The link under this heading is to a fictional story of how the future of the UK might look as a result of the government continuing along the current path to net zero CO2 emissions. While some aspects may seem far-fetched there are many elements which are only too believable. Indeed it is a a salutary tale of our times. Here is the link: On Belief in the Tooth Fairy: The Battle of Britain’s Climate 2021-2030 – Watts Up With That?
What appears to be minor in such a small number of degree warming is projected within multiple studies in science to show us that the difference in consequences is clear and damaging.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.carbonbrief.org/scientists-compare-climate-change-impacts-at-1-5c-and-2c/
Half a degree makes a very big difference when judging how different parts of the world will feel the effects of climate change.
This is the conclusion from the first study to compare and contrast the consequences of 1.5C world compared to a 2C world, published today in Earth System Dynamics.
Both 2C and 1.5C are explicitly mentioned in the Paris agreement as potential upper limits for global warming since the preindustrial era, but details from scientists on how the temperature thresholds compare have been sparse.
For example, an extra 0.5C could see global sea levels rise 10cm more by 2100, water shortages in the Mediterranean double and tropical heatwaves last up to a month longer. The difference between 2C and 1.5C is also “likely to be decisive for the future of coral reefs”, with virtually all coral reefs at high risk of bleaching with 2C warming.
There is real data to see what a 0.5C warming would do, as we have had that much since 1980 when satellite measurements began. Since then there has been no noticeable change in any of the maor climate measurements. For detail look at the video by Dr Christy, which is linked in my post for 19th December.
ReplyDeleteDr. Christy is only one person who has a reputation for creating false science. Below is a summation of 70 peer reviewed science papers of effects of warming based in temperature.
ReplyDeletehttps://interactive.carbonbrief.org/impacts-climate-change-one-point-five-degrees-two-degrees/
The link you have provided starts with the words " is projected". In other words it is a prediction and not a look at the actual data from the past 40 years. We have all seen weather forecasts and sometimes they are correct and sometimes they can be quite badly wrong. The actual data is the gold standard.
ReplyDeleteThe core of all the projections is based on the increased radiation forcing from increased GHGs. This section of science is rock solid. From this basis, its very clear what kind of energy increase our different sections of our climate will be subjected to. ANother point about science is that scientists are conservative about their conclusions. 19 out of 20 papers will under state their conclusions. Most of this will be a little stronger than they state in their conclusions. We are warming and there is no way out of it.
DeleteDr Christy is a very predictable conclusion of the science always favoring the fossil fuel industry. The rest of climate tells the truth while Dr. Christy does the opposite.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_climate_change
Earth is in radiative equilibrium and the climate system will be relatively stable. Global warming occurs when earth receives more energy than it gives back to space, and global cooling takes place when the outgoing energy is greater.[5] Multiple types of measurements and observations show a warming imbalance since at least year 1970.[6][7] The rate of heating from this human-caused event is without precedent.[8]
Whatever you say, projections cannot replace actual DATA! And the actual data shows that the amount of warming is less than all the projections, so there must be something radically wrong with them.
ReplyDeleteThat is false. There are a lot of sccurate projections.
Deletehttps://skepticalscience.com/how-well-have-models-predicted-gw.html