With the warming already committed in the climate system plus the additional warming expected from
rising concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the Arctic will experience significant changes during this century even if greenhouse gas emissions are stabilized globally at a level lower than today's.
«I continue to believe that warming of Earth's surface temperatures
from rising concentrations of greenhouse gases carries risks that society must take seriously,» he wrote, «even if we are lucky and (as my work seems to suggest) the most catastrophic warming scenarios are a bit less likely.»
A: In this draft statement on Earth's Changing Climate, APS «reiterates» its 2007 statement in stating that: the climate is changing, humans are contributing to climate change, and
rising concentrations of greenhouse gases pose the risk of significant disruption around the globe.
Another, of course, is that the science illuminating the extent of the human influence on climate is not «settled» for many specific, and important, points, even though the basic case for rising risks
from rising concentrations of greenhouse gases is robust enough to merit a strong response, according to a host of experts (even if you take the intergovernmental panel's findings with a grain of salt).
Rising concentrations of greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere increase the temperature of air and water, which causes sea level to rise in two ways.
But there are vast volumes of studies concluding that
rising concentrations of greenhouse gases are already influencing the climate and will continue to raise the odds of fiercer floods, drier droughts and other disruptive changes, including a quickening pace of coastal retreats (and all as human populations soar in some of the world's most vulnerable places).
Original post On Tuesday, a simple but sobering note predicting an imminent end to measurements of carbon dioxide in air lower than 400 parts per million was posted by the group at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography that has been carefully measuring
the rising concentration of this greenhouse gas in the atmosphere since 1958.
Given that their scientific questioning seems more about taking potshots at existing studies than proposing convincing counterarguments (on what precise basis should
rising concentrations of greenhouse gases * not * be considered a significant risk?)