I'm interested in learning peoples' science backgrounds regarding global warming. Specifically I'm wondering what's the highest level of classes you've taken in (1) physics (2) meteorology/climate (3) chemistry (4) biology (5) geology (6) math and (7) statistics. Feel free to go into any details you think are relevant.

Best answer: The UN (United Nations) is an intergovernmental organization. Its objectives include maintaining international peace and security, promoting human rights, fostering social and economic development, protecting the environment, and providing humanitarian aid in cases of famine, natural disaster, and armed conflict.


The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is an intergovernmental body of the United Nations, dedicated to providing the world with an objective, scientific view of climate change and its political and economic impacts. The IPCC provides an internationally accepted authority on climate change, producing reports which have the agreement of leading climate scientists and the consensus of participating governments.

The IPCC had a budget of about 5 million in 2017. Considering that governments around the world hand out about 5 trillion dollars in direct and indirect subsidies to the fossil fuel industry it is a drop in the ocean and there is little the UN can do. It is up to the politicians of the individual countries to act if they chose to.

Best answer: Your PROVEN FACTS are a bit off.

Best answer: Well we are due for one,
Interglacial's usually last 10 to 12 thousands years, ours is now 12,000 years old.
However ice ages start slowly, so even if we are at the start it might be hundreds of years before we feel it's effects.
As you can see on this graph we spend far more time in an ice age than out of one
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/BKi2QDBAGJWf6b7zXaDXz8d4sElo4qjSmY5LzXKyrXHRWu2mUZVEao74Y6EYFZWbxQ6zrOU=s170

'Incredibly, the stark summary is still a relatively conservative assessment of the consequences we might face if global warming does exceed 1.5C.' 'It is written in matter-of-fact language, but it omits some of the biggest risks of climate change, which are described in the full text.' 'For instance, the summary indicates that warming of 2C would have very damaging impacts on many parts of the world. But it does not mention the potential for human populations to migrate and be displaced as a result, leading to the possibility of war.' https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...

Best answer: If they could, they would.

Contrary to denialist claims, governments are not out to reward scientists to scare people or to suppress contrary evidence.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/08/politics/...

Why did they omit self-reinforcing feedbacks? https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/1...

... general principles and, in particular, as a means of tackling global warming and climate change?

I rhetorically ask this because JimZ said "From about 1980 onward, there was a minor warming trend which ended about 2000."

Best answer: no
but you should still vote against the anti science, anti environment GOP

Best answer: No, I did not. Did you know horses and buggies were so numerous in New York City at one time that locals thought they would have to buy hip boots to wade through the road apples?

'Donald Trump suggests he does not know if climate change is manmade, saying: 'It'll change back again' 😂 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world...