It's Climate Change I tell'ya!! IT'S CLIMATE CHANGE!!
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Why are they so worried? I'm not & I don't think anyone else should be either. Don't know what the issue is!!!European climate agency says this will likely be hottest year on record -- again
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Melina Walling
Published Nov 06, 2024 • Last updated 20 hours ago • 4 minute read
CHICAGO — For the second year in a row, Earth will almost certainly be the hottest it’s ever been. And for the first time, the globe this year reached more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming compared to the pre-industrial average, the European climate agency Copernicus said Thursday.
“It’s this relentless nature of the warming that I think is worrying,” said Carlo Buontempo, director of Copernicus.
Buontempo said the data clearly shows the planet would not see such a long sequence of record-breaking temperatures without the constant increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere driving global warming.
He cited other factors that contribute to exceptionally warm years like last year and this one. They include El Nino — the temporary warming of parts of the Pacific that changes weather worldwide — as well as volcanic eruptions that spew water vapor into the air and variations in energy from the sun. But he and other scientists say the long-term increase in temperatures beyond fluctuations like El Nino is a bad sign.
“A very strong El Nino event is a sneak peek into what the new normal will be about a decade from now,” said Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist with the nonprofit Berkeley Earth.
News of a likely second year of record heat comes a day after U.S. Republican Donald Trump, who has called climate change a “hoax” and promised to boost oil drilling and production, was reelected to the presidency. It also comes days before the next UN climate conference, called COP29, is set to begin in Azerbaijan. Talks are expected to focus on how to generate trillions of dollars to help the world transition to clean energies like wind and solar and avoid more warming.
Also on Thursday, a report released by the United Nations Environment Programme called for increased funds to adapt to global heating and its consequences. It found that the $28 billion spent worldwide to adapt to climate change in 2022 — the latest year the data is available — is an all time high. But it’s still far short of the estimated $187 to $359 billion needed every year to deal with the heat, floods, droughts and storms exacerbated by climate change.
“Earth’s ablaze,” said UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres in a pre-recorded statement marking the report’s release. “Humanity’s torching the planet and paying the price” with the vulnerable most affected, he said.
“Frankly, there is no excuse for the world not to get serious about adaptation,” said UNEP’s director Inger Andersen. “We need well-financed and effective adaptation that incorporates fairness and equity.”
Buontempo pointed out that going over the 1.5 degree Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) threshold of warming for a single year is different than the goal adopted in the 2015 Paris Agreement. That goal was meant to try to cap warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) since pre-industrial times on average, over 20 or 30 years.
A United Nations report this year said that since the mid-1800s on average, the world has already heated up 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.3 degrees Fahrenheit) — up from previous estimates of 1.1 degrees (2 degrees Fahrenheit) or 1.2 degrees (2.2 degrees Fahrenheit). That’s of concern because the UN says the greenhouse gas emission reduction goals of the world’s nations still aren’t nearly ambitious enough to keep the 1.5 degree Celsius target on track.
The target was chosen to try to stave off the worst effects of climate change on humanity, including extreme weather. “The heat waves, storm damage, and droughts that we are experiencing now are just the tip of the iceberg,” said Natalie Mahowald, chair of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Cornell University.
Going over that number in 2024 doesn’t mean the overall trend line of global warming has, but “in the absence of concerted action, it soon will,” said University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann.
Stanford University climate scientist Rob Jackson put it in starker terms. “I think we have missed the 1.5 degree window,” said Jackson, who chairs the Global Carbon Project, a group of scientists who track countries’ carbon dioxide emissions. “There’s too much warming.”
Indiana state climatologist Beth Hall said she isn’t surprised by the latest report from Copernicus, but emphasized that people should remember climate is a global issue beyond their local experiences with changing weather. “We tend to be siloed in our own individual world,” she said. Reports like this one “are taking into account lots and lots of locations that aren’t in our backyard.”
Buontempo stressed the importance of global observations, bolstered by international cooperation, that allow scientists to have confidence in the new report’s finding: Copernicus gets its results from billions of measurements from satellites, ships, aircraft and weather stations around the world.
He said that going over the 1.5 degree Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) benchmark this year is “psychologically important” as nations make decisions internally and approach negotiations at the annual UN climate change summit Nov. 11-22 in Azerbaijan.
“The decision, clearly, is ours. It’s of each and every one of us. And it’s the decision of our society and our policymakers as a consequence of that,” he said. “But I believe these decisions are better made if they are based on evidence and facts.”
— Associated Press reporters Seth Borenstein in Washington and Sibi Arasu in Bengaluru, India contributed to this report.
European climate agency says this will likely be hottest year on record -- again
For the second year in a row, Earth will almost certainly be the hottest it's ever been.torontosun.com
To be fair, all in the photo are vegan.
Your point being that unless you share the plight of the the desolate and dispossessed, trying to help them is wrong?
Then why are you voting Tory?
Trying to help them?
I'm not a rich, spoiled kid patting myself on the back about being a good world citizen while peasants dig for cobalt.
The bunch is nothing but hypocrites.
So. . . the only way they can be upstanding folk is to abandon their riches and starve in rags on the streets?
She is a hypocrite, as are most environmentalists leading the charge.
I thought this was about her eating well with the undernourished out the window.
What part of that image was about the environment?
And again I ask. . . is the only way to avoid being a hypocrite to reduce one's impact to zero?
Is Bill Gates a hypocrite? He donates more money to feeding the hungry and improving the environment than any other single individual on the planet, but he lives better'n you or me. So. . . hypocrite or charitable rich guy?
No, she's a professional protester who doesn't have to work like the rest of us; Mommy and Daddy flip the bill.
And she's cunt too.
Do you know anything about her donation history/habits? I freely admit I don't.
Given the power, would you suppress her freedom to speak?
While we're at it, precisely what makes her a cunt? Is that a bad thing? Rather fond of cunt, myself.
Last thought, then: I gotta get back to my novel. I don't begrudge anyone who worked for what they got and wants to give back.
Not Gates, not Bono, not Buffet...
Maybe if Greta pledged some of her wealth to some environmental R&D, I would change my opinion.
She has so many different protests to go to.
She is a rich kid who cares about clicks, likes, and celebrity.
She is fluff.
Not Gates, not Bono, not Buffet...
Maybe if Greta pledged some of her wealth to some environmental R&D, I would change my opinion.
She has so many different protests to go to.
She is a rich kid who cares about clicks, likes, and celebrity.
She is fluff.
Surely you agree many would. And obviously, she's partially right about climate change. If you pump greenhouse gases into a closed system, they will retain more solar heat. That's a fact. Whether or not this constitutes a "crisis" is a matter of opinion.
Personally, I support anti-pollution measures. First because pollution is bad for folk, and second because anti-pollution measures also reduce the production and release of GHGs. So, one solid benefit and one benefit of indeterminate value.
Raising the price of something will cause people to use less of it, if possible. That's bedrock economics. It will also spur innovation to make more efficient use of whatever commodity one has raised the price of. I regard this as beneficial in most circumstances. For example, the United States decided that home ownership was a Good Thing, so we encouraged it by making mortgage interest tax-deductible. That's the policy. Whether one could ultimately do better by renting and investing the difference varies.
As far as taxes go, I'd like to be presented a single bill annually for all my taxes. . . Federal, state, local all rolled into one. But I'd also like Nicole Kidman to swing by and give me a blowjob. The latter is far more likely than the former.
Again I ask, has she pledged some of her wealth to environmental R&D? I ask because I don't know. Nor much care, frankly. She's one not-particularly-well-informed amateur who has become popular. I don't care much for such, generally.
And there's a big difference between "pollution" and the so-called "climate change" which is stated as causing "pollution" when in fact, CO2 is necessary for ALL life. For me, that's the difference! One is definitely solvable, the other, not so much.