Tim W wrote:


I'm just deeply suspicious because of the political swerve on it and the way
that
AS well you might: teh problem is to properly understand the scientific
case takes a brain, some education and some training. Not many have that
and precious few in government. Or indeed in many other movements both
for and against..so it boils down to believeable fairy tales and
political and market manoeuverng.

Dr Iain Stewart is doing a far better job of presenting the case on
Channel 4 IIRC. Watch him. He is I feel fair and ubiased.

If the whole thing is as clear cut as some would like to believe, I wouldn't
expect to have 2 senior academics from top institutes in the relevant field
holding somewhat dissimilar views.

Look, its very clear cut at one level, but that doesn't mean that
accurate predictions are possible. With weather, its possible to say
that in general June is warmer than December. OTOH we have had frosts
and snow in June..and it can be very warm in December.

Lets say that the best sort of analogy, is that there is a die, and
human carbon relase has caused it o be thrown, and depending on which
way it lands, the world will warm up somewhere between 1 and 6 degrees
C. In the next - say - 100 years.

One we can cope with. Wine growing becomes a major industry.
Two is disruptive. Habitats wrecked in the far north and South, major
polar melts. Bangladesh floods, the thames barrier gets put to the test
etc. But not that much more. Kiss goodbye to Aklpine skiing. Warer is a
serious issue in many plces. 1/10th world populations dies, mainly in
tropical regions.

Three is getting serious. Major storms, sizzling summer heatwaves and
serious loss of agriculture in some regions, conversely the Orkneys,
Shetland and the Hebrides become almost pleasant, and iceland and
greenland are actually habitable. Holland and East Anglia under serious
risk, as will be most of the pacific atolls.

Four is heavy. Almost all te ice will melt (polar regions alwatyys
amplify any average change, it seems) and aloads of fresh water dumped
into te sea, with a major change in salination and ocean currents: Huge
changes in global weather patterns. Possible massive relseas of metahne
hydtrates on a scale bpot seen for a million year..serious
deesrtification of many regions. 30% die back in population

5 degrees and its less a question of who dies, more a question of who
doesn't. Almost complete breakdown of much of civilisation. Malaria in
the London swamps, etc etc.

6 degrees and its really last man sitartray rule, food riots, mass
epidemics, famine drought and so on.

And no one knows which number will come up, or even if what we may or
may not do now will make it a lower one. There is a problem, you see, in
that when climate changes, it never ever does it gradually. The ice
records show that in polar regions at least, it tends to go 5-6 degrees
one way or the other, sit there, and then flip back. In short it
exhibits all the normal characteristics of a chaotic system, with more
than one strange attractors. Let's say the earth is stable where it has
been for the last 100 years, its also stable at 10 degrees colder, and
its been stable at 10 degrees warmer. as well. Its possibly stable at
plus 5 and minus five as well. Or not.

Essentially what the history says is that small climate changes have
ONLY been a featire of the last 10,00 years. Prior to that the climate
has swumg many times in te past from hot and steamy, to more or less
desert, to almost completely frozen.

Triggered by actually very small (relatively speaking), events.
Certainly a lot less interestng than doubling the amount of CO" in the
atmosphere.

And thatst the situation. WE know the climate can flip, and has flipped.
If it was just the CO2, we wouldn't really worry. A couple of degrees
max. The point is that its NOT just the CO2, any more than it was just a
few bad debts that threw the banking system into chaos. There is a lot
of positive feedback in climate. There are billions of tons of methane
locked up in cold deep seas and in permafrost areas. There are huge
tracts of nice reflective ice all over the polar regions.If we lose
those, we get a bit more solar energy input, and a lot more greenhouse
gas effect. Ultimately, life will adapt and plant life and plankton
populations will soar, as cities return to jungle or desert or sink
beneath the rising sea levels, and CO2 will get laid down again as
hydrocarbons. Take 10,000 years, but that's not that long.

THEN the climate will flip back to an ice-age. Maybe.


Nothing much will be done, now. Its already too late. Copenhagen will be
a complete flop, climate change will happen, and billions will die.

The smarter countries will be those with cold regions and nuclear power
stations. And No socialist governments. Military dictatorships will be
the most likely result. Millions of Russians and Chinese will die, as
they always have. Africa will survive in pockets, but 90% will die.
India will struggle on with maybe only 50% dying.

Bangladesh isn't even worth saving.

You will understand what I mean when the camel trains are trading salt
round the M25.;-)