Monday, February 12, 2007

Global warming worse than what is being reported

Climate change: What the IPCC didn't tell us NewScientist ($) 2/9/07 - "...research deemed controversial, not fully quantified or not yet incorporated into climate models was excluded...many legitimate findings have been frozen out...This is the untold story of the report, uncovered in interviews with many of the scientists involved, the story of how a complex mixture of scientific rigour and political expediency resulted in many of the scientists' more scary scenarios for climate change - those they constantly discuss among themselves - being left on the cutting room floor."

What are the things "frozen out"? Only the most dramatic tipping point factors that researches believe could be devastating to civilization in this century. Like the collapse of the Greenland ice sheet, the massive release of methane from the ocean floor, soil and permafrost, also Antarctica melting much faster than previously thought and so on.

What does this mean? Much warmer temperatures - 8.1 degrees f. warmer or more, this century. That is the end of most industrial agriculture as we know it... which is the end of modern civilization. Forget certain areas being under water, that is the least of our worries. Beyond the general warming trend will be massive chaotic weather extremes that again will assure that crops fail on a global level.

It's appalling that many important facts about global warming remain for the most part with climatologists. Most of the media deserves a failing grade in their coverage of global warming.

One of the best ways to address global warming is to vote exclusively for politicians where this is their number one issue and to make sure that they are truly educated on the topic and sincere. I think if most Americans knew that the fate of civilization was really at stake... in this century, they wouldn't be spending their time with twaddling candidates.

I'd love to think that James Lovelock is wrong that 2-4 billion people might die in this century because of our inaction. So far we seem to be proving him right. He's also been right that most climate models have proven significantly wrong (underestimating the warming) for three decades. The facts on the ground (and in the air and water) are almost always worse than most climatologists expect.

On a side note I would have expected NewScientist to have put the importance of this story above profit and made it freely available. However, they have been one of the best journalistic outlets for the truth on global warming so I can't nick 'em that hard on this.

No comments: