<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Sea-level rise this century could be twice IPCC’s predictions, says research]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Delay And Deny http://www.grist.org/article/sealevel/ Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:39:08 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/sealevel/1 Inflationary Soothsaying


Amazing!

You're original prediction...is exceeded...by another prediction!

Two nights ago I dreamed I was a monkey, and yesterday I dreamed I was a giraffe!

Everything's getting bigger -- in hypothetical land!

BTW:

Bailo Model forecasts a precipitous drop in sea level.


]]> Inflationary Soothsaying


Amazing!

You're original prediction...is exceeded...by another prediction!

Two nights ago I dreamed I was a monkey, and yesterday I dreamed I was a giraffe!

Everything's getting bigger -- in hypothetical land!

BTW:

Bailo Model forecasts a precipitous drop in sea level.


]]> Comment #2 by Des Emery http://www.grist.org/article/sealevel/ Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:30:59 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/sealevel/2 Sea Rise

The IPCC, composed of good scientists as it should be, is automatically a conservative group of about 2500 people.  It has been around for 25 years or longer, examining the evidence for abnormal global warming.  The key word here is "abnormal."

The difficulty is fixing a time line for the events forecast by their studies.  The fact of their general "conservativism" downplays the urgency of the situation.  Their own surprise at the rapidity of change should alert the rest of us to the immediacy of the problem.  

If we look at the same pictures they do, we should realize that the IPCC is way off in its estimate of the time we have left to actually do something about the future right now.  It's later  -  much later  -  than you think!

]]> Sea Rise

The IPCC, composed of good scientists as it should be, is automatically a conservative group of about 2500 people.  It has been around for 25 years or longer, examining the evidence for abnormal global warming.  The key word here is "abnormal."

The difficulty is fixing a time line for the events forecast by their studies.  The fact of their general "conservativism" downplays the urgency of the situation.  Their own surprise at the rapidity of change should alert the rest of us to the immediacy of the problem.  

If we look at the same pictures they do, we should realize that the IPCC is way off in its estimate of the time we have left to actually do something about the future right now.  It's later  -  much later  -  than you think!

]]>