A 2 degree rise is not safe

[Old Rocks]

Climate change target 'not safe', researchers say

The results show temperatures appear to have been more than 5˚C warmer in polar regions while the tropics only warmed marginally; strikingly similar to recent trends. Not only this, but taken together, the world appears to have been some 1.9˚C warmer when compared to preindustrial temperatures. Critically, the warmer temperatures appear to have resulted in global sea levels some 6.6 to 9.4 metres higher than today, with a rate of rise of between 60 to 90 centimetres per decade -- more than double that recently observed.

 

[daveman]

Global socialism is the only thing that can save us!

 

[editec]

If the rate of change were slow enough we could probably restructure our societies to adjust to the changes.

Sadly the changes seem to be coming far too quickly for us, or for the flora and fauna, to adapt.

If the changes continue to manifest them we can expect to see the bread baskets that feed the world to dry up into deserts.

Plan accordingly.

 

[IanC]

If the rate of change were slow enough we could probably restructure our societies to adjust to the changes.

Sadly the changes seem to be coming far too quickly for us, or for the flora and fauna, to adapt.

If the changes continue to manifest them we can expect to see the bread baskets that feed the world to dry up into deserts.

Plan accordingly.

the trillions of dollars that are called for would be much better spent on adapting to possible future change rather than being thrown away on solutions that will have no impact.

 

[westwall]

If the rate of change were slow enough we could probably restructure our societies to adjust to the changes.

Sadly the changes seem to be coming far too quickly for us, or for the flora and fauna, to adapt.

If the changes continue to manifest them we can expect to see the bread baskets that feed the world to dry up into deserts.

Plan accordingly.

And areas that are too cold to produce food will open up to become the new breadbaskets. You know editec, for every action there is a reaction. If it gets warmer more areas open up to food production then we have now. And just for your information, Brazil and parts of Mexico have average temperatures that are 6 degrees higher then the US and they don't seem to have any problem producing food.

But once again that would require you to actually read something about the outside world instead of your comfortable biased blogs.

 

[Big Black Dog]

If it gets cold, I'll put on my coat. If it gets hot, I'll take some clothes off. If the water rises, I'll get some hip boots. If it gets higher than that, I'll get a boat. Why worry about shit you can't do anything about? In the whole history of the world, it's still managed to keep spinning around the sun despite these routine changes. Seriously, find something else to worry yourself about. The Earth ain't going anywhere and if it does you'll go with it. Stop sweating the small stuff.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Has anyone told the Sun about the danger of this 2 degree increase?

 

[Trajan]

If the rate of change were slow enough we could probably restructure our societies to adjust to the changes.

Sadly the changes seem to be coming far too quickly for us, or for the flora and fauna, to adapt.

If the changes continue to manifest them we can expect to see the bread baskets that feed the world to dry up into deserts.

Plan accordingly.

the trillions of dollars that are called for would be much better spent on adapting to possible future change rather than being thrown away on solutions that will have no impact.

Bjørn Lomborg: $100bn a year needed to fight climate change

Exclusive 'Sceptical environmentalist' and critic of climate scientists to declare global warming a chief concern facing world

Bjørn Lomborg: $100bn a year needed to fight climate change | Environment | The Guardian

 

[Old Rocks]

Interesting.

Bjørn Lomborg: $100bn a year needed to fight climate change | Environment | The Guardian

But in a new book to be published next month, Lomborg will call for tens of billions of dollars a year to be invested in tackling climate change. "Investing $100bn annually would mean that we could essentially resolve the climate change problem by the end of this century," the book concludes.

Examining eight methods to reduce or stop global warming, Lomborg and his fellow economists recommend pouring money into researching and developing clean energy sources such as wind, wave, solar and nuclear power, and more work on climate engineering ideas such as "cloud whitening" to reflect the sun's heat back into the outer atmosphere.

In a Guardian interview, he said he would finance investment through a tax on carbon emissions that would also raise $50bn to mitigate the effect of climate change, for example by building better sea defences, and $100bn for global healthcare.

 

[2Parties]

In a Guardian interview, he said he would finance investment through a tax

Anyone else seeing the contradiction?

Brilliant.

 

[westwall]

If the rate of change were slow enough we could probably restructure our societies to adjust to the changes.

Sadly the changes seem to be coming far too quickly for us, or for the flora and fauna, to adapt.

If the changes continue to manifest them we can expect to see the bread baskets that feed the world to dry up into deserts.

Plan accordingly.

Geez, not according to olfraud. According to him there have been all kinds of rapid climate changes in the past and all kinds of "extinction events" caused solely by "globalwarmingclimatechangeglobalclimatedisruption" and lo and behold...we're still here? How the hell did that happen? Must be God. That's the only solution.

 

[Old Rocks]

No, not according to Old Rocks, according to geologists that study the rocks and fossils. They are the ones that have dated the extinctions, and the ones that have suggested, from proxy evidence, the causes of the extinctions.

Now Walleyes, you claim to be a geologist, then spout this kind of nonsense. Really creates doubt that you have any kind of scientific background.

Mass extinction - New World Encyclopedia

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Good Ole Days before the Temperature increase

 

[westwall]

No, not according to Old Rocks, according to geologists that study the rocks and fossils. They are the ones that have dated the extinctions, and the ones that have suggested, from proxy evidence, the causes of the extinctions.

Now Walleyes, you claim to be a geologist, then spout this kind of nonsense. Really creates doubt that you have any kind of scientific background.

Mass extinction - New World Encyclopedia

There you go calling the pot olfraud. Seems to me it was you who claimed that oxygen was the most important part of the Goldilocks planet. Big fail there, especially for someone claiming to have 3 years of geology under his belt.......a first quarter student would make you look like a monkey.