Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New report turns up the heat on global warming danger
Waterbury Republican-American ^ | April 7, 2007 | A.P.

Posted on 04/07/2007 11:27:17 AM PDT by Graybeard58

As the world gets hotter by degrees, millions of poor people will suffer from hunger, thirst, floods and disease unless drastic action is taken, scientists and diplomats warned Friday in their bleakest report ever on global warming.

All regions of the world will change, with the risk that nearly a third of the Earth's species will vanish if global temperatures rise just 3.6 degrees above the average temperature in the 1980s-90s, the new climate report says. Areas that now have too little rain will become drier.

Yet that grim and still preventable future is a toned-down prediction, a compromise brokered in a fierce, around-the-clock debate among scientists and bureaucrats. Officials from some governments, including China and Saudi Arabia, managed to win some weakened wording.

Even so, the final report "will send a very, very clear signal" to governments, said Yvo de Boer, the top climate official for the United Nations, which in 1988 created the authoritative climate change panel that issued the starkly worded document.

And while some scientists were angered at losing some ground, many praised the report as the strongest warning ever that nations must cut back on greenhouse gas emissions.

The report is the second of four coming this year from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations network of 2,000 scientists. The new document tries to explain how global warming is changing life on Earth; the panel's report in February focused on the cause of global warming and said scientists are highly confident most of it is due to human activity.

All four reports must be unanimously approved by the 120-plus governments that participate, and all changes must be approved by the scientists.

That edict made for a deadline-busting contentious final editing session that was closed to the public.

However, The Associated Press witnessed the hectic final 3½ hours of objections and conflict.

At one point, Chinese and Saudi Arabian delegates tried to reduce the scientific confidence level about already noticeable effects of global warming.

They lower the confidence level from 90 percent to 80 percent. Scientists objected, and one lead author from the United States, NASA's Cynthia Rosenzweig, left the building after filing an official protest.

"There is a discernible human influence on these changes" that are already occurring through flooding, heat waves, hurricanes and threats to species, she said.

Under a U.S.-proposed compromise, the final report deleted any mention of the level of confidence about global warming's current effects.

And that may have saved the day, according to some scientists who said the report had appeared doomed over that issue.

There were other disputes where scientists lost out:

n Instead of saying "hundreds of millions" would be vulnerable to flooding under certain scenarios, the final document says "many millions."

n Instead of suggesting up to 120 million people are at risk of hunger because of global warming, the revised report refers to negative effects on subsidence farmers and fishers.

Often it was the U.S. delegation who stood with scientists and helped reach compromise, said Stanford University scientist Stephen Schneider, a frequent critic of the Bush administration's global warming policies.

British scientist Neil Adger said he and others were disappointed that government officials deleted parts of a chart that highlights the devastating effects of climate change with every rise of 1.8 degrees in temperature.

Some scientists bitterly vowed never to take part in the process again.

Still, Adger and other scientists and even environmental groups hailed the final report as the strongest ever.

"This is a glimpse into an apocalyptic future," the Greenpeace environmental group said of the final report.

The tone of the report is urgent, noting those who can afford the least get hit the most by global warming.

"Don't be poor in a hot country, don't live in hurricane alley, watch out about being on the coasts or in the Arctic, and it's a bad idea to be on high mountains with glaciers melting," said Schneider, the Stanford scientist who was one of the study author's.

Africa by 2020 is looking at an additional 75 million to 250 million people going thirsty because of climate change, the report said. Deadly diarrheal diseases associated with floods and droughts will increase in Asia because of global warming, the report said.

The first few degrees increase in global temperature will actually raise global food supply, but then it will plummet, according to the report.

"The poorest of the poor in the world -- and this includes poor people in prosperous societies -- are going to be the worst hit," said Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "People who are poor are least able to adapt to climate change."

But even rich countries, such as the United States say that the report tells them what to watch for.

James Connaughton, the head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality noted that food production in North America would rise initially, but so will increased coastal flooding.

The head of the U.S. delegation, White House associate science adviser Sharon Hays, said a key message she's taking home to Washington is "that these projected impacts are expected to get more pronounced at higher temperatures," she said in a conference call from Brussels. "Not all projected impacts are negative."

Schneider said a main message isn't just what will happen, but what already has started: melting glaciers, stronger hurricanes, deadlier heat waves, and disappearing or moving species.

It all can be traced directly to greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels, according to the report.

Martin Parry, who conducted the tough closed-door negotiations, said that with 29,000 sets of data from every continent include Antarctica, the report firmly and finally established "a man-made climate signal coming through on plants, water and ice."

"For the first time, we are not just arm-waving with models," he said.

But many of the worst effects aren't locked into the future, the report said in its final pages. People can build better structures, adapt to future warming threats and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, scientists said.

"There are things that can be done now, but it's much better if it can be done now rather than later," said David Karoly of the University of Oklahoma, one of the report authors.

"We can fix this," Schneider said.

-- -- --

On the Net:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: http://www.ipcc.ch/

The summary of the report: http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM6avr07.pdf


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News
KEYWORDS: climatechange; climategrifters; globalwarming; gorebalism; humansaregod; ipcc; unitednations
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 next last
To: Congressman Billybob

OH NOOOO.

You’re going GW too?

Looking forward it. ;-)


21 posted on 04/07/2007 11:47:35 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ...... BumP'n'Run 'Right-Wing Extremist' since 2001 ... My profile is on FiRe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
"Don't be poor in a hot country, don't live in hurricane alley, watch out about being on the coasts or in the Arctic, and it's a bad idea to be on high mountains with glaciers melting," said Schneider, the Stanford scientist who was one of the study author's.

Best advice I've ever seen from the scientific community - funny though, my Great Grandmother use to say the same things about 35 years ago before this so-called 'Global Warming". I believe she use to call it "Common Sense".

22 posted on 04/07/2007 11:47:51 AM PDT by uptoolate (If it sounds absurd, 51% chance it was sarcasm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NicknamedBob
"It all can be traced directly to greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels, according to the report."

Wasn't it just 30 years ago Chicken Little told us all the fossil fuels will be gone and so would most of the other resources on earth would be gone too. Also the air would be so bad that we would have to wear oxygen masks and the worlds population would be so many that everyday 500 million would die of starvation. Also isn't a glacier supposed to be rolling over the corner of Madison and 5th because we are in new ice age.

Well seems I survived all the doom and gloom of last century so a little global warming this century is a walk in the park.

23 posted on 04/07/2007 11:49:20 AM PDT by A message (Liberalism does not breed survivors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Yvo de Boer - Al Gore wannabe.

24 posted on 04/07/2007 11:49:21 AM PDT by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
Bleakest Report Ever On Global Warming

It’s in our bleak mid-summer,
That April is so cruel.
On heads of gentle flower,
She sends a breath of cool.

To herald all the dangers,
That “Global Warming” brings,
Song birds will start teeth chattering,
Instead of cheerful sings.

Oh, yes, it’s Global Warming!
Pay no attention to the man,
Who stands behind the curtain,
With long-johns and a fan.

He’s only staking out a claim,
Upon the hearts and minds,
Of gullible sheeplike followers,
With brains in their behinds.

The globe has changed,
It will again,
But none of it.
Was caused by men.

Burma Shave.

As Observed by NicknamedBob on April 7, 2007

25 posted on 04/07/2007 11:50:08 AM PDT by NicknamedBob (I know where I have gone wrong, and I can cite it, chapter and verse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
"The poorest of the poor in the world -- and this includes poor people in prosperous societies -- are going to be the worst hit," said Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "People who are poor are least able to adapt to climate change."

No need to fear, people. This statement does not contain the catastrophic words, "Women and children will be hit the hardest".

26 posted on 04/07/2007 11:50:49 AM PDT by uptoolate (If it sounds absurd, 51% chance it was sarcasm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

I’m sure, Congressman, that you’re familiar with Twain’s essay into science:

“In the space of one hundred and seventy six years the Lower Mississippi has shortened itself two hundred and forty-two miles. That is an average of a trifle over a mile and a third per year. Therefore, any calm person, who is not blind or idiotic, can see that in the Old Oölitic Silurian Period, just a million years ago next November, the Lower Mississippi was upwards of one million three hundred thousand miles long, and stuck out over the Gulf of Mexico like a fishing-pole. And by the same token any person can see that seven hundred and forty-two years from now the Lower Mississippi will be only a mile and three-quarters long, and Cairo [Illinois] and New Orleans will have joined their streets together and be plodding comfortably along under a single mayor and a mutual board of aldermen. There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.”

And so it goes, even to this day.

IMHO, The Prophet Algore and his minions have conjectured a lot of crap out of a very trifling investment of fact.


27 posted on 04/07/2007 11:52:13 AM PDT by Ole Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

To apply for your carbon offset, please email ‘uptoolate’ and have your credit card handy for your $100.00 fee.


28 posted on 04/07/2007 11:52:37 AM PDT by uptoolate (If it sounds absurd, 51% chance it was sarcasm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dallas59

Janis Joplin remake, I presume?


29 posted on 04/07/2007 11:53:18 AM PDT by uptoolate (If it sounds absurd, 51% chance it was sarcasm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

millions of poor people will suffer from hunger

This claim is made for people in this country today. This taken from another website:

One of the most disturbing and extraordinary aspects of life in this very wealthy country is the persistence of hunger. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported that in 2005:

35.1 million people lived in households considered to be food insecure.

Guess what? We must be totally involved in global warming today. It doesn’t feel bad at all.


30 posted on 04/07/2007 11:53:28 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ancient_geezer

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
— H. L. Mencken


The liberal agenda of creating chaos then establishing themselves as the saviors of man from that chaos, just continues on.


31 posted on 04/07/2007 11:56:01 AM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
This is a UN sponsored report.

Then it holds as much authority as an Iraqi resolution.

32 posted on 04/07/2007 11:56:06 AM PDT by uptoolate (If it sounds absurd, 51% chance it was sarcasm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

“Martin Parry, who conducted the tough closed-door negotiations, said that with 29,000 sets of data from every continent include Antarctica, the report firmly and finally established “a man-made climate signal coming through on plants, water and ice.” “

Ok. Let’s say it is true. If that is the case, then why should China, who has 5 times as many people as us continue to throw CO2 into the atmosphere while we pay taxes to get to do the same thing?

Let’s change it. Let’s build a few dozen nuke plants, clean coal plants and retool our oil refineries so they are bigger and more efficient. Companies can use their “winfall profits” to do research and development. We don’t need any givernment programs. We need technology which we already have.

Don’t hear the MSM talking about this.


33 posted on 04/07/2007 12:00:58 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (The Clintons: A Malignant Malfeasance of the Most Morbid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
As the world gets hotter by degrees, millions of poor people will suffer.....

We all know that this scenario is entirely preventable, of course, by US taxpayers giving up their selfish consumption of the majority of the world's limited resources and ponying-up to fund every environmental research initiative and start-up company that is poised to address the global-climate change issues, especially those that will offer "educational" programs, condoms and "responsible" population control programs at no cost to second and third-world countries. And, by the president agreeing to sign the Kyoto treaty. Also, people must be willing to give up their gas-guzzling cars and SUV's and ride bicycles or walk (politicians and environmentalists will be exempted, of course, because they have important meetings to attend). Then we can all be one happy, environmentally correct family! "We are the world..."


34 posted on 04/07/2007 12:03:40 PM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

LOL! I like the way you think!


35 posted on 04/07/2007 12:05:22 PM PDT by proudofthesouth (Mao said that power comes at the point of a rifle; I say FREEDOM does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
Today, Governor Mitt Romney issued the following statement on the current environmental debate:

“Governor Mark Sanford is right. Unfortunately, some in the Republican Party are embracing the radical environmental ideas of the liberal left. As governor, I found that thoughtful environmentalism need not be anti-growth and anti-jobs. But Kyoto-style sweeping mandates, imposed unilaterally in the United States, would kill jobs, depress growth and shift manufacturing to the dirtiest developing nations.

“Republicans should never abandon pro-growth conservative principles in an effort to embrace the ideas of Al Gore. Instead of sweeping mandates, we must use America’s power of innovation to develop alternative sources of energy and new technologies that use energy more efficiently.”

http://www.mittromney.com/News/Press-Releases/Environmental_Debate

Makes sense. Who is he referring to? Which of our GOP brethren have gone over to Algore's side?

36 posted on 04/07/2007 12:11:30 PM PDT by redgirlinabluestate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

WE'RE GONNA DIE! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!

37 posted on 04/07/2007 12:15:31 PM PDT by RockinRight (Support FREDeralism. Fred Thompson in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
As the world gets hotter by degrees

What have we raised? 1 degree in the last 150 years.

All regions of the world will change, with the risk that nearly a third of the Earth's species will vanish if global temperatures rise just 3.6 degrees above the average temperature in the 1980s-90s

How many species died out the last time we had an even warmer climate, during the Medieval Warm Period (ad 800-1300).

if global temperatures rise just 3.6 degrees

Its taken 150 years to raise 1 degree. How long will it take to raise 3.6 degrees.

The Medieval Warm Period or Medieval Climate Optimum was from approx. 800ad -1300ad. Then came this thing called The Little Ice Age, from approx. 1300-1850.

Imagine after warming for about 500 years, it then cools off for about 500 years.

Notice the coincidence of the ending of the Medieval Climate Optimum and the beginning of the Little Ice Age. And then the ending of the Little Ice Age, and the beginning of our current warming.

The first few degrees increase in global temperature will actually raise global food supply, but then it will plummet, according to the report.

All regions of the world will change, with the risk that nearly a third of the Earth's species will vanish if global temperatures rise just 3.6 degrees above the average temperature in the 1980s-90s, the new climate report says.

So which is it, 3.6 warmer destroys 1/3 of all species, or a few degrees warmer will raise global food supplies?

38 posted on 04/07/2007 12:20:11 PM PDT by mountn man (The pleasure you get from life, is equal to the attitude you put into it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA
..as opposed to scientific proven fact...

Liberals and the law of unintended consequences strike again.

The banning of DDT is probably the one of the most glaring examples but..
it's what they do..
it's all they do..
and they won't stop...
EVER!

39 posted on 04/07/2007 12:22:29 PM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

"REMAIN CALM....ALL IS WELL!!"

40 posted on 04/07/2007 12:22:49 PM PDT by dfwgator (The University of Florida - Still Championship U)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson