RE:RE:RE:RE:suspitious Sorry to disappoint, but a report like that, that throws random shiite in as if it’s relevant, puts my hackles up. There’s enough hot air already on the topic. Someone wants me to believe a report like that, dot the Is and cross the Ts. Prove that the information in it is accurate and relevant. This sounds more like a cookware ad on TV.
It’s impossible to predict with any certainty what the environment will look like in 100 years. He11, we can’t get a reliable fix on next week!! We can get accurate information on atmosperic composition, going back a very long time. We can compare that with the fossil record to see what kind of life was supported at that time. That’s a start.
Even without climate models we can model the effects of atmospheric composition. That can be tested in a lab.
Concerns about ghg go back many decades. Methane is a nasty ghg, and with hundreds of thousands of years of vegetation now thawing and rotting (9 million square miles of permafrost) there’s a problem. Whether it’s man-made or not is actually academic, the results will be the same. Some preparation is indicated.
The “emergency” is because it will not be easy. It will take time. Doing nothing about anything will have disastrous consequences. David Attenborough put it well, when he noted that previous changes in climate have been accompanied by a breakdown of civilization.
Look around you now.
Claude13 wrote: Sadie222. I expected more from you EOM