MONDAY, APRIL 21, 2014
4
PAGE 4
TEXT
FREE FOR ALL
Text your FFA submissions to (785)289-8351 or at kansan.com
Can someone please explain to me why there were NO RECYCLING BINS AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENERGY CONFERENCE?!!!
That moment when you think you don't need a knife to cut your pancake. Then, you remember you're at Es.
Thursday's paper got me so excited for Wednesday Aug 28th 2019, I am going to jump in my freezer someone thaw me on like the Monday before.
The Daisy Hill bus drivers hit the brakes just to watch all of the freshmen fall over. Like dominoes.
The UDK being in black and white today makes my heart cry.
THE PHAAAANTOM OF THE
FIELDHOUSE IS THERE... INSIDE
YOUR MIND!
Dead random girl, why are you in the library playing candy crush at midnight?
A Nerufigher is someone who is made purely of awesome and fights to decrease World Suck. Look up the vlogbrothers on YouTube for more info.
The only thing my girlfriend does when she is stressed is play 2048 I don't know how we'd still be together without that game.
Nutella is life. Life is Nutella.
Believe it or not, ealing during lecture is legitimately rude and distracting. I'm looking at you, BIOL 412.
Downloading 2048 was probably the worst decision I've ever made in my life. I am now seeing it in every day situations on campus.
Any guy that likes Disney movies is a keeper.
To the guy with the adorable dog in front of Wescoe, thank you.
I needed that.
With technology being so advanced you would think that they could increase the character limit on text messages.
Just heard a tour guide call Haworth hall. Ha worth. It's a long a. Not a short one. Who trains these guys?
Editor's Note: The Haworth family asked the tour guides to say it that way (since that's how the name is pronounced). Most people actually say the building name incorrectly.
I want to have a huge Earth Day party. Does anybody want to help me planet?
There are open parking spaces on daisy hill. I think I'm in the twilight zone.
UN group sounds another climate change false alarm
CON
The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC, recently released its "Fifth Assessment Report", the AR5. If you still haven't read the titanic, 1,535-page report written by hundreds of scientists from various disciplines, I don't blame you. The IPCC has for more than two decades now attempted to sound the climate change alarm, and this is the fifth iteration. If you want further exposure to climate change false alarms that stink of liberal biases, try reading the AR4, which was released in 2007.
When you hear an alarm, you're trained to react. Fire alarm? Leave the building. But this climate change alarm, the AR5, is one that you should ignore. In fact, Robert Tol, one of only three economists that contributed to the AR5, withdrew from the final draft, claiming that the report had become "too alarmist". Truthfully, politicians and pundits, liberal to conservative, ignore most of the report and tend to focus on a 28-page "Summary for Policymakers."
It's more of a liberal soapbox than a summary. The Wall Street Journal, straight from the AR5, gives the following example: "Recognizing how inequality and marginalization perpetuate poverty is a prerequisite for climate-resilient development pathways." The IPCC goes on later to say that investment in "developing countries" must increase by "orders of magnitude."
That's right to fight this climate change monster, the IPCC is taking the fight to poverty and inequality in developing countries first.
These endless political agendas mark the IPCC. If you take the liberal-spin off of the IPCC assertion, it would look like this: Improving a nation's economy will lead to improvements in its ability to combat climate change. But the carbon taxes, intensified regulatory scrutiny and continued waves of climate activism the IPCC hopes to inspire damage the very economic growth that is absolutely critical to protecting the environment, while also confusing the public.
As the Wall Street Journal aptly puts it, "the IPCC supports the very
regulation, income redistribution and politically favored misallocation of resources that will make the world poorer — and less able to adapt if the climate threat proves to be as real as the U.N.'s computer models claim."
Although government intervention has changed water quality, smog problems and other environmental issues for the better. climate change is not the same issue Rather, it reeks of Malthusian error. As Matt Ridley, author of "The Rational Optimist," asserted in the New York Times, climate change alarmism is more similar to other exaggerated global environmental scares of the past half century, like killer bees. The problem is not as extreme as the alarms argue, but only after waves of international funds line the coffers of climate scientists will everyone quietly converge on a more moderate position.
Sadly, what determines which side — the lukewarmers like myself who don't deny climate change, but are sick of the doom and gloom, and the alarmists who think the Earth is being poisoned — will get to say "I told you so," is driven by perception rather than fact. The IPCC knows that.
Don't get swept up in the climate change hoopla, especially in a liberal environment like Lawrence. Finish your engineering degree and make the next generation battery. Study business and find ways to make green energy more economic. Get involved in tangible environmental issues, like the depletion of the Ogallala aquifer. But don't waste your time sounding the climate change alarm.
Chris Ouyang is a senior from Overland Park studying petroleum engineering and economics.
PRO
Action must be taken to combat climate change
When Nicolaus Copernicus first suggested that the Earth was not stationar
Earth was not stationary, but revolved around the sun, his idea was met with disdain. Today, we view Copernicus as a forefather of the Scientific Revolution and a saint of controversial science. His ideas ushered in not only a great change in astronomy, but also a great change in our understanding of our place on Earth.
The latest International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) "Fifth Assessment Report" has been met with similar misunderstanding. In my opinion, the IPCC report should usher in a great change in policy and a greater understanding of our individual role in the largest problem facing the 21st century: climate change.
The IPCC consists of thousands of scientists from 195 different countries and was established in 1988 by the United Nations Environmental Programme and the World Meteorological Organization. During the last year, the IPCC released its latest report on climate change in three parts. The latest section, titled mitigation of climate change, was released in late March.
The third report's message was clear: We have until 2030 to more aggressively pursue greenhouse gas (GHG) emission mitigation before our world will be unmistakably altered due to drastic temperature increases.
The science in the latest report makes it very clear that humans are responsible for an unprecedented increase in GHG emissions. In fact, the IPCC says with high confidence that rising emissions across all sectors since 2010 are due to increased economic growth. With similar confidence, the report indicates that emissions will continue to rise in the face of continued population and economic growth without implementation of GHG mitigation. This drastic upset in the balance of atmospheric carbon will cause global temperatures to rise between 38.6 and 40.6 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100 compared to pre-industrial times.
The IPCC believes this drastic increase in temperature will cause many reasons for concern, including the following harrowing examples. First, coastal communities are at risk of illness, injury and death due to
flooding and storm surges. Second, extreme weather events will breakdown infrastructure networks that deliver electricity, water and health and emergency services. Third, a high likelihood of an agricultural breakdown from water shortages will cause widespread food insecurity.
In addition to presenting extensive data on the science and outcomes of climate change, the latest IPCC report provides mitigation strategies. In order to keep our planet from warming 35.6 degrees by 2100, we must keep our atmospheric carbon content at 450 parts per million. This can be achieved by lowering our carbon emission 40-70 percent from 2010 levels through implementation of a strict carbon tax, creation of sustainable urban development, increased infrastructure and energy efficiency and modification of individual consumption behaviors.
As was true in the times of Copernicus, science can be a polarizing force that cripples reasonable action, but in the case of climate change, the cost of inaction will be far greater than the immediate costs of GHG mitigation. If we do not adopt stronger mitigation strategies by 2030, our world will continue on its朵daystrajectory. We must ask ourselves whether we want to pay higher prices for energy now or suffer food shortages, biodiversity loss, public health problems from disease and a legacy of environmental degradation in the near future.
We must take the concept of cost effectiveness out of mitigation dialogue because human life, future human life and the environment cannot be monetized. The science does not lie. If we ignore the latest TPCC report, our children and our world will pay the price for our inaction.
Gabrielle Murnan is a sophomore from Pittsburg studying environmental studies.
CHECK OUT THE NEXT PART OF THE CARTOON AT KANSAN.COM/ OPINION
RICKY SMITH/KANSAN
FFA OF THE DAY I didn't choose the Nutella life, the Nutella life chose me.
LETTER GUIDELINES
CAMPUS CHIBA
Send letters to opinion@kansan.com. Write LETTER TO THE EDITOR in the email form below.
**LETTER TO THE EDITOR**
**Length:** 300 words
The submission should include the author's name grade and hometown. Find our full letter to the editor policy online at kansan.com/letters.
HOW TO SUBMIT A LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Follow us on Twitter @KansanOpinion Tweet us your opinions,and we just might publish them.
Katie Kutka, editor-in-chief
kkutko@kansan.com
Allison Kohn, managing editor
akohn@kansan.com
Lauren Armendariz, managing editor
armendariz@kansan.com
Anna Wenner, opinion editor awenner@kansan.com
Sean Powers, business manager spowers@kansan.com
Kolby Botts, sales manager
Kolby Botts, sales manager
kbotts@kansan.com
CONTACT US
Brett Akagi, media director and content strategist
bakagi@kansan.com
Jon Schiltt, sales and marketing adviser
jschiltt@kansan.com
THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Members of the Kansan Editorial Board are Katie Kutlis, Allison Koen, Lauren Armendariz, Anna Werner, Sean Powers and Kobbots Kotls.
+