U.N. Chief Warns Of Water Shortages

Secretary-General Says Scarcity Of Water Contributes To Armed Conflicts, Poverty

(CBS/AP)  U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the world on Thursday to put the looming crisis over water shortages at the top of the global agenda this year and take action to prevent conflicts over scarce supplies.

He reminded business and political leaders at the World Economic Forum that the conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan was touched off by drought - and he said shortages of water contribute to poverty and social hardship in Somalia, Chad, Israel, the Palestinian territories, Nigeria, Sri Lanka, Haiti, Colombia and Kazakhstan.

"Too often, where we need water we find guns instead," Ban said. "Population growth will make the problem worse. So will climate change. As the global economy grows, so will its thirst. Many more conflicts lie just over the horizon."

He said a recent report identified 46 countries with 2.7 billion people where climate change and water-related crises create "a high risk of violent conflict" and a further 56 countries, with 1.2 billion people "are at high risk of violent conflict." The report was by International Alert, an independent peace-building organization based in London.

Ban noted that it was a drought that precipitated the violence in Darfur, Sudan. "Fighting broke out between farmers and herders after the rains failed and water became scarce," he said of the conflict, which has so far claimed about 200,000 lives and displaced several million people. "But almost forgotten is the event that touched it off - drought, a shortage of life’s vital resource."

Ban told the VIP audience that he spent 2007 "banging my drum on climate change," an issue the Forum also had as one of its main themes last year. He welcomed the focus on water this year saying the session should be named: "Water is running out."

"We need to adapt to this reality, just as we do to climate change," he said. "There is still enough water for all of us - but only so long as we can keep it clean, use it more wisely, and share it fairly."

Ban said he will invite world leaders to "a critical high-level meeting" in September to focus on meeting U.N. development goals - including cutting by half the number of people without access to safe drinking water by 2015 - particularly in Africa.

The links between climate change and supplies of clean water were underscored by Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense, who suggested that the repercussions of rising temperatures - water shortages and droughts - should spur increased efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions. "Unless we put caps on the global warming pollution we’re throwing up into atmosphere, we’re walking into a hell for water shortages," he said.

Ban urged top business executives to join a U.N. project to help poor people gain access to clean water - and he praised Coca-Cola, Dow Chemical and Nestle for their programs and their efforts to be part of the water solution.

Ban's call for global action on water got strong support from several top business executives.

The map at left shows what percentage of country populations has access to both safe drinking water and sanitation. The darkest green signifies countries where less than 50% of people have access to clean water. Source: UNICEF/WHO

"Water is today's issue," said Andrew Liveris, chairman and CEO of Dow Chemical Co., the world's second largest chemical company. "It is the oil of this century, not a question."

"The technology is there [to improve supplies]. We need the innovation to get the business model and the delivery systems to the table, and we're very committed to doing that," he said.

Liveris said there is a lot of water on the planet and "all of us" should be trying to meet the challenge of affordable desalination of sea water and accessing ground water above and below bedrock.

E. Neville Isdell, chairman and CEO of The Coca-Cola Co., said "this is an issue which ranks next to climate change. ... However, water has got lost as part of the climate change debate."

"The solutions are there," he said, but "the awareness globally and the commitment globally is not there yet."

Isdell urged the world to "raise the issue of water to the level that we have managed to raise the issue of climate change."

He also issued "a clarion cry for engagement," especially with the agricultural sector which uses 70 percent of water resources, compared with 23 percent by industry and 7 percent by "humanity in general."

Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, chairman and CEO of Nestle SA, the world's biggest food and drink company, said "time is still on our side but time is running out, just like water is running out."

He said the demand for biofuels is misguided because 9,000 liters of water are needed to produce one liter of biodiesel.

"This can only work because water has no price," Brabeck said. "If we are going to use 1,950 cubic kilometers of water for biofuels when at the same time our ... water reservoirs are already depleted now, you can see that this strategy that we have today - and which is backed by all major governments - is not the right strategy."

"If you would allow market forces to define how to define the value of the water, we could make a big step forward," Brabeck said.

Krupp agreed that ethanol was not only using massive amounts of water but was diverting food crops for fuel, leading to higher food prices.

"We need a market price ... for industrial users and massive (water) consumers," he said. "That will get tremendous efficiency and be a key to solving this problem."

There also has to be a cap on the amount of water withdrawn from rivers and a solution to the global warming problem "because climate is going to be a great accelerator of water shortages," Krupp said.

we desperately need to start working on desalination and how to make it economically viable. Tampa Bay produces about 10% of its drinking water via desalination. Our aquifers are drying up - we need to start taking more of our drinking water from the oceans.

[raised4952]

instead of spending money to go into space they need to find a way to clearify sea water to drinking water!!

[pboskovich]

Studies show that when atmospheric CO2 goes up plant are significantly more productive and need much less water. Get over the manmade global warming hoax and there you go.

Studies show that when atmospheric CO2 goes up plant are significantly more productive and need much less water. Get over the manmade global warming hoax and there you go.

pboskovich: but we''re not Triffids. Get over the deniacon smokescreen, and there we are.

[octavianfdlr]

Does anyone remember how the ice ages (global cooling) have traditionally dried the climate, and the interglacials (global warming) have increased rainfall? Nevertheless, famous scientist Ban Ki-moon is saying that the postulated "Global Warming" is going to decrease the water supply.

Oh no. Ban Ki-moon is not a respected scientist, he is the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The same United Nations which has been promoting worldwide treaties to stop "Global Warming." As such, Ban Ki-moon will gain more political power if people believe him.

Can you say "fraud?"

[hypnotoad72]

De-Salination, perhaps? How much does it cost to remove the salt from sea water? You''d have drinkable water (and salt, useful for seasoning tasty dead animals) in return.

[octavianfdlr]

Good suggestion, hypnotoad72. Desalination is our primary source of clean water.

The sun warms the ocean. Water evaporates out of the ocean. The water vapor blows across the land, which lifts it up to a higher altitude. Adiabatic cooling causes the water vapor to condense out as rain. The rain, freed of the salt, falls onto the land.

If the ocean is warmer (global warming) the concentration of water vapor is higher, and more rain falls. If the ocean is cooler (global cooling, or ice age conditions) there is less water vapor and less rain. Exactly the opposite of what the would-be supreme ruler of the Earth wants us to believe.

[skyk-2009]

You missed the class on snow pack. If the mountain snow pack melts too quickly, which it will with climate change the steady flow of water through out the season is interrupted. And reservoirs can only hold so much water before they have to let it flow out to the ocean.

You see the conundrum of Climate change is that there is more water vapor in the air, but it all comes down at once in massive flurries that flood and rush out to sea. And winter snow pack melts very quickly, once again flowing out to sea. So, you see you have not proven that Climate change is not happening, you have in fact validated it.

Additionally Water Vapor is the king of all green house %u201Cgases%u201D. If the vapor goes up in the upper Troposphere, which coincidently it has been recently, it will add exponentially to the heating of the planet. To reiterate, climate patterns are interrupted and rain fall will increase in intensity and duration in very differently locations around the globe, leading to, Yes You Guessed it, Drought.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by curse914 at 12:40 AM : Jan 26, 2008
+ report abuse

I sit and read these post and just shake my head at some of these folks. Of course you are right about the snow caps and Global Warming will most certainly cause draught, even though the drying increases the amount of H2O in the air, that air MOVES that to some OTHER area, mostly in violent storms.

[skyk-2009]

Studies show that when atmospheric CO2 goes up plant are significantly more productive and need much less water. Get over the manmade global warming hoax and there you go.


Posted by pboskovich at 08:07 PM : Jan 25, 2008
+ report abuse

Only a FOOL would ignore this warning... ONLY a fool would ignore the obvious changes to our enviroment....

[skyk-2009]

Oh no. Ban Ki-moon is not a respected scientist, he is the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The same United Nations which has been promoting worldwide treaties to stop "Global Warming." As such, Ban Ki-moon will gain more political power if people believe him.

Can you say "fraud?"


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by octavianfdlr at 09:16 PM : Jan 25, 2008
+ report abuse

Not EVERYONE is a Nazi and not everyone has a motive to control. I guess you can continue to just ignore the facts before you but they are there and they are real.

curse914: I''m not disagreeing with you. We are going to see severe water shortages around the globe. Water doesn''t contain calories, but without it, we''re dead. The North American aquifers are in serious trouble. The Ogallala aquifer is being depleted - and now that T Boone Pickens is planning on sucking out massive amounts of water to sell - it''s going to be depleted even more quickly. Desalination is the only way to go, and we need to start building more plants. It is working in Tampa Bay, but we need more plants.

[beehive21-2009]

Man is a short time guest on the planet Earth , and shall kill each other before he ruins the Earth.

[downsteamjim]

It seems as though the U.N. has discovered a new problem. At what point in the last 100; 1000; or whenever years was there no droughts. At the U.N.; Greenpeace; etc. there is always an upcoming end of the world. Chicken Little was right.

downsteamjim: For how many years has mankind withdrawn enormous amounts of water from underground aquifers? About 100. We''re sucking the planet dry faster than it is able to replenish itself. Much of southeast asia has historically taken its water from the spring thaw of mountain glaciers. Those glaciers are vanishing. Forget the UN - read for yourself. Google Ogallalah Aquifer. It supplies most of the fresh water for the central US. And it''s going dry.

[downsteamjim]

I find it interesting that the folks who are cynical of opinions or projects that may genuinely benefit society in an egalitarian way have a hard time turning that cynical eye on their own %u201Cleaders%u201D. In other words their critical thinking skills, ironically, are myopic and self destructive.

Posted by curse914 at 10:55 AM : Jan 26, 2008


Thanks curse914: I repeated this phrase three times and all of the fleas fell off my dog.

[downsteamjim]

Curse914: Lighten up and post back when the UN accomplishes something positive.

[erasmus6]

The U.S. is already getting water from Canada. So now because of the climate change their water shortage will become worse. So that means they will be wanting even more water. Tell me, should Canada have to supply water to a country that is in denial about global warming and isn''t doing anything about the problem? Hmmm, I don''t think so.

[pboskovich]

erasmus6

Can you tell me what study demonstrates the connection between a raise in CO2 anbd global warming? You cannot because there is none.

Look, the earth is diffinately in a crisis stage, but until we start using real science and not politically contrived opinions we will never fix the problems.

[erasmus6]

pboskovich

Are you going to answer my question?

[bcweitzel]

Moreover, if we are on a warming trend, there are thousands of contributing factors besides CO2 that enter into the equation. Solar output, distance to the sun, geothermal output, volcanic output, and the tilt of the Earth are just a few.

But no, instead "environmentalists" tell the logging industry that they can no longer go into forests and selectively log and debrush the forests. Then, about in July or August, WE STAND BACK AND WATCH HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF ACRES OF FORESTS TO BURN. So much for decreasing CO2 emmissions, huh? Hundreds of thousands of tons of CO2 emitted into our atmosphere, not to mention all of that thermal polution!

Might want to read http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20070315&articleId=5086, which, might I add, is from a website in CANADA, regarding this topic.

Remember, just a few decades ago they were claiming we were wearing holes in the ozone with CFC''s and causing a global cooling. Never mind that CFC''s are more dense than standard air and have a tendancy to stay near the ground... LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!! So much for your "scientific facts".

[bcweitzel]

Erasums- do you have a job? I mean, every time I look at a comment page you''re always stirring up trouble...

Yes, the US gets some water from Canada, but it has ALWAYS been that way. Even before present day Canadians claimed their country from the natives there have been rivers such as the Columbia that originate as tributaries in Canada and end up going through what is now called the US.

And I don''t know about where you''re at, but at least here (and I live in a desert) last year we were average if not a little higher in average precipitation.

As far as Global Warming, you have to understand where they are getting the whole idea that "the Earth is Warming". They are observing frozen ice chunks and how much CO2 is entrapt in it. They did not have reliable thermometer (measured) data for much more than a few hundred years, which, while comparing it to the age of the Earth at 4 billion years, is very MINISCULE.

Instead, we are looking at the CO2 levels in ice and extrapolating from only ONE potential indicator (which has not been totally scientifically proven to correlate with global warming) and including our few hundred years of temperature data to say that we are on a warming trend. Not only is it poor science, it is immoral and wrong to represent the data as a fact and not a theory.

[bcweitzel]

Erasmus: you gonna answer my question? Pboskovich is still waiting for his too...

Oh, you got nothin? That''s what I thought.

[tucano2]

Co2 is exhaled by humans among others. Humans convinced Co2 is killing planet Earth are invited to simply stop breathing
permanently. Practically any plastic bag will do the job in under 5 minutes, less if duct tape is used to reduce leakage.

[erasmus6]

Posted by nonyabiz2 at 02:15 PM : Jan 26, 2008


Hmm, asking a question is stirring up trouble?

Also there have been many things written and posted on this site giving statistics and proof but the deniers never read them, so what is the point? One thing I have come to learn is that there is absolutely no point in discussing anything with someone that is in major denial.

It must be nice living in denial.

The whole world is on board with this, only the U.S. is in major denial. That''s pretty funny, isn''t it, considering the Americans are the biggest polluters and emitters of C02?

Nope, when the time comes when things get bad, the U.S. will be the ones that deserve NO HELP.

curse914: T. Boone Pickens is investing in water. Fortunes will be made in water. "Pickens and a group of more than 100 landowners formed Mesa Water in 1999 to develop groundwater from the Ogallala Aquifer under Roberts County in the far northeastern Texas Panhandle. Today, Mesa Water is prepared to sell 320,000 acre-feet of aquifer water per year to regions that desperately need it."

Farmers in So Cal are already trying to figure out how to sell their subsized water at a profit, rather than using it to farm.

Tampa Bay''s desalination plant is turning out 25 million gallons of water a day. If the day comes when desalinized water is the ONLY source of drinking water, you can bet your bippy people will be scrambling over themselves to pay for it.

tucanofulano: The CO2 that animals exhale have been a part of the carbon cycle for many millions of years. It doesn''t affect the climate. CO2 found in fossil fuels has NOT been part of the carbon cycle - burning it puts it INTO the carbon cycle, thus warming the atmosphere.

[pboskovich]

erasmus6

Sorry for the delay. I actually have a life outside of this blog.

If Canada wants to export its water to the US who are we to stop them. Its their water isn''t it. If they do not then I guess the US will have to get it from somewhere else. Its called supply and demand. Desalinization, conservation, recycled water, finding more efficient ways to farm are all viable answers.

What you still need to understand, however, is that it is not a global warming issue. It is an issue of how mankind uses the earth''s resources. Stop using manmade global warming as a smokescreen to change man''s behavior. If you looked beyond the main stream media bias you would know the evidence against manmade global warming is getting stronger every year if not every month.

I think we both agree that we need to conserve the earth, but focusing on the fiction of manmade global warming will not do it. Conservation must be based on real science or it will fail.

[pboskovich]

nonyabiz2

I actually used to be totally on board with manmade global warming, however, when I went to look information because I really wanted to understand the science of why, I was amazed at what are nothing less that opinions based on observations and not cause and affect relationships. I know the whole world is on board with this and that simply is not true. I think you will find many scientific skptics if you look for them.

The problem is that it has become so poticacally incorrect to speak up against manmade global warming anyone who does speak out are black balled and pressured into submission. It is like facisism.

The computer models are completely flawed, there is a complete disregard for real science and anytime a skeptic tries to debate the issue, supporters of MMGW make personal attackes as say we are the equivilent of holocost deniers.

I will ask again. What study shows that the increase in manmade CO2 causes MMGW? You cannot answer this question. I want to conserve the earth too, but not based on flawed conputer models.

[erasmus6]

"If Canada wants to export its water to the US who are we to stop them. Its their water isn''''t it. If they do not then I guess the US will have to get it from somewhere else." posted by pboskovich


Hahaha, you don'' REALLY think that Canada WANTS to give the U.S. water, do you? It means that we could run short one day.

And just where do you think the U.S. is going to get their water? MEXICO? If that is the case, why aren''t they already doing it?


"Desalinization, conservation, recycled water, finding more efficient ways to farm are all viable answers."


Well then why aren''t you doing this already? Why are you using up our resources? You aren''t even willing to clean up your pollution or whatever, what makes you think that you will be able to do something about your water? Geez.

[erasmus6]

"I actually used to be totally on board with manmade global warming, however, when I went to look information because I really wanted to understand the science of why, I was amazed at what are nothing less that opinions based on observations and not cause and affect relationships." posted by pboskovich

You are full of c-r-a-p. If you had really researched it you would have found the information. I don''t believe that you were ever on board.

pboskovich:
"Trends
There is a close correlation between Antarctic temperature and atmospheric concentrations of CO2 (Barnola et al. 1987). The extension of the Vostok CO2 record shows that the main trends of CO2 are similar for each glacial cycle. Major transitions from the lowest to the highest values are associated with glacial-interglacial transitions. During these transitions, the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 rises from 180 to 280-300 ppmv (Petit et al. 1999). The extension of the Vostok CO2 record shows the present-day levels of CO2 are unprecedented during the past 420 kyr. "

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.htm

[clestes-2009]

This reminds me of the story where Nero fiddles away while Rome burns.

The dumbf*ck leaders of UN Security council are wasting time farting around with Iran over its non existent weapons program among other things, and not spending time on issues that are far far far more important .

And just like climate change, they will wait until some disaster, Darfur is not close enough to home, before they wake up and say "We got to do something now".

Loss of water supplies is going to cause much more chaos and loss of life than Iran.

There are bunch of useless idiots.

[runningralph]

They''re building a big wave pool in the desert in Arizona. Forget agriculture, think real estate.

[tngreen]

There are two interrelated issues not explained in this article. Western corporations wish to dam up waterways in underdeveloped regions in order to create electricity to power factories, under the guise of modernizing these areas'' water supply systems. The locals then have to buy water that used to run freely. Next is the fact that electric production depletes more water than does straight-up water usage.

These free marketers are evil people who would starve out Third Worlders to profit large corporations.

[rushlimpdrug]

pboskovich

Are you a total reetard?
You actually looked at the research and it was flawed?
Do you wear your underwear backwards/inside out?
Your post is actually laughable.
bye

[bcweitzel]

I suggest that you read up on some of the facts that do not support the "Global Warming" claim before you all go and claim that it is SCIENTIFIC FACT. Please keep in mind that, as with any scientific experiment, until you can PROVE your argument it is still just A THEORY!

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/

"Are you a total reetard? You actually looked at the research and it was flawed?"

I am not pretentious enough to expect you to understand the website listed above, especially since you spell "retarded" wrong (something ironic about that).

"Your post is actually laughable."

Yes, rushlimpdrug, your post is laughable. It has no social redeeming value other than comic relief.

"You are full of c-r-a-p. If you had really researched it you would have found the information. I don''t believe that you were ever on board."

If you can''t s-p-e-l-l it without hyphenating, then don''t.

BTW, I did read up on it (not sure how far pboskovich did, I would assume at least some), and I have found the information. The pro-warming propaganda DOES NOT "PROVE" ANYTHING! If warming is true, they have not PROVEN that it exists or the true cause of it through the standard SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

As soon as you can debunk everything at http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/ with your "enlightened and superior knowledge", I will eat humble pie. Until then, by God don''t go around claiming it is a universally accepted FACT and those that think it is junk science are "reetarded".

[pboskovich]

rushlimpdrug

Actually, I look over a lot of the pier reviews for many of the studies. Let''s take the computer model currently being used by the IPCC. When data from 1970 to the present is used it correlates very nicely with the model. However, when data from 1900 to the present is used it shows that the temperature should be about 6 degrees higher than it is now. I call that a flaw. If a computer model is accurate it needs to be accurate over any time period. This fact was actually pointed out by many scientists at the last IPCC summit and it was ignored by the panel''s published statement. If the only place you get your info is the NY Times and CBS you would never know this. Can you say "Media Bias"?

Let''s take the ice records being used. In every instance when there is an increase in CO2 temperature goes up. What your narrow mind and the rest of the global warming sheep seem to ignore is the fact that EVERY time temp goes up first and then CO2 goes up. This would seem to show that temp controls CO2 not the other way around. I would call this another flaw in the interpretation of the data. Do you understand the difference between opinion and fact?

To answer you other question... I do not wear any underwear.

Stop being a mindless sheep and look for answers yourself. If you open your mind to other posibilities you might actually learn something.

[pboskovich]

erasmus6

Believe it or not it is possible to care about protecting the environment and not believe the global warming myth.

[occamsrazor1]

Many of the same "experts/commentators" jumping on the global warming bandwagon, were saying in the 1970''s a new Ice Age was upon us. Is their purpose to curry favor with the junk science of the month club? Or is it the desire for simple "connect the dot" answers to everything because they are overwhelmed by the complexity of such issues and cannot provide sound bites to back up the media/political bully pit? It just may be human arrogance believing humans are the masters of Earth and the belief humans can control/change natural events by giving them an identified "cause/effect" when one isn''t available based on the data/research.

[pboskovich]

Is there anyone out there capable of intelegent debate? I get a lot of insults but no seems to have the ability to give a counter point to anything.

Once again...Ice core samples show again and again that temperature goes up first and then 200-1000 years later CO2 goes up. This seems to show that temperature controls CO2 output not the other way around.

Can anyone give one scientific study that seems to show otherwise?

pboskovich: core samples show that there is a tight correlation between rise in CO2 and temperature. The fact is - CO2 rises both before AND after temperature increases. The current level is unprecedented in the last 420k years, and it''s going to get much higher. And when massive amounts of methane is released from the thawing tundra, the temperature is going to sky rocket.

[pboskovich]

Hominatrix53

Thank you for your intellegent response.

You are right that CO2 levels are higher that they have been in nearly half a million years. However, the studies that I have read regarding the ice core samples show that after every major glaciation period, CO2 always follows a raise in temp. Do you know of studies that show otherwise?

Also, changes in temp and CO2 are observational and do not explain causd and affect. Do you know of any studies that quantify a positive correlation between CO2 and temperature? How do you explain that from 1940 to 1970 when CO2 output started to go through the roof, temperature was goiong down? The CO2 theory is totally incosistent.

pboskovich: Are you a climatologist?

[chipper777]

I know that global warming is an issue but the problems with putting in dams or taking out dams is really a bigger problem. We put in big dams and people say that the turbines are killing all small smult. Then they say if you take out the dams we will have terrible problems with drought. Ever wonder why we as a nation sell millions of pounds of salmon eggs to japan to resell to us for fish bait? Ever wonder why we don''t have more baby salmon? The eggs are used to catch more fish. And if we let out all of the water from the dams, where will the rich people get water for their swimming pools while others are lacking water to live? I maintain that the real reason the world is getting hotter is the fact that millions of people are now using electic tooth brushes. Point is a hundred years ago few people brushed their teeth. It takes energy to look and smell pretty and smile pretty. So conserve water and electricity by taking a bath once a month, or force swimming pool or hot tub owners to share their water so you can get cleaned up, and never use your electric tooth brushes.

[stddating]

Can you tell me what study demonstrates the connection between a raise in CO2 anbd global warming? You cannot because there is none.


#########################
We both almost gave up hope due to herpes/hpv, but just posted our

success story to pozgroup.com, where we met each other.Stop feeling

dejected,don''t let your hopes fade away.Love is bigger than the H

virus!

[stddating]

Can you tell me what study demonstrates the connection between a raise in CO2 anbd global warming? You cannot because there is none.


#########################
We both almost gave up hope due to herpes/hpv, but just posted our

success story to pozgroup.com, where we met each other.Stop feeling

dejected,don''t let your hopes fade away.Love is bigger than the H

virus!

[pboskovich]

Hominatrix53

No, I am not a climatologist. I took elective courses in earth sciences and meteorology 20 years ago in college but that is about it. I do, however, read a lot about the subject online. There is a lot of info out there available to the public. The bottom line is that no one has all the answers and anyone who says that they know exactly what is going on is a liar or misguided.

Are you a meteorologist?

If you want a broader understanding about the other side of global warming do a search for a British documentary called the "Great Global Warming Hoax". The movie is about an hour. While this is by no means a complete view of the other side of the issue, you owe it to yourself to take a look at it if you really do care about the issue. Even if you totally disagree with everything you will understand why many of us believe what we do. We are not crazy, we are just looking for hard evidence to support the claims made by many. I have been looking for over two years to find published evidence of man made global warming and I can not find it. Let me know when you do. I would love to read it.

There is also a study by a Dutch scientist that quantifies the relationship between changes in the sun%u2019s magnetic field (sun spots), cosmic rays (from stellar supernova many light years away) and the formation of water droplets. I cannot remember his name but I will let you know when I track it down. The implications of this effect on climate are huge.

pboskovich: You might consider taking some more recent classes. I''m an undergrad - major is anthropology/archaeology but I have recently taken several classes on environmental science, and am currently taking environmental issues. And in the interests of time - I''m 54 and have been discussing and studying this issue for many many years. There is no question in my mind that the current global warming is largely anthropogenic.

the reason I asked if you were a climatologist is that I have seen many many many arguments against the reality of global warming - all of which seem to center on a half-dozen points - one of which is the lead/lag of CO2. In fact, when I said that it does both - you again asked for a study proving a point that 1. we all know doesn''t exist and 2. some know doesn''t matter. I''m not going to waste my time arguing what is quite possibly the most complicated scientific issue of the modern age. I''m not a climatologist, and neither are you. Our opinions are not well-informed, and I have other things to do that are more pressing, as I''m sure do you as well. I''m just going to say that I prefer to do whatever I can to ensure the well-being of future generations, whether it inconveniences me or not.

[rf35]

"including cutting by half the number of people without access to safe drinking water by 2015 - particularly in Africa."

Actually, cutting by half the number of people -period- would be a wise move for all. Through reproductive responsibility (not having numerous children) this goal is achievable in less than a century. The U.N. needs to focus on the root problem and not the symptoms. Water shortage is a symptom. MMGW, if it turns out to be true, is also a symptom. Elevated CO2 and other GHG''s are symptoms. When you think about it, the U.N. itself is a symptom. The root cause of all these issues is overpopulation.

I cannot comprehend the thought process of anyone who claims humans cannot/have not effected nature. You need look no farther than South America to see the effect man has on the planet. BTW, that effect is another symptom. It''s claims like that that cause me to look with suspicion on the anti-MMGW camp.

[pboskovich]

Hominatrix53

1) You still have not cited any study that quantifies the correltation between CO2 and temperature.

2) Per your own statement sometimes CO2 goes yup before temp and sometines after. If this is true then by simple logic neither controls the other.

3) Just because I do not believe in the PROOF of man made global warming does not believe the extreme need for alternative energy and preserving the earth''s resources for genetations to come.

4) Most of the scientist at the IPCC conference were not climatolighst either. Neither is Al Gore.