6-degree increase by 2100 forecast after review of scientific data

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33011378...s-environment/

I don't have much to comment on here, but thought this deserved a thread because many of you love talking about this sort of stuff.

all the more reason to scrap all these stupid proposals.

Are you CRAZY? It will go up sixty hundred eleventy degrees then!

That's awesome. Now we get to watch people make the ludicrous swing from: "There's no such thing as MMGW!!11!" to "It's too late to do anything about MMGW!!!1!"

Kewl..... I hope enough ice melts to make my suburban Chicago home primo oceanfront property.

ONE TIME DEALA!!!!

Nuclear War will do that !

Or some of us can remain consistent in our position that man had very little to do with the temperature at all, and it is normal for the temps to go through cycles.

6 degrees is pretty much an apocalypse for MMGW proponents isn't it? I think we all can agree that dumping trillions down this hole is a dumb idea now though.

Sure was a cool summer in Chicago.... I have lived here almost 40 years and it's the coolest weather I can ever remember in this area.

If the polar bears of the arctic ever nuke the penguins of the antarctic we are all screwed.

either way its probably true. new technology is probably the only real way to do anything IF MMGW is a real phenomenon simply due to population growth unless we want our standards of living to go in the crapper through either emission reduction or MMGW-induced global crises. /rant

i thought this was cool. we're growing at an estimated 1.18% annually so by my calculations the world population will be 19 billion at that rate. one way or another that doesn't seem sustainable unless we find some crazy new sources of power.

This is absolutely absurd, and the fact that people actually believe the U.N on this of all organizations is laughable. The same doom and gloom projectionists on MMGW are the same cartoon characters that projected in 70's that we would be in an ice age by 2000. It is breathtaking that people actually slurp this garbage up.

Please read Climate of extremes by Patrick J. Michaels from the CATO institute...actually just read the first chapter the next time you in the book store, and every MMGW propaganda you believe in will be debunked

We really don't need much new technology I don't think. Why do people think there is a population problem, or will be?????? Many cities were more crowded in the past then they are now, when national and world populations were much smaller. Less than 5% of the land area is developed in the U.S. and forests alone cover six times as much land as all the cities and towns in the country put together.

The problem isn't in developing new technology, the problem is poor countries that have kept out and continue to keep out foreign trade and foreign investments. China and India are great examples of poor countries that abandoned there severe international trade and investment restrictions which led to HUGE increases in their economic growth rates, and led to tens of millions of their citizens rising out of poverty.

If people aren't suppressed by government intervention and are allowed to prosper on their own the word overpopulation would have never been created. Pictures of of crowded slums in third world countries may make people think that OVERPOPULATION is the cause of poverty, when in fact, poverty is the reason for the crowding among people unable to afford the TRANSPORTATION costs of commuting, but who are yet unwilling to forego the benefits of urban living.

So basically let the people prosper without government intervention, and they'll be able to afford the transportation costs to commute and avoid overcrowding and poverty.

There is no such thing as overpopulation.

I applaud every new thread that enables people to show their disdain for science.

I have a tremendous love for science, but a great disdain for most scientists.

Preface: I don't believe that MMGW has a significant effect on overall climate change.(I won't try and convince you, please grant me the same courtesy) Because of this, while I don't waste resources, I don't insist on the electricity I use to be produced by windmills instead of coal burning power plants./ end about me :-)

I'm making an assumption, and forgive me if I am wrong, but you believe that MMGW is the cause of climate change. It seems that there are a lot of ideas/legislation that have been proposed that would reduce the effect of MMGW. Would I be mistaken in also assuming that you've already incorporated those ideas/legislation that you agree with into your everyday life? If greenhouse gases are causing MMGW, are you walking or biking to work? If not, why not? If you believe in the merits of cap-and-trade(or any legislation that is passed in the interest of preventing global warming/climate change) why wait for it to be formalized? You can conform to those regulations on your own regardless of what legislation is passed.

Show me the time machine first.

First off, you, sir, are an instigator!

Second, that article is absolutely atrocious.

1. They don't tell you what temp scale they are using. The IPCC uses C, but they are using F.

2. The part you quoted makes it seem like mitigation will have no effect, but later on they say:

3. The difference between3F and 6F is huge in terms of effects.

You suck hard, MSNBC.

fyp

Well played.

Nonetheless, we really can't be satisfied with +3F as a best-case scenario.

To me, this reinforces my judgement that emissions cuts are only effective as a short and medium term measure. In the long run, we need a better solution for stabilizing Earth's climate.


Also, republicans and libertarians: even if you doubt the science, you can contribute more fruitfully to the discussion if you make proposals for how to deal with the alleged problem. It's your fault we are faced with this sopping piece of corporate-giveaway-laden garbage called Waxman-Markey right now.

I thought it might be C too, but then they say:

which has to be F. Also, the IPCC's highest estimated range for 2100 barely reaches 6C.

Hi Feltstein.

The US out of the UN, and the UN out of the US.

This is just another scheme in order to further their corruption...

If you trust the UN on anything, then you haven't read enough of their founding documents and the about the vision of their founders.