APS rejects plea to alter stance on climate change
Sam Wormley
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/40916
The American Physical Society (APS) has "overwhelmingly rejected" a proposal from a group
of 160 physicists to alter its official position on climate change. The physicists, who
include the Nobel laureate Ivar Giaver, wanted the APS to modify its stance to reflect
their own doubts about the human contribution to global warming. The APS turned down the
request on the recommendations of a six-person committee chaired by atomic physicist
Daniel Kleppner from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The committee was set up by APS president Cherry Murray in July, when the society received
the proposal for changing its statement, which had originally been drawn up in November
2007. It has spent the last four months carrying out what the APS calls "a serious review
of existing compilations of scientific research" and took soundings from its members. "We
recommended not accepting the proposal," Kleppner told physicsworld.com. "The [APS]
council almost unanimously decided to go with that."
Different positions
The official APS position on climate change says that "emissions of greenhouse gases from
human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate" and
adds that there is "incontrovertible" evidence that global warming is occurring. The APS
also wants reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions to start immediately. "If no mitigating
actions are taken," it says, "significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and
ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur."
Robert Higgins
Much of this debate is pointless. China and India have repeatedly
refused to limit their carbon emissions at all. China is the largest
"villain" for CO2 emissions.
Even if the most extreme current models are accepted, and the most
draconian political measures actually implemented (forgetting for a
moment that they will destroy world economies), the increase in global
temperatures would be decreased by a tenth of a degree.
One also gets a clue as to how "catastrophic" climate change can be,
when the only reasonable and effective way to limit GHG's, nuclear
power, is anathema to precisely those elements who are most
"concerned" about "Climate change".
Surfer
<robert_h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Much of this debate is pointless. China and India have repeatedly
>refused to limit their carbon emissions at all. China is the largest
>"villain" for CO2 emissions.
>
China vows to reduce emissions
September 23, 2009
http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90776/90883/6764989.html
India is planning aggressive cuts in emissions: Ramesh
September 22, 2009
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/63072/India/India+is+planning+aggressive+cuts+in+emissions:+Ramesh+.html
Robert Higgins
> On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 08:47:40 -0800 (PST), Robert Higgins
>
>
> >Much of this debate is pointless. China and India have repeatedly
> >refused to limit their carbon emissions at all. China is the largest
> >"villain" for CO2 emissions.
>
> China vows to reduce emissions
>
> India is planning aggressive cuts in emissions: Ramesh
Bullshit.
The quote is ""We will endeavor to cut carbon dioxide emissions per
unit of GDP by a notable margin by 2020 from the 2005 level,"
Note the phrase "per unit of GDP". SInce China's GDP has been
increasing at 7-8% per year, minimal increases "per unit GDP" still
mean huge increases in ACTUAL CO2 emissions. Even at that, it will be
impossible - China is building huge numbers of coal fired electrical
plants every year.
The EU made similar "bold" commitments to reduce GHG and reneged on
all of them.
Cwatters
"Robert Higgins" <robert_h...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:fdb774e4-5920-4a68...@u20g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
> Much of this debate is pointless. China and India have repeatedly
>refused to limit their carbon emissions at all. China is the largest
>"villain" for CO2 emissions.
Rubbish. Check the map. It's true there emissions are rising but they have a
long way to go to catch up with the USA, Canada or Australia...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita
Robert Higgins
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
> "Robert Higgins" <robert_higgins...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Again the dishonesty. The map show emissions PER CAPITA. IS it that
you are stupid, or dishonest. China's emissions PER CAPITA are lower
than the US, because they have so many damn people. Their TOTAL CO2
emissions have exceeded the US for several years. Let me ask you: Is
the PER CAPITA CO2 that causes global warming, or the TOTAL CO2?
Maybe you should see a wikipedia article to explain the concept of
"per capita" to you.
Androcles
"Cwatters" <colin.wat...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote in message
news:SISdneY4q97Y-p3W...@brightview.co.uk...
>
> "Robert Higgins" <robert_h...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:fdb774e4-5920-4a68...@u20g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
>> Much of this debate is pointless. China and India have repeatedly
>>refused to limit their carbon emissions at all. China is the largest
>>"villain" for CO2 emissions.
>
> Rubbish.
Cwatters
On Nov 15, 3:40 pm, "Cwatters"
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
> "Robert Higgins" <robert_higgins...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:fdb774e4-5920-4a68...@u20g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Much of this debate is pointless. China and India have repeatedly
> >refused to limit their carbon emissions at all. China is the largest
> >"villain" for CO2 emissions.
>
> Rubbish. Check the map. It's true there emissions are rising but they have
> a
> long way to go to catch up with the USA, Canada or Australia...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emis...
>Again the dishonesty. The map show emissions PER CAPITA. IS it that
>you are stupid, or dishonest. China's emissions PER CAPITA are lower
>than the US, because they have so many damn people.
No it's because they have a less energy intensive lifestyle. What percentage
of the Chineese drive SUV or have airco in their houses?
Robert Higgins
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
> "Robert Higgins" <robert_higgins...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:22329abd-dad8-4c23...@x15g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 15, 3:40 pm, "Cwatters"
>
>
>
> <colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
> > "Robert Higgins" <robert_higgins...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:fdb774e4-5920-4a68...@u20g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > Much of this debate is pointless. China and India have repeatedly
> > >refused to limit their carbon emissions at all. China is the largest
> > >"villain" for CO2 emissions.
>
> > Rubbish. Check the map. It's true there emissions are rising but they have
> > a
> > long way to go to catch up with the USA, Canada or Australia...
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emis...
> >Again the dishonesty. The map show emissions PER CAPITA. IS it that
> >you are stupid, or dishonest. China's emissions PER CAPITA are lower
> >than the US, because they have so many damn people.
You did not comment on your dishonesty here, claiming that China
wasn;t the world's largest emitter of GHG by linking to a Wikipedia
map of PER CAPITA emissions.
>
> No it's because they have a less energy intensive lifestyle. What percentage
> of the Chineese drive SUV or have airco in their houses?
More and more, actually.
If you find the Chinese lifestyle so superior, why don't you go live
in China, rather than force everyone else in the West to live like you
imagine they should? BTW, the CHINESE don't like the Chinese lifestyle
- that is why they refuse to commit to real emission curbs (being a
"Developing nation", and all). They are industrializing at a rapid
pace, with little or no concern about safety, the environment, or
climate change.
Cwatters
On Nov 16, 5:06 am, "Cwatters"
>You did not comment on your dishonesty here, claiming that China
>wasn;t the world's largest emitter of GHG by linking to a Wikipedia
>map of PER CAPITA emissions.
Perhaps that's because I'm quite happy to admit that China is the largest
total emitter by country.
If CO2 has to be rationed isn't it fair that each person has an equal share
or do you feel you personally should be allowed a bigger ration?
>> No it's because they have a less energy intensive lifestyle. What
>> percentage
>> of the Chineese drive SUV or have airco in their houses?
>More and more, actually.
>If you find the Chinese lifestyle so superior, why don't you go live
>in China, rather than force everyone else in the West to live like you
>imagine they should?
I didn't say it was superior.
Surfer
<robert_h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Nov 15, 12:06�pm, Surfer <n...@spam.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 08:47:40 -0800 (PST), Robert Higgins
>>
>> <robert_higgins...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Much of this debate is pointless. China and India have repeatedly
>> >refused to limit their carbon emissions at all. China is the largest
>> >"villain" for CO2 emissions.
>>
>> China vows to reduce emissions
>> September 23, 2009http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90776/90883/6764989.html
>>
>> India is planning aggressive cuts in emissions: Ramesh
>> September 22, 2009http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/63072/India/India+is+planning...
>
>Bullshit.
>The quote is ""We will endeavor to cut carbon dioxide emissions per
>unit of GDP by a notable margin by 2020 from the 2005 level,"
>
>Note the phrase "per unit of GDP". SInce China's GDP has been
>increasing at 7-8% per year, minimal increases "per unit GDP" still
>mean huge increases in ACTUAL CO2 emissions.
>
Well, its a start.
And China's emissions per capita are still much lower than US and EU
emissions.
Robert Higgins
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
> "Robert Higgins" <robert_higgins...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e17e07e9-696c-4e9f...@r31g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 16, 5:06 am, "Cwatters"
>
> >You did not comment on your dishonesty here, claiming that China
> >wasn;t the world's largest emitter of GHG by linking to a Wikipedia
> >map of PER CAPITA emissions.
>
> Perhaps that's because I'm quite happy to admit that China is the largest
> total emitter by country.
>
> If CO2 has to be rationed isn't it fair that each person has an equal share
> or do you feel you personally should be allowed a bigger ration?
China is the biggest emitter (india is gaining ground quickly). China
and India not only have no intention of curbing emissions, but are
hell-bent on economic policies that will accelerate their emissions.
No matter what the West does, it is all moot. To save face, Obama &
Co. insist that they can "convince" China and India to change their
ways. It is utter nonsense, of course.
So you are left with curbing Western emissions, destroying Western
economies, while the Chinese laugh their asses off.
>
> >> No it's because they have a less energy intensive lifestyle. What
> >> percentage
> >> of the Chineese drive SUV or have airco in their houses?
> >More and more, actually.
> >If you find the Chinese lifestyle so superior, why don't you go live
> >in China, rather than force everyone else in the West to live like you
> >imagine they should?
>
> I didn't say it was superior.
How could it NOT be? It has a smaller carbon "footprint"; doesn't that
"save the planet"?
Marvin the Martian
FRAUD, which was exposed today when the contents of a mail server at the
Climate "Research" center was published on a Russian website.
The conspiracy to lie and collude against the United States with their
global warming lies was obvious.