Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
How much, humans are the dominant forcing in climate right now according to the science. The discussion about the costs of doing something vs. the costs of doing nothing is important, and regardless of climate change in a lot of cases the remedies are worthwhile.. fossil fuels are a finite resource and pollute in other ways and finding alternative and renewable sources for our energy, increasing efficiency to reduce the energy used, etc are worthy goals in and of themselves.
The gist isn't from scientists though, the article's author is taking different things and comparing them, feigning shock and drawing an invalid conclusion when they don't match, and misquoting the scientists themselves to the degree the quoted scientist has to speak up in objection.
The real implications of doing nothing is a good question, a more difficult one to answer. This can give some idea. |
The bolded doesnt make sense when this data is right in the study...no?
Back then, it said that the planet was warming at a rate of 0.2C every decade – a figure it claimed was in line with the forecasts made by computer climate models.
But the new report says the true figure since 1951 has been only 0.12C per decade – a rate far below even the lowest computer prediction.