Carbon cuts 'only give 50/50 chance of saving planet'—simulations show catastrophe just years away

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/carbon-cuts-only-give-5050-chance-of-saving-planet-1640154.html

Carbon cuts 'only give 50/50 chance of saving planet'

As states negotiate Kyoto's successor, simulations show catastrophe just years away

By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor

Monday, 9 March 2009

The world's best efforts at combating climate change are likely to offer no more than a 50-50 chance of keeping temperature rises below the threshold of disaster, according to research from the UK Met Office.

The key aim of holding the expected increase to 2C, beyond which damage to the natural world and to human society is likely to be catastrophic, is far from assured, the research suggests, even if all countries engage forthwith in a radical and enormous crash programme to slash greenhouse gas emissions – something which itself is by no means guaranteed.

The chilling forecast from the supercomputer climate model of the Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research will provide a sobering wake-up call for governments around the world, who will begin formally negotiating three weeks today the new international treaty on tackling global warming, which is due to be signed in Copenhagen in December.

The treaty, which is due to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, is widely seen as the Last Chance Saloon for the community of nations to take effective action against the greatest threat the world has ever faced. But the Met Office's new prediction hits directly at the principle guiding all those hoping for an effective agreement, with the European Union in the lead: that of stopping the warming at two degrees Centigrade above the "pre-industrial" level (the level of average world temperature pertaining two hundred years ago).

…

[PetrusMonsFormicarum]

1. Fate forbid

that the world sees another significant volcanic eruption. We'll be toast.

[damntexdem]

2. 50% chance is better than zero.

We can but try.

[OKIsItJustMe]

3. Yes, let's try

At least we can try to improve the lot of future generations.

However, you might want to read the entire article.

[Nihil]

5. Definitely - we *have* to try ...

... and my somewhat pessimistic view of the likelihood of enough
people *bothering* to try is in no way detracting from my own efforts
in this regard.

Definitely read the entire article but don't bother with the comments
afterwards ... they seem to have been written by the likes of our two
recent visitors ... :-(

[alexandria]

4. Fearmongers Never Quit.

Since the 1960s Western Society has been in the grip of a remarkable and very dangerous psychological phenomenon. Again and again we have seen the rise of some great fear, centered on a mysterious new threat to human health and well-being.

As a result, we are told, large numbers of people will suffer or die. Salmonella in eggs; listeria in cheese; BSE in beef; dioxins in poultry; the Millennium Bug; DDT; nitrate in water; vitamin B6; Satanic child abuse; asbestos; SARS; Asian bird flu—the list is seemingly endless. Indeed, we are currently in the grip of the greatest of such fear of all: that of a warming of the world’s climate which, we are officially told, could well put an end to much of civilized world as we know it, report Christopher Booker and Richard North. (1)

Nearly 40 years ago Stanford University population biologist Paul Ehrlich warned of imminent global catastrophe in his book The Population Bomb. Ehrlich predicted that in the 1970s, the world would undergo famines and hundreds of millions of people would starve to death. Ehrlich’s predictions about England were also quite gloomy. “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.” (2)


http://www.hawaiireporter.com/storyPrint.aspx?6fae7ace-ef5c-4749-bb4f-33eba9dc9a72

[OKIsItJustMe]

6. Why limit yourself to the last half century

Study a little bit about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eschatology">eschatology. People have (essentially) always been anticipating the end of the world.

However, keep in mind the hypochondriac's epitaph, "I told you I was sick!" Or, the tale of the "boy who cried 'wolf!'" (eventually, there really was a wolf.) Or the tale of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra">Cassandra who—as GliderGuider likes to remind us—was right!

The chances are good that some of the most dire predictions of "Climate Change" are off the mark. However, even the rosiest of scenarios are quite unpleasant.

Please, educate yourself on the science involved here. We're not talking about some wacko, we're talking about the vast majority of specialists in the field who are warning about "Climate Change"/"Global Warming."

[NYC_SKP]

7. Look, anyone who doesn't think humans are having an impact is in denial.

Or they're imbalanced, or they're ignorant.

Even fundamental Christian groups who formerly though of humans as divine masters of the planet have come around.

I get pretty tired of having to explain it, but the planet has a limited ability to adapt to the shit we do to it.

Sooner or later it's going to kick our ass.

If thinking in terms of your grandchildren's future doesn't wake you up, try imagining what THEIR grandchildren will face in terms of scare resources and a fouled environment.

:patriot:

[hatrack]

8. Oh, please, tell us again about Julian Simon and the commodity bet!!! Please?!? PLEASE?!?!?!?

That's my favorite one!!!!!

[Barrett808]

9. Alexandria, I ask in earnest: Is there any evidence that would convince you the warming is real?

Or, put another way, what aspect of climate science do you doubt?

[alexandria]

10. I belive it is the natural cycle of the planet,not man made.

This cycle is still continuing...


Ancient Greenland was actually green!
DNA analysis reveals ice-covered country was once home to butterflies.


The oldest ever recovered DNA samples have been collected from under more than a mile of Greenland ice, and their analysis suggests the island was much warmer during the last Ice Age than previously thought.

The DNA is proof that sometime between 450,000 and 800,000 years ago, much of Greenland was especially green and covered in a boreal forest that was home to alder, spruce and pine trees, as well as insects such as butterflies and beetles.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19619301/


Ancient cemetery found in 'green' Sahara Desert.

WASHINGTON — A tiny woman and two children were laid to rest on a bed of flowers 5,000 years ago in what is now the barren Sahara Desert.
The slender arms of the youngsters were still extended to the woman in perpetual embrace when researchers discovered their skeletons in a remarkable cemetery that is providing clues to two civilizations who lived there, a thousand years apart, when the region was moist and green.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2008-08-14-green-sahara-cemetery_N.htm.

Egyptian Prehistory..

Seven or eight thousand years ago, at the farthest reaches of human memory, before there was Egypt or the pyramids, North Africa was a lush and green place. There were vast grasslands and green forests stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea. Over this enormous green area, humans wandered in small groups; eventually, about eight thousand or so years ago, some of these small groups began to plant and cultivate their food. You might say that this change, which happened so slowly that it probably took a millenium to take place, was the single most important event in human history. For it turned humans into agriculturalists. As farmers, these wandering human groups settled down in one place, and human culture, confined now to villages, radically changed shape.

snip/

This is where the great Nile civilizations were fostered and grew: Egypt, Nubia, Meroe. From the desperate human communities forced by the growing desert to live on the banks of the Nile grew one of the first great urban cultures of human history. However, we know almost nothing of these early pre-Egyptian communities. What did they think? What gods did they worship? How did these communities evolve into the great urban centers of the Nilotic kingdoms? Like the grass and trees swallowed by the desert, we'll never know,

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/EGYPT/PREHIST.HTM

[Barrett808]

11. Thank you for the reply. Let me just suggest there's nothing natural about human carbon emissions...

Climate has indeed always fluctuated naturally. But what humans have done to the planet is anything but natural. In particular, we have dumped some 500 gigatons of carbon into the atmosphere, elevating the natural level by about 37%. We know from the geological record that large, sudden excursions in the global carbon budget are very bad for the biosphere.

Do you find anything to disagree with here?

[alexandria]

13. Climate myths: Human CO2 emissions are too tiny to matter .

Ice cores show that carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have remained between 180 and 300 parts per million for the past half-a-million years. In recent centuries, however, CO2 levels have risen sharply, to at least 380 ppm .

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11638

Thank you for being civil,and not calling me names which seems to to be very popular at the moment on DU ..

[Barrett808]

14. No problemo. That's a good link you posted.

Although I think you misread it -- New Scientist is strongly advocating the climate science, not the contrarian position. So, "Human CO2 emissions are too tiny to matter" is the myth being corrected.

The whole list, "Climate change: A guide for the perplexed" is here:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11462-climate-change-a-guide-for-the-perplexed.html

Very educational, a great place to start.

[OKIsItJustMe]

15. Civility

I personally find that name calling is tremendously helpful in swaying people's opinions. I suspect that's why it is so common. Belittling one's opponent is a potent weapon. Condescension as a method of persuasion is underrated, but more people seem to be recognizing its worth.

Sadly, irony is almost wholly unappreciated. (This being an example.)

I am sincerely sorry for any insults you may have received; most sorry if you perceived any coming from me.

[OKIsItJustMe]

12. About natural cycles…

Do you believe it is possible for "man" to kick off a natural process? (Forest fires are natural, but "man" can start them. Right?)

How about an "ice age" or a warming?

If we look at the natural cycles in the period you mention, there seems to be a correlation between "greenhouse gas" concentrations in the atmosphere, and temperature. Check the CO₂ levels on this graph. (There are other factors as well.)


Now, why did the CO₂ levels go up back then? (It wasn't SUV's.) It was a natural thing. Apparently it was a feedback loop. Something started the warming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles">probably related to the motion of the Earth around its axis and around the Sun.) The Earth warmed up slightly, and CO₂ was released. That led to more warming, etc.

OK. At the top of that feedback loop, CO₂ levels got to about 300ppm.

They're currently higher than 380ppm. Do you see where this leads?