UN says they are 95% sure humans cause global warming

So the UN has proclaimed they are pretty sure humans are the cause of global warming since the fifties....



www.bbc.co.uk...



I am kind of buying this, and I am kind of not.



Has made me wonder where the ball is in your park? Are you pro human cause, or pro it's a natural occurrence?

reply to post by brace22


Well they still need to explain why ALL our planets and moons are changing as well

its the sun, I know we cause an impact but we are NOT the root cause.

reply to post by brace22
Its laughable ...they are 95% pretty sure but not 95% absolutely sure ..It doesn't sound they are sure at all let alone being 95% pretty sure ...peace

And the United Nations being the amazing scientific organization that has been so right on so many occasions, they must be correct here..

(HEAVY SARCASM INTENDED)

The United Nations is perhaps the most expensive and worthless organization the world has ever known

Well now, this sounds like a typical political report. It meets all the criteria. Big scary number to make everyone sit up and take notice. Grand declarations on something that cannot or has not been proven to the level they dearly wish they could say it was ....and a little (*HUGE*) 5% margin to cover their butts on any outcome later.

I'd respect them a little if they took a STAND...and didn't always play the coward's position with a big backdoor to escape through when or if they are proven outright wrong.

More people may take them seriously too...if every report didn't have hedging fine print and conditional terms programmed in, every time.

We'll I am sure this will make corporate loving republicans pop a vein in their heads.

So this is the same UN that wants a NWO and one world government and the UN wants foreign troops in America to kill you as they aren't under the constitution. Hmmm should we trust them lol

People should remember this is a UN commissioned report that has taken input from thousands of scientists across the world, from all countries, from all political backgrounds.

And that 95% certainty is the same level of certainty as science has that smoking causes cancer.

I simply cannot see why so many people think this is a conspiracy, when it is clear to me that the only camp that has a vested interest in establishing a conspiracy about Global Warming is the oil industry, who are indeed spending huge sums of money to try and discredit any idea that the world is heating up because of their product and that maybe we need to burn less hydrocarbons.

To be honest when I see people saying there is no such thing as Global Warming, I just think well, there's the oil companies success right there.


This is pretty cut and dried to me, this UN study is the biggest and most sweeping round-up of all of the available evidence to date. And it all points in the one direction.

damwel
We'll I am sure this will make corporate loving republicans pop a vein in their heads.

... and make corporate loving Democrats a whole lot richer.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

They should just come clean and answer to the emails from climategate . Maybe then they could develop a new transparent way of dealing with the science instead of using their peer/pal review of the papers .Its a joke ,they know it ,we know it, and they know we know it ...peace

hknudzkknexnt
reply to post by brace22

 

Well they still need to explain why ALL our planets and moons are changing as well

its the sun, I know we cause an impact but we are NOT the root cause.

There are plenty other explanations for this that don't invalidate man-made Global Warming here on earth. For example:


The warming on Triton could be the result of an extreme southern summer on the moon, a season that occurs every few hundred years, as well as possible changes in the makeup of surface ice that caused it to absorb more of the Sun’s heat.

Researchers credited Pluto’s warming to possible eruptive activity and a delayed thawing from its last close approach to the Sun in 1989.

And the recent storm activity on Jupiter is being blamed on a recurring climatic cycle that churns up material from the gas giant’s interior and lofts it to the surface, where it is heated by the Sun.

reply to post by Painterz


And you've just given 'natural' explanations for things happening elsewhere.

Is it thus then plausible that warming here is similarly 'natural'?

reply to post by Painterz
Lets see the documents that show that big oil is funding the skeptics to create a conspiracy .Big oil is the ones that would benefit the most from this sham if you ask me .More taxes from the little guy and higher prices and profits for the corporations .....peace

www.rollingstone.com...


"One recent analysis by the Center for American Progress found that almost a third of the 535 members of the House and Senate are climate deniers. Not coincidentally, those 161 reps have taken more than $54 million in political contributions from the fossil-fuel industry."

abecedarian
reply to post by Painterz

 

And you've just given 'natural' explanations for things happening elsewhere.

Is it thus then plausible that warming here is similarly 'natural'?

Well perhaps, but this far-reaching report today gives an overview that concludes with near absolute certainty that it is not in fact a 'natural' process, and is caused by man.

When you've got thousands of scientists all saying the same thing on one side, and lawyers and spin doctors from the oil companies on the other side saying the opposite, personally I'm inclined to go with the science.

I wonder how much Al Gore paid the United Nations to come up with that bunk.
Seriously ... the people who are the loudest about 'going green' and 'carbon credits'
are the same people who have the biggest financial investments in making sure that the
world buys into the 'man made global warming' crap.

Congratulations IPCC! With the release of your new Nonsensus Report you’ve miraculously managed to officially resurrect a state of knowledge eerily similar to that of the Dark Ages, which is doubly ironic since the keepers of knowledge on whose expertise you rely on have worked so hard to make any pesky evidence of medieval warming disappear from the records.

That was certainly no small feat. You fully deserve to take all the credit for this incredible accomplishment that will be given to you in the history books of the future.

Warmist regards, a fan
__________________________________________________

The biggest headline here in Germany is Sea Levels (not much to report on the warming). Someone has suggested sponges.

__________________________________________________



Summary for Policy Makers official release

This morning before leaving the house ABC News reported the report claimed that they said "humans very likely cause up to 50% warming".

Then in the car NPR changed it to "UN report says absolutely certain humans cause global warming."

Anybody want to pay money to see the full report and check?

There is quite a significant difference between what ABC News and NPR reported.

It's worth mentioning that both outlets are suspiciously void of directly quoting the report. As though they didnt read the report themselves. Anyone surprised?

Painterz

abecedarian
reply to post by Painterz

 

And you've just given 'natural' explanations for things happening elsewhere.

Is it thus then plausible that warming here is similarly 'natural'?

Well perhaps, but this far-reaching report today gives an overview that concludes with near absolute certainty that it is not in fact a 'natural' process, and is caused by man.

When you've got thousands of scientists all saying the same thing on one side, and lawyers and spin doctors from the oil companies on the other side saying the opposite, personally I'm inclined to go with the science.

So the UN can have "scientists", but oil can only have "lawyers and spin doctors"?
Oil can't have "scientists"? Logical thinking people can't have "scientists"?

Like I said, you gave natural explanations for similar things happening elsewhere.
But similar things happening here aren't natural.
Biased much are you?

reply to post by Painterz
Those numbers of scientist you are claiming to agree with that small bunch of charlatans at the un is bunk ..Christopher Moncton has did some digging and others as well and the math on that is like the math they are using in the report ..its only suggestive to those that might fall for it ..and that is not the majority of scientist ...Oh and saying a bunch of politicians are getting money from big oil is true but its the voters that are convincing them to be skeptical . Those political whores will take anyone money and say what ever they need to get reelected ...peace