Key sentence from the last link. "a time span of 10-15 years was misleading in the context of climate change, which is measured over decades and centuries." They are exactly right. Anything less than a 30 year period is not climate. It's a weather pattern.
\"According to the research, which assesses the impact of warming using an average of well-accepted computer climate models, the average annual global temperature will move \"to a state continuously outside the bounds of historical variability\" in 2047... \"\r\goo.gl…
In your article: "I think to not address it would be a problem because then you basically have the denialists saying, 'Look the IPCC is silent on this issue,"'... They're talking about you, the denialist. Also in the article they attribute it to random fluctuation.
@nxnn As you say yourself energy innovation is something that geographical areas as well as trillion dollar industries will fight against. Climate change SHOULD be something that we all fight together, if we can agree that we all have skin in the game.
@BigFish I guess my overarching point is that you could enjoy polluting and still want better cheaper energy. Those that want cleaner air should talk about "energy innovation" rather than about "fighting climate change"
@BigFish benefits of renewable energy are far higher in terms of costs savings for the product itself and potential efficiency beyond even the environmental impact that is why I didn't think it was necessary for people to even see climate as part of it to be onboard
@nxnn It goes back to cost benefit. Right now the costs are high, but they'd be offset by the long term benefits if we could all get out from behind the tomfoolery and agree on what those benefits (ie avoidance of future costs) would be.
@nxnn People are interested and investing in that sector already, obviously. But with the issues surrounding climate change clouded by marketing and lobbying, the problem isn't as real to the public as it needs to be to generate widespread support.
Should actions be taken to prevent global warming?
Sign in with Facebook
Sign in with Google
Sign in with Email
One of the biggest problems in this debate is that the term "global warming" is being used as a catch-all phrase when it is only one proposed aspect of changing climates. Many climate scientists who acknowledge climate change aren't sure about human influenced warming.
GW has almost become laughable. Every other week the So-called Scientists are getting caught faking the data, forging the numbers. FOllow the money! You won't find Big Business, you'll find BIG GORE and BIG Government! Climate fluctuates, man has little to do with it!