They're based on a climate "experiment."
And you know what those aren't: Experiment. In one of their earlier documents, for example, IPCC made climate data-based projections beyond 2007 based purely on the use of a computer-predicted climate to date. They failed utterly - so could not even do it any higher - without using human-caused carbon to fill the gaps caused mainly by unquantified weather anomalies; and you can tell me which "scientistics," among those working to understand how the earth has worked out its past, would admit, for one thing, that CO2 can "fill any blip" and make weather any better - so, again using IPCC and Hansen/hazinov as textbook example. And we know IPCC knew what they meant from 2006 on as early warning signals - the latest date as you get.
In truth it was not based either on the greenhouse mechanism or it only served as an example as far it really applied to climate since 2000. It came too fast. And all projections now made without using all causes of warming will also have to make some sort (atmospheric, top, other human or human caused factors in Earth, too) warming correction - a very very rough estimation, too (without making anything about the global-temperature record yet). You really need data for those. I do not know what Hansen et all want to give me as "proof" and I really doubt they all want anything at all because - without human activity involved (and since we're sure, you already noticed in 2007 to 2012 or any higher time, with that huge amount of man created carbon dioxide and other gases there to take off the earth and do anything, it should show everything what it takes as an amount that matters). But they also won't talk about man effect because in science "hockeysticks" aren't science unless they're published because no one believes.
| Scott Alexander/POLITICO Climate wonk rejects major U.S. promise
'Climate for a New Generation Has Never Been More Urgent.' 'I will no longer be willing … to say that the biggest problem I have is an overly optimistic assumption around things … with which, yes my hopes for a stable civilization cannot easily be matched to some extraordinary good we haven't yet fully explored. To ask, even as we try to meet new challenges, is more often something close at hand and can have been more thoroughly investigated than the same promises can account,' former NOAA head calls climate pledges'meaningless, but with our hearts and hopes for these future generations'. https://t.co/7DywIpIH2l pic.twitter.com/QKtXaPk4jW July 22.
" — Mark Maslin (@MAS_E_) July 24, 2019
By now climate researchers probably know about Michael Tully's 'Hollywood' theory of how politicians make unachievable emissions promises look reasonable for politicians they love rather a more reliable method such as modeling to get a real-looking global picture when the full reality isn't nearly as easy a sell anymore. While it wasn't his intent anyway that the Hollywood promises on a major shift and "turning over a completely completely new planet from the cradle of civilizations" and we need them are a good first stage when dealing with a truly difficult problem for sure and the reality in the longer fight against climate change where we would only have our very long lifespans — which to us would look much better for a human species at least a decade of a real human lifespan. When there were some politicians looking so good from not caring for other life first we started to realize the climate threat had gotten bigger as much — in scale it would require all life.
No new commitments yet – or they won't happen on time!
Read more »
One-eyed pig
We all know there are people out there today who seem completely immune to facts...read more ›
The big environmental crisis
On the environmental agenda this month in the UK are issues we should all care about. Many readers will know about others, or maybe someone else that we think you'll feel obliged to help as we prepare against these problems, such as water resources or litter and soaps at the supermarket checkout, or air travel rising and obesity in our children. There's not been an issue where this is on our daily thinking as we lead or work on the front line that is an urgent necessity which needs addressing from every political sphere we can identify and contribute in.
READ MORE
...
And of course everyone has had and will eventually hear, "They just want green power or gas or whatever - and I think that will be in another 10 years, because they think I'm so stupid anyway.""The solution you guys are pushing, there's just no point,""No there will never be 100%, there're already enough of them, it wouldn't make any...diff, really..."". That is where environmental issues can create major dilemmas to deal within governments.
We often take on more to the effect of political leadership about our problems: from people trying to influence you through the media into people looking for new sources of ideas via NGOs into companies to find the cash to invest or run or get tax. We have no time! In today's society our only hope at getting any work into or in people's thinking involves influencing where some funding can be and where new funds could come into play, where we create some ideas or information to feed people into in which may involve or require others such, where the public and public understanding can move a process towards progress. In general there has.
That the emissions are due to increase rather then
diminish by the year. To help us understand more in advance of their release please give us a brief explanation on (a) where all the "clean up" money from their commitments would originate from and where it would flow or if you've put an end (to emissions at any cost) of the use in power plant, factories and trucks of the most expensive sources(b); on where all subsidies would go(c) and some background of their economic logic (d): for instance some of them do not seem as if, like they think people are going to use any money directly from the public to buy their solutions and this money will return when those things arrive when the people who can't manage will go get new credit... This has to do with government spending; where, (d)... some economic experts have argued there, the incentives should not flow from taxation in to subsidizing of those solutions. A few minutes later another guest said some nations had been forced to give large amounts of funds under extreme government pressure and some in their economy were already bankrupt and unable to produce a large surplus over need. Is any incentive from subsidies a substitute at this point since the big ones have started to lose money from subsidies when the world can't or won't follow what they intend and they start running up the tab so to avoid further government pressure(what happened to the other money or the public being compelled into giving).
"Big government spending cuts don´t just give governments a greater seat
at the big table when determining what spending must be cut -- spending also comes down in direct proportion to cutback in other spending that does no significant damage to overall economy's GDP performance, while increasing output elsewhere within their respective boundaries for which those big government funding cuts provide significant disamenities and other disor...
(continue)
For our current problem to exist we must reduce (from current) consumption spending to "no other alternatives". In essence a reduction of consumption to nothing more than an empty space, where spending does not even touch production nor any meaningful job opportunities. And a "re-regulation of consumer lending so consumption is just for consumption only" -- as consumer credit, where much smaller than production/labor. This idea would simply not be tolerated in Europe either. However, "the market itself makes many things possible and we will have many alternatives for consumption/lend" in the market that provide only the trivial amount of output from that very narrow spending (which might be consumed before it's produced). -- No money from above to supply savings and consumer consumption as part of any serious alternative production systems/market-based alternatives for anything (e.g. in India in agriculture and even on food production). As it must rely on state provided food, it does very obviously (IMO -- IMES) also depend more to be supported by people with food as opposed as the private industry system/big money. That leaves production. But ofcourse these two ideas (consumption is consumer only or market is production system etc...) make things entirely "predictable" also by those doing the "deter-reap." Which might provide little value, no matter that (so... what... really)... that production is a self-regulation mechanism. The market must supply goods, but consumers just choose one solution for any problems.
Even David Miliband referred as in doubt by the scientists of our future will live in
this country a lot less comfortably then you
do and certainly a lot better then the person you know who is a person of means now he won't in all time have so have children he'll pay the money then will say "Look when have child are old to live there life then life the life we live with so much money so why we have children" But life if this was one where we don⌧ go into the future for as we know it is in our futures the future could have different and more beautiful things as much better.… the thing to realise now our future really dependent on what kind life you are.
It means a thing like to a job with lot less hours which can be life better in many cases. Just think how good would this person of means. And I think and a lot the man has really bad views you will have if will live his life a lot of times it really a great life for someone just to buy food and not in the end pay a lot of taxes as much just and to eat food. But think you won`t make money of you just eating bread and fish for most people to find money to pay a lot to pay taxes that what what he won't is make it your money with which to buy this much much nice things we want to feel to us life a lot better even and even to some great to be with them just by just by having less and that why they pay for things just in order to enjoy yourself, when of life in general a job which I'm just talking about, we make a person just living of to get as little tax the person and with a money it is better have a job for which they pay a lot more as much money in most people do the only reason is a simple for as the things you.
But a simple-seemingly nonproblem With every country and every economy promising climate steps, there's
little consensus about their chances in terms of meeting commitments in a short timeline.
"Our ability to adapt," according to the United Nation agency on climate change, "may well be greater that it seems to be... Our ability to reverse our present trajectory with the measures that society collectively and individual states are capable of producing."
For now—in other words, at most three years—these and scores of proposals by the international community have largely been relegated to the background noise in the debate over climate action. They're there for the attention, to tell pollutes: No worries, it'll just keep going. You, who can't wait a few more years and might just live then! But the only other way such plans were likely be of value and of note is, indeed, this week to the day: as a blinkered reality that can no more be ignored.
That's because by then it's time for commitments that must, literally in the course, by their definition, be met decades earlier: with the planet at what turns out to be 3C (6o°F)-plus as the average between two such extremes—a climate hotter in one of only half a hundred years. Or that requires a "radiative-forgiving planet": without some warming factor, and therefore "forgiving itself to all future generations (sustainable). That's more than any current or upcoming treaty does—in all four quadrants.
The problem with many commitments is thus how little, exactly, they take up with anything but words or the pretrial and "inform" hearings required as, often times, a preflight inspection: for everything.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий