Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 6 December 2007 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2007.361
News
Scientists issue declaration at Bali
International researchers put their names to a proposal for emissions cuts.
More than 200 international climate scientists issued a declaration today urging politicians at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali to agree on strong targets for tackling climate change.
Global greenhouse-gas emissions need to be reduced by at least 50% below 1990 levels by 2050, the declaration says.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email webadmin@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
I am confident that concerns of Angkasa Pura are misplaced, since panel members fear global warming, and so would not use carbon emitting methods of transport, such as aircraft. --- (11/3/2007) Tempo Interaktif reports that Angkasa Pura - the management of Bali's Ngurah Rai International Airport are concerned that the large number of additional private charter flights expected in Bali during the UN Conference on Climate Change (UNFCCC) December 3-15, 2007, will exceed the carrying capacity of apron areas. To meet the added demand for aircraft storage officials are allocating "parking space" at other airports in Indonesia. The operational manager for Bali's Airport, Azjar Effendi, says his 3 parking areas can only accommodate 15 planes, which means that some of the jets used by VIP delegations will only be allowed to disembark and embark their planes in Bali with parking provided at airports in Surabaya, Lombok, Jakarta and Makassar. © Bali Discovery Tours. Articles may be quoted and reproduced if attributed to http://www.balidiscovery.com. All images and graphics are copyright protected.
Global Warming is real. It is also only 1/2 of one degree. That's it. No more.
1/2 of one degree rise in 36 years: from a low point in 1970-72. (Actually, since an El Nino peak in 1998, global warming has ... been NOTHING. Average temperatures the past nine years have NOT RISEN. Thus, I should argue Bush has already solved global warming, since the average temperatures have been declining his entire period in office. That 1/2 of one degree is now being used by the enviro's and UN/European socialists to fine (tax) the US, Canada, Spain, Australia, Italy, and Eastern Europe trillions of dollars to Germany (they closed their ex-Communist inefficient coal plants, England (they switched from coal to nat gas to end coal miners' strikes, France (mostly nuclear - and who wants the US economy destroyed/taxed) and the Soviet Russia (where Putin wants taxes for selling his unused power (his economy is ruined and declining) and his natural gas.) AGW extremists, of course, want more billions spent funding their research. But they censor and ridicule people who question their propaganda. Facts? The AGW extremists don't want to discuss "inconvenient" facts - they DO censor those incovenient facts but propagandize alarmist PREDICTIONS and extrapolations endlessly to a fawning news media. Not ONE piece of evidence (except over-excited press releases) since 1998 has shown global warming is occurring: Temps are as warm now (Dec 2007) as they were between 1933-1942, temps were warmer in 1100 than now, temps were warmer about 200 BC than they are now. And every one of those warming periods occurred before humans emitted CO2. If I followed trends, I'd expect temps to peak about 2 degrees warmer than now: that's what has happened before. But we are overdue for Hansen's Ice Age by some 2000 years, so I am skeptical that we will actually evere get higher than +2 degrees above now. When CO2 levels were four times higher in the past, temp's were lower. Every time before, in every ice age the past 400,000 plus years, temperatures changed FIRST, then (about 800 years later) CO2 levels began to rise. CO2 has risen. We know that. We don't dispute that: But today's enviro's refuse to admit that ALL of today's crops grow 12% to 26% FASTER, more hardier, growing better food, feed, and fodder in longer growing seasons in more acreage in more regions of the world BECAUSE of today's rise in CO2. Reducing CO2 levels, paying corrupt third-world dictators "carbon credits" to (literally) freeze and starve their subjects will kill millions. Doom many millions more to a (shorter) lifetime of misery and death and illness. NOT ONE PREDICTED "crisis" that AGW extremists claim will occur from global warming can be justified. EVERY crisis is based on extrapolated hype and one conditions that CANNOT occur. (For example: The postulated "stopping" of the Gulf Stream cannot occur today (nor in the future!) because there is NO glacier mass covering half the North American continent. There is simply no ice available to melt, therefore there can be NO cold fresh water to flood the depp Atlantic and stop the Gulf Stream. Another: Malaria can be easily stopped with DDT. Malaria outbreaks occur in ANY land (not tropical regions) and it is NOT a tropical disease. The worst known malaria outbreak happened in north Communist Russia in the 1920's: hardly a "tropical paradise" for those in Lenin's and Stalin's frozen gulags. Rising sea level? 28 inches (maybe) in one hundred years. That's all. Less than 1 meter in one hundred years. And for that the enviros want to kill millions by denying them clean water, transporatation and better food, more fertilizer, and reliable energy. Why does the UN/IPCC/socialists support AGW extremists? For the money. Trillions of it. To harm economies of those they hate and envy. Because many AGW extremists hate and fear the world's innocent population.
Dear Mr. Cook, cool it, here speaks a European socialist! A little socialism can't harm, as Mr. Reagan said (about prayer!). The oldamerican Inka state - quasi ideal - did'nt know private property. Clearly, there is no climate katastrophy and there is enough people who knows that. The Gulf Stream is only part of the global movement of the world's ocean system, nothing can stop it, besides the continental drift. See level change? under experts, it is called an "enigma": around India, there is a maximum (10mm/y), and on the full pacific east coast there is a see level drop: 5mm/y. Till today, all katastrophies are manmade: The flooding of New Orleans occured because the american society is not willing to stabilize with public money their dike-system. By the way, there was no Gulag under Lenin! To join the ICPP-train brings a lot of money, I feel, you should appreciate that! have a nice day!
Ok, let´s pretend that the socialist regimen in East Europe was great and delicious. Lenin was a nice fellow, my grandfather was not murdered by the Czech sweet communists and, more, that the billion tonnes of oil that is burned every week will not do any harm to anyone. Santa Claus will be visiting our homes and, soon, Easter Rabbit will be bringing little chocolate eggs to all of us. Speaking of Easter, let´s pretend that the beautiful people that lived in the Easter Islands did not burn all their forests and died off from their blindness. After all they were gracious people not contaminated by ugly capitalism. It's amazing how there are people that keep ignoring reality in favor of ideological or religious blindness.
As far as I can see, Robert Cook is wrong and tendentious. Selecting 2 points in a noisy profile is not a fair way to compare the trend in the time series. THere are studies that indicate that the moving window average temperature is increasing. See the picture in wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png, it is not good to cite wikipedia on scientific grounds, but this has references). The time instants Cook takes are just selceted to make his point, but are devoid of any value. As for the anti-communist comments, they simply do not belong here. For the record, far-rightist's dictatorship regimes, supported or implanted by the US in Latin America in the 70' had devastated the region, both in their resources and their rights. If someone wrote the "Black Book of Capitalism" I am not sure that the death-toll would be much different than the Communist one, even in a per-year basis. Regards