Global Warming has made a lot of dire predictions. Have any of them come true?

Question

Not, "will they", but "have they"?

Answer 1

Yes:

- Warmer temperatures (now at the far high end of prediction ranges)

- Sea level rise (accellerating)

- Glacial and ice cap melting (now faster than predicted)

- Resource wars (Darfur)

- Food riots (Haiti, etc.)

- Disruption of wildlife (earlier Spring, etc.)

- Moving ecological zones (pikas moving higher in elevation, tree species moving northward, etc.)

- Reduced snowpack (reduced water supplies) and increased incidence of drought

- Increased incidence of extreme weather

- Heat and drought damage to crops

- Ocean acidification, coral reef bleaching, disruption of ocean food chains

- Extinction of much of the life on this planet (seen clearly in evidence from past warmings)

Is there any global warming prediction that hasn't come true faster than expected?

Many of the predictions are long term though, and some, like the "we only have 10 years to drastically reduce carbon emissions before we're screwed" (made in 2006 if I remember correctly so we have 8 years left) we won't see the consequences of for decades.

Since CO2 remains in the air and drives additional warming for 1000+ years and many of the predictions are for future decades, it would be a bit premature (understatement) for people in denial to claim that any of the dire predictions have not come about.

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/State...

"Present examples only hint at the scale of the planetary emergency that climate studies reveal with increasing clarity.  Our home planet is dangerously near a tipping point at which human-made greenhouse gases reach a level where major climate changes can proceed mostly under their own momentum. Warming will shift climatic zones by intensifying the hydrologic cycle, affecting freshwater availability and human health. We will see repeated coastal tragedies associated with storms and continuously rising sea levels. The implications are profound, and the only resolution is for humans to move to a fundamentally different energy pathway within a decade. Otherwise, it will be too late for one-third of the world’s animal and plant species and millions of the most vulnerable members of our own species.

We may be able to preserve the remarkable planet on which civilization developed, but it will not be easy: special interests are resistant to change and have inordinate power in our governments, especially in the United States."

Answer 2

A "prediction" by it's very nature has to do with a future events.  Since we haven't yet even reached the time-frame of concern for the "dire predictions", it's a bit disingenuous to infer that those predictions are wrong.

For example, if I were a time-traveler (this is hypothetical, but a decent analogy to computer modeling of future climate events) who says the New York Yankees will win the world series in 2080 and someone says my prediction hasn't come true yet, does that criticism have any merit?

As for global warming predictions (not of the "dire" genre) coming true, the answer would be yes some have already occurred.  The last decade was the warmest in recorded history.  The worlds glacier mass has continued to decrease. The Arctic sea ice coverage has continued it's decreasing trend. As warmer climates shift north, species migration has already been detected.  etc., etc.  While none of these are yet "dire" in their consequences, they certainly do increase the credibility of climate scientists who predicted such things decades ago.  Which makes these same scientists predictions of future decades and more "dire" consequences something we'd be foolish to ignore.

Answer 3

No!  My favorite is Al Gore's recent claim that his "scientists" have concluded that Global Warming is worse then expected and that the polar ice caps will now completely melt in 5 years.  Combining that new set of data with his expert "scientists" assertion that global sea levels will rise by 20 feet, we can expect a 4 foot increase in sea level every year for the next 5 years - assuming a linear progression.   It is now almost May.  If in November of this year seal levels rise by 2 feet and much of Manhattan is under water, then you will have concrete evidence that these expert scientists Al Gore promotes are correct and Global Warming is a serious matter to contend with.  However, if sea levels do not rise, then you will know conclusively that Al Gore's science experts are blowing smoke.  Of note, given the surface vertical area variability of the polar ice caps and the fact that the flux of heat is a function of area,  the melting of the polar ice caps and the rise in sea levels is not linear.  That being said and taking into account Al Gore's science experts, global sea levels should rise at least 6 inches over the next 12 months using non-linear correlations.  Therefore, Manhatten will still see significant changes.  Let me set you at ease.  Sea levels will not change significantly within the next 12 months.  Al Gore's experts will be wrong - once again.  However, he and his experts will make lots of money from gullible people during this time promoting his THEORY of man-induced global warming.

Answer 4

yes, it's getting warmer even in rainy season, more places got flooded now, we never have tornado and hurricane in malaysia before but now roofs been flying & trees uprooted even in a normal storm. probably its been wrongly predict (meltdown of polar ice caps and ozone hole really leads to what?). what i can see is our weather pattern grown more chaotic and what will it really lead to? hopefully they will do more research on effects of global warming and provides really good prediction, actually based on their research.

Answer 5

Daily; Ask the Eskimo. One of the main commerce is fishing, as the water heats up, the cold water fish are robbed of their habitat, the fishing season is jeopardized, and the fisherman loose their lively hood.

Ask the polar bears, whose land is melting beneath their feet. Same for the seals.

Ask the people of the Arctic, where their towns are melting & literally dropping into the sea. Not only the cold climates: Look at the tropics:

"WASHINGTON (AFP) — Global warming could pose a greater risk to tropical insects and other species sensitive to the slightest shifts in temperature than to creatures living in the world's tundra, US scientists warned Monday.

While cold weather animals are used to huge temperature changes, tropical species live under a much smaller temperature range and face a bigger risk of extinction with an increase of just two or four degrees Celsius, according to a team led by University of Washington scientists."

This question would take a book to answer comprehensivly; May I suggest you do some homework w/ the following links?

http://www.climatehotmap.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warm...

This is no joke, and ignorance is NOT bliss. Our descendants will suffer the consequences of our ignorance. Dump aerosol. And keep our Earth pristine. We live here.

Answer 6

Some of the adverse effects of global warming is already visible, such as, melting of glaciers, severe erratic climatic conditions, floods, drought etc. For details regarding effects of global warming and other related issues on environment please refer blog -

http://www.environmentengineering.blogsp...

Answer 7

No.  Sea levels are unchanged, no unusual weather that couldn't be attributed to El Nino, no drowning polar bears.  This is just like the dire predictions of yesteryear when the enviros claimed that we would run out of oil in the 1980s and that millions of Americans would die of starvation by 1990.

Answer 8

Yeah, it's gotten warmer

Answer 9

No scientist is saying the "dire predictions", as you call them, will happen overnight. Nice try!

See chapter 3 (Climate change and its impacts in the near and long term under different scenarios) of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report...

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report...

Answer 10

An article from 19 years ago:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg12...

"The clash was most marked during hearings last month in front of the Commons energy committee. The NERC argued, naturally enough, for more money to be spent on research into the greenhouse effect. But, it continued: 'This must go in parallel with policy and management decisions. Waiting for research to be completed means that the benefits from information already to hand will be lost if the application of that knowledge is postponed until certainty (or near certainty) is achieved. . .To wait 20 years for temperatures and sea levels to 'prove' current predictions is not necessary. By then, the opportunity to avert or ameliorate that outcome will have been lost.'

The Department of Energy ****** a snook at the committee by sending its most junior minister, Baroness Hooper. She told the committee that the government was 'extremely sceptical' about calls for a 'greenhouse tax' on activities that emit carbon dioxide. She spoke of 'wild' speculation about the consequences of global warming and warned that it would be '10 to 15 years before we begin to get a grip of the problem and to understand the detailed regional climate changes which may come about'. The NERC had stressed that, though 'reliable predictions of regional climate do not exist', there was 'a consistent scientific consensus that a significant global climate change will be induced . . . due to man's activities'."

20 years later:  The sea levels have not changed, the temperature has not changed, the dire predictions have not changed...it's still just 20 years away.

Answer 11

ZERO