For example :-
Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and more powerful storms.
This premise is not strongly supported by the scientific evidence:
• the science of climate change is not settled, and evidence reported by the IPCC AR5 weakens the case for human factors dominating climate change in the 20th and early 21st centuries
• the science of climate change is not settled, and evidence reported by the IPCC AR5 weakens the case for human factors dominating climate change in the 20th and early 21st centuries
• with the 15+ year hiatus in global warming, there is growing appreciation for the importance of natural climate variability
• the IPCC AR5 and SREX find little evidence that supports an increase in most extreme weather events that can be attributed to humans, and weather extremes in the U.S. were generally worse in the 1930’s and 1950’s than in recent decades.
Not only is more research needed to clarify the sensitivity of climate to carbon dioxide and understand the limitations of climate models, but more research is needed on solar variability, sun-climate connections, natural internal climate variability and the climate dynamics of extreme weather events.
4 comments:
Yes, still no working model.
Sackers - which I suppose future researchers may find unsurprising.
Meanwhile the problem of global overpopulation goes largely ignored.
Wolfie - a reduction of population would reduce a lot of problems, from pollution to fresh water. But no group seems to be volunteering.
Post a Comment