Climate change will show no mercy to dithering Thailand

[webfact]

STREETWISE
Climate change will show no mercy to dithering Thailand
Achara Deboonme

BANGKOK: -- Prevention is better than cure. That truth is obvious when it comes to personal health, but it also applies to the health of the environment, on which we all depend.

Only 20 per cent of farmland - 30 million rai - is irrigated in Thailand, which prides itself on being a land of agriculture.

Most rivers, canals and reservoirs have remained unchanged for decades, merely undergoing periodic dredging under a vast range of agencies - from the Royal Irrigation Department, Interior Ministry and Defence Ministry to local administrative bodies.

But in the light of drastic changes in our climate which have resulted in both longer droughts and excessive rainfall, we need fresh investment for water management and improvement works if we are to avoid disaster.

Thailand learned a hard lesson in 2011. The devastating floods that year were blamed on a combination of high rainfall, urbanisation and insufficient drainage and flood-protection systems.

According to the World Bank, the disaster cost Thailand's economy about Bt1.4 trillion - over half of the country's annual budget. Meanwhile, the budget allocated to the Irrigation Department was less than Bt1 billion per annum through the 1990s.

Given our track record, it is almost impossible to see how Thailand can cope with global climate change.

The Bt350-billion water-management plan initiated by the Yingluck government following the flood disaster is now under review by the National Council for Peace and Council (NCPO). The junta is also expected to review urban planning, following speedy urbanisation and construction on floodplains in many provinces, particularly Bangkok.

The NCPO's vow to tackle the problem in a sustainable way is more than welcome as the public coffers can no longer cover the damage.

Still, there are concerns that the junta, like its predecessors in power, is merely paying lip service to the issue of climate change - especially given its policy on energy prices. By reducing those prices and keeping them lower than the global level, the NCPO is encouraging reckless consumption and higher carbon emissions - a major cause of global warming.

Thailand must do more to build its resilience to climate change, as lives are in danger and the country's natural resources insufficient to compensate for the losses it brings. Insurance coverage is also low. The series of climate-related disasters across Asia in 2011 did US$370 billion (Bt11.8 trillion) in damage, but only $16 billion worth of affected property was insured. That explains why many industrial estates in Thailand decided to erect high floodwalls, ignoring objections from nearby communities.

The dangers from climate change are clear and present.

Thailand covers a mere 500,000 square kilometres of the planet's surface, but the shift in atmospheric conditions is global and having a knock-on effect on us.

However, we have the power to help the world reduce the negative impact while at the same time strengthen our resilience to climate change.

Thais are now familiar with "El Nino" and "La Nina", Spanish words describing the two systems of ocean currents and temperatures that cause variations in regional climate patterns.

Data on the El Nino-Southern Oscillation show that the periods of warmer-than-normal and cooler-than-normal ocean water temperatures have shortened, leading to higher frequencies of drought and floods in recent decades.

Seasonal temperatures have also been disrupted. (Anyone notice how Thailand's past few summers have been hotter, followed by unusually cool conditions when the rains arrive?)

Climate change has prompted many aid organisations to switch their focus. Visiting Bangkok in 2012, Helene D Gayle, co-chair of the World Economic Forum on East Asia said that her organisation had moved from emphasising relief to strengthening communities' resilience to natural disasters. Gayle, also chief of humanitarian organisation CARE USA, noted that 200 million people in Asia are affected by climate change each year, and the need was to ensure "they are not wiped out every time disasters strike". Aside from funding early-warning signals, CARE is helping vulnerable communities alter their way of life through initiatives such as introducing flood-resistant livestock.

Bindu Lohani, Asian Development Bank vice-president for Knowledge Management and Sustainable Development, told a March 2012 environment forum in Bangkok: "Public lenders and private investors cannot continue to channel billions of dollars to massive infrastructure projects without factoring in the realities of warmer temperatures, rising sea levels and more violent storms."

Notably, it is policymakers who must do more: they are the ones with the power to yes or no to a particular project. But if their wider goal remains fuzzy, our chances of mitigating the impacts of climate change will remain as small as ever. Brace yourself for more disasters and even greater damage.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Climate-change-will-show-no-mercy-to-dithering-Tha-30237444.html


-- The Nation 2014-07-01

[jaltsc]

"Thailand must do more to build its resilience..."

Amulets. Got to produce a lot more amulets.

Edited July 1, 2014 by jaltsc

[canuckamuck]

So irrigating more land will help protect them against climate change? More dams might help with water management but irrigation itself is not going to make an effect on flooding. It might actually make things worse because they will clear more trees.

The climate has always changed and it is a relatively slow process. Man has always adapted. Nothing to see here move along

[rakman]

Considering the fraud science that is perpetrated by the likes of Hanson and Mann et.al. The IPCC report which keeps being quoted as the bible is a regurgitation of false information.

All the computer models say we should be another degree warmer, but temperatures have either not changed or have gone down in the last 15 years. The amount of ice in the Arctic and Antarctic has grown. The US Great Lakes broke new records of ice, but one year is not climate.

How can the US historical temperature go down in the early 20th century and be higher than measured in the late 20th century? First, historical data doesn't change, unless modified by an agency with a flawed computer models and a agenda.

Statistical studies show fewer storms and less energy than historical norms have happened over the last years. One reason these storms seem so bad, there are more people and development in harms way.

The lesser countries are looking to cash in on a global tax bonanza, and they are just lining up for the payoff.

The 97% of scientists agreeing is another bogus lie, but the propaganda masters know if you tell it long enough and often enough it will be believed.

[toybits]

[toybits]

Good thing, we said goodbye to Bangkok many years ago and now live well above the maximum sea level rise.

[swifty5x5]

Considering the fraud science that is perpetrated by the likes of Hanson and Mann et.al. The IPCC report which keeps being quoted as the bible is a regurgitation of false information.

All the computer models say we should be another degree warmer, but temperatures have either not changed or have gone down in the last 15 years. The amount of ice in the Arctic and Antarctic has grown. The US Great Lakes broke new records of ice, but one year is not climate.

How can the US historical temperature go down in the early 20th century and be higher than measured in the late 20th century? First, historical data doesn't change, unless modified by an agency with a flawed computer models and a agenda.

Statistical studies show fewer storms and less energy than historical norms have happened over the last years. One reason these storms seem so bad, there are more people and development in harms way.

The lesser countries are looking to cash in on a global tax bonanza, and they are just lining up for the payoff.

The 97% of scientists agreeing is another bogus lie, but the propaganda masters know if you tell it long enough and often enough it will be believed.

I want to do the drugs your doing.

[antimedia]

Considering the fraud science that is perpetrated by the likes of Hanson and Mann et.al. The IPCC report which keeps being quoted as the bible is a regurgitation of false information.

All the computer models say we should be another degree warmer, but temperatures have either not changed or have gone down in the last 15 years. The amount of ice in the Arctic and Antarctic has grown. The US Great Lakes broke new records of ice, but one year is not climate.

How can the US historical temperature go down in the early 20th century and be higher than measured in the late 20th century? First, historical data doesn't change, unless modified by an agency with a flawed computer models and a agenda.

Statistical studies show fewer storms and less energy than historical norms have happened over the last years. One reason these storms seem so bad, there are more people and development in harms way.

The lesser countries are looking to cash in on a global tax bonanza, and they are just lining up for the payoff.

The 97% of scientists agreeing is another bogus lie, but the propaganda masters know if you tell it long enough and often enough it will be believed.

I want to do the drugs your doing.

I think you are doing quite well with what you are on now, if you honestly believe all bogus clap trap about global warming and the like.

[i claudius]

Man made climate change is a load of bullshit,when Britain was under the ice ,there were no men about ,and when the Sahara desert was a forest ,was it manmade then ,just a way to tax you .

[FangFerang]

Considering the fraud science that is perpetrated by the likes of Hanson and Mann et.al. The IPCC report which keeps being quoted as the bible is a regurgitation of false information.

All the computer models say we should be another degree warmer, but temperatures have either not changed or have gone down in the last 15 years. The amount of ice in the Arctic and Antarctic has grown. The US Great Lakes broke new records of ice, but one year is not climate.

How can the US historical temperature go down in the early 20th century and be higher than measured in the late 20th century? First, historical data doesn't change, unless modified by an agency with a flawed computer models and a agenda.

Statistical studies show fewer storms and less energy than historical norms have happened over the last years. One reason these storms seem so bad, there are more people and development in harms way.

The lesser countries are looking to cash in on a global tax bonanza, and they are just lining up for the payoff.

The 97% of scientists agreeing is another bogus lie, but the propaganda masters know if you tell it long enough and often enough it will be believed.

You are cherry picking your science, a symptom of American Republicans. Are you one of those George Murderous Bush touting, Rush WIndbag worshipping idiots?

The rapidity of the Greenland ice shelf melting is so rapid that the land mass is rising an inch a year -- ask a geologist, and they will tell that is an insane development. Ask the people whose islands are being swallowed by the rising seas -- just pick one out of literally thousands -- and your arguments do not hold water. Ask people in central Virginia, where they will tell you that it snowed every year while they were growing up and now it is once every few years, because they live where snow is neither absent nor constant and can tell you their margin has shifted..

First, industrialists claimed there was no change. Then they claimed there might be change. Then they admitted there was change going on, even rapid change, but it was not from human action. Now the new call to inaction is that 'there is rapid change, but we cannot do anything about it."

I am one of the 97% of the scientists who agree, and I am no bogus lie. At conferences all over the world, in poll after poll after poll, more than 96.2% of all relevant scientists agree on climate change and furiously argue about what should and can be done (some polls only ask physicians, who are neither meteorologists nor climatologists, and are funded by Republican group-think tanks).

You are cherry picking scientific information to fulfill a political agenda.

That is laughable.

Edited July 1, 2014 by FangFerang

[Robert2006]

Considering the fraud science that is perpetrated by the likes of Hanson and Mann et.al. The IPCC report which keeps being quoted as the bible is a regurgitation of false information.

All the computer models say we should be another degree warmer, but temperatures have either not changed or have gone down in the last 15 years. The amount of ice in the Arctic and Antarctic has grown. The US Great Lakes broke new records of ice, but one year is not climate.

How can the US historical temperature go down in the early 20th century and be higher than measured in the late 20th century? First, historical data doesn't change, unless modified by an agency with a flawed computer models and a agenda.

Statistical studies show fewer storms and less energy than historical norms have happened over the last years. One reason these storms seem so bad, there are more people and development in harms way.

The lesser countries are looking to cash in on a global tax bonanza, and they are just lining up for the payoff.

The 97% of scientists agreeing is another bogus lie, but the propaganda masters know if you tell it long enough and often enough it will be believed.

I want to do the drugs your doing.

Actually he is correct, private corporations and their sales teams the governments push climate change science as a way to implement a tax on carbon dioxide. Most scientists that are not in the pocket of big business say it’s a scam, pure propaganda perpetrated for profit and control.

[canuckamuck]

This is a chart of land elevations which maxes out at 80 meters. I see no data, so I guess we are just supposed to be afraid of the scary red areas.

[Robert2006]

Considering the fraud science that is perpetrated by the likes of Hanson and Mann et.al. The IPCC report which keeps being quoted as the bible is a regurgitation of false information.

All the computer models say we should be another degree warmer, but temperatures have either not changed or have gone down in the last 15 years. The amount of ice in the Arctic and Antarctic has grown. The US Great Lakes broke new records of ice, but one year is not climate.

How can the US historical temperature go down in the early 20th century and be higher than measured in the late 20th century? First, historical data doesn't change, unless modified by an agency with a flawed computer models and a agenda.

Statistical studies show fewer storms and less energy than historical norms have happened over the last years. One reason these storms seem so bad, there are more people and development in harms way.

The lesser countries are looking to cash in on a global tax bonanza, and they are just lining up for the payoff.

The 97% of scientists agreeing is another bogus lie, but the propaganda masters know if you tell it long enough and often enough it will be believed.

You are cherry picking your science, a symptom of American Republicans. Are you one of those George Murderous Bush touting, Rush WIndbag worshipping idiots?

The rapidity of the Greenland ice shelf melting is so rapid that the land mass is rising an inch a year -- ask a geologist, and they will tell that is an insane development. Ask the people whose islands are being swallowed by the rising seas -- just pick one out of literally thousands -- and your arguments do not hold water. Ask people in central Virginia, where they will tell you that it snowed every year while they were growing up and now it is once every few years, because they live where snow is neither absent nor constant and can tell you their margin has shifted..

First, industrialists claimed there was no change. Then they claimed there might be change. Then they admitted there was change going on, even rapid change, but it was not from human action. Now the new call to inaction is that 'there is rapid change, but we cannot do anything about it."

I am one of the 97% of the scientists who agree, and I am no bogus lie. At conferences all over the world, in poll after poll after poll, more than 96.2% of all relevant scientists agree on climate change and furiously argue about what should and can be done (some polls only ask physicians, who are neither meteorologists nor climatologists, and are funded by Republican group-think tanks).

You are cherry picking scientific information to fulfill a political agenda.

That is laughable.

You are either a shame scientist, your not informed, or your wrapped up in the republican / democrat fairytale. I don't believe your a scientist.

[Hawk]

No worries Thailand as the polar caps are a long way away. Well a famous Thai scientist said so!

A few sandbags and some plastic pipe is all that Bangkok needs. Bye-bye everyone.

[bassman]

chief of humanitarian organisation CARE USA said that "Aside from funding early-warning signals, CARE is helping vulnerable communities alter their way of life through initiatives such as introducing flood-resistant livestock."

With the above quote makes me question the point of the whole article, sounds more like a sales pitch for CARE. Would love to know more about flood resistant livestock?

[spermwhale]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Considering the fraud science that is perpetrated by the likes of Hanson and Mann et.al. The IPCC report which keeps being quoted as the bible is a regurgitation of false information.

All the computer models say we should be another degree warmer, but temperatures have either not changed or have gone down in the last 15 years. The amount of ice in the Arctic and Antarctic has grown. The US Great Lakes broke new records of ice, but one year is not climate.

How can the US historical temperature go down in the early 20th century and be higher than measured in the late 20th century? First, historical data doesn't change, unless modified by an agency with a flawed computer models and a agenda.

Statistical studies show fewer storms and less energy than historical norms have happened over the last years. One reason these storms seem so bad, there are more people and development in harms way.

The lesser countries are looking to cash in on a global tax bonanza, and they are just lining up for the payoff.

The 97% of scientists agreeing is another bogus lie, but the propaganda masters know if you tell it long enough and often enough it will be believed.

I want to do the drugs your doing.

I think you are doing quite well with what you are on now, if you honestly believe all bogus clap trap about global warming and the like.

You must be a Republican American because that's the only place it seems that climate change deniers live. Why don't you watch the documentary "Chasing Ice" and see for yourself with no statistical "manipulation" as you denialists say. You can watch it with your own eyes.

[SouthernMan3]

"Thailand must do more to build its resilience..."

Amulets. Got to produce a lot more amulets. [/fo

nt]

Dumb.......

[bangkapi]

Globalist Propaganda.

[skildpadden]

Simple things such as proper garbage disposal - both from individuals and companies - would likely help a lot with drainage.

I remember that a lot of the canals and khlongs in 2011 were full of garbage that blocked water flow.

Further in 2011 they also "suddenly" found out that a lot buildings were built illegally near canals, rivers and khlongs, which did not improve warer flow as well.

A proper city planning would also help reducing the problems.

Now is the time to enforce rules and regulations that all past governments failed to enforce.

[GettingOlder]

I am concerned about the information level which some of the TV members show about climate change.

Go visit Greenland and observe the ultra rapid disappearance of the ice, which by the way - in case all are melted - will increase sea level around 6 meters. And yes, that level increase is of course global as all seas are interconnected. Besides from Greenlands ice we have the poles, and luckily they currently seem not to melt...

However, the change in climate is very different in different regions, some areas seem to get colder. But in average we globally face a warming as well as more fluctuations and more extremes.

I don't care much if the effect is caused by man, but I care if the lower elevated areas become inhabitable. This has enormous costs to many countries...

Edited July 1, 2014 by GettingOlder

[johnmcc6]

Talk about laughable? Your political hate spray on republicans proves you are so left wing biased your opinion is meaningless. I can't believe that with the obsevable facts showing all the models wrong, with all the debate that rages from multitudes of qualified scientists against your opinions that you can say the science is settled? As for cherry picking you do a great job yourself. Global warming may be happening but it is certainly nothing to do with C0 2.( See obsevable facts). Cracks me up that leftists like you that feel so morally superiour are so embroiled in hate speech.

You are cherry picking your science, a symptom of American Republicans. Are you one of those George Murderous Bush touting, Rush WIndbag worshipping idiots?

Considering the fraud science that is perpetrated by the likes of Hanson and Mann et.al. The IPCC report which keeps being quoted as the bible is a regurgitation of false information.

All the computer models say we should be another degree warmer, but temperatures have either not changed or have gone down in the last 15 years. The amount of ice in the Arctic and Antarctic has grown. The US Great Lakes broke new records of ice, but one year is not climate.

How can the US historical temperature go down in the early 20th century and be higher than measured in the late 20th century? First, historical data doesn't change, unless modified by an agency with a flawed computer models and a agenda.

Statistical studies show fewer storms and less energy than historical norms have happened over the last years. One reason these storms seem so bad, there are more people and development in harms way.

The lesser countries are looking to cash in on a global tax bonanza, and they are just lining up for the payoff.

The 97% of scientists agreeing is another bogus lie, but the propaganda masters know if you tell it long enough and often enough it will be believed.

The rapidity of the Greenland ice shelf melting is so rapid that the land mass is rising an inch a year -- ask a geologist, and they will tell that is an insane development. Ask the people whose islands are being swallowed by the rising seas -- just pick one out of literally thousands -- and your arguments do not hold water. Ask people in central Virginia, where they will tell you that it snowed every year while they were growing up and now it is once every few years, because they live where snow is neither absent nor constant and can tell you their margin has shifted..

First, industrialists claimed there was no change. Then they claimed there might be change. Then they admitted there was change going on, even rapid change, but it was not from human action. Now the new call to inaction is that 'there is rapid change, but we cannot do anything about it."

I am one of the 97% of the scientists who agree, and I am no bogus lie. At conferences all over the world, in poll after poll after poll, more than 96.2% of all relevant scientists agree on climate change and furiously argue about what should and can be done (some polls only ask physicians, who are neither meteorologists nor climatologists, and are funded by Republican group-think tanks).

You are cherry picking scientific information to fulfill a political agenda.

That is laughable.

[RPCVguy]

The data as to CO2 acting as a blanket is based upon science researched in the 1950s as the US Air Force was perfecting its heat seeking missile technology.
▶ CO2 & the Atmosphere - YouTube
(

)

We know a great deal about what affects the Earth's balances of absorption vs radiance... and the observations don't track unless we add in the effects of CO2... indeed,we'd be cooling now, except for the blanket effect of the CO2
How do we know the climate is changing because of CO2?
YouTube - Sir David Attenborough: The Truth About Climate Change
(

)

And we know, based upon the math of sheer tonnage of fossil fuels sold and burned annually, but also because of the percentages / ratios of isotopes of Carbon that the CO2 is because of humans and not volcanoes
▶ "It's Us" - YouTube
(

)

I say "we" - speaking as a chemist, and aware of the predominant number of scientists who understand the logic of the above sequence of observations.
For the remainder of humans, there are a portion who claim to be of homo sapiens as a species, who trust their GPS, their satellite TV equipment, maybe even their doctor's reports - but are unwilling to accept evidence that might require them to reduce consumption and shift energy supply options. i.e. not really sapient. Edited July 1, 2014 by RPCVguy

[Rockhound]

^{I'm a geologist. So is Don Easterbrook here giving testimony to the US congress. Man Made GLobal Warming/Climate Change is absolute bunk.}

^{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LkMweOVOOI&feature=player_embedded}

[Daniel Boon]

^{I'm a geologist. So is Don Easterbrook here giving testimony to the US congress. Man Made GLobal Warming/Climate Change is absolute bunk.}

^{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LkMweOVOOI&feature=player_embedded}

You've got rocks in your head ...

[Daniel Boon]

Climate Change is real ... the leading ditherers is largely the Western world, with the USA the 'leader' (we have a moron as PM, who likewise thinks 'it's crap') ...

[rickirs]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Considering the fraud science that is perpetrated by the likes of Hanson and Mann et.al. The IPCC report which keeps being quoted as the bible is a regurgitation of false information.

All the computer models say we should be another degree warmer, but temperatures have either not changed or have gone down in the last 15 years. The amount of ice in the Arctic and Antarctic has grown. The US Great Lakes broke new records of ice, but one year is not climate.

How can the US historical temperature go down in the early 20th century and be higher than measured in the late 20th century? First, historical data doesn't change, unless modified by an agency with a flawed computer models and a agenda.

Statistical studies show fewer storms and less energy than historical norms have happened over the last years. One reason these storms seem so bad, there are more people and development in harms way.

The lesser countries are looking to cash in on a global tax bonanza, and they are just lining up for the payoff.

The 97% of scientists agreeing is another bogus lie, but the propaganda masters know if you tell it long enough and often enough it will be believed.

I want to do the drugs your doing.

Actually he is correct, private corporations and their sales teams the governments push climate change science as a way to implement a tax on carbon dioxide. Most scientists that are not in the pocket of big business say it’s a scam, pure propaganda perpetrated for profit and control.

With 3% of the scientists disagreeing, I'd put my support behind the 97% of scientists agreeing with global warming.

[johnmcc6]

Isn't it strange that CO2 is rapidly increasing yet temperatures are not increasing as predicted? The IPPC itself acknowledges there has been fewer cyclones and other severe weather events over the last few decades. As for sea rises???? Hardly any. If it appears to rise in one part of the globe it would register everywhere as all oceans are linked. Why has the arctic ice sheets grown to record levels recently? Why have all the dud warmist predictions been so wrong? Has anyone ever looked at waterfront real estate prices on these islands that are supposed to be inundated ? This weather of ours has been changing for billions of years. Why do they call greenland green? It once was and may be again.For man to think they can control the weather baffles the mind.

I will not be swayed by out of date you tube presentations but rather by what I see happenning in front of me. The very fact I could produce just as many scientists to refute what you claim means one thing for certain. The science is not settled.

The data as to CO2 acting as a blanket is based upon science researched in the 1950s as the US Air Force was perfecting its heat seeking missile technology.
▶ CO2 & the Atmosphere - YouTube
(

)

We know a great deal about what affects the Earth's balances of absorption vs radiance... and the observations don't track unless we add in the effects of CO2... indeed,we'd be cooling now, except for the blanket effect of the CO2
How do we know the climate is changing because of CO2?
YouTube - Sir David Attenborough: The Truth About Climate Change
(

)

And we know, based upon the math of sheer tonnage of fossil fuels sold and burned annually, but also because of the percentages / ratios of isotopes of Carbon that the CO2 is because of humans and not volcanoes
▶ "It's Us" - YouTube
(

)

I say "we" - speaking as a chemist, and aware of the predominant number of scientists who understand the logic of the above sequence of observations.
For the remainder of humans, there are a portion who claim to be of homo sapiens as a species, who trust their GPS, their satellite TV equipment, maybe even their doctor's reports - but are unwilling to accept evidence that might require them to reduce consumption and shift energy supply options. i.e. not really sapient.

[h90]

Climate Change is real ... the leading ditherers is largely the Western world, with the USA the 'leader' (we have a moron as PM, who likewise thinks 'it's crap') ...

yes it changes, just we don't know yet if it is going warmer or if an ice age is coming and all the CO2 we are blowing out is actually helping.

[johnmcc6]

I meant antarctic sea ice...google climate debate daily for two colums , one pro and one anti climate change. Very interesting to see just how many scientists are sceptics and their reasons why.

Isn't it strange that CO2 is rapidly increasing yet temperatures are not increasing as predicted? The IPPC itself acknowledges there has been fewer cyclones and other severe weather events over the last few decades. As for sea rises???? Hardly any. If it appears to rise in one part of the globe it would register everywhere as all oceans are linked. Why has the arctic ice sheets grown to record levels recently? Why have all the dud warmist predictions been so wrong? Has anyone ever looked at waterfront real estate prices on these islands that are supposed to be inundated ? This weather of ours has been changing for billions of years. Why do they call greenland green? It once was and may be again.For man to think they can control the weather baffles the mind.

I will not be swayed by out of date you tube presentations but rather by what I see happenning in front of me. The very fact I could produce just as many scientists to refute what you claim means one thing for certain. The science is not settled.

The data as to CO2 acting as a blanket is based upon science researched in the 1950s as the US Air Force was perfecting its heat seeking missile technology.
▶ CO2 & the Atmosphere - YouTube
(

)

We know a great deal about what affects the Earth's balances of absorption vs radiance... and the observations don't track unless we add in the effects of CO2... indeed,we'd be cooling now, except for the blanket effect of the CO2
How do we know the climate is changing because of CO2?
YouTube - Sir David Attenborough: The Truth About Climate Change
(

)

And we know, based upon the math of sheer tonnage of fossil fuels sold and burned annually, but also because of the percentages / ratios of isotopes of Carbon that the CO2 is because of humans and not volcanoes
▶ "It's Us" - YouTube
(

)

I say "we" - speaking as a chemist, and aware of the predominant number of scientists who understand the logic of the above sequence of observations.
For the remainder of humans, there are a portion who claim to be of homo sapiens as a species, who trust their GPS, their satellite TV equipment, maybe even their doctor's reports - but are unwilling to accept evidence that might require them to reduce consumption and shift energy supply options. i.e. not really sapient.

[BlackJack]

its called weather

Edited July 1, 2014 by BlackJack