Actually, there were IPCC-like reports periodically produced during
the ozone debate. The World Meteorological Organization produced
periodic assessments of the science of ozone depletion, and, like the
IPCC reports, they are the gold-standard assessment of what we know
about ozone loss and how confidently we know it. They are generally
given great credit for bringing an accurate assessment of the science
to the debate. See this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Assessment_of_Ozone_Depletion
My view of why climate change is different is that it's a harder, more
expensive problem. Thus, there's a lot more incentive for people to
come up with reasons to do nothing.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
