IPCC report: humans ‘dominant cause’ of warming

| 27/09/2013

(BBC): A landmark report says scientists are 95% certain that humans are the "dominant cause" of global warming since the 1950s. The report bythe UN's climate panel details the physical evidence behind climate change. On the ground, in the air, in the oceans, global warming is "unequivocal", it explained. It adds that a pause in warming over the past 15 years is too short to reflect long-term trends. The panel warns that continued emissions of greenhouse gases will cause further warming and changes in all aspects of the climate system. 

After a week of intense negotiations in the Swedish capital, the summary for policymakers on the physical science of global warming has finally been released.

The first part of an IPCC trilogy, due over the next 12 months, this dense, 36-page document is considered the most comprehensive statement on our understanding of the mechanics of a warming planet. It states baldly that, since the 1950s, many of the observed changes in the climate system are "unprecedented over decades to millennia".

Each of the last three decades has been successively warmer at the Earth's surface, and warmer than any period since 1850, and probably warmer than any time in the past 1,400 years.

"Our assessment of the science finds that the atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amount of snow and ice has diminished, the global mean sea level has risen and that concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased," said Qin Dahe, co-chair of IPCC working group one, who produced the report.

Go to full article

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Science and Nature

About the Author ()

Comments (29)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. See Level says:

    So I guess I only imagined the wave erosion cut that is plainly visible at the base of the Bluff……..

  2. Anonymous says:

    The offshore world contributes to environmental destruction by moving businesses away from effective domestic responsibility and regulation.

    • Anonymous says:

      ROTFL Ummm….much of the U.S. financial crisis was due to a lack of effective regulation by ONSHORE authorities such as the SEC. That's how great onshore regulation is.

      • Anonymous says:

        The point was about environmental regulation.  Are you really that stupid?  Bet you like FOX news

  3. Anonymous says:

    My god the comments from the climate change deniers are getting sillier and sillier.

    • Anonymous says:

      I don't think anyone is denying "climate change"; instead they are denying that it is caused by humans and that there is anything we can do about it.

    • Whodatis says:

      Almost as silly as the term "climate change deniers".

      I don't deny it for a moment. The climate changes every day, week, month, year, century, millenium and eon as far as I am concerned … and as science shows.

      If you want to be the donkey that is convinced that scientists have a plan that will enable a force as insignificant as mankind in the grand universal and inter-planetary scheme of things to change it … then good on ya' son! Lol!

      Lemme guess … they need some of your hard-earned money to do so, right?

      AGW / "climate change" is nothing but the newest religion forced upon the masses – only this time it is on a global level.

      See you around, sheep.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Wow, I don't know who to believe. Whodatis and the other commentors on this blog, or the vast majority of real scientists who have all concluded climate change is real, and it's man made. 

    All you have to do is turn to the weather channel to see record temperatures, floods, drought, wild fires, extreme storms, and the list goes on. Republicans and oil companies want to say the science is unproven b/c scientists cannot predict precisely how much the ocean will rise or exactly what the temperatures will be 50 years from now. Sorry, despite mans best efforts, weather is still extremely difficult to predict, but that does not disprove the science behind climate change. That type of stupidity is dangerous! 

    • Whodatis says:

      You should believe Whodatis.

      Not only does the scientific data not support the AGW theory, but also Whodatis has no dog in this fight.

      Your call though.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Sadly, this is just over-paid bureaucrats protecting their fat salaries by publishing BS again. Google 'Climategate' to get the full picture. And CNS how can a 36-page document be 'dense'? I get daily newspapers that are thicker than that and have written single incident insurance reports that were longer.   

  6. Anonymous says:

    The "pause in warming over the past 15 years" means that global warming is not caused by humans since (a) earth's human population has grown by over 1 billion in that period, and (b) there has been no net decrease in greenhouse gases over that period.

    • Anonymous says:

      This type of person took an extra three hundred years to be convinced the world wasn't flat, back in the day.

    • Einstein says:


      I hurts me  to tell you but I will! It has little to do with "Population Growth" what it has to do with is the polluting of the atmosphere thru the usage of things like burning of coal & oil, pesticides, burning of  waste and all the other pollutants we send into the air we breathe. Let us all do our part by not being wasteful or uncaring. Hopes this helps!! 

      • Anonymous says:

        LOL. Ummm…all the things you list are done by humans which is why the article suggests that global warming is caused by humans. It should follow that an increase of 17% in the human population should cause an increase in "burning of coal & oil, pesticides, burning of waste and all the other pollutants".

  7. Anonymous says:

    You don't say!

  8. Whodatis says:

    The AGW / man-made "climate change" house of cards is falling apart – end of.

    Some of us saw this predatory and devious global fraud inflicted upon all of mankind on the behalf of greedy, heartless entities and individuals for what it was from a long time ago.

    (The CNS archives will provide the evidence if anyone is interested.)

    Listed below are a few related reports regarding the topic at hand:




    Nevertheless, the lobbyists behind this fraud are very well connected and financed. In spite of the obvious scientific data that disproves the theory, most of the news reports continue to conclude that the world must continue in step behind this massive shambles.

    Understandable though, as so many jobs and new economies are now reliant on the promotion of this fake crisis.

    However, I am a steadfast proponent for the nationwise implementation and utilization of solar energy in the Cayman Islands – however, strictly for the cost benefits and because technology has introduced so many useful alternatives.

    • Anonymous says:

      oh yes and smoking is actually good for you too!!!!………….zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz #crackpot

      • Whodatis says:

        Au contraire, if you believe the effects of smoking on the human body is any way comparative or relevant to the b.s. AGW theory  then logic suggests you are actually the village "crackpot".

    • Slowpoke says:

      There you go again – I have scolded you before, for the same offence. 

      If you make too many different points, sometimes conflicting, who knows what you are getting upped and downed for?   Not that it is the endall but, it makes it unclear what people are reacting to.

      • Whodatis says:

        (Very cute of you to appoint yourself as the designated Whodatis scolder.)

        Anyway, where did you find a conflict?

        Lastly, if my points matter that much to you are we to understand that deep-down you really value Whodatis' opinion?

        • Slowpoke says:

          I trust that you took my "scolding" comment in jest, if not, I want to apologize for my lack of judgement.

          My point was, that on one hand you are a "denier" and on the other hand you "embrace" the need for change.

          So, when you get a vote, there is no knowing what they are endorsing. 

          Like you, I get my fair of automatic "Troll" and "downfisters".  But, I still like to try to get an understanding to what they are reacting to by keeping the message clear.

          I may be behind, but I am still in the hunt for the most negative votes on the CNS comments.



          • Whodatis says:

            I support solar energy, but only because it makes economic sense.

            I don't for a minute believe in the AGW b.s. theroy. The fact that the 2 are often thrown in the same box was not my doing.

            However, if I can manipulate the situation to bring about a "change" that will be beneficial to myself and others around me then so be it.

            Sometimes the masses are blind and have to be led by those that can see – you know, make the best out of a bad situation and all that good stuff.

            Lastly, I don't really care how my posts are rated. If I did I would be a very sad and insecure individual.


    • Anonymous says:

      Your post  places a lot of reliance on articles from a  newspaper that is deemed little more than a rag by the general UK populace, a paper that right wing dummies are to be seen reading whilst moving their lips. You'll prpbably still be denying global warmng when the North Sound washes over Seven Mile Beach in 60 years or so.

      • Whodatis says:

        Yes, very valid points because the editors of that particular newspaper (which by the way is the most popular online news source today) are also the researchers and scientists that have compiled the research to which they refer.


        • Anonymous says:

          A silly rebuttal, and so grammatically flawed. The point was, why rely on a low-rated newspaper's opinion which has right wing tendencies. Your response – it is a popular online newspaper and they are only reporting, not writing the research so it must be true. How ridiculous!

          BTW the SUN is the most popular printed newspaper in the UK. Does that make it an equally good source?  http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/

          As you say…… (sigh)

  9. Anonymous says:

    Make no mistake, there are Billions in government, ngo, and scientific grants at risk with this decades-old liberal science thesis which has not panned out into the much-hyped global cataclysm.  Ask yourself:  

    1. If humans are 95% of the cause, how did we simultaneously melt the ice caps on Mars?  Did that ice just melt in sympathy with the Earth?  What was the man-made input on distant planets?  

    2. Man-made C02 emissions on Earth are measured in parts per trillion and there is very little concensus on what (if any) impact that statistically insignificant amount has on atmospheric temperatures.  NASA's JPL has recently spent Billions launching new satellites to better study this phenomenon, so very curious to suggest a true scientific consensus has already been reached.  

    3. Any archeologist/geologist can tell you the Earth has undergone intense weather cycles through the millenia – glacial and inter-glacial periods are all very well studied with historical backup long before any modern random temperature readings were kept.  There have been at least 10 glaciations and inter-glacial periods in the last 100,000 years alone!  I would argue very strongly that any scientist that purports that weather is static is not a reliable historical voice on the subject.  The geologial record speaks otherwise.

    • Anonymous says:

      oh yes this is just one big conspiracy involving thousand of scientists worldwide…….zzzzzzzzzzzz

      keep drinking the oil industry kool-aid

    • Anonymous says:

      Yes, but can you find "any scientist that purports that weather is static"? 

      Your straw man is hiding.