I fully agree about the IPC. The reason that dozens of governments are involved in the review process is purely because, if they can't inject "acceptable compromise" into the dialog, there will be no political progress in controlling emissions.
While necessary, this measurably hamstrings the science involved. That's the main reason that EVERY measure of actual change is at the top of the scale of predictions by climate models, or grossly exceeds them.
China, India and to a very large extent, corporate America are among the worst offenders that have distorted and minimized the actual danger to all of the world's societies. Heckuva job! Johnny Bolton!
Posted by DeminNewJ at April 15, 2008 04:51 AMYet the Know Nothing Right gorges on internet shit that declares the IPCC "lib'rul" and "political". And the MSM continues to present the situation as though a scientific "debate" is still going on about whether human fossil fuel burning is the cause of the present warming.
And of course since the IPCC is a UN entity, it's demonically anti-American as well. Daily e-mail trees along these lines are sent out to the bitter conservative rubes, whose main "goal" is to "defeat" lib'ruls, whatever the issue. As well as maintain their gas guzzling mode of existence, all else be damned.
The current pinhead position is that scientific predictions that there will be irreversible climate effects causing substantial changes to sea levels and precipitation patterns is "alarmist". Head in the sand, as always.
The creation of all these "conservative" American shitbrains by the conservative movement and its corporate sponsors has rendered progress on any front almost impossible. As a result of conservative intransigence and stupidity, everyone is doomed. But at least the conservatives will be, too, and due to their massive stupidity and delusion, they will get the worst of it as the country descends into chaos and desperation.
Posted by euzoius at April 15, 2008 05:58 AMWe're number two!
China has already overtaken the US as the world's "biggest polluter", a report to be published next month says.
The research suggests the country's greenhouse gas emissions have been underestimated, and probably passed those of the US in 2006-2007.
The University of California team will report their work in the Journal of Environment Economics and Management.
They warn that unchecked future growth will dwarf any emissions cuts made by rich nations under the Kyoto Protocol. courtesy of BBC
US emissions are still growing too, though much more slowly.
Dr Auffhammer told BBC News that his projections had made an assumption that the Chinese government's recent aggressive energy efficiency programme would fail, as the previous one had failed badly.
"Our figures for emissions growth are truly shocking," he said.
"But there is no sense pointing a finger at the Chinese. They are trying to pull people out of poverty and they clearly need help.
"The only solution is for a massive transfer of technology and wealth from the West."
He acknowledged that this eventuality was unlikely.
How much more wealth do we need to give the Chinese?
Posted by peter at April 15, 2008 06:52 AM