|
|
// Robert Cordingley wrote://
> I found too much uncertainty and vagaries in the IPCC report, by the
> way, to think it can be really useful - but I didn't study it in depth.
> The variation in population growth projections was inconclusive, too
> disparate and may be one of them looked like a "pulse eruption" - lots
> more work to be done.
Not sure whether you mean the 3rd (2001) or 4th (2007) assessment. The
4th doesn't appear yet to have the supporting materials and is just the
executive summary for policymakers. Anyway, even in the 2001 version, I
think the intent of the different scenarios was actually not to be
precise in the details of a given prediction, but to consider wide
ranging but reasonable scenarios to give an idea of sensitivity to
variables, esp. like population size. All of them, even those
representing very environmentally conscious scenarios, predict a
persistent change in temperature for centuries to come, and the
aggressive growth + business-as-usual scenario predicting much higher
and changes in temperature.
|
Locked
