In this Monday, Feb. 22, 2016 file photo, trekkers pass through a glacier at the Mount Everest base camp, Nepal. One-third of Himalayan glaciers will melt by the end of the century due to climate change, threatening water sources for 1.9 billion people, even if current efforts to reduce climate change succeed, according to an assessment released Monday, Feb. 4, 2019. by the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. (AP Photo/Tashi Sherpa, file)

在這張拍攝于2016年2月22日星期一的照片中，徒步旅行者正在尼泊爾珠穆朗瑪峰大本營(yíng)的冰川中穿行。2019年2月4日(周一)發(fā)布的一份評(píng)估報(bào)告顯示，到本世紀(jì)末，三分之一的喜馬拉雅冰川將因氣候變化而融化，這將威脅到19億人的水源，即便目前減少氣候變化的努力取得了成功。

KATHMANDU, Nepal (AP) — One-third of Himalayan glaciers will melt by the end of the century due to climate change, threatening water sources for 1.9 billion people, even if current efforts to reduce climate change succeed, an assessment warns.

尼泊爾加德滿(mǎn)都(美聯(lián)社)——據(jù)一份評(píng)估報(bào)告警告說(shuō)，由于氣候變化，到本世紀(jì)末，三分之一的喜馬拉雅冰川將會(huì)融化，這將威脅到19億人的水源，即使目前減少氣候變化的努力取得了成功。

If global efforts to curb climate change fail, the impact could be far worse: a loss of two-thirds of the region's glaciers by 2100, said the Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment released Monday by the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development.

國(guó)際山地綜合開(kāi)發(fā)中心(International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development)周一發(fā)布的興都庫(kù)什喜馬拉雅(Hindu Kush Himalaya)評(píng)估報(bào)告稱(chēng)，如果全球遏制氣候變化的努力失敗，其影響可能會(huì)嚴(yán)重得多：到2100年，該地區(qū)三分之二的冰川將消失。

"Global warming is on track to transform the frigid, glacier-covered mountain peaks of the Hindu Kush Himalayas cutting across eight countries to bare rocks in a little less than a century," said Philippus Wester of the center, who led the report.

該中心的菲利普·韋斯特(Philippus Wester)是這份報(bào)告的負(fù)責(zé)人，他說(shuō):“全球變暖將在不到一個(gè)世紀(jì)的時(shí)間里，把興都庫(kù)什喜馬拉雅山脈那些被冰川覆蓋的寒冷山峰變成裸露的巖石?！?/span>

The five-year study looked at the effects of climate change on a region that cuts across Asia through Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Nepal, China, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Myanmar. The area, which includes the world's tallest mountain peaks, has glaciers that feed into river systems including the Indus, Ganges, Yangtze, Irrawaddy and Mekong.

這項(xiàng)為期五年的研究著眼于氣候變化對(duì)亞洲地區(qū)的影響，該地區(qū)橫跨阿富汗、巴基斯坦、印度、尼泊爾、中國(guó)、不丹、孟加拉國(guó)和緬甸。該地區(qū)包括世界上最高的山峰，冰川匯入印度河、恒河、長(zhǎng)江、伊洛瓦底江和湄公河等水系。

The assessment said that the impact of the melting could range from flooding from the increased runoff to increased air pollution from black carbon and dust deposited on the glaciers.

該評(píng)估稱(chēng)，冰川融化的影響可能包括洪水、徑流增加、黑碳和沉積在冰川上的灰塵所造成的空氣污染加劇。

Saleemul Huq, director of the International Center for Climate Change and Development, an environmental research center in Dhaka, described the findings of the report as "very alarming," especially for downstream nations such as Bangladesh.

達(dá)卡環(huán)境研究中心——國(guó)際氣候變化與發(fā)展中心主任薩利姆胡克(Saleemul Huq)稱(chēng)，該報(bào)告的發(fā)現(xiàn)“非常令人擔(dān)憂(yōu)”，尤其是對(duì)孟加拉國(guó)等下游國(guó)家而言。

"All the countries affected need to prioritize tackling this upcoming problem before it reaches crisis proportions," he said in an email. Huq was one of the study's external reviewers.

他在一封電子郵件中說(shuō)，“所有受影響的國(guó)家都需要在這個(gè)即將到來(lái)的問(wèn)題達(dá)到危機(jī)程度之前，優(yōu)先解決它。”胡克是該研究的外部審稿人之一。

The study said that even if the most ambitious Paris climate accord goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) by the end of the century were met, more than a third of the region's glaciers will be lost. If the global rise in temperature were 2 C (3.6 F), two-thirds of Himalayan glaciers will melt, it said.

研究稱(chēng)，即使巴黎氣候協(xié)議中最雄心勃勃的目標(biāo)得以實(shí)現(xiàn)——到本世紀(jì)末將全球變暖控制在1.5攝氏度(2.7華氏度)以?xún)?nèi)，該地區(qū)三分之一以上的冰川也將消失。如果全球氣溫上升2攝氏度(3.6華氏度)，三分之二的喜馬拉雅冰川將會(huì)融化。

The 2015 Paris Agreement was a landmark moment in international diplomacy, bringing together governments with vastly different views to tackle global warming. It set a headline target of keeping average global temperatures from rising by more than 2 C, or 1.5 C if possible.

2015年《巴黎協(xié)定》是國(guó)際外交的一個(gè)里程碑式時(shí)刻，各國(guó)政府在應(yīng)對(duì)全球變暖問(wèn)題上意見(jiàn)迥異。它設(shè)定了一個(gè)總體目標(biāo)，即防止全球平均氣溫上升超過(guò)2攝氏度，如果可能的話(huà)，不超過(guò)1.5攝氏度。

According to a recent report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, emissions of the most abundant greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, would need to be reduced to a level the planet can absorb — known as net zero — by 2050 to keep global warming at 1.5 C as envisaged in the agreement.

根據(jù)政府間氣候變化專(zhuān)門(mén)委員會(huì)(IPCC)最近的一份報(bào)告，到2050年最豐富的溫室氣體二氧化碳的排放量需要降低到地球可以吸收的水平——也就是凈零——以便按照協(xié)議的設(shè)想，將全球變暖控制在攝氏1.5度。

The International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development said the study included work by more than 350 researchers and policy experts from 22 countries. It said it had 210 authors and 125 external reviewers.

國(guó)際山地綜合開(kāi)發(fā)中心說(shuō)，這項(xiàng)研究包括來(lái)自22個(gè)國(guó)家的350多名研究人員和政策專(zhuān)家的工作。有210位作者和125位外部審稿人。

The Kathmandu-based center said it receives donations from regional countries, non-regional countries such as Australia, Austria, Norway, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, and other international programs such as USAID.

這個(gè)設(shè)在加德滿(mǎn)都的中心說(shuō)，它接受來(lái)自地區(qū)國(guó)家、澳大利亞、奧地利、挪威、瑞士和英國(guó)等非地區(qū)國(guó)家以及美國(guó)國(guó)際開(kāi)發(fā)署等其他國(guó)際項(xiàng)目的捐贈(zèng)。

(評(píng)論部分)

Jim in CA?
Interglacial： A comparatively short natural period of warmth during an overall period of glaciation. Interglacials are characterized both by the melting of ice producing a change in sea levels and by a change in vegetation.
See also: Holocene interglacial, Eemian interglacial, Sangamon interglacial, Yarmouth Interglacial stage (Obsolete), Marine Isotope Stage 5, Marine Isotope Stage 7, Marine Isotope Stage 9, Marine Isotope Stage 11. Marine Isotope Stage 13, Marine Isotope Stage 15, etc etc etc. (ending around MIS 104)

間冰期：在整個(gè)冰期中相對(duì)較短的自然溫暖期。間冰期的特征是冰的融化導(dǎo)致海平面的變化，以及植被的變化。
參見(jiàn)：全新世間冰期、埃米安間冰期、桑加蒙間冰期、雅茅斯間冰期(已廢棄)、海洋同位素5期、海洋同位素7期、海洋同位素9期、海洋同位素11期。海洋同位素13期，海洋同位素15期，等等(在MIS 104附近結(jié)束)
(注：海洋同位素階段［Marine isotope stages，MIS］，又稱(chēng)海洋氧同位素階段或氧同位素階段，是根據(jù)深海鉆孔沉積物中的氧同位素?cái)?shù)據(jù)所反映的溫度變化推斷出來(lái)的地球古氣候冷暖交替周期)



Ugly??
Eventually trees and plants will replace the ice. Small creatures of the forest will return. Life will renew in this barren wasteland! It isn't all doom and gloom folks. Check to see how high above sea-level you live. If you're above 10 feet you've got nothing to worry about.

最終，樹(shù)木和植物將取代冰。森林里的小動(dòng)物會(huì)回來(lái)的。在這片貧瘠的荒原上，生命將得到新生!人們并不都是悲觀的。看看你住的地方離海平面有多高。如果你在10英尺以上，你就沒(méi)什么好擔(dān)心的。

Zorro??
This is the reason the Chinese will be the first to develop fully automated Soylent Green factories. That are moved around with giant dirigibles. And the Soylent picked up by robot drones. Like in the movie "Zardoz".

這就是為什么中國(guó)將率先發(fā)展完全自動(dòng)化的Soylent綠色工廠。它們隨著巨大的飛船四處移動(dòng)。Soylent被機(jī)器人無(wú)人機(jī)接收。就像電影《Zardoz》里那樣。
（注：《薩杜斯》zardoz電影簡(jiǎn)介，三百年后的地球?yàn)橐蝗焊呒?jí)科學(xué)家所統(tǒng)治，他們奴役賤民以供自己享樂(lè)，但有一名野蠻的毀滅者闖進(jìn)了科學(xué)家所建的世外桃源，使情況整個(gè)改觀）

Josey Wales?
If the glaciers have been feeding the rivers, I guess they have been melting for a long time already

如果冰川一直在滋養(yǎng)河流，我猜它們已經(jīng)融化了很長(zhǎng)一段時(shí)間了。

John?
There are too many needless people on this planet.

這個(gè)星球上不必要的人太多了。

charles
When will China stop polluting our environment?

中國(guó)什么時(shí)候停止污染我們的環(huán)境?

——————分割線(xiàn)——————

joesmith?
Just another untested hypothesis put out by a moron who is stating his opinion. What's with the total lack of science in climate change "studies?"

只是一個(gè)白癡提出的另一個(gè)未經(jīng)檢驗(yàn)的假設(shè)，他不過(guò)是在發(fā)表自己的觀點(diǎn)?！皻夂蜃兓芯俊蓖耆狈茖W(xué)依據(jù)，這是怎么回事？

MGC? （回復(fù)樓上）
the great lying denier spews more mindless idiocy.

自大的說(shuō)謊狂人說(shuō)出了更多的愚蠢的話(huà)。

joesmith （回復(fù)樓上）
Well, that's real scientific. The glaciers ain't even that old.

這是很科學(xué)的。冰川還沒(méi)那么古老。

Reverend Jim??
The study was based on past reductions of glaciers in the area, and projecting forward.

該研究基于該地區(qū)過(guò)去冰川的減少，并預(yù)測(cè)未來(lái)。

joesmith?
Did they test their hypothesis? Nope. Ergo, opinion. Never any science in climate articles.

他們檢驗(yàn)他們的假設(shè)了嗎？沒(méi)有。因此這只是我的意見(jiàn)。從來(lái)沒(méi)有任何科學(xué)的氣候文章。

——————分割線(xiàn)——————

Tom? ?
Well from looking at some of the posts at least the Trump Tards are consistent: They put their EGO ahead of reason and logic (not that they're really capable or eason and logic).
The sea levels rise and swallow islands. The ice caps are shrinking. Glaciers are disappearing. One day Florida will be completely under water and they'll still deny global warming. All because their egos will never allow them to admit they were lied to and they themselves believed and propagated the lies.

從一些帖子來(lái)看，至少特朗普的觀點(diǎn)是一致的：他們把自我置于理性和邏輯之上(并不是說(shuō)他們真的有能力或理由、邏輯)。
海平面上升，吞沒(méi)了島嶼。冰蓋正在縮小，冰川正在消失?？傆幸惶旆鹆_里達(dá)會(huì)完全被水淹沒(méi)，他們還是會(huì)否認(rèn)全球變暖。這都是因?yàn)樗麄兊淖宰鹦牟辉试S他們承認(rèn)自己被騙了，他們自己也相信并傳播了這些謊言。

MikeyPooh?
If requesting 'self-consistency' is EGOTISM then fine, i'm EGOTISTICAL. I do want REAL science that allows real predictions that don't change daily, and I have it for nearly every part of life but then i look at the alarmists and it's just pure insanity.

如果要求“自我一致性”是自我主義，那好吧，我就是自私自利。我確實(shí)想要真正的科學(xué)，讓真實(shí)的預(yù)測(cè)不會(huì)每天都改變，我生活的每個(gè)部分幾乎都有它。但當(dāng)我看到危言聳聽(tīng)的人，這純粹是精神錯(cuò)亂。

——————分割線(xiàn)——————
Kevin?
SO what? Probably another in a long list of failed exaggerated false predictions. The fluctuations in glaciers has been happening for eons. The benefits out weigh the problems by warming up slightly, too bad we have only .002% of anything to do with it.

那又怎樣?這可能是一長(zhǎng)串錯(cuò)誤預(yù)測(cè)中的又一個(gè)。冰川的波動(dòng)已經(jīng)發(fā)生了好幾個(gè)世紀(jì)。這樣做的好處是稍稍預(yù)熱一下就能抵消問(wèn)題的影響，可惜我們只有0.002%與之相關(guān)的東西。

iuingaR??
I find that the weather man is right about half the and long term weather reports usually a bust! Yeah, predict 80 years ahead with solar cooling taking effect! Scare us! LOL!!!

我發(fā)現(xiàn)天氣預(yù)報(bào)員大約有一半是對(duì)的，而且長(zhǎng)期的天氣預(yù)報(bào)通常是錯(cuò)誤的！是啊，預(yù)言80年前太陽(yáng)冷卻會(huì)生效！嚇到我們了！哈哈！

Lucy Fi? （回復(fù)樓上）
You have a really bad weather man where you live. Mine here in Houston is excellent.

你住的地方有個(gè)很差勁的天氣預(yù)報(bào)員。我在休斯頓的預(yù)報(bào)員表現(xiàn)很出色。

Dave? ? ? ?
So which of the extremely wide range of estimates for climate sensitivity to CO2 was used to come up with the scary sounding projections in this article?
And why is that crucial detail always left out of articles like this? Surely not because it is just more fear-mongering propaganda aimed at the gullible and scientifically illiterate, right?

那么，在這篇文章中，關(guān)于氣候?qū)Χ趸嫉拿舾行缘臉O大范圍的估計(jì)中，哪一個(gè)被用來(lái)得出聽(tīng)起來(lái)嚇人的預(yù)測(cè)呢？
為什么像這樣的文章總是忽略了關(guān)鍵的細(xì)節(jié)呢？當(dāng)然不是因?yàn)樗皇轻槍?duì)那些容易上當(dāng)受騙和不懂科學(xué)知識(shí)的人的更多散布恐懼的宣傳，對(duì)嗎？

MikeyPooh? ??
"carbon dioxide, would need to be reduced to a level the planet can absorb" WHAT is the level the planet can absorb?! How can they make statements like that all the time without ever asking the most basic questions!!! If you don't KNOW how much earth can absorb, then you don't KNOW what 'net zero' is!!!

“二氧化碳，需要降低到地球能吸收的水平”
“地球能吸收的水平是多少?”他們?cè)趺茨芤恢边@樣說(shuō)，卻從來(lái)不問(wèn)最基本的問(wèn)題??！如果你不知道地球能吸收多少，那么你就不知道什么是“凈零”!!

TigerMan? ? ??
"The 2015 Paris Agreement was a landmark moment in international diplomacy, bringing together governments with vastly different views to tackle global warming. It set a headline target of keeping average global temperatures from rising by more than 2 C, or 1.5 C if possible."
A bogus target pulled out of their.......

“2015年《巴黎協(xié)定》是國(guó)際外交的一個(gè)里程碑式的時(shí)刻，各國(guó)政府在應(yīng)對(duì)全球變暖問(wèn)題上的觀點(diǎn)大相徑庭。它設(shè)定了一個(gè)總體目標(biāo)，即防止全球平均氣溫上升超過(guò)2攝氏度，如果可能的話(huà)，不超過(guò)1.5攝氏度?！?/span>
又一個(gè)從他們的嘴里說(shuō)出的假目標(biāo)……

Williamyesterday
Nothing can or will be done to prevent it....but...don't worry, the next ice age will replace them..

什么都不能也不會(huì)阻止它…但是…別擔(dān)心，下一個(gè)冰河世紀(jì)將會(huì)取代它們…

——————分割線(xiàn)——————

tod? ? ?（樓主）?
Please look up the Dansgaard Oeschger Cycle and then ask the AGW followers how they reconcile that science with their CO2 fetish.

去查閱“丹斯加德－奧斯切爾循環(huán)”，然后詢(xún)問(wèn)AGW的追隨者，他們?nèi)绾螀f(xié)調(diào)科學(xué)與他們對(duì)二氧化碳的迷戀。
（注："丹斯加德－奧斯切爾循環(huán)"是在上次冰期期間和末期非常有規(guī)律性地發(fā)生的迅速的氣候波動(dòng)。這種現(xiàn)象里有個(gè)周期性，如果能知道產(chǎn)生周期的原因，就能知道觸發(fā)變化的因素）

PlentyCoups（回復(fù)樓上）
tod. when can we expect your actual evidence from scientific sources?

Tod，我們什么時(shí)候能從科學(xué)來(lái)源得到你的實(shí)際證據(jù)？

tod? （樓主回復(fù)）
@PlentyCoups ...Nothing you post refutes what I posted, please troll elsewhere, you are boring...

你發(fā)的任何東西都不能反駁我所發(fā)的，請(qǐng)?jiān)谄渌胤剿阉饕幌掳?，你很無(wú)聊…

PlentyCoups
"there is no test that can differentiate a 12c isotope generated by a volcano, etc. from one generated by a power plant, etc. "
You're lying again. It's all you do.
A declining C13 ratio shows that the carbon is from a biological source and is not volcanic in origin.

你說(shuō)“沒(méi)有任何測(cè)試可以區(qū)分火山等產(chǎn)生的12C同位素和發(fā)電廠等產(chǎn)生的12C同位素。”
你又說(shuō)謊了。這就是你所做的一切。C13比率的下降表明，碳來(lái)自生物來(lái)源，而不是火山來(lái)源。

Tod-" Science guesses the 12c isotope is from human sources because it shows up more in tests done and from the way they program and tune models"
More made up nonsense.

你還說(shuō)過(guò)“科學(xué)推測(cè)12C同位素來(lái)自人類(lèi)，因?yàn)樗趯?shí)驗(yàn)中表現(xiàn)得更多，而且來(lái)自于他們編程和調(diào)整模型的方式?！?/span>
你又在胡言亂語(yǔ)了。

MikeyPooh
Speaking of C14, the closest we have to a controlled atmosphere experiment was the nuclear test ban of 1963. After the 1963 peak, C14 levels exhibited a half life of less than 9 years. Being heavier means it reacts more slowly, so C12 must have a half life much shorter than 9 years.
Man's emissions are only 3% of the NATURAL yearly emissions, and these natural emissions are largely a return to equilibrium between the sea and the rocks which not only compose the overwhelming majority of emissions, but they're also sources of old decayed carbon as well.

說(shuō)到C14，我們所擁有的最接近受控大氣實(shí)驗(yàn)的是1963年的核試驗(yàn)禁令。1963年達(dá)到峰值后，C14的半衰期不到9年。更重意味著它的反應(yīng)更慢，所以C12的半衰期必須比9年短得多。
人類(lèi)的排放量只占自然年排放量的3%，而這些自然排放量在很大程度上是恢復(fù)了海洋和巖石之間的平衡，海洋和巖石不僅占了排放量的絕大多數(shù)，而且也是舊的腐爛碳的來(lái)源。

Reverend Jim?
Doesn't explain the current isotopic C fingerprint. The relative amount of C14 is lower than in the past because of burning of fossil fuels.

不能解釋目前的同位素C指紋。由于燃燒化石燃料，C14的相對(duì)含量比過(guò)去要低。

——————分割線(xiàn)——————

dali??
In 100 years fresh water will be more valuable than oil.

100年后，淡水將比石油更有價(jià)值。

MikeyPooh??
If anyone dies of thirst on a planet that is HALF water that is a statement of politics not science. Besides, a gallon of oil can easily desal and purify hundreds of gallons of yuck water.

在一個(gè)半水的星球上，如果有人死于干渴，不是科學(xué)。此外，一加侖的油可以很容易地去除和凈化數(shù)百加侖的討厭的水。

——————分割線(xiàn)——————

2.0yesterday
I believe nature knows best. When going get tough the tough get going. Mother nature again will recover but humans might not

我相信大自然最清楚。當(dāng)你變得堅(jiān)強(qiáng)的時(shí)候，你就會(huì)變得強(qiáng)大。大自然母親會(huì)再次恢復(fù)，但人類(lèi)可能不會(huì)。

V? ?
Humans don’t deserve to survive.
The planet will survive and heal itself eventually, but human beings will die out and the human race deserves to die off.

人類(lèi)不配生存。
地球?qū)?huì)生存下來(lái)并最終自愈，但是人類(lèi)將會(huì)滅絕，人類(lèi)應(yīng)該滅絕。

Derek??
Humans still bicker in disbelief that they are the cause. We will be gone because of our own stupidity.

人類(lèi)仍在爭(zhēng)吵，不敢相信這就是原因。我們會(huì)因?yàn)樽约旱挠薮蓝А?/span>

T T T? ?
Nature does what nature does. Nature is reacting to increased CO2 naturally (warming) from humans. There's no tough going nor recover to Mother nature. Mother nature does what Mother nature does. It's an entropy of the universe.

自然做自身該做的事。這只不過(guò)是大自然是對(duì)人類(lèi)不斷增加的二氧化碳(變暖)的自然反應(yīng)。沒(méi)有艱難的過(guò)程，也沒(méi)有恢復(fù)到大自然母親的狀態(tài)。大自然母親做自己該做的事。這就是宇宙的熵。
?