Skip to main content

Proof - if it was ever needed


From the subject of climate warming being the topic of the moment last year, this year it has seemingly been relegated to something akin to ho-humm news. It oughtn't to be, as the very critical issue of the survival of our planet as we know it should be forefront in our minds - and action!

the heraldscotland reports in "Fresh evidence global warming is man-made":

"Climate scientists hit back at the sceptics today with new research they say has uncovered the “fingerprint” of man-made global warming.

Researchers working like detectives investigating a crime compared real observational evidence with data from computer simulations to see how they matched up.

They concluded there was an “increasingly remote possibility” of human behaviour not being the chief driver of climate change.

The clues were unravelled using a forensic technique called “optimal detection” in which different factors – natural and human – were given equal consideration.

They covered a wide range of trends affecting land and sea temperature, the saltiness of the oceans, humidity, rainfall and Arctic sea ice.

Also included was warming in the Antarctic, which has more recently been attributed to human influence.

Dr Peter Stott, from the Met Office Hadley Centre in Exeter, who co-led the study, said: “What we’ve shown in this paper is that the fingerprint of human influence has been detected in many different aspects of climate change.

“We’ve seen it in temperature and increases in atmospheric humidity, we’ve seen it in salinity changes ... we’ve seen it in reductions in Arctic sea ice and changing rainfall patterns.

“What we see here are observations consistent with a warming world. This wealth of evidence we have now shows there is an increasingly remote possibility of climate change being dominated by natural factors rather than human factors.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...