National Geographic Daily News
A photo of a man's hand on the dry Nile River.

A man places his hand on parched soil in northeastern South Sudan, Africa. Climate models predict extreme shifts in temperature and amount of water.

PHOTOGRAPH BY PRESS ASSOCIATION VIA AP

Brian Clark Howard

National Geographic

Published March 29, 2014

Updated on March 31, 2014 at 10 a.m. ET.

The world is not ready for climate change, which poses a number of serious risks, says the planet’s leading body of climate scientists.

On Monday morning in Yokohama, Japan, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a major report on the impacts of climate change, with the goal of spurring world leaders to act more decisively to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The report warns of serious impacts from changing climate on agriculture and human civilization and argues that governments are ill prepared for its effects.

The hundreds of scientists who wrote the report argue that world leaders have only a few years left to reduce carbon emissions enough to avoid catastrophic warming. At the same time, governments must step up efforts to protect vulnerable communities from increased natural hazards associated with climate change.

"Observed impacts of climate change are widespread and consequential," the scientists of the IPCC write in the report.

The new report show that "today's choices are going to significantly affect the risk that climate change will pose for the rest of the century," says Kelly Levin, a scientist who studies the impacts of climate change at the World Resources Institute in Washington, D.C.

"Crossing a Threshold"?

The new IPCC report warns that the world is close to missing a chance to limit the global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution to two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), a goal that world leaders had previously agreed was an important target. Beyond that point, "impacts will begin to be unacceptably severe," the authors wrote.

(Quiz: What You Don't Know About Climate Science.)

"There is potential for crossing a threshold that leads to large system changes, and that's a very unknown world that has severe consequences," Levin says. If the warming were to go beyond four degrees Celsius, she says, as predicted by some climate models, "we would see extensive changes in agriculture." Some areas where people currently live could also be rendered uninhabitable due to extreme shifts in temperature, amount of water, or sea level.

Even at the lower end of predictions, the report warns: "Climate change will lead to increased frequency, intensity and/or duration of extreme weather events such as heavy rainfall, warm spells and heat events, drought, intense storm surges and associated sea-level rise."

Levin says the report may be a "wake-up call, letting people know that climate change is now everywhere and that impacts are already unfolding." She hopes the report will help fill in some details and serve as a call to action for international leaders to negotiate more aggressive attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

People Aren't Ready for Climate Change

The report from Working Group II further warns: "Impacts from recent extreme climatic events, such as heat waves, droughts, floods, and wildfires, demonstrate significant vulnerability and exposure of some ecosystems and many human systems to climate variability (very high confidence). These experiences are consistent with a significant adaptation deficit in developing and developed countries for some sectors and regions."

Levin says the bottom line is that governments need to invest a lot more in planning for the impacts of climate change. Communities that are already marginalized, she says, including the urban poor, are most at risk.

Some communities should be moved to less risky areas, and support services need to be bolstered, she says. "We need more fast-acting institutions and early-warning systems. We are already committed to significant warming, so adaptation is a great necessity."

Planners of infrastructure also need to pay more attention, she says. For example, power plants will need to have enough water to function in places that are likely to get hotter and drier.

When it comes to response to climate change, the next decade is critical and will "shape the rest of the century," says Levin. Energy companies and governments are actively planning and building the infrastructure that will be in service for decades, she notes. "Whether we pick a low-emission or high-emission pathway, we may not see changes immediately, but in terms of a century it is a drastically different world."

Still, Levin says the "window hasn't closed" on addressing climate change. There is still time to head off the most severe impacts. The new IPCC report should help show the way, she says.

In response to the report, Frances Beinecke, the president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, says, "This is an S.O.S. to the world: We can't wait any longer to sharply curb carbon pollution—the primary driver of climate change. If we don't, punishing rainfall, heat waves, scorching drought and fierce storm surges will worsen, and the toll on our health and economy will skyrocket."

Bad News for Farms

The new report specifically calls out risks to agriculture from changing climate. “There’s a lot of evidence in the scientific literature that climate extremes can impact crops,” says Noah Diffenbaugh, a climate scientist at Stanford University and one of the lead authors of the North American section of the document.

“In the U.S. we have seen acute effects of severe heat on corn, cotton, and soy yields,” he adds. “That kind of severe heat is likely to increase in response to continued global warming.”

What is the IPCC?

The United Nations-affiliated IPCC is an association of thousands of scientists from around the world that was founded in 1988. Since then it has released a report on the current state of scientific knowledge about climate change roughly every five years. The new Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) updates the science since the last report was issued in 2007.

The massive report, running hundreds of pages, is being released in three sections prepared by three different Working Groups. Working Group I focused on the physical science behind climate change; its report was published September 27, 2013 (see the report's five key takeaways). Working Group II is releasing its report this week on the impacts of climate change and how people might adapt to them. In April, Working Group III will address how governments can work to mitigate climate change.

Follow Brian Clark Howard on Twitter and Google+.

59 comments
Dipanjan Mitra
Dipanjan Mitra

What astonishes me is that there are so many thousands of reports and articles out there from the best of sources, showing global warming, climate change, greenhouse carbon, rise in sea level, etc. etc. and that we are heading for danger and disaster but what are we as consumers actually doing physically to curb down on the usage of modern gadgets without which we can do and which can lead to less emission of heat from each and every household from here on? like microwaves, washing machines, air conditioners, etc. etc. or ar we really at a point of no going back? what is the solution from here? time will never stop. i personally feel we every single consumer should at least start thinking in similar terms. give away with things without which we can do in our daily lives. it is time to get back to basics and come out of the mental comfort zone that we have all gone into. And it is time to give back something to nature. 

If we can accept and use the facilities invented by science and technology, then why are we still not awakening to the fact that the same science is warning us against the climate change and global warming and future global disasters. We really have to start realizing and act fast. Thanks.

Brady Fergusson
Brady Fergusson

For the millions of people living within a few feet of sea level, climate change and rising sea levels are not theories to be debated - they are impending realities to be dealt with.

John C.
John C.

With the clock ticking toward December 2015 and the last chance to conclude a global treaty at the Paris climate conference, the job of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is to ratchet up the alarm. This it did in its report, released at the beginning of the week, on the impacts of climate change. It scored a bull’s-eye in the Financial Times: “Climate change harms food crops, says IPCC,” the headline ran. “Climate Signals, Growing Louder,” the New York Times opined, though the reality is that the volume is being turned up by the IPCC, not the climate itself. For the IPCC, this is mission accomplished — at considerable cost to the body’s residual credibility and integrity.


The IPCC’s Working Group II, tasked with assessing the risks and impacts of climate change, could have chosen to make amends for its previous effort in 2007, which was widely panned for bias and numerous errors. Such was the outcry over the 2007 report that the Dutch parliament ordered the country’s Environmental Assessment Agency to carry out an audit. It found that the working group was dismissive of the potential benefits of climate change, and it criticized the group’s process for being insufficiently transparent. Similarly, a report by the InterAcademy Council, chaired by Princeton’s Harold Shapiro, noted that the group’s Summary for Policymakers had been criticized “for various errors and for emphasizing the negative impacts of climate change.” The summary contained many statements that “are not supported sufficiently in the literature, not put into perspective, or not expressed clearly,” the Council said.


The summary, as the object of intensive political editing by government officials, is a document designed to generate talking points for sympathetic politicians and pundits to re-spin. Scientific coherence is not its goal. Instead of raising the bar in pursuit of objectivity, the current working group doubled down on its 2007 summary: It unfurls a series of distortions designed to magnify the threats, ignore the benefits, and downplay the possibility of adapting to climate change.


Its most eye-catching claim is that negative impacts of climate change on crop yields are more common to date than positive impacts are. This improbable claim finds only the weakest support in the main body of the report, with its qualification that climate change played a “minor role.” It is, the report states, “extremely difficult” to define a clear baseline from which to assess the impact of climate change, and many non-climate factors are often difficult to quantify.


More egregiously, the summary speaks of rapid price increases following climate extremes since the 2007 report. This negligence amounts to downright dishonesty, as the summary omits mention of one of the principal causes of the 2007–08 spike in food prices, which is highlighted in the main body of the report. It was not climate change that increased food costs, but climate policies in the form of increased use of food crops in biofuel production, exacerbated by higher oil prices and government embargoes on food exports.


In attempting to attribute changes in farm output to climate change, the IPCC makes heavy use of models linking climate to agriculture, most of which assume that farmers don’t change their behavior as the climate changes. Instead of relying on speculative models based on the condescending assumption that farmers are robots and don’t adapt, a more intelligent approach would be to examine how farmers and agricultural output have reacted to climate change in the past. But the IPCC rendered this approach impossible when it erased previous periods during which temperatures might have been higher than they are now (symbolized by the Hockey Stick in the IPCC’s 2001 report). In 2005, Jonathan Overpeck, one of the drafting authors of the 2014 summary, e-mailed a colleague, saying he intended to “deal a mortal blow” to the supposed “misuse” of the Medieval Warm Period in the 2007 report. Overpeck succeeded in his aim of getting rid of the Medieval Warm Period.


A feature of the Working Group II is that it is dominated by by natural scientists, led by Chris Field, a biologist from Stanford. “It is true we couldn’t find very many benefits of climate change,” Field told the Financial Times. “We worked really, really hard to identify every benefit we could find.” But not that hard. As journalist Matt Ridley wrote in the Wall Street Journal in January 2013 on the greening of the planet, analysis of satellite data shows that between 1982 and 2011, 20.5 percent of the world’s vegetated area got greener, while just 3 percent grew browner; the most likely causes are higher temperature, higher levels of carbon dioxide, or both.


Of the 71 authors of the summary, only three are economists; of these, one did not engage in work on the summary for the last two years; and one, Richard Tol, insisted his name be removed from the summary because it is, as he put it, too alarmist and it makes silly claims. The IPCC’s own analysis suggests that a warming of 2 degrees Celsius could cause losses equivalent to 0.2–2 percent of world gross domestic product. Climate change is not, Tol says, humanity’s biggest problem. Nor is it even our biggest environmental problem.


In 1972, the British government appointed an environmental commission chaired by a botanist that produced a report entitled “Pollution: Nuisance or Nemesis?” The majority, comprising scientists, thought civilization was facing nemesis. The minority, led by the economist Wilfred Beckerman, opted for nuisance. Two years later, Beckerman wrote of his experience on the commission, observing that scientists “do not have a minimal understanding of the way that the world of human beings operates.” As the IPCC has shown this week, plus ça change

Stuart Blaber
Stuart Blaber

I doubt very much that we will give up our cars and meat and planes even though we are on the verge of extinction.  We will just "sink into decay and oblivion"

Victoria C.
Victoria C.

Never thought it would come up to this point. Where it's like the last chance we get to live safe and sound in the world we're currently in. 

Just for one certain fact: many people around my age can't live off technology and electricity (cell phones, tablets, computers, etc.)

But temperate climate... where summer is scorching humid and the winter is freezing dry. 

I better off living without using large amounts of electricity and oil transportation. Because having extreme weather is the big deal.


Think if it this way:

Want to save energy? Or want hurricanes every week?

Roxy Arnold
Roxy Arnold

“Nothing is new under the sun” Even though we are faced with theses present circumstance due to our lack of action in the past, with or without humans, the earth will survive andflourish once again. Time will tell if humans will learn from society mistakes wither in this lifetime or the next. The earth is self healing, without negative human impact in time the earth can heal itself.

Jackson Santos
Jackson Santos

It is terrible! This situation show us that the men is unable to care our planet

Daniel Rolan
Daniel Rolan

This is perhaps one of the biggest untold crises in the world today: the world's complete lack of readiness for what will be the biggest driver of extreme weather, ecosystem decline, war, human migration and economic collapse in the years ahead. Lets not kid ourselves. The implications of runaway climate change could topple any and all of today's seemingly robust social and economic systems. Climate Change could in the end put in question the habitability of Earth for humans. 

If you feel this is true, I highly recommend you read The New Message from God, which is a spiritual solution to the grave threat of runaway climate change. 

http://www.newmessage.org/the-race-to-save-human-civilization

This is a race to save human civilization. Nothing less.


Geetha Mohan
Geetha Mohan

Oil, play a very important role to earth. Drilling oil have to be stopped. Tress have to grow. Sea have to reduce the intake of fishes.

How is this going to be possible?

Andrew Booth
Andrew Booth

Another confirmation of increased atmospheric warming and climate change must be the increasingly extreme weather conditions of recent years. We are having repeated record summer temperatures, heavier rainfall and floods and more violent storms including hurricanes like Katrina.

Surely those facts speak for themselves and point directly at climate change being real?     

Tracey Bushman
Tracey Bushman

Climate change deniers aren't even denying climate change anymore. 

Trisha Klatte
Trisha Klatte

the global warming is everywhere. it do not  mean its going to get warm everywhere! it means the weather is changing everywhere! and it isn't good!

Ron Bockman
Ron Bockman

Wish we'd get some of that global warming stuff, it's still cold as hell in the U.S. northeast

Larry Thompson
Larry Thompson

Yes, sadly, as Tom Tumminia says, "violence, . . . the final gasp, the rise of totalitarian leaders." And, I might add, as others have, the struggle for resources, i.e., the Germans called Lebensraum. What about the fertile soil of Ukraine?

Adolfo Gomez Cala
Adolfo Gomez Cala

Global Warming will have a place in the history of media advertisement just the same as Orson Welles  radio adaptation of The War of the Worlds had in 1938. Panic was reportedly spread among listeners who believed the fictional news reports of a Martian invasion.
Media has developed since and they now include Internet, United Nations and (liberal) governments all over the world as part of the prop, so the scary effects are even greater. Same science fiction though.

John Simpson
John Simpson

The earth has been heating up and cooling off for millions of years.Climate change is nothing more than a natural event that we as humans have no control over.A single volcanic eruption spews forth more dangerous emissions than mankind has put into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution!

tom tumminia
tom tumminia

The reason the world has not embraced global warming, is simply because the remedy includes billions dying, economic systems failing, weather becoming more violent and in the final gasp, the rise of totalitarian leaders.  

Raeven Wood
Raeven Wood

Who are these worthless fools posting sarcastic or flatly ignorant comments? People can't possibly maintain such blatant ignorance without direct compensation. I'm genuinely excited about the extinction of humanity. We are a disgustingly destructive, parasitic species. I only hope that we will wipe ourselves out before we finish off everything else, and not make it beyond this rock. Some of us may not be total idiots- unfortunately, that means knowing we're past our expiration date. 

hi ho
hi ho

how can scientist believe this BS? How did global warming help the US East coast with their most snowed and coldest winter in many years?


It used to be religion was based on belief and science on observance, but it seems that this branch of 'science' is more based on belief than reality!

Asok Smith
Asok Smith

"Observed impacts of climate change are widespread"


What observed "impacts"?

Rommey L.
Rommey L.

There are no deniers, if it would be so, they would just ignore what the rest of the world is talking about. The fact that they are not ignoring what we are saying, demonstrates that they are indeed "contrarians" and the only thing that is left is to figure out their motivations. Fortunately we don't need to exhaust ourselves looking up which are those motivations, one tiny fraction of the "contrarians" are "flat-earth" fanatics, together with assorted "creationists". The other, much larger fraction, is composed by those being subsidized by corporate interests, either because they work for those interests or because they profit from those interests. These include owners of shares of those corporations, which are exposed to a great devaluation of their assets (coal and oil reserves, i.e.) if these assets are forced to stay in the ground and banned from extraction. If the governments would forbid the exploitation of those reserves, it would eliminate a big chunk of their balance sheet, making for them a lot more difficult to borrow funds, even as they will have to pay severely larger interest rates, thus negatively impacting their profits, subsequently the earning of the shareholder. Nothing emotional about this. It is a simple cold greed what fuels the 98% of the contrarians. 
The world is ready to dismiss their complaint. The IPCC 5th assessment is the evidence that will decide the verdict of the public jury. They know it and they are growing desperate. Expect their violent reactions, even insults and threats. Don't ignore them, just make sure that they cannot carry on with those threats... 

Gerard Van der Leun
Gerard Van der Leun

Yet more blah blah blah blather from the gang that really, really, really is worried they won't get those fat checks any longer.  "There's still time....." Yes there is. Billions of years. You natgeo folks really need to stop being such a dumping ground for this blather.


And, Brian, you keep writing tripe like this nobody will ever take you seriously as a writer. Just a clue for you. Get some real ambition and quit grinding out the propaganda with your dull old axe.

Andrew Booth
Andrew Booth

I think human-induced climate change has already passed the point of no return. Global warming started with the Industrial Revolution but modern medicine, farming methods, motor vehicles and lifestyle have ensured that the process is irreversible. 

The human population continues to increase unchecked and that is the single underlying cause of climate change, New populations want more land which only comes from destroying habitats and their associated animal and plant species. New populations now all want cars, TVs and every domestic item with an electric plug which means more and more power stations and dams, new industries, millions more cars and consumer goods, new roads and cities and more consumerism. 

It's no argument that the developing world now has the right to build the same commercial and consumer lifestyle as the West as that lifestyle has caused this disaster and more of the same is madness. 

The IPCC can talk and talk and talk but only a bad doctor refuses to recognise the cause of a disease and treats the symptoms instead. A good doctor knows to treat the cause of the illness and the symptoms will disappear. Disastrous climate change can only be averted by reversing the increase in human population. That won't happen of course as humans seem insistent upon increasing the population even while the IPCC talk - ergo the climate has passed the point of no return. 

Andrew Booth
Andrew Booth

@Daniel Rolan Oh dear, I was with you up to the message bit. However, what you say is quite true, especially if a single natural event such as a major volcanic eruption tips the scales.

N A
N A

@Trisha Klatte The weather is ALWAYS CHANGING EVERYWHERE. Just in case you forgot this.

Kat H
Kat H

@Ron Bockman Maybe you should take a trip to Australia where they are having record high temperatures and dealing with fires. Have you overlooked the rest of the world while focusing on your own issues? Think of it as global climate instability. Remember the non-existent winter a couple of years ago? I think you need start considering the bigger picture.

E. Schwarzmueller
E. Schwarzmueller

@Ron Bockman  It's cold because of global warming. Arctic air travels south more easily when it is warmer than usual so you are shivering because our planet is getting warmer. Does this make sense?

John Patt
John Patt

@Ron Bockman  This is looking at the little picture. A few weeks of cold weather does not negate the trend. This is like saying that since Tom Brady threw two incomplete passes in a row, he is a below average quarterback.

Doc Holiday
Doc Holiday

@Adolfo Gomez Cala  I know, and some of those fools even try to say smoking tobacco is bad for you!


I'm glad 3% of scientists are not quacks and don't just do what their corporate masters tell them to.

Doc Climate
Doc Climate

Would "media advertisements" according to you, would also include the over 97% of climate scientists, worldwide agree that man-made global warming is a fact, not a theory (according to The National Academy of Sciences and every other scientific body in the world that deals with climate science, worldwide, over 200 of them.) and the 9,000 peer-reviewed climate science articles, the total number published last year, not one of which questioned AGW. The other 3%, by the way, don't publish because they are shills for the fossil fuel corporations and their statements have no scientific validity, so you only see them or hear them on right-wing media. They are paid to deny the science just as the phony "scientists" who worked for big tobacco and denied for decades that smoking cause lung cancer. The one billion dollar-a year denial campaign (see Scientific American on that) in addition to using big tobacco's playbook, even uses one of the same crooked PR firms, Heartland.

Man-made warming is a simple phenomenon that has been well understood since the mid-nineteenth century. It is a matter of basic physics and simple chemical reactions. Easy to prove and easy to measure. It was never questioned until it be began to threaten the profits of the fossil fuel industry.

Doc Climate
Doc Climate

Yes, Earth's climate has changed in the past and ice cores and other measures tell us why. Based on this knowledge, and other types of evidence we know the human emissions of greenhouse gases are warming the climate. We now have climate change on steroids, faster than ever before, in millions of years. That's because it's not "natural" climate change: We're messing with the climate by adding over 37 billion tons a year into the atmosphere which can't be absorbed in the natural cycle.

The 'climate changed naturally in the past' argument is a logical fallacy known as non sequitur, in which the conclusion doesn't follow from the arguments. It's equivalent to seeing a dead body with a knife sticking out the back, then arguing the death must be natural because people died naturally in the past. It fails to even consider the available evidence.

Doc Climate
Doc Climate

Not if we act quickly. Read Jeremy Rifkin's book, The Third Industrial Revolution. If we act in time we can transform not only our economy but our society for the better by transitioning to solar and wind power. He makes a convincing case citing examples where it's already up and working. He's a senior lecturer at the Wharton School of Advanced Management and has been a consultant to the EU and US governments for decades on energy policy. We're just got to tax carbon fuels for polluting and give the money to consumers to buy renewables. Read the plan on the Citizens Climate Lobby website. It's endorsed by eight Nobel Prize winning economists and even prominent Republicans because it's a market-driven solution and it's revenue neutral.

Kat H
Kat H

@hi ho  

Another person here that is overlooking the rest of the world while focusing on their tiny place in the world... Look up what is going on in the southern hemisphere? Check out Australia. Think back a couple of winters when spring blooms were happening an entire month early. Hi, ho, it's instability. Quit thinking your region reflects the entire world.

Bob Bingham
Bob Bingham

@hi ho  The USA is only 2% of the earth's  surface and only half of that was cold. You need to get out more.

Doc Holiday
Doc Holiday

@hi ho  warming arctic prevented the jet stream from maintaining the polar vortex  over the pole and the cold moved south, meanwhile alaska didn't get any snow.


Now repeat after me, say it ten times in a row:


"climate is not weather"

Barbara Dobriansky
Barbara Dobriansky

@hi ho  That's not even worth a reply. Although it did remind me of all the jokes made about climate change deniers this past nasty winter, so it gave me a laugh.

Barbara Dobriansky
Barbara Dobriansky

@Asok Smith  Random and rapid changes in temperature and weather. Climate change isn't just a warmer earth, meaning global warming, it's about the effects of a warming earth on all the seasonal weather changes. 

That Greenland defrosted the past few years, for example. Rising shorelines. Glaciers melting or shearing off. Some areas becoming more wet (UK, Australia), some becoming more dry (California). And that's just off the top of my head. Feel free to play scientist and do some research of your own; here's help:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/no-pause-in-global-sea-level-rise/

david auburn
david auburn

@Gerard Van der Leun Who is out for the $$$$$$$$$$$.......?   you don't think that compared to what the fossil fuel industry has at stake so far out measures anything hundreds or thousands of PHD's might cost? Wake up man, i agree with you to follow the $ but your trail went off sometime ago.

Guy Holder
Guy Holder

@Andrew Booth While I agree that our ever growing population is a fundamental problem and has impacted on our environment in myriad ways there is little to suggest we have impacted our climate.

With RSS satellite data confirming no warming for over 17 years and various studies suggesting as many as 9 different reasons for the hiatus to include the most recent - the fragrance from pine needles - it's clear our CO2 emissions are not the primary driver of climate. As a result global warming has become climate change - a natural and ongoing process. CO2 a gas required to sustain life, is now referred to as Carbon a solid and equated with soot.

It's shocking that countless young adults will graduate high school this year believing the world is dangerously warming even though temperatures have been stable during the entirety of their lives. It is shocking these kids believe our co2 emissions present a great threat to the environment and are largely ignorant of the fact that all environmental damage to date is the result of hunting, habitat encroachment and habitat destruction. A generation of resources and talent wasted on this folly.


Here's 10,000 years of climate.

http://smpro.ca/crunch/GISP2Civil.png

Louis Hooffstetter
Louis Hooffstetter

@Doc Climate Despite a continuous rise in CO2 the planet has not warmed for 17+ years and counting. The only place greenhouse gasses cause significant warming is in global climate models, which have proven themselves to be incorrect. They clearly do not handle one of the most potent greenhouse gasses (water vapor) correctly and deviate farther from reality every day. 


Don't believe the models, believe the empirical data and your own lying eyes. This winter was as cold as it was in 1979 when climatologists predicted the onset of a new ice age. Climatologists are witch doctors.

John Patt
John Patt

@Doc Climate  I agree. We bit the bullet and went solar hot water last Dec. It's already reducing our KWH by about 50%. We need to put our money where our mouth is. If we can generate enough energy with solar we may be able to chemically reduce CO2 to hydrocarbons. But we have to put our money where our mouth is.

Miles Monroe
Miles Monroe

@Guy Holder  "the fragrance of pine needles"?!  Seriously?

Ram Samudrala
Ram Samudrala

@Louis Hooffstetter This winter where? Australia? Alaska? The Arctic? The Arctic is the canary in the coal mine. Watch what is happening there and wait until it goes ice free in the summer (any year now).  Trust your eyes and believe the empirical data, and don't believe in the models, which UNDERPREDICTED the rate at which the ice would be reduced in the Arctic. It is more following an exponential decay curve than a linear one (which was what was predicted by the models). 



Kat H
Kat H

@Guy Holder @Bill Davis@Andrew Booth 

I just finished viewing the link from Bill in which the actual scientist who conducted the GISP2 stated that this data cannot be used how you are stating. This is local and is not considering ice core from the southern hemisphere. View the video

Guy Holder
Guy Holder

@Bill Davis @Guy Holder@Andrew Booth


The GISP 2 ice core data is probably the best temperature record we have  - the data speaks for itself.

I like Freeman Dyson who suggests climatoligists are no Einsteins.

Share

How to Feed Our Growing Planet

  • Feed the World

    Feed the World

    National Geographic explores how we can feed the growing population without overwhelming the planet in our food series.

See blogs, stories, photos, and news »

The Innovators Project

See more innovators »

Latest News Video

See more videos »

See Us on Google Glass

Shop Our Space Collection

  • Be the First to Own <i>Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey</i>

    Be the First to Own Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey

    The updated companion book to Carl Sagan's Cosmos, featuring a new forward by Neil deGrasse Tyson is now available. Proceeds support our mission programs, which protect species, habitats, and cultures.

Shop Now »