But, I don't believe they offered an explanation for the divergence. Did they? If that's true then it implies some issues with the entire methodology that would greatly increase the margin of error of the historical data. Right?
They offered some possible explanations. Nevertheless, if there are no divergences elsewhere, then only the recent stuff needs to possibly larger error margins. The tracking was never perfect to start with, so the error margins are pretty large already.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
I don't get the point about arguing about error margins of tree rings. Its only 1/10,000th of the problem. The IPCC report gives a more solid prediction of "Total Consequences" and associated error margins, which even in the best case, widest error margins included, gives us bout the same chance as bacon on a BBQ. I think we would have to find severe problems with at least 50% of ALL the data that was assemilated to reach their results in order to say the outcome is not likely or not severe enough, or both, no to do anything about it.
It's Thunberg, Greta Thunberg (pronounced tun-bear). She is an articulate and justifiably angry spokesperson for her generation. She's not radical, and she is far from alone. Have you noticed how many 20-somethings have decided not to have children? They've done the math, seen the writing on the wall. There is no more certain indicator of loss of hope than declining to reproduce.
JoshPlumSE said:
That's it's already too late and we're all doomed unless we immediately kill 40% of the human population and start living as subsistence level hunters and gatherers.
That's just being ridiculous (besides putting words into my mouth, again). Look at what clowns like Drumph, Bolsonaro and Johnson are doing and tell me they are not making things much worse. Pointing out the hypocrisy of the super-rich (most of whom keep discreetly quiet) is just a distraction. We have it in our power to vote out the scoundrels from all parties and bring in fairer policies (I know, sounds like socialism).
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
The consequences on the ground (and air and oceans) are rapidly overtaking IPCC predictions. We are seeing the change right in front of us and still the corporate-owned idiot media wants to question the data, wasting precious time.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
I think that's called D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y, but that word isn't in any of their vocabularies either.
I even remember when we didn't have seat belts, because that would make cars too expensive and Detroit wouldn't make their sales targets. How we couldn't ever have 20 mpg. Exploding Corvets. When smoking was safe. I still have a diver's watch that lights up at night with radium .. kept in a jar now ... won't bore you with the rest.
The reason I have never purchased a GM product and never will is that they and their lawyers fought Congress for 14 years from making airbags mandatory. All to save the cost of $75 per bag, after they were proven to save lives.
The safety systems in a 1998 Civic, primarily the airbag, saved my life in a head-on crash in 2009.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
We could afford all that crome, but ..
Two angle of attack indicators .. no way ..
It'just s amazing what we can do to save them a buck and what we can't do to save a life, eh.
Greta Thundberg is quite radical in my opinion. Though she is not a hypocrite. My only argument was that she was so extremely pessimistic (as you are as well) to the point where no one is going to listen to them.
Why? Because the argument is for complete overturning / upheaval of our entire economy.... immediately. And, using the most extreme fear tactics to do so. That (IMO) hurts the cause.
I'm used to my views on climate change being outside of the mainstream. I look at this from an energy economics standpoint more than anything else. That may not be popular with the extremists (on either side), but it is a much more realistic way to approach the changes that need to happen (IMO).
That may be so, but no one is listening to those ideas either. Given the do-nothing until something breaks mentality isn't cutting it; not sure that preaching fire and brimstone is a solution either, but there's at least a chance that someone will get their come to Jesus moment, sooner, rather than later.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
Preaching fire and brimstone just causes polarization. I'm all for a transition to clean energy. However, I think completely replacing our current infrastructure in short time I'd counter-productive and wasteful.
Josh,
(i) You really know nothing about me. What you have is a box you think I fit into.
(ii) Greta is not at all radical, just a straight talker who an awful lot of young folks identify with.
(iii) Hypocrisy is not the sin, but it's what looks bad and what the media self-righteously gorge on. The sin is what our so-called leaders do, much more than what they say. While Drumpf was entertaining and outraging us on twitter, we were distracted from the horrific orders he was implementing in the background.
Tugboat,
Infrastructure inertia is a massive problem. The more we build it, the more we are committed to living according to its demands. But that train is heading off an environmental cliff*.
* Don't shoot the messenger
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
The Earth's temperature goes up and down, see the image above. The human influence is questionable. Regardless, a bit of warming isn't going to cause an end to life. Life started when earth had no polar ice caps. I doubt it's going to end if we lose our polar ice caps.
If what they say is true about global warming, I think the worst result is that there will be a whole lot more coast line which will devalue the rich peoples' properties.
I'm just here to be controversial. People love to talk about the "science". Heck, for all we know a bit of warming will benefit the world and anybody who says otherwise is denying the science.
OK, I can go there. Doesn't make sense to me. We are neither at the beginning, nor end. We're not talking about the survival of Earth.. it will. We are talking about continuing to be able to adapt to a changing environment in real time. If that change happens too fast for us to keep up with in either an environmental-biological sense, or in the financial sense, it won't fare well. Many areas are becoming unsuitable for habitation for many species, including humans, and for many reasons, drought, flooding, fire and wars created so the local rich people can grab remaining land to use for their survival. There are already plenty of "climate migrants", UN est. 20MM/yr, although you may call them something else. There's going to be increased competition for remaining land. One example is Saudi Arabia buying up farmland in Africa for years, which is displacing locals and diverting scarce water reserves. This is displacing many, probably towards your favorite coastal zones eventually. Israel is kicking locals off their farms and making new settlements for "others" to farm. Sure, Hudson Bay Resorts and banana farming in Greenland and Siberia may become an option some day soon, after those 20MM people/yr move there, but is that really going to happen. Everybody is already building walls to keep them home. Already it's not working. We've had 20,000 subSaharan African migrants land here just in the last 6mo. 280 during last weekend alone. Its certainly not Covid related. You dont crowd into a little boat with 70 others for a 700+km ride to possibly mid Atlantic nowhere just because you're scared of C19, or being poor. They have already survived that. It's life or death now, staying or going, and going looks like the best option to them. Really? This route is the most dangerous route to Europe with record numbers, thousands,dying this year of those choosing it, yet they take it anyway. Those deaths are climate change deaths. Its happening in real time here.
.
Climate change is the least of Africa's problems. The leadership goes one of two ways, inept or warlords. There is no middle ground. They need to manage what they have. Rwanda is figuring it out, the rest of Africa not so much.
Fires, at least here in California, are largely related to mismanagement as well. We clear cut logged the state over a century ago and the forests are coming back densely overgrown with smaller trees. It's normal for fire to burn through every 25-35 years but we have been supressing the natural process. Our governor just doubled down on that error saying all fires will be suppressed even in uninhabited areas.
