Hot in here

The warming is anthropogenic

On page three of the R K Pachauri committee’s report is the money quote:

“A global assessment of data since 1970 has shown that it is likely that anthropogenic warming has had a discernable influence on many physical and biological systems” [IPCC]

Daily Grist has a round-up of reports on how negotiations on the climate change report went down to the wire, as the world’s governments did what they could to protect their interests. [See a recent post on climate change dilemma]

4 thoughts on “Hot in here”

  1. If the main reason for global warming is anthropogenic , then please point out the PRECISE evidence.
    Also please explain the reason for global warming from 1919 -1940(when anthropogenic CO2 emissions were very low) and global cooling from then on to 1976 ( when anthropogenic CO2 emissions increased rapidly). Also please explain why the climate change models that predict climate of 2080(where the values of the variables are not precisely known) cannot explain the climate of the past(where the values of the variables are more certainly known).
    Good luck trying.

  2. Gurmeet,

    The questions you have should rightly be addressed to IPCC. This blog is not its advocate. I am interested in its national security implications: whether or not the change is anthropogenic and whether or not it is reversible will impact state behaviour in a fundamental way.

    So I’ll urge you to read this post (it’s mentioned in the post above) on the climate change dilemma before you jump at anyone who mentions ‘climate change’.

  3. You clearly announced (in bold)-The warming is anthropogenic. Read your own money quote. Since you clearly believe in what IPCC has said(everything in your post suggests,nay,says so), all I am asking is why? On what evidence, since there is a lot of evidence to the contrary and and several eminent scientists who disagree with the IPCC?
    If the hysterical warnings are wrong or exaggerated then so are the security implications, which is your concern.Surely, you would like to base your judgments on solid grounds.
    My objections still remain.

  4. Gurmeet,

    I see that you are spoiling for a debate with someone who can hold up the IPCC’s end. Well, I’m not that someone, so stop treating me as one.

    My argument is simple: that climate change entails risks to national security, and that the Indian strategic affairs establishment has to develop a strategy to address it.

Comments are closed.