[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Human vs. natural influences on the environment



In article <32244d4d.176361891@nntp.st.usm.edu>,
Harold Brashears <brshears@whale.st.usm.edu> wrote:
>"D. Braun" <dbraun@u.washington.edu> wrote for all to see:
[snip]

>>Actually, the global warming issue isn't an issue any longer, but a
>>reality. The recent IPCC report settled that. 

>You think so?  I tend to disagree with you.  There has been some
>controvery concerning that report, with some of the participants
>claiming that the body of the report changed to conform to a more
>alarmist summary.  The administrators state that the changes were made
>only in response to the initiatives by some of the other participants,
>but that does not change the fact that some object to portions of the
>report.

I have not seen a report that any of the participants had 
objected--rather, it was outside critics objecting.  I'd be interested 
in seeing such an article.

>In any case, if I remember correctly, the report forcasts an average
>global 0.5 C change in the next hundred or so years.  I still do not
>see that, even if all scientists agreed, as any type of emergency.

"For the mid-range IPCC emission scenario, IS92a, assuming the "best 
estimate" value of climate sensitivity and including the effects of 
future increases in aerosol, models project an increase in global mean 
surface air temperature relative to 1990 of about 2 deg. C by 2100."

Climate Change 1995, pp. 5-6.

>Regards, Harold

snark


Follow-Ups: References: