It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Global warming "irreversible" for next 1000 years: study

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 05:50 AM
link   

Global warming "irreversible" for next 1000 years: study


www.abc.net.au

Climate change is "largely irreversible" for the next 1,000 years even if carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions could be abruptly halted, according to a new study led by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

The study's authors said there was "no going back" after the report showed that changes in surface temperature, rainfall and sea level are "largely irreversible for more than 1,000 years after CO2 emissions are completely stopped."
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 05:50 AM
link   
Well, this study is hardly one of light and hope, basically we are boned.

However, it does seem to indicate that although the change will be "largely irreversible" for a thousand years (and that is even if all carbon emissions instantly stopped), it doesn't say that the change will be sudden or sweeping. We can always hope that either the study is wrong/fearmongering or that science and technology will come up with a way to save the day instead of just making the problem worse.

www.abc.net.au
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 05:59 AM
link   
well duh, what else was one to expect?


The effects of the destuction that humans did on earth will certainly last longer than a thousand years. The recovery alone takes millions of years.

[edit on 27-1-2009 by Clairaudience]



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 06:12 AM
link   
The study is stupid.

Assuming we can make something happen in under 1000 years we could probably correct it in under 1000 years, it's stupid to assume otherwise or to even make such nonsensical longterm predictions.

Not that I assume we did make it happen, to me global warming is just elitist fearmongering and setting up the people for global taxation intended to keep standards of living as low as possible. The real problem is global deflorestation, mostly due to corporate greed and global pollution, going far beyond CO2, mostly due to the elitist controlled corporate sphere which not only pollutes but also supresses the technologies that could stop us polluting.

The average person is less to blame for all this than is blamed.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 06:42 AM
link   
the global warming isn't man made. Its a natural process that the earth goes through, after the warming there will be a cooling, which the humans at that time will blame others for, say "we're doomed" and try to reverse. there's nothing we can do about it, there's nothing we could do about it 1 hundred years ago, 1 thousand years ago or even a thousand years ago.

its a natural process.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Copied from post i started here
my post

Right so im reading this MSM propoganda BS

'Unsto ppable' climate change will last 1,000 years

with this opening statement



Global climate change will be "irreversible" for 1,000 years, scientists declared today.

Rising temperatures around the globe will be unstoppable despite attempts by millions of families to adopt greener lifestyles, researchers warned.


Then, knowing that it is BS i find this

The Coming Global Cooling?

with this statement



They were on a roll and they continued stating “The global climate warming is not solely affected by the CO2 greenhouse effect. The best example is temperature obviously cooling however atmospheric CO2 concentration is ascending from 1940s to 1970s. Although the CO2 greenhouse effect on global climate changes is unsuspicious, it could have been excessively exaggerated. It is high time to re-consider the global climate changes.


So whats to be thought of in all this, are the chinese fells full of crap even tho their using the same datasets that other western bodies use to analyse and draw their conclusions from, not to mention that they had this publishing in what appears to be a recognised publication

"Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics"

What are peoples thoughts on this matter, is Al Gore full of it (just picking at the effort he made with the incovenient *cough BS* truth, spinning his info to suit the "Elite Agenda"?



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join