I clipped more of this than I usually would, but read the whole excerpt and as you read it, count on you fingers all the ways we are going to die:
Climate change: report warns point of no return may be reached in 10 years, leading to droughts, agricultural failure and water shortages
The global warming danger threshold for the world is clearly marked [it is? who marked it?] for the first time in an international report to be published tomorrow – and the bad news is, the world has nearly reached it already.
The countdown to climate-change catastrophe is spelt out by a task force of senior politicians, business leaders and academics from around the world – and it is remarkably brief. In as little as 10 years, or even less, their report indicates, the point of no return with global warming may have been reached.
The report, Meeting The Climate Challenge, is aimed at policymakers in every country, from national leaders down. It has been timed to coincide with Tony Blair’s promised efforts to advance climate change policy in 2005 as chairman of both the G8 group of rich countries and the European Union. [This paragraph says all you need to know about this “science” paper.]
And it breaks new ground by putting a figure – for the first time in such a high-level document – on the danger point of global warming, that is, the temperature rise beyond which the world would be irretrievably committed to disastrous changes. These could include widespread agricultural failure, water shortages and major droughts, increased disease, sea-level rise and the death of forests – with the added possibility of abrupt catastrophic events such as “runaway” global warming, the melting of the Greenland ice sheet, or the switching-off of the Gulf Stream.
The report says this point will be two degrees centigrade above the average world temperature prevailing in 1750 before the industrial revolution, when human activities – mainly the production of waste gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), which retain the sun’s heat in the atmosphere – first started to affect the climate. But it points out that global average temperature has already risen by 0.8 degrees since then, with more rises already in the pipeline – so the world has little more than a single degree of temperature latitude before the crucial point is reached.
More ominously still, it assesses the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere after which the two-degree rise will become inevitable, and says it will be 400 parts per million by volume (ppm) of CO2.
The current level is 379ppm, and rising by more than 2ppm annually – so it is likely that the vital 400ppm threshold will be crossed in just 10 years’ time, or even less (although the two-degree temperature rise might take longer to come into effect).
Taken at face value, this paper is a breathtaking example of the hubris of man. As if a few numbers on a gauge we created can determine when we all die. It is all the more laughable because they assume we have to return to 1750 levels. That makes the fundamentally misguided assumption that the earth must remain static. If there is anything that we KNOW as scientists is is that the earth constantly changes. Expecting it to remain in the same parameters it was when we first invented ways to measure it is unimaginably egotistical.
But this is NOT a scientific paper so none of that matters.
This paper is just an environmentalist manifesto dressed up as science. Ted Kaczynski without the bombs but with a few letters behind his name. The environmental movement has a problem they did not expect to have when it started. A deadline.
To fully understand this report, you have to first understand that the environmental movement is not about science, it is about policy. Be they socialists, luddites or whatever their motivation, the aim is to affect policy. Therein lies the problem.
Policy makers will not pass the draconian legislation the environmental movement wants because there is no pressing need to ruin the lives of millions of people on the whacky theory of the week. So the environmentalists have now created an artificial deadline to motivate policy makers. The news report even says that is why this paper was written!
They actually did it last year when they said that up to 20% of the land mass would be flooded if we didn’t do something in 5 years. That was laughed at, so now, like a kid trying to extend their bed time, the environmentalist are going back to the policymakers and saying “Ok, 10 years?”
I for one welcome the deadline– and I liked the 5 year deadline. Then we can get this goofball, chicken little theory behind us.
Remember this post. When you ring in 2015 and there was no “Global Catastrophy,” tell the person you’re sharing the champagne with, “You know, that guy on the internet was right.”
And please spare me links to people who swear this hoax is true. You will only prove you are gullible. The environmental movement has about a 0-150 record in their predictions of doom and gloom. I’m not buying it.