Nobel laureates call on leaders to counter climate change

Sunday 04th October, 04:57 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 18 Total Comments Show All

gogogo at 12:27 PM JST - 4th October

Japan doesn't care anymore they lost the 2016 olymics, whats the good in reducing CO2 if no one is watching you.
Alphaape at 12:36 PM JST - 4th October

I think people would take them more serious if they were to talk about putting less pollution, instead of saying that we are changing the climate of the earth. As the events of last week fade into memory (rains in PI, tsunami in Samoa, earthquake in Indonesia) we had better learn that the earth holds the ultimate "trump card" and we had best concern ourselves about stuff we can affect, like trying to make cleaner water and not wasting our land resources like building "olympic stadiums and venues" that will not be used after the games are gone.
captainjohann at 12:49 PM JST - 4th October

People in the know that Climate change happens in Human history. Today the reason is not green houses but due to vanishing sun spots and also Sun;s irradiance and wobbling.Hey where are the scientists who predicted ICE AGE/!!!!!!This is scam created by a set of capitalistas who want to exploit carbon credits led by GOLDMAN SACHS.
sf2k at 02:03 PM JST - 4th October

I see, so because some math was wrong, all math is wrong? Typically why we're all in a huge mess of arguing with brick walls. Science is not about having an opinion. You don't have heart surgery over an opinion, but over careful provable facts.

There is a graph, showing temperature decline thus proving why scientists said it would get colder in the 70s. On the same graph, it also shows temperatures getting hotter. Both are true..for those who know how to read THE SAME GRAPH.

BTW, the warming part of the graph is magnitudes greater than the blip cooling one. Which one do you think the climate change trolls harp on? Figures.

Is it any wonder why so many people will suffer for listening to global ineptitude?

Japan funny enough will work out okay. Lots of transit, walkable communities, local food, local culture. There's a lot of positive steps than can happen.
mtimjones at 02:30 PM JST - 4th October

From my perspective (not a global climate scientist), there are reputable voices on both sides of the argument. Unless there's an abundance of evidence that stands the test of scrutiny, all of this is nothing more than a theory than actual fact.

But most importantly, I tend to question this even more when I see (in the U.S.) high profile politicians profiting from this new "industry." Al Gore has a horrible carbon footprint (look at his house in Tennessee), but loves to lecture us all with "facts" that not even global climate specialists agree with. He's developing businesses that profit from climate change, and not just in speaking engagements. He's also encouraging Governments to cap emissions, but permit purchase of waivers. Hmmm, that sounds like more of a tax scheme to me.

I want to do the right thing, but I'd prefer consensus before destroying our economy.
MichaelJP at 02:35 PM JST - 4th October

Forget arguing, there are enough gullible people to believe the lies spread by big business. Prepare for the worst. Arguments in favor of economics and money will always trump the environment until the environment becomes unsuitable for our civilization.
sf2k at 04:26 PM JST - 4th October

@mtimjoines, captainjohann et al

for pete's sake, here are Nobel laureates, among them Japanese winners as well. They want us to take them seriously. So let's do that then huh? Let's focus on the article presented.
usaexpat at 11:19 PM JST - 4th October

"Cap and trade, cap and trade" The modern day equivalent of "Let them eat cake" Stuff global warming, real or imagined, man made or sun spots I don't give a good G%d Dmn. The economy is in the sh&ter and the elites want to assure that the middle class evaporates completely. No thank you
ashika1009 at 05:08 AM JST - 5th October

**Global warming is more a faith-based cult than a science and note that the term is being replaced by the more convenient "climate change." Since when has the climate NOT changed?? Moreover, a colder than average winter is expected on the US East Coast, so I doubt very much that global warming will be the phrase of choice. In fact the very skimpy research and limited data used to develop the "hockey stick" graph upon which "global warming" is based has ALREADY been discredited and its author admits his "error". But the hoax goes on. You see, this hoax is good business for many and very good politics for the likes of that doofus Obama. The one thing "global warming" is not, is good science. In the 70s we were told to expect an ice age, devastating population growth, the depletion food and oil. AND this was to have happened ALREADY but here I sit in front of my pc with an onigiri in my hand. Yes, there ARE food shortages, but aid can cover these completely IF the food reaches the people who need it. More often than not, countries with food shortages are dictatorships who seize food shipments for themselves and their military or they are countries with fairly oppressive political systems in general. The food IS available and so is the aid, IF these countries allow it and some even refuse it.
sf2k at 11:27 AM JST - 5th October

get a grip people, Nobel Laureates are not into you diatribes and fantasies. They just want you to take a break from them long enough that you might read something from actual experts.

It's clear though in this thread, and so many other threads out there for that matter, that their efforts fall on deaf indignant ears. Is it any wonder why the planet is doomed? Thanks a bunch America, good luck to you.
ashika1009 at 01:26 PM JST - 5th October

sf2k

In fact the very skimpy research and limited data used to develop the "hockey stick" graph upon which "global warming" is based has ALREADY been discredited and its author admits his "error".

I add here that of course the liberal dominated media has no interest in presenting this evidence to the public as the liberal media in the US is invested in global warming . . . er . . . climate change.

And Japans media coverage of the US is merely a small mirror of Americas own faulty liberal coverage. The fact that Obama is failing miserably is barely mentioned in Japan, for example.

Unfortunately this global warming hoax is diverting attention from real and meaningful efforts to conserve the environment. The hoax becomes intertwined with good old conservation thus negatively impacting the latter.

Sf2k: The "hockey stick" graph is crucial to the "theory" of global warming and it has been proven to be WRONG. It was based on paltry evidence. Studies relying on a greater preponderance of data have doomed the graph that you appear to support as dooming the planet.

However, you are right that the planet is doomed. Eventually our sun will go super-nova expand and burn the Earth to ashes. And the sun is doomed as well, for after going super nova it is expected to contract and eventually expire. Of course humans and just about everything else on the planet will have perished in the rising temperatures long before the globe is engulfed.

Now that is global warming you can believe in.

Of course your comment is no model of organization, so it is a bit challenging to divine your intent.

So do forgive me if I have misunderstood you.

Well, if you are thanking America a bunch and wish America good luck, I have no quarrel with you. Thanks for thanking America.You are welcome sf2k.
Yelnats at 04:10 PM JST - 5th October

Research earth atmosphere changes, and you will see that there is nothing we can do about it. I say, go surfing and have fun.
sf2k at 04:45 PM JST - 5th October

this story is about Nobel Laureates today, not yesterday, not hockey stick statisticians who made a fateful blunder in 2006. This article is 2009. Questioning tree bark is one thing, and scientists are trying very hard to get people to listen. But it's not working. Too many interests, too many failed science students. Forget tree bark. But again, wrong once, wrong forever in some minds. Pity that.

Move on.

If instead we'd focus on removing pollution, costing pollution outright and making it mandatory that if I make a polluting power plant or business, I must plant enough trees to counteract that pollution or some such other counterbalance, that would seem reasonable. It then rewards CO2 farming as a business as well as forestry, and the land. Thus rewarding me if I save myself from causing pollution. Also selling credits if I don't pollute as much as I have capacity for.

Here are well educated people trying to say that action is necessary, and all we can do is stand in their way and pi## in the pool a little longer.

Ironically had America sought to invest in the future it would be out of its debt mess and into revitalizing it's cities and transportation networks.

I personally see a lot of opportunity in making things green. I hope you don't end up with the same pollution injury to my lungs. I will not go quietly into that good night and I'd like to spare you that as well. But people are all too happy to be in the way.
BlackOut at 05:42 PM JST - 5th October

Global warming is a hoax or not, I am not really care.

But whatever can help us use less oil, being less dependent from the evil OPEC,it good enough for me.

and who every try to develop better technology, find better way of using energy, It isn't hurt for me to listen and support.

We has been caught up with this fossil-fuel base technology for how long? hundred or more years already.

Research earth atmosphere changes, and you will see that there is nothing we can do about it

I am not sure about that. By Human activity we release co2 alone around 28billion tons (wiki) to the air every year. If we can reduce that, I think it would certainly help.

Say28billion tons, people might not realize how much the emission we put up in the air. Let say the last eruption of Mount St. Helens which was the level5, a huge one. She released around 2.2 million tons.

2.2 million Vs 28billion tons,

how many st.helens size of eruption mother nature need to do to keep up with human activity in a year?
BlackOut at 06:34 PM JST - 5th October

ashika1009

sun will never go "super-nova". its too small. it will go red giant in about 5 billion years and the earth will be burned then, but 5 billion years's way too far to worry.

i still see the amount of emission we currently put up in the air and its effect on human and environment are a lot more worrisome to than the sun burn us all.