Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked in 10 Years.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked in 10 Years.

    ...says an article from 1989.


    UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.

    Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees,′ ′ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.

    He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.

    As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations, Brown told The Associated Press in an interview on Wednesday.

    Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. A fifth of Egypt’s arable land in the Nile Delta would be flooded, cutting off its food supply, according to a joint UNEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study.

    ″Ecological refugees will become a major concern, and what’s worse is you may find that people can move to drier ground, but the soils and the natural resources may not support life. Africa doesn’t have to worry about land, but would you want to live in the Sahara?″ he said.

    UNEP estimates it would cost the United States at least $100 billion to protect its east coast alone.

    Shifting climate patterns would bring back 1930s Dust Bowl conditions to Canadian and U.S. wheatlands, while the Soviet Union could reap bumper crops if it adapts its agriculture in time, according to a study by UNEP and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

    Excess carbon dioxide is pouring into the atmosphere because of humanity’s use of fossil fuels and burning of rain forests, the study says. The atmosphere is retaining more heat than it radiates, much like a greenhouse.

    The most conservative scientific estimate that the Earth’s temperature will rise 1 to 7 degrees in the next 30 years, said Brown.

    The difference may seem slight, he said, but the planet is only 9 degrees warmer now than during the 8,000-year Ice Age that ended 10,000 years ago.

    Brown said if the warming trend continues, ″the question is will we be able to reverse the process in time? We say that within the next 10 years, given the present loads that the atmosphere has to bear, we have an opportunity to start the stabilizing process.″

    He said even the most conservative scientists ″already tell us there’s nothing we can do now to stop a ... change″ of about 3 degrees.

    ″Anything beyond that, and we have to start thinking about the significant rise of the sea levels ... we can expect more ferocious storms, hurricanes, wind shear, dust erosion.″

    He said there is time to act, but there is no time to waste.

    UNEP is working toward forming a scientific plan of action by the end of 1990, and the adoption of a global climate treaty by 1992. In May, delegates from 103 nations met in Nairobi, Kenya - where UNEP is based - and decided to open negotiations on the treaty next year.

    Nations will be asked to reduce the use of fossil fuels, cut the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases such as methane and fluorocarbons, and preserve the rain forests.

    ″We have no clear idea about the ecological minimum of green space that the planet needs to function effectively. What we do know is that we are destroying the tropical rain forest at the rate of 50 acres a minute, about one football field per second,″ said Brown.

    Each acre of rain forest can store 100 tons of carbon dioxide and reprocess it into oxygen.

    Brown suggested that compensating Brazil, Indonesia and Kenya for preserving rain forests may be necessary.

    The European Community is talking about a half-cent levy on each kilowatt- hour of fossil fuels to raise $55 million a year to protect the rain forests, and other direct subsidies may be possible, he said.

    The treaty could also call for improved energy efficiency, increasing conservation, and for developed nations to transfer technology to Third World nations to help them save energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions, said Brown.

    https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0


    THIS is why people keep scoffing at the politicians regarding global warming, or climate change as they call it now.


    It might be real, but they have been blowing it out of proportion and playing Chicken Little for over 30 years now.


  • #2
    The key word is "compensating". It's an income redistribution scheme.
    When I Survey....

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      ...says an article from 1989.


      UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.

      Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees,′ ′ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.

      He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.

      As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations, Brown told The Associated Press in an interview on Wednesday.

      Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. A fifth of Egypt’s arable land in the Nile Delta would be flooded, cutting off its food supply, according to a joint UNEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study.

      ″Ecological refugees will become a major concern, and what’s worse is you may find that people can move to drier ground, but the soils and the natural resources may not support life. Africa doesn’t have to worry about land, but would you want to live in the Sahara?″ he said.

      UNEP estimates it would cost the United States at least $100 billion to protect its east coast alone.

      Shifting climate patterns would bring back 1930s Dust Bowl conditions to Canadian and U.S. wheatlands, while the Soviet Union could reap bumper crops if it adapts its agriculture in time, according to a study by UNEP and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

      Excess carbon dioxide is pouring into the atmosphere because of humanity’s use of fossil fuels and burning of rain forests, the study says. The atmosphere is retaining more heat than it radiates, much like a greenhouse.

      The most conservative scientific estimate that the Earth’s temperature will rise 1 to 7 degrees in the next 30 years, said Brown.

      The difference may seem slight, he said, but the planet is only 9 degrees warmer now than during the 8,000-year Ice Age that ended 10,000 years ago.

      Brown said if the warming trend continues, ″the question is will we be able to reverse the process in time? We say that within the next 10 years, given the present loads that the atmosphere has to bear, we have an opportunity to start the stabilizing process.″

      He said even the most conservative scientists ″already tell us there’s nothing we can do now to stop a ... change″ of about 3 degrees.

      ″Anything beyond that, and we have to start thinking about the significant rise of the sea levels ... we can expect more ferocious storms, hurricanes, wind shear, dust erosion.″

      He said there is time to act, but there is no time to waste.

      UNEP is working toward forming a scientific plan of action by the end of 1990, and the adoption of a global climate treaty by 1992. In May, delegates from 103 nations met in Nairobi, Kenya - where UNEP is based - and decided to open negotiations on the treaty next year.

      Nations will be asked to reduce the use of fossil fuels, cut the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases such as methane and fluorocarbons, and preserve the rain forests.

      ″We have no clear idea about the ecological minimum of green space that the planet needs to function effectively. What we do know is that we are destroying the tropical rain forest at the rate of 50 acres a minute, about one football field per second,″ said Brown.

      Each acre of rain forest can store 100 tons of carbon dioxide and reprocess it into oxygen.

      Brown suggested that compensating Brazil, Indonesia and Kenya for preserving rain forests may be necessary.

      The European Community is talking about a half-cent levy on each kilowatt- hour of fossil fuels to raise $55 million a year to protect the rain forests, and other direct subsidies may be possible, he said.

      The treaty could also call for improved energy efficiency, increasing conservation, and for developed nations to transfer technology to Third World nations to help them save energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions, said Brown.

      https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0


      THIS is why people keep scoffing at the politicians regarding global warming, or climate change as they call it now.


      It might be real, but they have been blowing it out of proportion and playing Chicken Little for over 30 years now.
      The actual predictive element on which this article is based is 1 to 7 'degrees' in 30 years. Which is now. 1 to 7 has to be F, there has never been a prediction of 7 C in such a short period of time. Given that, the actual rise in that same period is about 1.1 F, which is the low end, but still in the specified interval. Further, there were two elements unknown at the time that pushed thing to the low end. One was the low sunspot activity of the last 2 solar periods. The other was a cycle of oceanic warming - a period of higher than normal heat transfer from the atmosphere to the oceans.

      So the science on which the predictions was base is sound. But the predictions are clearly worst case.

      For now, basically, we've been given a pass. But right now we are seeing GREATER ice melt than worst case predictions. And if we see factors that favor accelerated warming toward the higher side of predictions rather than the low side as was the last 30 years, your perspective on predictions would be seen as naive.

      But I do agree, on the whole, there is a tendency toward overplaying the potential immediate threat. It's a slow process, with a lot of inertia. We may well be beyond reversal for a very, very long time no matter what we do. Which was the point of the article. But the real cost and impact of that fact may not start really costing a lot of money and impacting a large population in low lying area for another 20 or 30 years

      Keeping in mind that the drastic effect in the arctic is NOW. And that melting permafrost will add large amounts of CO2 in concert with our own emissions, you may just find that this article is in fact a good bit more accurate than it appears superficially.

      jim
      My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

      If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

      This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
        The actual predictive element on which this article is based is 1 to 7 'degrees' in 30 years. Which is now. 1 to 7 has to be F, there has never been a prediction of 7 C in such a short period of time. Given that, the actual rise in that same period is about 1.1 F, which is the low end, but still in the specified interval. Further, there were two elements unknown at the time that pushed thing to the low end. One was the low sunspot activity of the last 2 solar periods. The other was a cycle of oceanic warming - a period of higher than normal heat transfer from the atmosphere to the oceans.

        So the science on which the predictions was base is sound. But the predictions are clearly worst case.

        For now, basically, we've been given a pass. But right now we are seeing GREATER ice melt than worst case predictions. And if we see factors that favor accelerated warming toward the higher side of predictions rather than the low side as was the last 30 years, your perspective on predictions would be seen as naive.

        But I do agree, on the whole, there is a tendency toward overplaying the potential immediate threat. It's a slow process, with a lot of inertia. We may well be beyond reversal for a very, very long time no matter what we do. Which was the point of the article. But the real cost and impact of that fact may not start really costing a lot of money and impacting a large population in low lying area for another 20 or 30 years

        Keeping in mind that the drastic effect in the arctic is NOW. And that melting permafrost will add large amounts of CO2 in concert with our own emissions, you may just find that this article is in fact a good bit more accurate than it appears superficially.

        jim
        The whole overplaying of the threat, i.e. "The world is gonna end in 10 years!," is why people are not taking global warming seriously, and even claiming it isn't happening at all. This article shows that they have been making the same doomsday prophesies for 30 years now. Just as we dismiss the Jehovah's Witnesses and other cults who keep predicting the Rapture every few years or whenever their is a blood moon or asteroid passing by, people dismiss the global warming alarmists.

        Today it is people like Alexandria Cortez who use the latest UN IPCC report that says that the point of no return is, yet again, a dozen years away.

        If the scientists and politicians want people to take them seriously, they need to stop with the drama and scare tactics. Every time they cry out that the sky is falling and it doesn't, they lose more credibility. So when the sky really does fall, nobody will believe them.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          But the predictions are clearly worst case...
          jim
          And that is what the alarmists, like little Greta, are using as the inevitable "facts"
          That's what
          - She

          Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
          - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

          I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
          - Stephen R. Donaldson

          Comment


          • #6
            And I predict that the Earth will continue as it has since creation until the Day of Judgment.
            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
            Than a fool in the eyes of God


            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              THIS is why people keep scoffing at the politicians regarding global warming, or climate change as they call it now.


              It might be real, but they have been blowing it out of proportion and playing Chicken Little for over 30 years now.
              Who are "they"? How many people are we talking about and are "they" the same persons today as over 30 years back? If "It might be real" perhaps it is a rather bad idea to dismiss what is said today because of what was said 30 years ago...
              "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

              Comment


              • #8
                Global Warming and Climate Change is the same as Climate Change and Global Warming.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Charles View Post
                  Who are "they"? How many people are we talking about and are "they" the same persons today as over 30 years back? If "It might be real" perhaps it is a rather bad idea to dismiss what is said today because of what was said 30 years ago...
                  Al Gore!
                  That's what
                  - She

                  Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                  - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                  I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                  - Stephen R. Donaldson

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Climate change is no longer theoretical or in the distant future. The impact of climate change on human behavior is steadily increasing. Your border wall won’t protect you.
                    “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                    “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                    “not all there” - you know who you are

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                      Climate change is no longer theoretical or in the distant future. The impact of climate change on human behavior is steadily increasing. Your border wall won’t protect you.
                      Are you threatening to come to the US?
                      That's what
                      - She

                      Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                      - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                      I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                      - Stephen R. Donaldson

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by dirtfloor View Post
                        Climate change is no longer theoretical or in the distant future. The impact of climate change on human behavior is steadily increasing. Your border wall won’t protect you.
                        You're right... except the danger is not rising temperatures but corrupt politicians trying to take our money and freedoms in the name of Mother Earth.
                        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                        Than a fool in the eyes of God


                        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                          You're right... except the danger is not rising temperatures but corrupt politicians trying to take our money and freedoms in the name of Mother Earth.
                          MM, I don't think is it 'either or' (false dichotomy). The world is warming, it is a problem, and some entities (politicians, for profit companies etc) are using the issue and the debate over it to gain financially and/or manipulate their constituency.
                          My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                          If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                          This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                            The impact of climate change on human behavior is steadily increasing.

                            Example...
                            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                              MM, I don't think is it 'either or' (false dichotomy). The world is warming, it is a problem, and some entities (politicians, for profit companies etc) are using the issue and the debate over it to gain financially and/or manipulate their constituency.
                              The Earth warms, and the Earth cools. It has been this way since God said, "Let there be light." Right now we are holding more or less steady and have been for a couple of decades, but at some point in the future there will be a period of warming or cooling. It's as natural as the rotation of the Earth and nothing to be alarmed about.
                              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                              Than a fool in the eyes of God


                              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                              6 responses
                              48 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                              42 responses
                              234 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                              24 responses
                              104 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Ronson
                              by Ronson
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                              33 responses
                              190 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Roy
                              by Roy
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                              73 responses
                              313 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Working...
                              X