4 Comments

The authors argue, "Because these feedback loops are not yet fully integrated into climate models, current emissions reduction plans might fall short in adequately limiting future warming."

I thought the main purpose of climate models were to take into account the unknown factors of feedback from changing climate. It's understandable that predicting how much methane will be released is impossible (for just one example) but if these factors are not even included it's safe to say that the models are worthless for predicting future climate with any accuracy.

Climate is a chaotic system. An underlying order made up of random unpredictable events. Humans have evolved during the underlying order we refer to as climate which has been reasonably stable throughout our evolution. When the random events are disrupted and the overall climate can be severely changed.

The authors of the paper did not adequately address the social economic consequences of climate change destruction. The destruction caused by Helene will require a massive rebuilding effort. Where the reconstruction could be going towards the construction of new housing it will instead be for replacement. Hence CO2 emissions will double. Hence instead of reducing co2 and resource use every natural disaster will have double the negative effects. And is it even wise to rebuild there? Relocating thousands will have significant negative impacts on the economy and lives as the industrial and economic base is destroyed.

The system that is being ignored is civilization itself which is also a chaotic system reliant on a stable climate and a healthy ecosystem- both of which are failing. While climate "catastrophe" is forecast for the end of the century in terms of temperature, civilization will be effected far sooner. Civilization is at or beyond the tipping point in terms of population. Overpopulation is what is driving climate change and is not being addressed. It's too inconvenient and unthinkable. Considering the government solutions to the homeless population what will be the solution for millions of people displaced from climate change? American policies towards Gaza and now the Mideast in general are a clear indication of what is in store for Americans.

Thanks for the essay. The Oxford piled higher and deeper crowd are beginning to wake up. A few more decades of studies and they're bound to arrive at a conclusion.

Expand full comment

Certain groups, as you know, have investigated the domestic and cross-border ramifications. But for the most part there is no mitigation strategy, except tinkering at the edges. Like most major problems, we'll delay action until the threat slaps us in the face.

Expand full comment

It's a good review of the paper. At 13 pages few will actually read all of it. Which is wild, because it's the "Decision Maker" Summary. Your article is probably the "sweet spot" for what the average person will read without MEGO.

The things that LEAP out at me are:

1. This is "mainstream" Climate Science speaking. The inclusion of Michael Mann among the authors tells you that this is the Climate Moderate Faction's position on the state of the Climate System.

2. This is confirmed when they predict +2.7°C by 2100. Because, as DIRE as that sounds. The Alarmists model in 2021 predicted +5.7°C for the same level of CO2. Using +2.7°C means they are using a LOW value for Climate Sensitivity (2XCO2).

3. If they are WRONG about the 2XCO2 value, then warming will be twice as fast and twice as much as this report indicates.

4. The Moderates, who still cannot explain the warming in 2023, give ONE sentence to James Hansen and his position that aerosol changes caused the warming. James Hansen is an Alarmist -btw.

That's what leapt out at me in this report.

Expand full comment

It's amazing how much variance there is between forecasts. It's not immaterial, as you know.

Expand full comment