99.999% certainty humans are driving global warming: new study

Originally posted by pintohoo ↑

"The problem and the solution

Why is this research important? For a start, it might help put to rest some common misunderstandings about there being no link between human activity and the observed, long-term trend of increasing global temperatures.
Our analysis – as well as the work of many others – shows beyond reasonable doubt that humans are contributing to significant changes in our climate.
Good risk management is all about identifying the most likely causes of a problem, and then acting to reduce those risks. Some of the projected impacts of climate change can be avoided, reduced or delayed by effective reduction in global net greenhouse gas emissions and by effective adaptation to the changing climate.
Ignoring the problem is no longer an option. If we are thinking about action to respond to climate change or doing nothing, with a probability exceeding 99.999% that the warming we are seeing is human-induced, we certainly shouldn’t be taking the chance of doing nothing."

One of the reasons I dislike these wallies -------------- they tell us there is a problem - and then even tell us there is a solution ------------

but, they never mention WHY it is a problem in the first place.

We have change - therefore it MUST be a problem.

Must it?

Arrh, unnatural change?

Arrh, so man is ?unnatural?

wallies

Expand

No you do not understand how human society works. If there is a natural problem you can't sue anyone. If you produce a product such as coal or petroleum and your product causes damage, You can get sued. The more people who are able to demonstrate measurable damage, the more likely that litigation will follow.

If/when cases come before the courts who do you think will be the expert witnesses?

Will they be right wing ideologues from blogsites like this one? I think not.

Will they be the right wing commentators who only ever say things they believe their audience will like? I think not.

Will they be the leading scientists at the forefront of research? I think so.

Anyone who owns shares in fossil fuel companies should be assessing the risk of their company facing the same kinds of problems faced by James Hardie over asbestos. Just in case you don't know, asbestos is a natural set of fibrous minerals. If you dig the natural stuff up and use it in products, then you are accountable if people get damaged. Asbestos suppliers were unlucky in that their products caused one particularly nasty cancer as well as a whole series of less cause specific disorders. The link is not yet as clear between greenhouse gas pollution and actual measurable damage to real people but you can be sure there are plenty of lawyers ready for any coming tsunami of litigation.