If you read Robinson Myers The Atlantic article in April 2022 it paints a totally different picture of how three different paths could lead to outcomes. None really align with your article. I know which one I would believe.
You mention the IPCC report:- I have been unable to find the source of the screen snap that you have displayed, but it reads very differently to all other informed assessments I have seen. There is no doubt our climate is changing at a faster rate than history and geology has previously recorded with the exception of the events surround of the extinction of the dinosaurs.
www.ipcc.ch
You mention the IPCC report:- I have been unable to find the source of the screen snap that you have displayed, but it reads very differently to all other informed assessments I have seen. There is no doubt our climate is changing at a faster rate than history and geology has previously recorded with the exception of the events surround of the extinction of the dinosaurs.
Here is a link to the official IPCC report:-
Press
Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group II contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report
Itsmy view that climate change has always occurred due to natural changes which have seen periods of warmer conditions alternating with colder ice ages. these natural oscillations have generally had a periods of millennia (1000s of years) to see 1C average changes, the evidence that we are now seeing over 1.5C changes in only 100yrs is whats sounding the alarm bells.
This acceleration of rate of change happens to tie in with the advent of mans industrial activities. And even without climate change we can see across the globe locations where man's activity has radically altered the local ecosystems to the point that traditional species of plant and animal can no longer live in certain places.
There have been a number of ice ages and presently Earth is in an interglacial period.You mention the IPCC report:- I have been unable to find the source of the screen snap that you have displayed, but it reads very differently to all other informed assessments I have seen. There is no doubt our climate is changing at a faster rate than history and geology has previously recorded with the exception of the events surround of the extinction of the dinosaurs.
Here is a link to the official IPCC report:-
Press
Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group II contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report
Itsmy view that climate change has always occurred due to natural changes which have seen periods of warmer conditions alternating with colder ice ages. these natural oscillations have generally had a periods of millennia (1000s of years) to see 1C average changes, the evidence that we are now seeing over 1.5C changes in only 100yrs is whats sounding the alarm bells.
This acceleration of rate of change happens to tie in with the advent of mans industrial activities. And even without climate change we can see across the globe locations where man's activity has radically altered the local ecosystems to the point that traditional species of plant and animal can no longer live in certain places.
If you were to read the IPCC report any mitigation is only achievable by major technological changes. How else would rising CO2 levels be countered. That technological change also will require major lifestyle changes in parallel. O’Neill set out five possible paths to tackle climate change and warming, but what he shared in common is the need to achieve the same reductions as advised by IPCC. So it’s not a case of the end, more one of the means to achieve the end.the link
We’re Heading Straight for a Demi-Armageddon
What happens when we do something—but not enough—to stop climate change?www.theatlantic.com
the problem with Climate Change is the alarmist camp will insist on predications of the most alarming, worst possible outcomes and never assume any improvement via science or technology.
an example?
in the early 70’s. Everyone was predicting oil would all have run run out by the year 2000, and the Earths atmosphere would be an unbreathable smog.
they extrapolated 1970 to 2000, but….
along comes the oil shock, and along comes learn burn engine technology.
if someone had claimed in 1970, a family car would do 80mpg , 130mph - and produce almost no pollution, everyone would have fallen over laughing.
because the technology ig the time was 20mpg, 85mph and belching clouds of smoke.
now? We have more oil reserves than 1970, vastly more cars on the roads, and smoky car exhausts are only in the old movies.
the future is always better than the doomsayers predict.
see the claims of no more snow, no more glaciers, rainforests etc in ‘the next 10 years’ Over the last 50 years
www.spectator.co.uk
I do agree there are some who could be consider to be "end of the earth is nigh" brigade, and to some extent that is a real possibility if we do nothing to kerb human excesses that continue damage the environment in the ways were currently are or could if present expansion of activities continues.the link
We’re Heading Straight for a Demi-Armageddon
What happens when we do something—but not enough—to stop climate change?
the problem with Climate Change is the alarmist camp will insist on predications of the most alarming, worst possible outcomes and never assume any improvement via science or technology.
....
To be honest I really don’t think that Insulate Britain, Rebellion and associated groups have influenced popular views one jot. They are looked at for what they are; disrupters with aims that whilst laudable must know that achieving those aims in their declared timescales is impossible and they only serve to undermine their cause and irritate the mainstream populations by their actions.the activists don’t want technical change, they demand total societal change, because at heart, they are old school Marxist anarchists. They have no interest in solutions - see the likes of one of the Insulate Britain mob who drove around the globe on an 81,000 mile jaunt in a diesel 4x4.
others holiday in the Caribbean, go on road trips to Canada, go surfboarding in the tropics,
’Just StopOil’ etc, it sounds so easy too a gullible teenager. But the minds behind it like Roger Hallam know it would collapse western economies and give them an in.
this is the mind behind the current Insulate Britain, Just stop oil blockades, not a read for the faint hearted!
The perverse fantasies of XR's founder
If we don’t cut carbon emissions, your mother will be raped. This is the deranged prediction of Roger Hallam, the weird-beard co-founder of Extinction Rebellion. Eco-doomsters used to say the ice caps would melt and polar bears would perish unless we all went green. Now they’re upping the ante...
That’s not anywhere near the ONS projections, which forecast that when the bulge in elderly has passed the fertility rate will have been dropping over that period too and future fertility rate is unlikely to increase, so whilst there will be growth it’s not forecasting that far ahead. Where did your figures come from?
Notwithstanding the Duke of Edinburgh views it’s not a given that the populations will continue to grow. Japan, Germany, China and Russia are all forecast to have falling population numbers. Other countries are forecast to increase. Your approach of just extrapolating isn’t at all valid.
