Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Political debate. Welcome Yahoo Message Board exiles and everybody else !!
User avatar
barrysoetoro
Get in my Belly!
Posts: 29273
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 7:55 pm

Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Post by barrysoetoro » Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:47 am

https://www.afp.com/en/news/2265/worst- ... doc-wx0de1

Earth's surface will almost certainly not warm up four or five degrees Celsius by 2100, according to a study released Wednesday which, if correct, voids worst-case UN climate change predictions.

A revised calculation of how greenhouse gases drive up the planet's temperature reduces the range of possible end-of-century outcomes by more than half, researchers said in the report, published in the journal Nature.

"Our study all but rules out very low and very high climate sensitivities," said lead author Peter Cox, a professor at the University of Exeter.

How effectively the world slashes CO2 and methane emissions, improves energy efficiency, and develops technologies to remove CO2 from the air will determine whether climate change remains manageable or unleashes a maelstrom of human misery.


Now that's a scam! Not Trumps tax bill (which hasn't caused any recessions :lo2l: ).
Last edited by barrysoetoro on Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
☪ "May God d*mn the Saudis and America.", brookboy123, liberal, coward, from a family of America haters

User avatar
evilconempire
Somebody please hep me I been hypmotized
Posts: 32028
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:25 am

Re: Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Post by evilconempire » Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 am

"Cox and colleagues, using a new methodology, have come up with a far narrower range: 2.2 C to 3.4 C, with a best estimate of 2.8 C (5 F).

If accurate, it precludes the most destructive doomsday scenarios."

Still too much, but better. Let's hope this is correct.
0 x
How sad that your Mother didn't have an abortion before she brought such an abomination as the likes of you into this world. - Aluannie :prech:

User avatar
barrysoetoro
Get in my Belly!
Posts: 29273
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 7:55 pm

Re: Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Post by barrysoetoro » Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:52 am

evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 am
"Cox and colleagues, using a new methodology, have come up with a far narrower range: 2.2 C to 3.4 C, with a best estimate of 2.8 C (5 F).

If accurate, it precludes the most destructive doomsday scenarios."

Still too much, but better. Let's hope this is correct.
Oh, how much is it supposed to be? And according to what news article you just googled right now? :lo2l:
0 x
☪ "May God d*mn the Saudis and America.", brookboy123, liberal, coward, from a family of America haters

User avatar
evilconempire
Somebody please hep me I been hypmotized
Posts: 32028
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:25 am

Re: Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Post by evilconempire » Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:54 am

barrysoetoro wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:52 am
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 am
"Cox and colleagues, using a new methodology, have come up with a far narrower range: 2.2 C to 3.4 C, with a best estimate of 2.8 C (5 F).

If accurate, it precludes the most destructive doomsday scenarios."

Still too much, but better. Let's hope this is correct.
Oh, how much is it supposed to be? And according to what news article you just googled right now? :lo2l:
Ideally it would be stable rather than increasing at an unprecedented rate. I didn't have to google that as it's common knowledge outside of the bubble.
0 x
How sad that your Mother didn't have an abortion before she brought such an abomination as the likes of you into this world. - Aluannie :prech:

User avatar
barrysoetoro
Get in my Belly!
Posts: 29273
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 7:55 pm

Re: Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Post by barrysoetoro » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:26 pm

evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:54 am
barrysoetoro wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:52 am
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 am
"Cox and colleagues, using a new methodology, have come up with a far narrower range: 2.2 C to 3.4 C, with a best estimate of 2.8 C (5 F).

If accurate, it precludes the most destructive doomsday scenarios."

Still too much, but better. Let's hope this is correct.
Oh, how much is it supposed to be? And according to what news article you just googled right now? :lo2l:
Ideally it would be stable rather than increasing at an unprecedented rate. I didn't have to google that as it's common knowledge outside of the bubble.
Wow, oh really really Mr Science??? Wow, lets talk about it over Starbucks. A latte?? Yes, these right-wingers just don't understand ideally it would be stable rather than increasing at an unprecedented rate. Everyone who is anyone knows that!

I can't believe you believe so badly in that stuff - I mean, you are obsessed with it - over some link you found on the internet. I haven't felt the effects of global warming, nor has anyone. Hell, even the polar bears are back and in numbers. Your science hero Al Bore got his ass handed to him over it.
0 x
☪ "May God d*mn the Saudis and America.", brookboy123, liberal, coward, from a family of America haters

User avatar
evilconempire
Somebody please hep me I been hypmotized
Posts: 32028
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:25 am

Re: Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Post by evilconempire » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:30 pm

barrysoetoro wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:26 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:54 am
barrysoetoro wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:52 am
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 am
"Cox and colleagues, using a new methodology, have come up with a far narrower range: 2.2 C to 3.4 C, with a best estimate of 2.8 C (5 F).

If accurate, it precludes the most destructive doomsday scenarios."

Still too much, but better. Let's hope this is correct.
Oh, how much is it supposed to be? And according to what news article you just googled right now? :lo2l:
Ideally it would be stable rather than increasing at an unprecedented rate. I didn't have to google that as it's common knowledge outside of the bubble.
Wow, oh really really Mr Science??? Wow, lets talk about it over Starbucks. A latte?? Yes, these right-wingers just don't understand ideally it would be stable rather than increasing at an unprecedented rate. Everyone who is anyone knows that!

I can't believe you believe so badly in that stuff - I mean, you are obsessed with it - over some link you found on the internet. I haven't felt the effects of global warming, nor has anyone. Hell, even the polar bears are back and in numbers. Your science hero Al Bore got his ass handed to him over it.
LOL I'm not the one that's obsessed with it. Look at how unhinged you get over it. That's clearly your thing. It's just a top priority for me and a topic I like to discuss.
0 x
How sad that your Mother didn't have an abortion before she brought such an abomination as the likes of you into this world. - Aluannie :prech:

User avatar
chucky
Ayatollah of Rock-n-Rolla
Posts: 19991
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Post by chucky » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:31 pm

evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:54 am
barrysoetoro wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:52 am
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 am
"Cox and colleagues, using a new methodology, have come up with a far narrower range: 2.2 C to 3.4 C, with a best estimate of 2.8 C (5 F).

If accurate, it precludes the most destructive doomsday scenarios."

Still too much, but better. Let's hope this is correct.
Oh, how much is it supposed to be? And according to what news article you just googled right now? :lo2l:
Ideally it would be stable rather than increasing at an unprecedented rate. I didn't have to google that as it's common knowledge outside of the bubble.
Climate is never completely stable it is always changing cyclically .
0 x
"I’d rather die standing up than live on my knees."
Stephane Charbonnier

User avatar
evilconempire
Somebody please hep me I been hypmotized
Posts: 32028
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:25 am

Re: Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Post by evilconempire » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:34 pm

chucky wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:31 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:54 am
barrysoetoro wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:52 am
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 am
"Cox and colleagues, using a new methodology, have come up with a far narrower range: 2.2 C to 3.4 C, with a best estimate of 2.8 C (5 F).

If accurate, it precludes the most destructive doomsday scenarios."

Still too much, but better. Let's hope this is correct.
Oh, how much is it supposed to be? And according to what news article you just googled right now? :lo2l:
Ideally it would be stable rather than increasing at an unprecedented rate. I didn't have to google that as it's common knowledge outside of the bubble.
Climate is never completely stable it is always changing cyclically .
In predictable patterns and within normal variations. IOW, stable, but I don't want to wreck a good hair-splitting so I'll step aside now.
0 x
How sad that your Mother didn't have an abortion before she brought such an abomination as the likes of you into this world. - Aluannie :prech:

User avatar
chucky
Ayatollah of Rock-n-Rolla
Posts: 19991
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Post by chucky » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:44 pm

evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:34 pm
chucky wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:31 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:54 am
barrysoetoro wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:52 am
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 am
"Cox and colleagues, using a new methodology, have come up with a far narrower range: 2.2 C to 3.4 C, with a best estimate of 2.8 C (5 F).

If accurate, it precludes the most destructive doomsday scenarios."

Still too much, but better. Let's hope this is correct.
Oh, how much is it supposed to be? And according to what news article you just googled right now? :lo2l:
Ideally it would be stable rather than increasing at an unprecedented rate. I didn't have to google that as it's common knowledge outside of the bubble.
Climate is never completely stable it is always changing cyclically .
In predictable patterns and within normal variations. IOW, stable, but I don't want to wreck a good hair-splitting so I'll step aside now.
There are many unpredictable anomalies that can affect it greatly. Ice ages are part of the pattern. Man does not do well during an ice age . Man with technology should have no trouble adapting to the increase in the small amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. I mean many scientists think living on Mars might be viable and it has an atmosphere of 95 % CO2 as opposed to .04 % for earth.
0 x
"I’d rather die standing up than live on my knees."
Stephane Charbonnier

User avatar
evilconempire
Somebody please hep me I been hypmotized
Posts: 32028
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:25 am

Re: Study: Worst-case global warming scenarios not credible... more bad news for Neil deGrasse

Post by evilconempire » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:54 pm

chucky wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:44 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:34 pm
chucky wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:31 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:54 am
barrysoetoro wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:52 am
evilconempire wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 am
"Cox and colleagues, using a new methodology, have come up with a far narrower range: 2.2 C to 3.4 C, with a best estimate of 2.8 C (5 F).

If accurate, it precludes the most destructive doomsday scenarios."

Still too much, but better. Let's hope this is correct.
Oh, how much is it supposed to be? And according to what news article you just googled right now? :lo2l:
Ideally it would be stable rather than increasing at an unprecedented rate. I didn't have to google that as it's common knowledge outside of the bubble.
Climate is never completely stable it is always changing cyclically .
In predictable patterns and within normal variations. IOW, stable, but I don't want to wreck a good hair-splitting so I'll step aside now.
There are many unpredictable anomalies that can affect it greatly. Ice ages are part of the pattern. Man does not do well during an ice age . Man with technology should have no trouble adapting to the increase in the small amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. I mean many scientists think living on Mars might be viable and it has an atmosphere of 95 % CO2 as opposed to .04 % for earth.
LOL So retreating to climate/atmosphere controlled facilities is the answer. You do realize they aren't saying we can live on Mars like we do here, right?
0 x
How sad that your Mother didn't have an abortion before she brought such an abomination as the likes of you into this world. - Aluannie :prech:

Post Reply