Anthropogenic Global Warming

[elprincipe]

godf said:

 

"1. I don't believe it or disbelieve it. I think we don't have enough evidence to say conclusively either way."

If the IPCC reports are true, and we go on polluting anyway, as we're not certain enough, we will cost millions of people their livelihoods, homes, and means of supporting themselves. We will not be certain we're causing climate change until well after it's too late to do anything about it.

Some people in the developed world seem willing to take that risk, knowing that their governments will have the resources to allow them to adapt. They know that they are taking a risk with the lives of others. This is especially ammusing when it's conservative Americans who had just supported the invasion of Iraq as, while the evidence of their WMD program was shaky, it was a risk that could not be taken.

First paragraph:  The key word in your analysis is "if."  My main point is we don't know for sure.  It's hard to say to people you're going to lose jobs and/or income in a major way because we think this might be happening.  And I disagree with the assessment we won't know until it's too late.  A lot of people will tell you it's already too late, so let's get the science right and not listen to the "do something now even though we don't have all the information" types.

Second paragraph:   CO2 has already increased a lot in the atmosphere; this is not a "risk," it is a fact.  If what has been said is 100% true, people's lives are already in grave danger because of this and cutting back emissions to 1990 levels is not going to change that in any meaningful way.

As for Iraq, clearly that is an entirely different subject that undoubtedly would lead to a very long thread, and should be in a different topic.  All I would say is it's very easy to say with 20/20 hindsight what should have been done, regardless of agreements/disagreements at the time and at present.