Here is yet another example of blatant exaggeration and cherry-picking of weather events to try and convince the public of the completely phoney "climate emergency". No dissent is ever allowed.
BBC’s Climate Check–Feb 22 | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_Sixth_Assessment_Report#Findings
ReplyDeleteThe report quantifies climate sensitivity as between 2.5 °C (4.5 °F) and 4.0 °C (7.2 °F) for each doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,[6] while the best estimate is 3 °C.[24]: SPM-14 In all the represented Shared Socioeconomic Pathways the temperature reaches the 1.5 °C warming limit, at least for some period of time in the middle of the 21st century. However, Joeri Rogelj [de], director of the Grantham Institute and a lead IPCC author, said that it is possible to completely avoid warming of 1.5 °C, but to achieve that the world would need to cut emissions by 50% by the year 2030 and by 100% by the year 2050. If the world does not begin to drastically cut emissions by the time of the next report of the IPCC, then it will no longer be possible to prevent 1.5 °C of warming.[25] SSP1-1.9 is a new pathway with a rather low radiative forcing of 1.9 W/m2 in 2100 to model how people could keep warming below the 1.5 °C threshold. But, even in this scenario, the global temperature peaks at 1.6 °C in the years 2041 – 2060 and declines after.[23]
I sincerely doubt that the BBC is lying or exaggerating. I haven't read the article that you have posted. I have been in the comment sections talking about climate for 16 years now. The is now in the beginnings of strong consequences if we don't accelerate off of burning fossil fuels quickly. According to the wiki article posted we have to cut fossil fuel burning by 50% to have a chance at staying under 1.5*C. That is not cherry picking or any other foul behavior by the community of science. In my 16 years of commenting and watching the disbelief of many of the climate science, the foul behavior comes from the fossil fuel funded think tanks. This has the same playbook as big tobacco denying cancer from cigarettes. When a person spends time denying reality, it slows the whole population down from taking action on a very serious issue.
The point made by the article is that the BBC has blatantly exaggerated by claiming that certain individual weather events or short term trends are due to global warming. There are many graphs shown which disprove what the BBC is saying. It is important to actually read the article before you can come to any conclusions about it. If you do read it you will see what I mean. Argument from authority or accepting the word of an organisation because of its reputation is not the way science works. There is a Latin saying "nullius in verba", which translates as "take nobodies word". You must look at the actual evidence.
ReplyDeleteThe deadly heat wave that roasted the Pacific Northwest and western Canada was virtually impossible without human-caused climate change that added a few extra degrees to the record-smashing temperatures, a new quick scientific analysis found.Jul 7, 2021
ReplyDeleteStudy: Northwest heat wave impossible without climate changehttps://apnews.com › article › climate-climate-change-scie...
There are weather events that just could not happen without global warming. When I get time, I wiil look over what is listed by the BBC.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-how-climate-change-affects-extreme-weather-around-the-world
ReplyDeleteScientists have published more than 350 peer-reviewed studies looking at weather extremes around the world, from heatwaves in Sweden and droughts in South Africa to flooding in Bangladesh and hurricanes in the Caribbean. The result is mounting evidence that human activity is raising the risk of some types of extreme weather, especially those linked to heat.
The BBC talked about extreme rainfall linked to global warming and here is a strong publication agreeing with it.
These articles are simply speculation. There is no EVIDENCE whatsoever that these weather events are caused by global warming. In fact there has not been sufficient global warming to cause any such events. This is scare-mongering using flawed computer programmes.
ReplyDeleteYou haven't done your homework. Ignoring science is deadly in this case. So you are going to blow off 350 peer reviewed papers? In this publication by the group Carbon Brief they show attribution in Great Britain due to climate in several points in their interactive graphic. The easy way out is to say that somehow the scientists are wrong without any work in it. The science of attribution is about 20 years old.
ReplyDeleteUK cold spring, 2013
UK
Formal study Cold, snow & iceDecrease, less severe or less likely to occur
“Anthropogenic climate change reduced the odds of an extremely cold UK spring in 2013 at least 30 times, as estimated from ensembles of simulations with and without human influences.”
Christidis, N. et al., (2014) [pdf] Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 95 (9), S79-S82.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-how-climate-change-affects-extreme-weather-around-the-world
ReplyDeleteThe above attribution came from the above publication.
UK extremely warm days, winter 2018-19
ReplyDeleteUK
Formal study HeatMore severe or more likely to occur
“Extremely warm winter days in central England, as in 2018/19, are still very rare, but human influence is estimated to have made them about 300 times more likely.”
Christidis, N. & Stott, P. A. 2021 [pdf] Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, DOI:10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0123.1
Same site as above. Again this is right in your country. Your scientists, your data was collected. Climate change is measurable right in Great Britain.
Also:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04426-5