U.N. Secretary-General warns world 'not on track' to limiting temperature rise to 1.5 percent: TVNZ

[webfact]

U.N. Secretary-General warns world 'not on track' to limiting temperature rise to 1.5 percent: TVNZ

 

FILE PHOTO: Secretary General of the United Nations Antonio Guterres speaks to Chinese Premier Li Keqiang (not pictured) during their meeting at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing, China, April 26, 2019. Parker Song/Pool via REUTERS

 

MELBOURNE (Reuters) - United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said the world was "not on track" to limiting global temperature rises to 1.5%, TVNZ reported on Sunday, during his visit to New Zealand.

 

Speaking to the media in Auckland alongside New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, Guterres warned about the dangers of not addressing climate change.

 

"Climate change is running faster than what we are ... the last four years have been the hottest registered," TVNZ quoted Guterres as saying.

 

Countries vowed under the 2015 Paris climate agreement to try to limit a rise in global warming even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

 

According to local media, Guterres also said he wished to show solidarity during Ramadan with those affected by the deadly Christchurch attacks on March 15.

 

"To pay tribute to their courage, to their resilience but also to pay tribute to extraordinary unity and to the message of solidarity that was given by the people and the government of New Zealand," TVNZ reported.

 

Guterres arrived in New Zealand on Sunday and will later also travel to Tuvalu, Vanuatu and Fiji as part of a Pacific tour focused on climate change.

 

(Reporting by Will Ziebell; Editing by Jacqueline Wong)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-05-13

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[pegman]

No worries, it's just those smart, educated folks that think there is a problem. Right Donnie Dimwit?

[Tug]

Yup he ain’t the brightest bulb is he but he is a temp and America will soon be back on track 

[RickBradford]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

"Climate change is running faster than what we are ... the last four years have been the hottest registered," TVNZ quoted Guterres as saying.

Note what he left out: Global temperatures have been falling since mid-2016.

 

According to the satellite data, the moving average is now down by almost 0.3C to a level which is cooler than in 1989 and 2010.

 

 

In truth, temperatures are irrelevant, because nothing is going to be done anyway. The EU's latest 5-year plan downgraded climate change to near-irrelevance.

 

Even Greenpeace said that the EU had relegated climate change to “a footnote to an afterthought in their statement on the future of Europe”.

 

That's the ball game, folks.

[bristolboy]

40 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

Note what he left out: Global temperatures have been falling since mid-2016.

 

According to the satellite data, the moving average is now down by almost 0.3C to a level which is cooler than in 1989 and 2010.

 

 

 

In truth, temperatures are irrelevant, because nothing is going to be done anyway. The EU's latest 5-year plan downgraded climate change to near-irrelevance.

 

Even Greenpeace said that the EU had relegated climate change to “a footnote to an afterthought in their statement on the future of Europe”.

 

That's the ball game, folks.

First off, everyone should not that as per usual the poster fails to include the source of his graph. I believe it comes from Dr. John Christy, who is an outlier climatologist on the question of global warmng.

This is typical of the subterfuge that denialists use. In fact, Christy's methods and consequent claims were shown to be faulty the most important single reason being that he didn't account of orbital decay in the satellites.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/may/11/more-errors-identified-in-contrarian-climate-scientists-temperature-estimates

 

What follows are summaries of 4 evaluations of global atmospheric warming that use not only satellite data but ground level data as well. Readers will note that they show the highest temperature recorded occurred in 2018. What makes that even more significant is that 2018 was not an El Nino year unlike 1998

 

 

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate-guide/science/temp-records

 

http://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/GlobalAverage_2018.png

 

There's also this:

Satellite confirms key NASA temperature data: The planet is warming — and fast

 

A high-profile NASA temperature data set, which has pronounced the last five years the hottest on record and the globe a full degree Celsius warmer than in the late 1800s, has found new backing from independent satellite records — suggesting the findings are on a sound footing, scientists reported Tuesday.

If anything, the researchers found, the pace of climate change could be somewhat more severe than previously acknowledged, at least in the fastest warming part of the world — its highest latitudes.

“We may actually have been underestimating how much warmer [the Arctic’s] been getting,” said Gavin Schmidt, who directs NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, which keeps the temperature data, and who was a co-author of the new study released in Environmental Research Letters.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/04/17/satellite-confirms-key-nasa-temperature-data-planet-is-warming-fast/?utm_term=.91c557700b36

 

[thaibeachlovers]

Does anyone believe that it is even possible to control the rate of temperature change, whether rising or falling?

Does anyone actually believe that if temperature stabilises at or under present level it will actually stop anything that Gaia sends our way?

While some are saying the sky is falling, everyone else carries on regardless, and that is the vast majority of the world's population.

Other than talking a lot, and flying to conferences in exotic locations, has anyone come up with an affordable, acceptable, realistic scheme to limit climate change?

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Does anyone believe that it is even possible to control the rate of temperature change, whether rising or falling?

Does anyone actually believe that if temperature stabilises at or under present level it will actually stop anything that Gaia sends our way?

While some are saying the sky is falling, everyone else carries on regardless, and that is the vast majority of the world's population.

Other than talking a lot, and flying to conferences in exotic locations, has anyone come up with an affordable, acceptable, realistic scheme to limit climate change?

Actually, something called the free market system is doing just that. Already thanks to advances in renewable energy generation and storage coal is already obsolete. Gas is on the verge of suffering the same fate. What mainly stands in the way now are opponents of the capitalist system who support corrupt government efforts to favor fossil fuels.

[Srikcir]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said the world was "not on track" to limiting global temperature rises to 1.5%

What is Trump's administration's latest take on global warming? Mike Pompeo says,

https://qz.com/1614211/mike-pompeo-says-melting-arctic-ice-good-for-shipping-routes/

• "melting Arctic ice is a wonderful economic opportunity"
• New routes, where the nuisance of sea ice has conveniently disappeared, could “become the 21st century’s Suez and Panama canals.”

[RickBradford]

The New York Times is having another bad climate day:

 

"Climate science has struggled mightily with a messaging problem.

 

"The well-worn tactic of hitting people over the head with scary climate change facts has proved inadequate at changing behavior or policies in ways big enough to alter the course of global warming."

 

Gee, you reckon? Anybody with an ounce more sense than a billiard ball has known that for 20 years or more.

 

Here's some advice to the activists. 

 

Stop lying.

 

Stop issuing catastrophic bulletins every time there is a bit of weather around.

 

And stop talking about "messaging" , as if the only barrier to climate action was the packaging. Everybody (except the activists) sees how condescending and arrogant that is.

 

More than 20 years, they've learnt nothing, and I expect they never will.

[bristolboy]

7 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

The New York Times is having another bad climate day:

 

"Climate science has struggled mightily with a messaging problem.

 

"The well-worn tactic of hitting people over the head with scary climate change facts has proved inadequate at changing behavior or policies in ways big enough to alter the course of global warming."

 

Gee, you reckon? Anybody with an ounce more sense than a billiard ball has known that for 20 years or more.

 

Here's some advice to the activists. 

 

Stop lying.

 

Stop issuing catastrophic bulletins every time there is a bit of weather around.

 

And stop talking about "messaging" , as if the only barrier to climate action was the packaging. Everybody (except the activists) sees how condescending and arrogant that is.

 

More than 20 years, they've learnt nothing, and I expect they never will.

"Stop lying."

That's rich coming from someone responsible for post #4.

[bristolboy]

8 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

The New York Times is having another bad climate day:

 

"Climate science has struggled mightily with a messaging problem.

 

"The well-worn tactic of hitting people over the head with scary climate change facts has proved inadequate at changing behavior or policies in ways big enough to alter the course of global warming."

 

Gee, you reckon? Anybody with an ounce more sense than a billiard ball has known that for 20 years or more.

 

Here's some advice to the activists. 

 

Stop lying.

 

Stop issuing catastrophic bulletins every time there is a bit of weather around.

 

And stop talking about "messaging" , as if the only barrier to climate action was the packaging. Everybody (except the activists) sees how condescending and arrogant that is.

 

More than 20 years, they've learnt nothing, and I expect they never will.

And of course the typical kind of charges that are impossible to disprove because the people who make them can always find someone saying extreme things. But that fact is it's people like you who are provably engaged in deception. Which is why you are allergic to facts except for the dubious kind.

[metisdead]

A troll post has been removed. 

[RickBradford]

9 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

And of course the typical kind of charges that are impossible to disprove because the people who make them can always find someone saying extreme things.

Unfortunately, it's not just wackos like Bob Geldof and Prince Charles occasionally saying extreme things about climate. Nobody cares about them.

 

The problem is the mainstream media repeating demonstrably false claims about climate catastrophe, or, as the BBC has amply demonstrated in the past, making up its own lies.

 

And then they have the stupidity to suggest it is the "messaging" that is at fault.

 

At least the NYT got one thing right. "The well-worn tactic of hitting people over the head with scary climate change facts has proved inadequate at changing behavior."

 

Not just inadequate, but counter-productive.

 

 

[Dek Somboon]

3 hours ago, bristolboy said:

First off, everyone should not that as per usual the poster fails to include the source of his graph. I believe it comes from Dr. John Christy, who is an outlier climatologist on the question of global warmng.

This is typical of the subterfuge that denialists use. In fact, Christy's methods and consequent claims were shown to be faulty the most important single reason being that he didn't account of orbital decay in the satellites.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/may/11/more-errors-identified-in-contrarian-climate-scientists-temperature-estimates

 

What follows are summaries of 4 evaluations of global atmospheric warming that use not only satellite data but ground level data as well. Readers will note that they show the highest temperature recorded occurred in 2018. What makes that even more significant is that 2018 was not an El Nino year unlike 1998

 

 

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate-guide/science/temp-records

 

http://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/GlobalAverage_2018.png

 

There's also this:

Satellite confirms key NASA temperature data: The planet is warming — and fast

 

A high-profile NASA temperature data set, which has pronounced the last five years the hottest on record and the globe a full degree Celsius warmer than in the late 1800s, has found new backing from independent satellite records — suggesting the findings are on a sound footing, scientists reported Tuesday.

If anything, the researchers found, the pace of climate change could be somewhat more severe than previously acknowledged, at least in the fastest warming part of the world — its highest latitudes.

“We may actually have been underestimating how much warmer [the Arctic’s] been getting,” said Gavin Schmidt, who directs NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, which keeps the temperature data, and who was a co-author of the new study released in Environmental Research Letters.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/04/17/satellite-confirms-key-nasa-temperature-data-planet-is-warming-fast/?utm_term=.91c557700b36

 

Thank you! Denialist dummies should no longer be given a platform to spread their bullshit and the TVF moderator should have banned the poster’s nonsense!

[RickBradford]

12 minutes ago, Dek Somboon said:

Thank you! Denialist dummies should no longer be given a platform to spread their bullshit and the TVF moderator should have banned the poster’s nonsense!

I can't work out whether that is a serious post, or an excellent parody of the typical snivelling complaint of a Social Justice Warrior to something they don't like.

[Dek Somboon]

I once had a chance to attend a speech given by climate activist Leilani Munter at the UN in Geneva. At the end of her talk, I politely drew the organiser’a attention (in private) to the irony of serving imported water in plastic bottles, at an event on climate change - held in a country with delicious free drinking water from the tap... Even water fountains are way more efficient, consume less energy and produce less heat.

 

”Oh right, yes indeed. Good idea! I will forward your comment to my boss.” was the standard bullshit answer.

 

In case anybody knows someone who knows someone else who works for these pretentious dummies, please feel free to forward this.

 

”If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem...”

 

#AbolishUN

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, RickBradford said:

Unfortunately, it's not just wackos like Bob Geldof and Prince Charles occasionally saying extreme things about climate. Nobody cares about them.

 

The problem is the mainstream media repeating demonstrably false claims about climate catastrophe, or, as the BBC has amply demonstrated in the past, making up its own lies.

 

And then they have the stupidity to suggest it is the "messaging" that is at fault.

 

At least the NYT got one thing right. "The well-worn tactic of hitting people over the head with scary climate change facts has proved inadequate at changing behavior."

 

Not just inadequate, but counter-productive.

 

 

Here's a link to the IPCC report showing how crucial it is to keep the temperature increase to 1.5 rather than allow it to go to 2.0

https://www.ipcc.ch/2018/10/08/summary-for-policymakers-of-ipcc-special-report-on-global-warming-of-1-5c-approved-by-governments/

[RickBradford]

19 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Here's a link to the IPCC report showing how crucial it is to keep the temperature increase to 1.5 rather than allow it to go to 2.0

https://www.ipcc.ch/2018/10/08/summary-for-policymakers-of-ipcc-special-report-on-global-warming-of-1-5c-approved-by-governments/

Here's a link to one of the authors of the report, confirming that isn't going to happen.

 

“It’s extraordinarily challenging to get to the 1.5C target and we are nowhere near on track to doing that,” said Drew Shindell, a Duke University climate scientist and a co-author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report.

 

If activists hadn't lied and exaggerated so much over 20 years, perhaps concerted action would have been possible. But they never learn.

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, RickBradford said:

Here's a link to one of the authors of the report, confirming that isn't going to happen.

 

“It’s extraordinarily challenging to get to the 1.5C target and we are nowhere near on track to doing that,” said Drew Shindell, a Duke University climate scientist and a co-author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report.

 

If activists hadn't lied and exaggerated so much over 20 years, perhaps concerted action would have been possible. But they never learn.

I'm assuming you got this quote from some dishonest denialist website. I know, I know. It's redundant to call a denialist website dishonest. Do you believe that Shindell is an honest person?

[SOTIRIOS]

....good job if you can get it......

 

...honor is not a prerequisite......

[RickBradford]

13 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I'm assuming you got this quote from some dishonest denialist website. I know, I know. It's redundant to call a denialist website dishonest. Do you believe that Shindell is an honest person?

You're bordering on hysteria now.

 

First, Shindell is one of the scientists who were authors of the report you were touting. Is he honest? I don't know. Are IPCC climate scientists honest? 

 

Second, the "dishonest denialist website" in question is The Guardian newspaper, a bastion of climate zealotry, but I don't think even they would have the nerve to make this stuff up, especially as it supports their preferred alarmist position.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/26/global-warming-climate-change-targets-un-report

 

Third, Shindell's comments are accurately echoed, nearly word for word, in the statement made in the OP.

 

Get a grip.

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, RickBradford said:

You're bordering on hysteria now.

 

First, Shindell is one of the scientists who were authors of the report you were touting. Is he honest? I don't know. Are IPCC climate scientists honest? 

 

Second, the "dishonest denialist website" in question is The Guardian newspaper, a bastion of climate zealotry, but I don't think even they would have the nerve to make this stuff up, especially as it supports their preferred alarmist position.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/26/global-warming-climate-change-targets-un-report

 

Third, Shindell's comments are accurately echoed, nearly word for word, in the statement made in the OP.

 

Get a grip.

It's clear that you didn't even bother to read the article. At least I hope so. Here are the subhead and the first 3 sentences:

Exclusive: Author of key UN climate report says limiting temperature rise would require enormous, immediate transformation in human activity

"The world’s governments are “nowhere near on track” to meet their commitment to avoid global warming of more than 1.5C above the pre-industrial period, according to an author of a key UN report that will outline the dangers of breaching this limit.

A massive, immediate transformation in the way the world’s population generates energy, uses transportation and grows food will be required to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5C and the forthcoming analysis is set to lay bare how remote this possibility is.

 

“It’s extraordinarily challenging to get to the 1.5C target and we are nowhere near on track to doing that,” said Drew Shindell, a Duke University climate scientist and a co-author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, which will be unveiled in South Korea next month."

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/26/global-warming-climate-change-targets-un-report

I'm betting you accepted the lies of some denialist website that misreported this.

[RickBradford]

^^^

I'm sorry, but you really have gone off the deep end now.

 

The article from The Guardian is dated Sep 27, 2018, so the report referred to was released in Oct 2018. 

 

Perhaps you should sit out the next few plays, at least until you sober up ....

[bristolboy]

 

1 minute ago, RickBradford said:

^^^

I'm sorry, but you really have gone off the deep end now.

 

The article from The Guardian is dated Sep 27, 2018, so the report referred to was released in Oct 2018. 

 

Perhaps you should sit out the next few plays, at least until you sober up ....

Wow. That's the article your quotation comes from! That exact quote! What has the date of the report's release got to do with it? You claimed this scientist was saying it was unlikely the increase would be as high as 1.5 degrees centigrade. Whereas what he really said is that it would be very difficult to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees. Even when you completely caught out in a falsehood, you just can't own up, can you? You're dead wrong.

[OneEyedPie]

I'm all for a temperature increase, particularly in the UK.  It's a long cold winter and a 1.5% temperature increase is a godsend.  

[RickBradford]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

You claimed this scientist was saying it was unlikely the increase would be as high as 1.5 degrees centigrade.

No, I didn't, as my post #18 states very clearly in the first sentence.

 

You really need to take some downtime, for your own good.

[OneEyedPie]

5 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

You really need to take some downtime, for your own good.

Far easier to stick him on your ignore list.  I did this a few days ago and life's been much simpler since.  

[bristolboy]

6 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

No, I didn't, as my post #18 states very clearly in the first sentence.

 

You really need to take some downtime, for your own good.

So let me get this straight. You start out with a claim that the global temperature is actually declining and now you support a statement from a leading climatologist that the global temperature is actually rising? Confused much?

[RickBradford]

Just now, bristolboy said:

So let me get this straight.

You're not even close to getting it straight. The opposite, in fact.

 

You said that a UN report from Oct 2018 warned about the damage from a temperature rise above 1.5C. I replied that one of the scientific authors of that report publicly stated that it looked very unlikely that the world could limit temperature rises to that amount.

 

Anything beyond that like "denialist websites", "falsehoods" and dishonest scientists is a product of your fevered imagination.

 

I've been very tolerant with you on this topic so far, but there's no point in continuing this until you've calmed down a bit.

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, RickBradford said:

You're not even close to getting it straight. The opposite, in fact.

 

You said that a UN report from Oct 2018 warned about the damage from a temperature rise above 1.5C. I replied that one of the scientific authors of that report publicly stated that it looked very unlikely that the world could limit temperature rises to that amount.

 

Anything beyond that like "denialist websites", "falsehoods" and dishonest scientists is a product of your fevered imagination.

 

I've been very tolerant with you on this topic so far, but there's no point in continuing this until you've calmed down a bit.

Well, if I misconstrued you comment it was because your first comment in the thread claimed that the global temperature was actually falling. I guess it was my mistake to expect consistency.