![]() |
|
|
. . . . . entries for 12.2.09 . . . . . I am perplexed by global warming skeptics, now more than ever. Here is an excerpt from my reading on ozone depletion and the Montreal Protocol: "The long life of CFCs ensured that the damage would continue long after the stoppage of use of the chemicals, and the adverse effects would be severe long before the ozone layer recovered. The world community accepted that actions had to be taken as a precautionary measure, as mentioned in the preamble to the Protocol. In 1992, this was incorporated in the declaration of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, as Principle 15 that, in cases where serious harm is threatened, positive action to protect the environment should not be delayed until irrefutable scientific proof of harm is available." It's like . . . HEY GUYS WE DID THIS ALREADY REMEMBER!? to say nothing of the fact that there is hardly any doubt, these days, in the anthropogenic nature of global warming. Here is a fun bit, pulled from a World Bank document, after what I quoted above. "Although scientific evidence that human activities was causing stratospheric ozone depletion was quite robust in the late 1980's, there were a number of sceptics who said 'wait for perfect knowledge; there is uncertainty in the ozone model.' Unfortunately the sceptics were absolutely right. The models were inaccurate. They underestimated [emphasis not mine] the impact of human activities on stratospheric ozone." And so on. come home? |
.:people:.
{ting} .:past:. April 2002 .:skin:. turtles! turtles! by araglas |