English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I have been reading the report and it seems to me to be something of a breakthrough for reasonable assessment of climate change.

I mean it says that it is very likely that most of the observed global increase in temperature in the latter half of the twentieth century is due to the anthroprogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations.

This seems for the first time, they want climatologists to stop blaming the temperate rises in the first half of the 20'th century on CO2 emmissions.

Even sceptics such as myself would agree that changing the contents of the atmosphere would have some effect on climate (not necessarily a large one). Apparently what the IPPC has determined is that the amount of temperature increase caused by human activity over a 50 year period is 90% likely to have exceded 0.3 degrees celcius.

The expectations of the report is for a 2 degree increase in global temperatures over the next 100 years which is lowest end of most global warming predictions.

2007-10-17 08:57:21 · 7 answers · asked by Ben O 6 in Environment Global Warming

If you're interested, here's their summary report. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/02_02_07_climatereport.pdf

2007-10-17 09:25:43 · update #1

Nickel
I was considering where they expect the earths temperature to increase at about 0.2 degrees per decade.

You correctly pointed out that the expected temperature change does depend on which scenario you consider as they cannot accurately predict future CO2 emmissions.

2007-10-17 09:32:58 · update #2

"A 2°C warming is an extremely optimistic scenario, according to the IPCC."

Dana, did they use those words or do you just think that thats what they should say instead of what they did say.

The IPCC doesn't need you speaking for them because they are trying to stick to the science and weed out the sensationalism. You are peddling your beliefs. and they are not on your side.

2007-10-18 02:43:38 · update #3

7 answers

The interesting thing about the IPCC report is how mild the effects are predicted to be. Much less than one meter sea level rise in 100 years. Very small temperature change. And all kinds of qualitative statements like increased incidents of severe weather events being "likely" or "very likely" without putting any numbers on it. They are saying what I still maintain, that global warming is a very subtle and minor problem. They DO say that these changes are greater than any in the last million years or whatever, and that makes people think that they will be severe. It doesn't mean that at all. It just means there has been very little change in times as short as a million years. So even a very small change can be larger than another even smaller change.

2007-10-17 09:32:47 · answer #1 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 0 1

The IPCC report is simply a summary of the body of climate science work around the world.

Climatologists have not blamed the temperature rises in the first half of the 20th century on CO2 emissions. They have correctly pointed out that CO2 emissions were one of the factors in those temperature rises, and the main factor in the more recent temperature rises:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

The report projects roughly a 2-6°C warming over the next century. A 2°C warming is an extremely optimistic scenario, according to the IPCC.

2007-10-17 16:22:44 · answer #2 · answered by Dana1981 7 · 2 2

You're misreading the report. They are merely showing caution about the data for the first half of the century as it is less reliable than more recent data. They are saying that the evidence for the connection since then is very strong. And their conclusions are very conservative, which is how you get many scientists to agree. Scientists are by nature skeptical, but the fact that thousands of them signed on to this report should tell you that they are believers in global warming.

2007-10-17 16:27:26 · answer #3 · answered by TG 7 · 1 0

They are very precise and tell which is the likelyhood in % of the wording "very likely"... if I remember it was like over 90%.

For the expectations of temperatures, I am not sure this is accurate. Recent changes in the environment seem to show that we are in a "high scenario" in which the 5°C is more likely than the 2°. But this needs further research with recent data.

2007-10-17 16:09:57 · answer #4 · answered by NLBNLB 6 · 2 1

I think they are wacked I'm always hearing that you got to be a climatologist to be qualified to talk about global warming and climatic change But here you got the Chairman of the IPCC, Mr Pachuri, He got a PHD in industrial Engineering and Economics so how the heck does that make him qualified to talk about GW.

Apperently you only have to be a climatologist if you disagree with AGW

2007-10-17 16:23:55 · answer #5 · answered by vladoviking 5 · 1 1

2 degree Celsius is not at the lower end. It is a ridiculous fabrication of the facts. So what logic would suggest that the warming in the later part of the century is man made but the earlier part is not. There was anthropogenic carbon in the earlier part of the century as well just not purportedly as much. Sorry for me it is more of the same. They always get more extreme in their predictions and my prediction is that their future predictions will continue to escalate.

2007-10-17 16:06:10 · answer #6 · answered by JimZ 7 · 1 2

Man is going to have a lot of effect on GW in the next 100 years. On what model of human behaviour is that increse based on?

Could you provide a link as citatioin for us?
.

2007-10-17 16:10:07 · answer #7 · answered by John Sol 4 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers