Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth

Experts: Aim of 2 Degrees Climate Goal Insufficient 442

Posted by samzenpus from the keeping-it-cool dept.
An anonymous reader points out that a long held goal of keeping the Earth's average temperature from rising above 2 degrees Celsius might not be good enough. "A long-held benchmark for limiting global warming is 'utterly inadequate,' a leading U.N. climate scientist declared. Keeping the Earth's average temperature from rising past 2 degrees Celsius – a cap established by studies in the early 1970s – is far too loose a goal, Petra Tschakert, a professor at Penn State University and a lead author of an assessment report for the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, said in a commentary published in the journal Climate Change Responses. Already, with an average increase of just 0.8 degrees Celsius, she wrote, 'negative impacts' are 'widespread across the globe.' Tschakert called for lowering the warming target to 1.5 degrees Celsius."

Comment Re:I am a paid troll (Score 1) 269

by Layzej (#49358947) Attached to: How Professional Russian Trolls Operate
The Heartland institute is paid by the fossil fuel industry to spread misinformation about climate change. Popular misinformation sites like WUWT have received $80,000 in a single year. Even as a lowly intern you can get a small piece of the pie. They'll pay you $150/week to comment on relevant blogs, newspaper articles, and social media.

Submission + - One Professional Russian Troll Tells All (rferl.mobi)

Submitted by SecState
SecState writes: Hundreds of full-time, well-paid trolls operate thousands of fake accounts to fill social media sites and comments threads with pro-Kremlin propaganda. A St. Petersburg blogger spent two months working 12-hour shifts in a "troll factory," targeting forums of Russian municipal websites. In an interview, he describes how he worked in teams with two other trolls to create false "debates" about Russian and international politics, with pro-Putin views always scoring the winning point. Of course, with the U.S. government invoking "state secrets" to dismiss a defamation case against the supposedly independent advocacy group United Against a Nuclear Iran, Americans also need to be asking how far is too far when it comes to masked government propaganda.

Submission + - "Founder" of Greenpeace says pesticides are safe to drink. (blogspot.com) 1

Submitted by Layzej
Layzej writes: "Founder of Greenpeace" Patrick Moore, who was reported here last week denying the physics of anthropogenic climate change on behalf of the Heartland Institute, is now claiming that the pesticide glysophate is safe for Argentinians to drink. "You can drink a whole quart of it and it won't hurt you" he stated. "It is not dangerous to humans". Although when pressed he refused to take a sip, he did state "I know it wouldn't hurt me".

Comment Re:What global warming? (Score 1) 573

by Layzej (#49310249) Attached to: Greenpeace Co-Founder Declares Himself a Climate Change Skeptic
Yup. That's about the level of 'argument' presented by Patrick Moore. It basically amounts to just making stuff up. Here is the temperature increase over the last 18 and 26 years according to the satellite reconstruction compiled by skeptic Roy Spencer: http://woodfortrees.org/plot/u... . The warming over the period is considerable. Equivalent to billions of nuclear bombs worth of accumulated energy.

Comment Re:incredulity != evidence (Score 2) 573

by Layzej (#49310023) Attached to: Greenpeace Co-Founder Declares Himself a Climate Change Skeptic

He shows he hasn't read an IPCC report when he says IPCC will "consider only the human causes of global warming". IPCC outlines scientific consensus on all sources of climate change from solar cycles to milankovitch cycles.

Honestly, there's a whole chapter on it. He could have figured this just by reading the headers.

Comment incredulity != evidence (Score 5, Informative) 573

by Layzej (#49310007) Attached to: Greenpeace Co-Founder Declares Himself a Climate Change Skeptic
Needless to say, scientists disagree. Patrick Moore shows he knows little of science when he says "There is no scientific proof." There is very compelling evidence, but there is no such thing as "Scientific proof".

He laughably accuses scientists of being in the pay of vested interests all the while being a PR front for fossil fuel interests such as the Heartland Institute that published this very piece.

His 'argument' amounts to long debunked talking points.

He shows he hasn't read an IPCC report when he says IPCC will "consider only the human causes of global warming". IPCC outlines scientific consensus on all sources of climate change from solar cycles to milankovitch cycles.

He shows he hasn't looked at paleoclimate reconstructions which show that the Earth has been generally cooling for the last 8000 years and that the current temperatures are likely higher than at least the last couple thousand.

The rest of his argument boils down to simple incredulity, which is not very compelling.
Earth

Greenpeace Co-Founder Declares Himself a Climate Change Skeptic 573

Posted by timothy from the but-that's-unpossible dept.
New submitter PensacolaSlick writes that [Patrick Moore a], co-founder of Greenpeace, and seven-year director of Greenpeace International, with other very pro-environmental credentials, has come out with a brief rationale for why he is "skeptical that humans are the main cause of climate change and that it will be catastrophic in the near future." He argues instead that in a historical context, human activity has saved the planet, declaring that "at 400 parts per million, all our food crops, forests, and natural ecosystems are still on a starvation diet for carbon dioxide." (Consider the source, which according to the New York Times is "the primary American organization pushing climate change skepticism.") Moore breaks with what might be expected of a Greenpeace founder as well in that he is currently chair of Allow Golden Rice.

Comment Re:heartland.org? (Score 1) 5

by Layzej (#49309885) Attached to: Greenpeace Co-Founder Declares Himself a Climate Change Skeptic.

Patrick Moore has been shilling for the fossil fuel/nuclear industry for over a decade. He is more favourable towards the scientific consensus when shilling for the Nuclear industry. Heartland advocates for the fossil fuel industry and appears to be paying the bills these days. http://www.sourcewatch.org/ind...

His opening paragraph is laughable: "There is no scientific proof..." What is scientific proof? There is no such thing as "scientific proof". There is compelling evidence, but there cannot ever be such a thing as "scientific proof"

The rationale he outlines is nothing more than incredulity and a gish gallop of long debunked talking points. Not compelling.

Slashdot Top Deals

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Close