网文来自网友原文翻译投稿，所有言论皆不代表本站立场 | 本文文字/图片来自网络，侵删 | 点击页眉也可刷新 | 注册送50花瓣，每日登录送5花瓣 | 本文内容仅供娱乐，不作任何严肃之用途
TED演讲：中国如何应对污染和气候变化，中美两国的做法有什么不同？本文译自Youtube，原标题：How China is (and isn't) fighting pollution and climate change | Angel HsuThe American president doesn't even believe in global warming.
It's called climate change now. He believes in climate change but he agrees with 97% of published science papers that the sun determines 99.75% of our climate and there is little we can do to change it.现在叫气候变化。虽然他相信气候变化，但他认同97%已发表的科学论文的观点，即太阳决定了99.75%的气候变化，要改变气候我们能做的很少。
You are a bit misinformed. Climate change is the result of global warming. It is not a change of description or title. And human caused global warming has been a conclusion of nearly all (more than 97%, closer to 99.5%) of scientific research. I will accept the findings of scientists who are experts in their field over the rantings of the mindless idiot that is your president.你有点被误导了，气候变化就是全球变暖的结果，这并不是在玩文字游戏，人类造成了全球变暖几乎是所有科学研究（大于97%，接近99.5%）的结论。我会接受科学家（他们是这个领域的专家）的发现，而不是愚蠢的白痴——你们的总统——的咆哮。
"I will accept the findings of scientists who are experts in their field"Yet you believe in fake "consensus" papers that have never been published by any actual climate scientists - only activists posing as scientists.“我会接受科学家们的发现，他们在自己的领域是专家”。然而，你相信的是那些从来没有被真正的气候科学家发表的虚假的“共识”论文——他们仅仅是假扮科学家的积极分子。
@Zoe PhinYou're quite the conspiracy theorist eh.
郑智林 No, I just looked at who wrote the "consensus" papers, and see that they're not climate scientists. There is not one paper written by a climate scientist. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada.不，我只是发现那些写“共识”论文的人并不是科学家而已，没有一篇“共识”论文是气候科学家写的，一篇都没有。
Zoe Phin "There is not one paper written by a climate scientist. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada."Are you saying that climate scientiest are incredibly lazy since they've never written any papers or that climate scientiest don't exist because no climate scientist have ever written a paper?“没有一篇“共识”论文是气候科学家写的，一篇都没有”。你的意思是说气候科学家都懒得出奇，因为他们从没写过任何论文，还是说气候科学家不存在，因为没有一位气候科学家写过论文？
Zoe Phin Climate scientiests don't tend to write papers on concensus. Just like how astrophysicsts don't tend to write papers on concensus or how AI researchers don't write papers on the consensus of AI research. Those are two subjects I happen to have read a few of such papers, and they were written by historians and philosophers asking the scientific community and comparing it to the past in the case of historians, or contemplating on what it means going forward in the case of the philosopher. It's part of what other people do. Like this paper on the scientific consensus of climate change by a historian of science who is asking how we can know we're right about climate change: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-65058-6_2气候科学家不倾向于写关于共识的论文，就像天体物理学家和人工智能研究人员不倾向于写关于共识的论文一样。在这两个学科，我恰巧都读过一些这样的论文，它们是由历史学家和哲学家撰写的，他们会咨询科学界，历史学家会将其与过去进行比较，哲学家会思考未来意味着什么，这是其他人做的事情的一部分。比如下面这篇由一位科学历史学家写的关于气候变化的科学共识的论文，他在论文中问我们怎么才能知道自己对气候变化的看法是正确的。
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-65058-6_2
Dirty Poul
Funny, that paper you linked was originally published in Discover Magazine as an Op-Ed article. It was never peer-reviewed. I guess 14 years later it was finally "peer-reviewed" and published in Climate Modelling journal. What a fitting journal name for what she's doing: Modelling a fantasy reality.有意思，你链接的那篇文章最初是作为专栏文章发表在《Discover》杂志上的，它从未经过同行评议。我猜14年后，它终于被“同行评议”并发表在《气候建模》杂志上。这是一个多么适合她所做的事情的杂志名称啊：模拟一个幻想的现实。
+Wiztard Global Warming is a component of climate change. Climate Change is still called climate change. Can you please provide sources for your claims that 97% of published science papers say 99.75% of GW is caused by the sun, cause that sounds kind of, you know, bullshitty, in the most utter sense of the word. If you don't think we can change the environment, go into a garage, start a car, and as you're dying, think how quickly the 'climate' changed and try to extrapolate that on a global level. Or, if you like living, just try looking out over a major city and tell me where that stinky yellow haze comes from, and why its over cities and not forests or parkland. Yeah nearly 7,000,000,000 of us sucking from this planet and we don't affect the environment at all........open your eyes pal.全球变暖是气候变化的组成部分。气候变化（Climate Change）也叫气候变化（climate change）。你声称97%的已发表论文说99.75%的全球变暖是太阳造成的，你能提供来源么？因为那听起来，你知道的，说极端点，很扯淡。如果你认为我们无法改变环境，你可以去车库启动一辆车，当你快要死的时候，想想“气候”变化得有多快，然后试着在全球范围内推测。或者，如果你想活，试着想想一个大城市，然后告诉我那恶臭的黄色雾霾是怎么来的，为什么它会出现在城市上空。是的，将近70亿人从地球吸取养分而我们不影响环境......睁开你的眼睛，朋友。
becoz america is a democracy and more americans don't believe in climate change than chinese, or more than almost anyone else. proves that democracy works very well因为美国是一个民主国家，不相信气候变化的美国人比中国人更多，也许比任何人都多。这证明民主运作良好。
@Zoe Phinwell, if you're coming from the mindset that it's all a big conspiracy then you probably won't believe any consensus survey, peer-reviewed or otherwise. But anyway it doesn't really matter how many scientists believe in AGW, what matters is the evidence that some of these scientists have brought forth. Because again: climate scientists don't do meta-studies, they do science on climate and that science points clearly in the direction that humans do have a very significant contribution right now.These papers most certainly go through peer-review, but more importantly they have methodology sections that allow independent confirmation (or falsification) of the results. So, if you disbelieve a paper, re-build the experiment / simulation / etc. and show what concretely is wrong or inapplicable. Don't just say it's wrong because your favourite politician or internet blogger told you it's all rubbish.如果你认为这是一个大阴谋，那么你可能不会相信任何共识调查，同行评审或者其他结论。但是不管有多少科学家相信全球变暖这不重要，重要的是这些科学家提供的证据。气候科学家不会做“超研究”（meta-studies），他们只会做气候研究。科学清楚地指出，人类现在对气候变化做出了非常重要的贡献。
这些论文肯定要经过同行评议，更重要的是他们拥有方法论并且允许对结果进行独立确认（或篡改）。如果你不相信某一篇论文，那么你可以重新构建实验/模拟/等等并说明具体的错误或不适用之处。不要因为你喜欢的政治家或者网络博主告诉你那都是垃圾，你就说他们都错了。
@Zoe PhinWhether you are a skeptic of climate science or not, don't you think it's at least a good idea to put some merit in looking for solutions JUST in case it is a problem? Why do you put more importance in the "victory" of nitpicking syntax and minor details over what could or couldn't have a seriously massive impact on you, your family, your potential children, your parents, friends, and everybody you love rather than possibly being right. That's the world today, nobody can be wrong.Also, I bet you don't have a clue what other incoming events are going to cause global destruction in the very near future, do you?不管你是否对气候科学持怀疑态度，难道你不认为发挥一些优势寻找解决方法至少是个好主意么，万一有问题呢？为什么你更看重挑剔语法和细枝末节上的“胜利”，而不是那些可能会对你和你的家人，你未来的孩子，你的父母，朋友和你爱的任何人有重大影响以及那些可能是对的东西呢？
还有，我打赌你不知道什么活动会在不久的将来造成全球毁灭，对么？
Glad China is doing something whereas US's president doesn't even believe in climate change lol很高兴中国在做着一些事，但是美国总统甚至不相信气候变化。
The power china produces is used mostly for production factories.The avrage chineese man lives in homes powered by coal.这些都是宣传。中国生产的能源主要用于生产性企业，中国的普通人住在靠煤发电的房子里。
My home hasn't been powered by coal in my life, and I was born in a 5th-tier city in China. Just FYI.我的家里从来没用过煤炭发电，我出生在中国的一个五线城市。仅供参考。
All the green power-make options weren't invented by china :). .............And China emits 10 times the CO2 into the atmosphere that the usa does - this CO2 then goes into the sea to create acid that kills the planets plankton tiny sea plants that make 66% of the oxygen you (yes you) breathe right now ... you moron !! :).所有的绿色发电选项都不是中国发明的，中国排放到大气中的二氧化碳是美国的10倍，这些二氧化碳进入海洋形成酸性物质杀死了浮游生物和66%的你（就是你）正在呼吸的氧气制造者——海洋小生物.......你个笨蛋！！！
Did Everyone forgot Obama and China already?
@High school HottieUSA's CO2 production per capita is higher than China :)...... And whoever invented green energy doesn't matter - who's actually putting to use does. and if you've (yes you) been actually watching the video, you'd know that China's leading in Hydropower, wind power, and solar energy ... you moron !! :)美国的人均二氧化碳排放量高于中国......谁发明了绿色发电选项不重要——重要的是谁真的在用。如果你（就是你）真的观看了这个视频，你就会知道中国在水力发电、风力发电和太阳能方面领先......你个笨蛋！！！
High school Hottie I don’t think what you said is fair. China simply has more people, and US has 5 times more carbon emission than world average. But it is the fact that China is willing to change that matter. US isn’t willing to change due to the elites’ investment in personal automobile and heavy industry.我不认为你说的是公平的。中国只是人口多而已，美国的人均碳排放量是世界平均水平的5倍。但事实是中国愿意改变现状，而美国仅仅因为它们的精英们对个人汽车和重工业的投资而不愿意（改变现状）。
Us has been the leading in environment meanwhile china has not changed.美国在环境保护方面一直处于领先地位，而中国没有做出改变。
@And-ySBs once again, china has been the no.1 polluter in the planet while US has been the one leading in saving it. Go to china and please compare the conditions to US and you'll see your facts. US companies has been recycling while china has never change.中国是全球第一污染大国而美国一直是挽救环境的先驱，去中国然后比较下两国的环境你就会看到事实。美国公司一直在循环利用而中国从未做出改变。
@And-ySalgore once said that ice in northpole will melt in 2015, its been 4 years since that has passed.曾经有人说北极的冰层会在2015年融化，现在已经过去4年了。
Just remember that China and India are the number 1 producers of pollution still. America has lowered emissions and pushes toward a cleaner environment regardless of what the president thinks. You are just brainwashed.你只需要记住中国和印度仍然是排第一位的污染制造者即可。不管美国总统怎么想，美国已经在降低排放并朝着一个更洁净的环境迈进了。你们被XI脑了。
And-yS that is the biggest lie ever to say that the US is doing “nothing” about climate change.
@Michael Priestnever said US is doing nothing. Some of the best mind in the field is US scientist. But it’s kind of hard when ur president just named a person that think CO2 will make the world a better place不要说美国什么也没做，这个领域里最聪明人之一就是美国科学家。但是会很艰难，因为他们的总统刚刚任命了一位认为二氧化碳会让世界更美好的家伙。
Also, don't forget that China has more than 1.5 billion inhabitants. China may be the 1st polluter on the globe, when you take that per inhabitant, US and other countries (for example EU countries) are awfully bad polluters. Go ahead China, lead the way since the US wont.还有，别忘了中国有15亿人口。中国或许是全球头号污染国，但当你们按照人均来算，美国和其他国家（比如欧盟国家）才是更可怕的污染者。加油，中国，在前面带路吧，因为美国不会这样做。
Even if you take the 1.5 billion people, each individually has an average of a CO2 footprint a tiny fraction of those in rich western countries. The main source of pollution in China and CO2 emissions is to produce things that other countries consume. Should this pollution be the fault of producers (China) or those that off-shored this production capacity and consume these goods? If rich western countries like USA or Canada or UK made its own crap, their emissions would be much higher.即使有15亿人口，他们的人均二氧化碳排放量也仅为富裕的西方国家的一小部分。中国的污染和二氧化碳的排放的主要来源是为其他国家生产的消费品。那么这些污染是生产者的错，还是那些将生产能力转移到别国并消费这些产品的人的错呢？如果像美国、加拿大和英国这样富裕的西方国家自己制造垃圾，它们的排放会比现在高得多。
That's because the average citizen can't afford things like cars to cause pollution.这是因为中国的普通公民买不起汽车之类的东西来制造污染。
+Daniel uh really...China's Middle class is booming and are more than capable of funding for private transportation. But they don't need/want it. China's public transportation innovation is off the charts, able to move people through cities quickly and efficiently.真的吗？中国的中产阶级在蓬勃发展，他们完全有能力购买私人交通工具，但是他们不需要/不想。中国的公共交通发展得好极了，能快速高效地让人们在城市中穿梭。
You have the numbers to support your idea?
co2 is not pollution, dummy, and it doesn't cause warming.
@Zoe Phinyeah. And because earth is flat, it flows on the side anyways so why bother是的。因为地球是平的，所以不管怎么说，它都会向一侧流动的，所以为什么要费心呢？
@zoephinActually it does. A lot of science has been done. Not all gases have the same ability to store heat energy. They have done many controlled experiments on this heat storing ability and found that among the few gases that are markedly able to store heat are methane and sulphur oxides, and CO2 as well.And if that doesnt make you think, at least think of how the human has evolved to live in a certain kind of environment. For example in industries even Oxygen has to be a certain level between 19% and 24% Oxygen to be ok. Even the life giving oxygen will poison us if it is too high. What is that? a range of +/-2%. That is so small a range, its insane if you think about it. Change oxygen by 2% and it harms us. Now CO2 has changed by 33%. Old science books are now obsolete, because that 0.03% CO2 in the books are now wrong. This is definitely not ok.It affects the plants too. Plants "eat" CO2. How can it be bad to have more of it? Well, new studies has found a link between reduced nutrients in our food due to CO2. No, theres no mysterious magic thing in this one. Plants simply are able to make glucose(read: carb/starch) better with more CO2 while the nutrients stay the same. The nutrients simply get diluted amongst the high calorie food. We need to consume more calories to obtain the same amount of nutrients.I doubt the human body is evolving fast enough to account for the changes we have introduced in the environment. Perhaps you may think differently and if so, so be it. I have delivered these info, and now onto you to decide to believe it or not.它会（造成气候变暖）。已经做了很多相关的科学实验，不是所有的气体都有相同的储存热量的能力。他们做了很多关于热量储存的可控实验，发现甲烷和硫氧化物还有二氧化碳是少数几种明显能够储存热量的气体。
如果这些还不能让你思考，至少想想人类是如何进化并生活在某个特定环境中的。
比如，自然界的氧气含量必须达到一定水平（即在19%-26%之间）才是合适的。即使是给人生命的氧气，含量过高也会毒死我们。波动需要控制在+/-2%的范围内，这个范围太小了，改变2%的氧气含量就会对我们有害，你肯定觉得这太疯狂了。现在二氧化碳变动了33%，旧的科学书籍已被淘汰，因为里面0.03%的二氧化碳占比在现在是错的。
它也同样影响了植物，因为植物会“吃”二氧化碳，多吃一点有什么问题呢？好吧，新的研究发现食物中营养的减少和二氧化碳有关。不，这并不是什么神秘的事。植物只是在营养素保持不变的情况下，用更多的二氧化碳使葡萄糖（读作：碳水化合物/淀粉）变得更好。在高卡路里食物中的营养会被稀释，要获得相同数量的营养我们需要消耗更多的卡路里。
我怀疑人类身体进化的速度之快是否足以说明我们在环境中引入的改变。或许你的想法不同，如果是，那就随他去吧。我已经发表了很多这样的信息，现在由你决定是否相信。
If every citizen of the world would live like an average American it would need 5 earths, And Europeans are doing far better than Americans in countering the climate change but the climate change would hugely affect the US the more warmer temperature leads to a more severe hurricane which can also reach the trump tower to take him away with wind.如果世界上的每个人都像普通的美国人那样生活，那我们需要5个地球。在抵抗气候变化上欧洲人要比美国人做的好得多，但是气候变化会对美国产生巨大的影响，因为气温越高，导致的飓风就越大。
Daniel yep my cousin lives in Shenzhen China and despite the fact that his earns over 200k dollars per year he still barely buys his first100 m squared little cozy house(which costs him about 150 million, in dollars). I bet other average person surely couldn’t buy a house of his own, not to mention the car我的堂兄在中国深圳，尽管事实上他一年收入20万美元，但他也只勉强买了他的第一个100平的舒适小房子（这花了他1.5亿美元，这个数字应该是写错了），我确信中国的普通人买不起自己的房子更别说车子了。
CO2, in essence, is not nearly as destructive as some of the other chemical species in the atmosphere like ones that cause radical reactions to damage the Ozone Layer, since it is a naturally existing component of air, but what an excess amount of CO2 can do is disrupt the equilibrium of the atmospheric system of heat and mass transfer causing hard-to-predict changes, aka Climate Change which includes warming in some parts on Earth during some periods. Like how this summer felt hotter than ever before.从本质上讲，二氧化碳不像大气层里的其他化学物质有那么大的破坏性，因为它是空气中自然存在的部分，但是超额的二氧化碳会破坏大气系统热量和传质的平衡，会造成难以预测的变化，包括地球的某些区域会在某个时期变暖。就好比这几年的夏天感觉比以往都要热。
China not only has more porpulation than all the countries of the western world combined, China also is the factory of the world. China is making thing and doing dirty jobs such as recycling for the world.Compare to the services China gives to the world, the emissions per capita in China is still much lower than the west.China is doing a good job here.中国不仅人口数量比所有西方国家的总和还要多，中国也是世界的工厂。中国在为世界制造东西的同时，还从事回收这样的肮脏工作。
相比中国为世界提供的服务，中国的人均排放量仍然远低于西方。
中国在做好事。
You probably don't know that western countries are used to exporting their garbage to China because they can't handle it themselves. They do this to developing countries all the time. Of course their pollution is not that bad lmao but it's not like they really take responsibilities; instead, they brought the problems to poorer and weaker countries so they can prentend some pollution don't exist.你可能不知道西方国家习惯于向中国出口垃圾，因为它们自己无法处理，它们总是这样对待发展中国家。无疑，它们的污染并没有那么严重，但是它们并没有真正承担责任；相反，它们把问题带到了更穷和更弱的国家，这样它们就可以假装污染不存在了。
@DanielChina is the biggest auto market. bigger than America. what year r u living in? 1970?中国是世界最大的汽车市场，比美国还要大。你生活中哪年？1970年吗？
Niza Laporre Do you really know something about mainland China?
@Niza Laporre us military carbon emissions or pollution is way worse than any other country and you know why美国军队的碳排放和污染比其他国家都要严重，你知道为什么吗？
@The Drive man There were 7 million more cars sold in China than the US last year... China also has as many electric cars as the rest of the world COMBINED. So you don't know what you are saying. In any event - Shenzen has a very vast local subway/metro system... It also has all electric buses and taxis. So you don't even need a car in Shenzen... Which reduces your emissions more than even if you had an electric car.去年中国的汽车销量比美国多700万辆......中国拥有的电动汽车数量也与世界其他国家的总和相当，所以你不知道你在说什么。无论如何——深圳有一个非常庞大的地铁系统......它还拥有全电动的公交车和出租车系统，所以你在深圳根本不需要车...这比你有一辆电动汽车更能减少你的排放。
if USA doesn't lead in climate change, I hope China does, if not we are all doomed如果美国不能带头应对气候变化，我希望中国可以，否则我们都厄运难逃。
@Justinian the Greatlol why should we believe in US that started basically most of the war happening on Earth today, and cancelled half of the treaties it signed, and are proven to be spying on everyone, and with a president that doesn't even believe that human are polluting the Earth instead of China, the country that had the biggest amount of forest growth, biggest renewable energy power plants, and a government that is working on a solution for problem instead of acting like the problem doesn't exist?大笑，为什么我们要相信美国，它们发动了今天地球上的大部分战争，取消了它签署的一半条约，被证明对每一个人进行了监视，有位甚至都不相信人类正在污染地球的总统。而中国，这个国家有世界上最大的森林覆盖增长率，最大的可再生能源发电厂，还有一个解决问题而不是假装问题不存在的政府。
@-SFA北美分局233号actually it was the British not Americans that started most wars
@jay daniI'm talking about war happening "today", not wars in history. Afterall, US only had a history of 244 years, and it was at war formally or informally for more than 200 years我说的是“现在的战争”而不是历史上的（战争）。毕竟，美国只有244年的历史，正式或非正式的战争在美国历史上持续了200多年。
@-SFA北美分局233号 well all major nations have a history of war ur country probably does too.And America hasn't fought any wars for nefarious purposes.好吧，所有的国家都有战争的历史，你的国家或许也一样。美国从来没有因为邪恶的目的而发起战争。
I live in east of China，the climate is going better than past years.
ironic to see that China is leading the important initiative for the future wellbeing of humanity. Where US is doing the opposite actually. I wont be supprised this may result in jump in wealth and growth in China, while this may add US economy at risk in the next 10 years or so. Or at least lost potential revenue.很讽刺的是我们看到中国领导着人类未来福祉的重要倡议，而事实上美国正相反。但我并不惊讶，这或许终会导致中国的财富和经济增长大幅增加，同时让美国经济在未来10年陷入危机或者至少失去潜在收入。
China creates the most pollution in the world. Even more than India. The people there are advised to not even go outside for long periods of time several days out of the year. What are you talking about?中国制造了世界上最多的污染，比印度还要多，那儿的人们甚至被建议一年有几天不要长时间外出。你们在说什么？
Solar panel production creates a lot of pollution. This type of pollution makes solar panels more expensive in the US, which puts China at a competitive advantage.太阳能电池板的生产制造了大量的污染，这种污染使太阳能电池板在美国更贵，让中国更具竞争优势。
Niels Robben funny though. US is doing other tactics to prevent China's economic growth
America's politicians and their campaigns are after all, strongly funded by big oil companies. Which is corrupt considering America wages disportionately extensive wars in oil rich Middle East and does not acknowledge the paris climate change pact as a legit concern.毕竟，美国的政客和他们的竞选活动都是由大型石油公司大力资助的。考虑到美国在盛产石油的中东地区发动了不公平的大规模战争，而且不承认巴黎气候变化公约是一个合理的担忧，这说明它是腐败的。
The air quality is much better than last year in HangZhou, I think that's a improvement杭州现在的空气质量比去年好得多，我认为这就是改进。
Hope some one leads the way, cause the west has failed and is slowly falling apart.我希望有人带头，因为西方已经失败了，而且正在分崩离析。
The EU is doing pretty well for the most part. We do have issues, but nothing as glarring as the US.欧盟在很大程度上表现良好。虽然我们确实存在问题，但并不比美国更明显。
您可以通过以下方式访问樱落网：
1. 网址：www.skyfall.ink
2. 樱落网APP（推荐，只有5M，不占空间，速度极快，也不需要任何权限，试过才知道有多方便）
安装地址（公众号可点击底部阅读原文）：点击这里
iphone安装：设置-通用-VPN与设备管理，点击描述文件即可
感谢诸位亲的相伴与支持，由于个别文章的用词和地图使用不规范，全部文章会在审核整理之后陆续上架。☆ 新翻译的文章会特别标注，未做标注即为发布过的文章。为避免误点收费文，所有1月17日之前注册的用户均已获赠1000花瓣，敬请查收。每日登陆送5花瓣 | 联系方式：QQ-1399710240 ，有任何问题请发邮件或者加QQ。
关键字：气候变化,应对气候变化 专题：社会责任编辑：管理员
来源：https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlHiEN1zTKI
