Select the correct text in the passage. Which three paragraphs in this excerpt from the article "The Melting Arctic" from the European Environmental Agency rely on expert opinion to support the organization's point of view? Greenland's ice sheet contains enough water to increase global sea levels by 7 meters. In any case, if it were to melt completely, it would take many centuries. Recent melting of the Greenland ice sheet is estimated to have contributed up to 0.7 millimeters a year to sea level rise (about one quarter of the total global average sea level rise of about 3.1 mm/year). Projections for global average sea level rise estimates by 2100 vary from 0.2 to 2.0, depending on the model and scenario used. "There is substantial uncertainty around by how much the sea levels may actually increase," said Professor David Vaughan from the British Antarctic Survey during his presentation. "Once sea level rises, it is quite difficult to make it fall again. At the moment, the sea level is increasing by about 3 mm per year, but with climate change, this rate is very likely to increase." Vaughan continued, "There are different factors behind sea level rise. About one third of the rise we can expect could be linked to the thermal expansion of oceans. Melting mountain glaciers are also predictable and their contribution can be estimated roughly. The big uncertainty is linked to ice sheets in Greenland and the Antarctica. We have studies on how they are losing ice, but projections come with high levels of uncertainty." Warmer temperatures in the Arctic accelerate the melting, which result in darker surfaces on the sea and land. These darker surfaces retain a larger part of the solar energy instead of reflecting it back. Warmer air and water temperatures in the region also affect the surrounding land, including the permafrost, which has started melting both on land and at sub-sea level. . . . In addition to potentially causing sea levels to rise and contributing to global warming, the Arctic melting could also alter th

what is the question.. you are more likely giving us something to read with no question

nominative

walter refusing lindner's offer.

yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

it is yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

hope this