Climate change: The two-degree target - by Nature Video

[TREACLE97]

They got the 2 degree limit agreed! - they can make it warmer but not colder - get ready for mass chemtrailing by the developed world - they are evil criminals and they will get their way - you heard it here first!...its about to get (artificially) warmer!

[aManApathetic]

Rephrase that in English with punctuation and I'll get back to you.

[aManApathetic]

The man who presided over the largest industrial expansion in history up to that point was an environmentalist?

Oh and: Godwin's Law.

[robotim322]

People stop imagining thing and do your homework about real causes of climate change before posting such narrow-minded bull crap on internet. Start by googleing The Great Global Warming Swindle. We should encourage responsible production and responsible consumerism instead of just talking nonsense on this scale that it is happening today. Action = reaction = consequence.

[1PercentRDA]

If you get it into the minds of people that we need to buy environmentally friendly products then the ideal situation would be to see a sharp rise in the consumption of such products. But we are just talking about it now to try to reach a consensus, if it doesn't work then the government will step in with hardcore regulations, because we all know that humans are lame and will always go for the cheaper products.

[morganbath]

I don't really see the point in staring at graphs as I am not an environmental expert :) My take on this is to ask what the consensus is in the scientific community (NOT the political or infotainment community and not the enrergy sector) is, and just take their word for it. I understand the scientific process, but not the science of climate change itself.

[tonyboysax]

despite everything we know ,,human behaviour will not change in time,,because politicians are not acting,,, Copenhagen will fail,and probably the next 5 major meetings too,,the 2 c degree rise is already unavoidable

when will the message hit home

with major disaster that,s when

[morganbath]

Completely agree. People should start concentrating on how to survive climate change rather than stopping it. Prevention is not realistic. Survival might be.

[teemuruskeepaa]

You should look at the geological theories that are based on the ice core tests from Vostok Station in Antarctica. The temperature goes in cycles. Yet the discourse about the climate change talk only about stopping the rise to 2 degrees. They take the people as dummies.

[kkirT]

You should pick up a high school book on climate, you might learn a thing or two. Have your mommy or daddy read it to you before bed time.

[teemuruskeepaa]

So you assumed that I don't accept Greenhouse effect? You assumed wrong and have the nerve to even mock me on that basis.

[HMSBeagle200]

With respect, the climate change problem is factored by the rate of such change, of cause climates change through out the natural history, but no by the rate which we are witnessing now. What I'm not clear is whether you think the 2 degree target is too little or you think human active has nothing to do with climate change?

[teemuruskeepaa]

We can affect the climate but while trying to hold the degree at + 2, we can make the ice age far worse. We really have a greenhouse effect but we also are on a brink of a 100000 year cycle of hot climate. What is the combination of those two and how should be respond to the cycle? If we had to make an unsure decision, we should at least stop meddling with the climatic cycle.

[morganbath]

How big are the cycles, and how rapid are they? Is the "cycle" we are in typical?

[teemuruskeepaa]

wikipedia's article global warming has the graph, with co2, temperature and dust particles from Antarctica since 600000 years. See for yourself. The global average temperature should crash 8 degrees since yesterday. By staring at the graph, I've found the change always happens first by a sudden reduction in the global CO2 levels. How and why does that happen and what if we increase those levels?