4 ms·

Climate change: New report will highlight 'stark reality' of warming

36 points by adrian_mrd 5y ago

ryanobjc 5y ago
Waiting for the “climate change isn’t an exact science” apologists to pop up. I’m surprised I’m the first commenter so far. Once you’ve become attuned to the air quality and pm2.5 levels you realize how much more healthy of a world we could be if only we stopped burning things. Even in Sam Francisco which benefits from coastal breeze the air quality sinks. And to think we could have been making serious attempts to fix all this. And spur on one of the greatest building economies ever. But hey. Why do anything?
tomjen3 5y ago
Why do they keep publishing these? We know it is real, we also don't have any good way to stop it[0] so that is where the focus should be. [0]: this implies that whatever you were about to post as a solution isn't a good solution.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
Proven 5y ago
> The climate summit held in the French capital, Paris, in 2015, committed nations to try to limit the rise in global temperature from pre-industrial times to no more than 1.5 degrees. How exactly can they do that? It doesn't look like they've a clue - all they know how to do is to tax, spend and boss people around. Let's see - has much has Germany lowered global temperature after hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes since the 90's? 0.001C? More? Less? Can anyone quantify positive results measured in terms of temperature?
drukenemo 5y ago
It’s interesting that many members of the IPCC are not climatologists or similar. The spokesperson for this article is a Dutch professor of “innovation studies and sustainability”. Furthermore, the chair is an economist, there are professors and researchers of alternative energies, environmentalists, etc. On the Wikipedia page about the IPCC you struggle to find but one climatologist mentioned. If someone would care to comment my question instead of just downvoting it, I’d appreciate that.
- hactually 5y ago
  I think you're missing the point. It's (IPCC) goal is to provide governments with scientific assessment as well as the impact. This would include climate specialists, sustainability specialists, modellers, politicians, economists and many more. Your question feels like it's deliberately trying to cast the effort in a bad light but maybe that's just how I read your question so hopefully my comment helps clear up any confusion.

36 points by adrian_mrd 5y ago

Waiting for the “climate change isn’t an exact science” apologists to pop up. I’m surprised I’m the first commenter so far. Once you’ve become attuned to the air quality and pm2.5 levels you realize how much more healthy of a world we could be if only we stopped burning things. Even in Sam Francisco which benefits from coastal breeze the air quality sinks. And to think we could have been making serious attempts to fix all this. And spur on one of the greatest building economies ever. But hey. Why do anything?

tomjen3 5y ago

Why do they keep publishing these? We know it is real, we also don't have any good way to stop it[0] so that is where the focus should be. [0]: this implies that whatever you were about to post as a solution isn't a good solution.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

Proven 5y ago

> The climate summit held in the French capital, Paris, in 2015, committed nations to try to limit the rise in global temperature from pre-industrial times to no more than 1.5 degrees. How exactly can they do that? It doesn't look like they've a clue - all they know how to do is to tax, spend and boss people around. Let's see - has much has Germany lowered global temperature after hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes since the 90's? 0.001C? More? Less? Can anyone quantify positive results measured in terms of temperature?

drukenemo 5y ago

It’s interesting that many members of the IPCC are not climatologists or similar. The spokesperson for this article is a Dutch professor of “innovation studies and sustainability”. Furthermore, the chair is an economist, there are professors and researchers of alternative energies, environmentalists, etc. On the Wikipedia page about the IPCC you struggle to find but one climatologist mentioned. If someone would care to comment my question instead of just downvoting it, I’d appreciate that.

hactually 5y ago
I think you're missing the point. It's (IPCC) goal is to provide governments with scientific assessment as well as the impact. This would include climate specialists, sustainability specialists, modellers, politicians, economists and many more. Your question feels like it's deliberately trying to cast the effort in a bad light but maybe that's just how I read your question so hopefully my comment helps clear up any confusion.