). Even the modelers admitted their older version was severely inaccurate:

"This updated version improves on prior versions ...The long term trend is reduced to about -2.8 103 km3/decade from -3.6 km3 103/decade in the last version."

http://psc.apl.wa...anomaly/

Here, you can see actual observational evidence showing the recent winter ice (peaks) have only been slightly lower than the 1979 - 2008 mean (average):

http://arctic.atm...ctic.png

VendicarE
4.3 / 5 (12) Sep 30, 2013
"As usual, Vendi-chatterbot is lying. It uses outdated data" - UbvonTard

Here UbVonTard claims that Hadcrut 4 is less recent than Hadcrut 3.

He is of course a liar.

Lying is what he does
Lying is his life
Lying is his only reason for being.
He is a perpetual liar, perpetually being caught telling one lie after another by myself and a long list of other technically trained people.

Filth.
VendicarE
4.3 / 5 (11) Sep 30, 2013
Once again UbVontard's lies are very easy to expose since they are so idiotic and blatant.

http://thinkprogr...1301.jpg

The plot above easily exposes his lie that arctic ice volume only dips to very low levels during the last months of the melt season.

VendicarE
4.3 / 5 (11) Sep 30, 2013
"Here, you can see actual observational evidence showing the recent winter ice (peaks) have only been slightly lower..." - UbVonTard

Here UbVonTard points to a plot of ice surface AREA and claims that it supports his position that Arctic Ice VOLUME has not substantively changed.

He has repeatedly been caught using the same Lie, and has been corrected for doing so.

UbVonTard is a habitual liar.
Lying is what he does
Lying is his life
Lying is his only reason for being.
Howhot
4.2 / 5 (10) Sep 30, 2013
@R2 says
This also happens to be a fine description of Dyson's own relationship to science. In the words of Avishai Margalit, a philosopher at the Institute for Advanced Study, "He's a consistent reminder of another possibility."

To each his own R2. To each his own. In the mean time you have the real world issue of global warming to deal with, we all have to deal with. Do you continue to be a denier?

ubavontuba
1.2 / 5 (22) Sep 30, 2013
Here Uba claims that Hadcrut 4 is less recent than Hadcrut 3.
Well that's an obvious Vendi-chatterbot lie, as both data sets run concurrently.

Once again Uba's lies are very easy to expose since they are so idiotic and blatant.

http://thinkprogr...1301.jpg

The plot above easily exposes his lie that arctic ice volume only dips to very low levels during the last months of the melt season.
LOL! the Vendi-chatterbot again resorts to using the same obsolete graphic, and doesn't even know it!

Here Uba points to a plot of ice surface AREA and claims that it supports his position that Arctic Ice VOLUME has not substantively changed.
Here the Vendi-chatterbot is again obviously lying, as I've not discussed ice "volume." But I guess I shouldn't expect a chatterbot to read and understand references...

VendicarE
4 / 5 (9) Sep 30, 2013
Once again UbVontard's lies are very easy to expose since they are so idiotic and blatant.

http://thinkprogr...1301.jpg

The plot above easily exposes his lie that arctic ice volume only dips to very low levels during the last months of the melt season.

UbVonTard is a habitual liar.
Lying is what he does
Lying is his life
Lying is his only reason for being.

VendicarE
4 / 5 (9) Sep 30, 2013
"FYI the Arctic has melted by half over several decades (and NASA's satellite data proves it)." -

"This is a ridiculous claim." - UbVonTard

http://thinkprogr...1301.jpg

The above graphic easily exposes UbVonTard's repeated lie.
ubavontuba
1.2 / 5 (21) Sep 30, 2013
http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/arctic-death-spiral-1979-201301.jpg

The plot above easily exposes his lie that arctic ice volume only dips to very low levels during the last months of the melt season.
Once again Vendi-chatterbot's lies are very easy to expose since they are so idiotic and blatant. Again it uses a falsified reference, which was actually falsified by the original creators!

LOL! Vendi-chatterbot is such a buffoon! Its minders better grab it quick and delete that bad reference before it becomes a complete laughing stock! LOL!

ubavontuba
1.2 / 5 (21) Sep 30, 2013
"FYI the Arctic has melted by half over several decades (and NASA's satellite data proves it)." -

"This is a ridiculous claim." - Uba

http://thinkprogr...1301.jpg

The above graphic easily exposes UbVonTard's repeated lie.
Yup, Vendi-chatterbot is definitely broken. LOL

runrig
4.2 / 5 (10) Sep 30, 2013
Here Uba points to a plot of ice surface AREA and claims that it supports his position that Arctic Ice VOLUME has not substantively changed.

Here the Vendi-chatterbot is again obviously lying, as I've not discussed ice "volume." But I guess I shouldn't expect a chatterbot to read and understand references...


Err ... from a few posts earlier Mr Uba stated...

"This updated version improves on prior versions ...The long term trend is reduced to about -2.8 103 km3/decade from -3.6 km3 103/decade in the last version."

http://psc.apl.wa...anomaly/


I'll leave it to the discerning to work out who is deluded and who isn't.
ubavontuba
1.2 / 5 (21) Oct 01, 2013
Here Uba points to a plot of ice surface AREA and claims that it supports his position that Arctic Ice VOLUME has not substantively changed.
Here the Vendi-chatterbot is again obviously lying, as I've not discussed ice "volume." But I guess I shouldn't expect a chatterbot to read and understand references...
Err ... from a few posts earlier Mr Uba stated...
Which served to demonstrate that not only was the Vendi-chatterbot going off on a tangent, but it was using a bad reference while doing so.

"This updated version improves on prior versions ...The long term trend is reduced to about -2.8 103 km3/decade from -3.6 km3 103/decade in the last version."

http://psc.apl.wa...anomaly/
I'll leave it to the discerning to work out who is deluded and who isn't.
Why is it AGWites resort to these baby tantrums instead of simply discussing the science?

Sinister1811
2.8 / 5 (17) Oct 01, 2013
Why is it AGWites resort to these baby tantrums instead of simply discussing the science?


I seriously wish someone would ban this idiot! And people like him.
runrig
4.6 / 5 (9) Oct 01, 2013
Why is it AGWites resort to these baby tantrums instead of simply discussing the science?


I seriously wish someone would ban this idiot! And people like him.


You don't mean Uba do you?

We would miss out on a lot of laughs if he was.

He is a shining example of the "inmate of the asylum who thinks he's the only sane one in there" ...
Despite a residency pass and the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

As I've said before ... it is a sure way to madness for yourself if you engage.

Proves it time and again.
Sinister1811
2.7 / 5 (16) Oct 01, 2013
You don't mean Uba do you?


Yep that's who I meant. ;)

We would miss out on a lot of laughs if he was.


Haha, you're right, runrig. :D But there's a point after a while where it just becomes draining, and starts to grate on your nerves.

He is a shining example of the "inmate of the asylum who thinks he's the only sane one in there" ...


The way you just put it was so brilliant! Haha, that is so gold! There is no way I could have ever made a better comparison. That sums up exactly who he is.

As I've said before ... it is a sure way to madness for yourself if you engage.


Too true, which is why I don't really bother anymore. I ignored his latest posts, and the little shite gave me (and a few others) 1/5 for every post. I think he's just a troll.

Proves it time and again.


Hehe, yep. Him and the rest of his gang too.
VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (10) Oct 01, 2013
"Why is it AGWites resort to these baby tantrums instead of simply discussing the science?" - UbvonTard

For 2 weeks you insisted that melting ice increases it's temperature as it melts. You chronically post statistically irrelevant data and claim statistical relevance. You dishonestly use older, data sets that you have been repeatedly told are biased, and refuse to use the more modern sets that are less biased.

You have admitted to using multiple identities on this system for the purpose of hiding your identity.

And of course you are constantly being caught flat out lying, lying, lying...

Your dishonestly is well documented and well known here.

You are not capable of honest discussion of science as you are wilfully science illiterate and a chronic liar.
runrig
4.6 / 5 (9) Oct 01, 2013
Too true, which is why I don't really bother anymore. I ignored his latest posts, and the little shite gave me (and a few others) 1/5 for every post. I think he's just a troll.


Proves it time and again.


Hehe, yep. Him and the rest of his gang too


I try to ignore them too - but it's like watching car crash - there's something gorishly compelling about them. Seeing how stupid he can get - not just with the initial riposte but the goalpost shifting and evasion that follow.

I hate to see injustice and to allow ignorance to go without rebuttal - so in I'll go knowing full well I'll not win unless I get as stupid as him - and then he's got the experience - so still lost. So I figure a quick rebuttal + a put-down and withdraw. Job done.

ubavontuba
1.2 / 5 (19) Oct 02, 2013
@runrig, Sinister1811, & VendicarE,

Why do you spend so much effort attacking the messengers
and not the message (rhetorical)?

Oh yeah, this is why:

"global warming
n.
An increase in the average temperature of the earth's atmosphere, especially a sustained increase sufficient to cause climatic change."

Global temperatures: http://www.woodfo....6/trend

LOL!

ubavontuba
1.2 / 5 (20) Oct 02, 2013
"Why is it AGWites resort to these baby tantrums instead of simply discussing the science?" - Uba

For 2 weeks you insisted that melting ice increases it's temperature as it melts.
This is a lie.

You chronically post statistically irrelevant data and claim statistical relevance.
Just becuase YOU don't like it doesn't make it irrelevant.

You dishonestly use older, data sets that you have been repeatedly told are biased, and refuse to use the more modern sets that are less biased.
Says the moron chatterbot, caught using an outdated and falsified ice volume reference.

You have admitted to using multiple identities on this system for the purpose of hiding your identity.
Another bold-faced lie. I've always had only the one account.

VendicarE, you are constantly being caught flat out lying. Your dishonestly is well known here.

You are not capable of honest discussion of science as you are wilfully science illiterate, a chronic liar, and a complete ass.

Neinsense99
2.6 / 5 (10) Oct 15, 2013
The deniers come back again and again to down rate not only the posts but the article itself. Desperation.