I do not agree. I've been following climate science closely since 1988 and earth science in general since forever. Take 1988, Jim Hansen gave what I consider the first serious, No doubt, warning to US senate and it's televised around the world. Since then there have been literally thousands of ever more dire warning from climate scientists and similar ever more dire warnings from wildlife and conservation biologists, warning of Overshoot and potential doom from environmental collapse unless humans change their behaviour and what did we do when the first serious climate warning were given in 1988? Globalization WooHOO!! We ushered in history's greatest economic BOOM/shopping spree with globe spanning jet setting vacations, SUV's and McMansion (bigger&bigger ever year) with a bang. There is no lack of information. If you need huge teams of scientists to repeatedly hit you in the head with information hammers everyday, you and your offspring are already done and you have no one to blame. They know.
Almost all the scientists know. The general population knows and even the deniers know. Deep down past all the bullshit and denial and reticence and career ladder climbing and job protection and status preservation they all know. Everybody knows. Same as addicts know, but wave it away, deny and lie, but they still know. Nature is rife with deception, but the humans excel at self deception. This is because the best liars are the ones that first lie and con themselves.
If free will exists then they all deserve what is coming. Alternatively, the humans are no different than all other creatures, in that they are following their biological programming -which they are not the authors of- and it's all a big fucking tragedy.
I can't debate false hope and false blame. They are emotional states.
If only the truth was know then the people would all join together and save ourselves. We just have to expose the IPCC and then the revolution will be begin.
The IPCC was not created to inform the public about climate science. It was created to control and minimize any negative information/framing that would threaten BAU. Just look at the nations that created the IPCC. Every time it's time to do the final part of a report, the policy recommendation section all the wealth oily nations, including the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia send their negotiating hit men who chew up naive scientists and spit them out, thus putting out another soft, non urgent and non threatening language report. You will never see A ICPP report that does not claim there is always more time and technology will save us.
The humans are incapable of changing their behaviour beyond a minor tweal here or there.
It's the scientists who are untouchable (retired or near it) who will tell you what they really think humans chances are and why.
*Humans will be extinct in 100 years says eminent scientist*
"(PhysOrg.com) -- Eminent Australian scientist Professor Frank Fenner, who helped to wipe out smallpox, predicts humans will probably be extinct within 100 years, because of overpopulation, environmental destruction and climate change.
Fenner, who is emeritus professor of microbiology at the Australian National University (ANU) in Canberra, said homo sapiens will not be able to survive the population explosion and “unbridled consumption,” and will become extinct, perhaps within a century, along with many other species."
"Fenner told The Australian he tries not to express his pessimism because people are trying to do something, but keep putting it off. He said he believes the situation is irreversible, and it is too late because the effects we have had on Earth since industrialization (a period now known to scientists unofficially as the Anthropocene) rivals any effects of ice ages or comet impacts.
Fenner said that climate change is only at its beginning, but is likely to be the cause of our extinction. “We’ll undergo the same fate as the people on Easter Island,” he said. More people means fewer resources, and Fenner predicts “there will be a lot more wars over food.”
*Wildlife biologist Neil Dawe says he wouldn't be surprised if the generation after him witnesses the extinction of humanity*
"All around him, even in a place as beautiful as the Little Qualicum River estuary, his office for 30 years as a biologist for the Canadian Wildlife Service, he sees the unravelling of "the web of life." "It's happening very quickly," he says. Registered Professional Biologist Neil Dawe has written over 80 papers on birds, ecology and the environment. He received Environment Canada's Regional Citation of Excellence Award for his work in co-founding and co-chairing the Brant Wildlife Festival. He received the Outstanding Service Award from the Federation of B.C. Naturalists and the Ian McTaggart-Cowan Award of Excellence in Biology from the Association of Professional Biologists of B.C. In 2006, he retired from the Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, after 31 years of managing National Wildlife Areas and Migratory Bird Sanctuaries on Vancouver Island. He is President of the Qualicum Institute:"
"People will focus on the extinction of a species but not "the overall impact," he says. When habitat diversity is lost, "it changes the whole dynamic."
"Economic growth is the biggest destroyer of the ecology," he says. "Those people who think you can have a growing economy and a healthy environment are wrong. "If we don't reduce our numbers, nature will do it for us." He isn't hopeful humans will rise to the challenge and save themselves. "Everything is worse and we're still doing the same things," he says. "Because ecosystems are so resilient, they don't exact immediate punishment on the stupid."
"Because ecosystems are so resilient, they don't exact immediate punishment on the stupid."
Best line ever and both Neal and Frank right say that it's more than just climate change.
It's Overshoot and IMO, Overshoot is baked in via evolution and the MPP Maximum
Power Principle.
The humans are not in control. Thermodynamics and Evolution wrote the script and all life follows.
.
* The purpose of life is to disperse energy
The truly dangerous ideas in science tend to be those that threaten the collective ego of humanity and knock us further off our pedestal of centrality. The Copernican Revolution abruptly dislodged humans from the center of the universe. The Darwinian Revolution yanked Homo sapiens from the pinnacle of life. Today another menacing revolution sits at the horizon of knowledge, patiently awaiting broad realization by the same egotistical species.
The dangerous idea is this: the purpose of life is to disperse energy.
Many of us are at least somewhat familiar with the second law of thermodynamics, the unwavering propensity of energy to disperse and, in doing so, transition from high quality to low quality forms. More generally, as stated by ecologist Eric Schneider, "nature abhors a gradient," where a gradient is simply a difference over a distance — for example, in temperature or pressure. Open physical systems — including those of the atmosphere, hydrosphere, and geosphere — all embody this law, being driven by the dispersal of energy, particularly the flow of heat, continually attempting to achieve equilibrium. Phenomena as diverse as lithospheric plate motions, the northward flow of the Gulf Stream, and occurrence of deadly hurricanes are all examples of second law manifestations.
There is growing evidence that life, the biosphere, is no different. It has often been said the life's complexity contravenes the second law, indicating the work either of a deity or some unknown natural process, depending on one's bias. Yet the evolution of life and the dynamics of ecosystems obey the second law mandate, functioning in large part to dissipate energy. They do so not by burning brightly and disappearing, like a fire torching a forest, but through stable metabolic cycles that store chemical energy and continually reduce the solar gradient. Photosynthetic plants, bacteria, and algae capture energy from the sun and form the core of all food webs.
Virtually all organisms, including humans, are, in a real sense, sunlight transmogrified, temporary waypoints in the flow of energy. Ecological succession, viewed from a thermodynamic perspective, is a process that maximizes the capture and degradation of energy. Similarly, the tendency for life to become more complex over the past 3.5 billion years (as well as the overall increase in biomass and organismal diversity through time) is not due simply to natural selection, as most evolutionists still argue, but also to nature's "efforts" to grab more and more of the sun's flow. The slow burn that characterizes life enables ecological systems to persist over deep time, changing in response to external and internal perturbations.
Ecology has been summarized by the pithy statement, "energy flows, matter cycles. " Yet this maxim applies equally to complex systems in the non-living world; indeed it literally unites the biosphere with the physical realm. More and more, it appears that complex, cycling, swirling systems of matter have a natural tendency to emerge in the face of energy gradients. This recurrent phenomenon may even have been the driving force behind life's origins.
This idea is not new, and is certainly not mine. Nobel laureate Erwin Schrödinger was one of the first to articulate the hypothesis, as part of his famous "What is Life" lectures in Dublin in 1943. More recently, Jeffrey Wicken, Harold Morowitz, Eric Schneider and others have taken this concept considerably further, buoyed by results from a range of studies, particularly within ecology. Schneider and Dorian Sagan provide an excellent summary of this hypothesis in their recent book, "Into the Cool".
The concept of life as energy flow, once fully digested, is profound. Just as Darwin fundamentally connected humans to the non-human world, a thermodynamic perspective connects life inextricably to the non-living world. This dangerous idea, once broadly distributed and understood, is likely to provoke reaction from many sectors, including religion and science. The wondrous diversity and complexity of life through time, far from being the product of intelligent design, is a natural phenomenon intimately linked to the physical realm of energy flow.
Moreover, evolution is not driven by the machinations of selfish genes propagating themselves through countless millennia. Rather, ecology and evolution together operate as a highly successful, extremely persistent means of reducing the gradient generated by our nearest star. In my view, evolutionary theory (the process, not the fact of evolution!) and biology generally are headed for a major overhaul once investigators fully comprehend the notion that the complex systems of earth, air, water, and life are not only interconnected, but interdependent, cycling matter in order to maintain the flow of energy.........
Yes - more people know than most would believe. But various stages and degrees of denial and bargaining are rife - even more so among the climate science/activist crowd.
When discussing the IPCC, it's imperative to understand that it is a corporate construct or as my friend and former colleague Professor Guy McPherson frames it" The designed to fail IPCC."
Additionally dive into my blog post titled:" Scientific Mal-Practice from the Mann Himself", calling out Mann and his bare faced lies.
I recall, many years ago, reading how IPCC conferences worked. The scientists would present their views in conference, and discuss them in various specialist meetings, and eventually come up with a scientific statement for the Conference. That would go then to the politicians and their advisors, including lobbyists for fossil fuel sectors, and they would then edit and rewrite the scientific statements to better suit their political views. This iteration may go on for a few days until the statement was approved and released - by the politicians!
Once I understood that, I realised the IPCC would NEVER be allowed to speak the scientific truth and, even worse, that ambitious scientists would quickly learn that their careers and future research funding would be dependant in fitting their views, research, publications and public statements to fit the politics that would otherwise censure them.
Trump's denial of climate science is simply the latest and most blatant version of something that has been going on for decades, and it is no surprise to me that most scientists have self-censored to fit the zeitgeist, and that they are left expressing constant 'surprise' that events are moving far faster than their modelling.
Yes - what you’re highlighting also applies to the crucial ‘Summary for Policy Makers’ issued with each IPCC report i.e. the only thing anyone normal ever reads. This is a politically/corporately influenced process - when it shouldn’t be - and, as per the article, is anyway already doomed-to-fail because the scientific papers being summarised themselves are way out-of-date/invalidated by the time of publication and/or later IPCC review. The whole system needs a radical re-design with the long-term studies in the background and a new focus on more-or-less ‘live’ expert commentary for governments and the media being provided instead.
All this, plus Trump's determination to defund climate science in the USA, means at the very least a few years of 'climate science shortfall' as scientists and teams (hopefully) decamp to other countries to continue their research.
And that means we'll have major gaps in the information we need, just at this most crucial time to work out what comes next. Europe is, I think, still well supported, but the USA will be especially impacted without comprehensive storm forecasting because of its older and more vulnerable infrastructure.
Thanks for mentioning the nonsense that is 'climate overshoot'. An un-useful term that muddies the waters around extreme human ecological overshoot which is actually a real thing with ecologically scientific veracity. Feel it's important also to note that - even if we could simply wave climate change away with a magic wand, we humans would nonetheless still be utterly fubar due to various other symptoms of ecological #overshoot including existentially diminished carrying capacity, peak-resources, spermageddon, trophic ecological collapse, toxic overload etc... Collapse is inevitable. Justice is not.
Thanks for the well deserved take down of the IPCC reports. I track the "Climate Pulse" page at C3S and that has another page for "anomalies" compared with all of the months and years since 1950. Up until 2 1/2 months ago, and consistent with the recent Hanson, et.al., paper, "Global Warming Has Accelerated:..." 2-3-25, we were on a sharp up-trend for GAST, but now are experiencing a 2 1/2 months long down-turn, much to my surprise.
I highly recommend an interesting read, which was on Obama’s 2020 reading list. Kim Stanley Robinson’s Ministry of the Future.
Lots of information packed into a bit of speculative fiction. Even has an extremely short chapter highlighting a first person view of a proton, leaving the sun.
It's interesting that the conspiracy theorists complain that climate scientists are alarmists who are trying to control us with climate policies when actually they're downplaying the crisis!
For me the impact of 'covid' cannot be underestimated. Before this mad time it was cool to be vegan and the environmental movement and a less consumption type of ethos was growing in strength: something had to be done... and boy was it.
The crazy 'covid' measures were immediately linked (by the Heartland Institute) to The Great Reset and climate lockdowns. Climate denialism and scorn of Thunberg and ER was all over social media. The vast majority fell for it. There's now a climate crisis denier in the White House (in public; Washington knows all about the Artic sea routes melting- that's why they have designs on Canada and Greenland) and Reform is growing in popularity in the UK while spouting complete scientific illiteracy.
The Greens have also linked themselves to the trans issue. They can be (rightly) criticised for not even knowing what a woman is (a biological female entitled to essential protection under the Equality Act) so how can they possibly know about climate science?
People hear what they want to hear and the fossil fuel and animal ag industries are absolute experts at social media manipulation.
Yes indeed to a lot of this - which represent only even more reason for senior climate scientists and the IPCC to get their communication-act together - especially when it comes to targetting the influential.
BS - you are a vicious science denying bigot. Are you seriously claiming these incidences are not real biological phenomena? (Klinefelter (XXY) syndrome
Turner syndrome triple X syndrome) And why does it matter to you? You made the very spurious claim that I am a misogynist because I don't support your anti-science bigotry. Big claim - zero evidence. Spend some time at the bottom of a lake and get to know your spiritual relations. Pond scum.
You appear to think you know better than at least 100,000 PhD Earth Scientists from a range of disciplines. What you say is garbled nonsense. The basic science of climate change is incredibly simple, has been settled for decades and is about as challenge-able as the laws of gravity. All I can advise is you do a bit more reading. Something that makes sense this time.
I do not agree. I've been following climate science closely since 1988 and earth science in general since forever. Take 1988, Jim Hansen gave what I consider the first serious, No doubt, warning to US senate and it's televised around the world. Since then there have been literally thousands of ever more dire warning from climate scientists and similar ever more dire warnings from wildlife and conservation biologists, warning of Overshoot and potential doom from environmental collapse unless humans change their behaviour and what did we do when the first serious climate warning were given in 1988? Globalization WooHOO!! We ushered in history's greatest economic BOOM/shopping spree with globe spanning jet setting vacations, SUV's and McMansion (bigger&bigger ever year) with a bang. There is no lack of information. If you need huge teams of scientists to repeatedly hit you in the head with information hammers everyday, you and your offspring are already done and you have no one to blame. They know.
Almost all the scientists know. The general population knows and even the deniers know. Deep down past all the bullshit and denial and reticence and career ladder climbing and job protection and status preservation they all know. Everybody knows. Same as addicts know, but wave it away, deny and lie, but they still know. Nature is rife with deception, but the humans excel at self deception. This is because the best liars are the ones that first lie and con themselves.
If free will exists then they all deserve what is coming. Alternatively, the humans are no different than all other creatures, in that they are following their biological programming -which they are not the authors of- and it's all a big fucking tragedy.
You might be better off reading the article. If you want to debate any specific points - happy to do so.
I can't debate false hope and false blame. They are emotional states.
If only the truth was know then the people would all join together and save ourselves. We just have to expose the IPCC and then the revolution will be begin.
The IPCC was not created to inform the public about climate science. It was created to control and minimize any negative information/framing that would threaten BAU. Just look at the nations that created the IPCC. Every time it's time to do the final part of a report, the policy recommendation section all the wealth oily nations, including the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia send their negotiating hit men who chew up naive scientists and spit them out, thus putting out another soft, non urgent and non threatening language report. You will never see A ICPP report that does not claim there is always more time and technology will save us.
The humans are incapable of changing their behaviour beyond a minor tweal here or there.
It's the scientists who are untouchable (retired or near it) who will tell you what they really think humans chances are and why.
*Humans will be extinct in 100 years says eminent scientist*
"(PhysOrg.com) -- Eminent Australian scientist Professor Frank Fenner, who helped to wipe out smallpox, predicts humans will probably be extinct within 100 years, because of overpopulation, environmental destruction and climate change.
Fenner, who is emeritus professor of microbiology at the Australian National University (ANU) in Canberra, said homo sapiens will not be able to survive the population explosion and “unbridled consumption,” and will become extinct, perhaps within a century, along with many other species."
"Fenner told The Australian he tries not to express his pessimism because people are trying to do something, but keep putting it off. He said he believes the situation is irreversible, and it is too late because the effects we have had on Earth since industrialization (a period now known to scientists unofficially as the Anthropocene) rivals any effects of ice ages or comet impacts.
Fenner said that climate change is only at its beginning, but is likely to be the cause of our extinction. “We’ll undergo the same fate as the people on Easter Island,” he said. More people means fewer resources, and Fenner predicts “there will be a lot more wars over food.”
https://phys.org/news/2010-06-humans-extinct-years-eminent-scientist.html
~~
*Wildlife biologist Neil Dawe says he wouldn't be surprised if the generation after him witnesses the extinction of humanity*
"All around him, even in a place as beautiful as the Little Qualicum River estuary, his office for 30 years as a biologist for the Canadian Wildlife Service, he sees the unravelling of "the web of life." "It's happening very quickly," he says. Registered Professional Biologist Neil Dawe has written over 80 papers on birds, ecology and the environment. He received Environment Canada's Regional Citation of Excellence Award for his work in co-founding and co-chairing the Brant Wildlife Festival. He received the Outstanding Service Award from the Federation of B.C. Naturalists and the Ian McTaggart-Cowan Award of Excellence in Biology from the Association of Professional Biologists of B.C. In 2006, he retired from the Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, after 31 years of managing National Wildlife Areas and Migratory Bird Sanctuaries on Vancouver Island. He is President of the Qualicum Institute:"
"People will focus on the extinction of a species but not "the overall impact," he says. When habitat diversity is lost, "it changes the whole dynamic."
"Economic growth is the biggest destroyer of the ecology," he says. "Those people who think you can have a growing economy and a healthy environment are wrong. "If we don't reduce our numbers, nature will do it for us." He isn't hopeful humans will rise to the challenge and save themselves. "Everything is worse and we're still doing the same things," he says. "Because ecosystems are so resilient, they don't exact immediate punishment on the stupid."
https://www.farmlandbirds.net/content/wildlife-biologist-neil-dawe-says-he-wouldnt-be-surprised-if-generation-after-him-witnesses-
"Because ecosystems are so resilient, they don't exact immediate punishment on the stupid."
Best line ever and both Neal and Frank right say that it's more than just climate change.
It's Overshoot and IMO, Overshoot is baked in via evolution and the MPP Maximum
Power Principle.
The humans are not in control. Thermodynamics and Evolution wrote the script and all life follows.
.
* The purpose of life is to disperse energy
The truly dangerous ideas in science tend to be those that threaten the collective ego of humanity and knock us further off our pedestal of centrality. The Copernican Revolution abruptly dislodged humans from the center of the universe. The Darwinian Revolution yanked Homo sapiens from the pinnacle of life. Today another menacing revolution sits at the horizon of knowledge, patiently awaiting broad realization by the same egotistical species.
The dangerous idea is this: the purpose of life is to disperse energy.
Many of us are at least somewhat familiar with the second law of thermodynamics, the unwavering propensity of energy to disperse and, in doing so, transition from high quality to low quality forms. More generally, as stated by ecologist Eric Schneider, "nature abhors a gradient," where a gradient is simply a difference over a distance — for example, in temperature or pressure. Open physical systems — including those of the atmosphere, hydrosphere, and geosphere — all embody this law, being driven by the dispersal of energy, particularly the flow of heat, continually attempting to achieve equilibrium. Phenomena as diverse as lithospheric plate motions, the northward flow of the Gulf Stream, and occurrence of deadly hurricanes are all examples of second law manifestations.
There is growing evidence that life, the biosphere, is no different. It has often been said the life's complexity contravenes the second law, indicating the work either of a deity or some unknown natural process, depending on one's bias. Yet the evolution of life and the dynamics of ecosystems obey the second law mandate, functioning in large part to dissipate energy. They do so not by burning brightly and disappearing, like a fire torching a forest, but through stable metabolic cycles that store chemical energy and continually reduce the solar gradient. Photosynthetic plants, bacteria, and algae capture energy from the sun and form the core of all food webs.
Virtually all organisms, including humans, are, in a real sense, sunlight transmogrified, temporary waypoints in the flow of energy. Ecological succession, viewed from a thermodynamic perspective, is a process that maximizes the capture and degradation of energy. Similarly, the tendency for life to become more complex over the past 3.5 billion years (as well as the overall increase in biomass and organismal diversity through time) is not due simply to natural selection, as most evolutionists still argue, but also to nature's "efforts" to grab more and more of the sun's flow. The slow burn that characterizes life enables ecological systems to persist over deep time, changing in response to external and internal perturbations.
Ecology has been summarized by the pithy statement, "energy flows, matter cycles. " Yet this maxim applies equally to complex systems in the non-living world; indeed it literally unites the biosphere with the physical realm. More and more, it appears that complex, cycling, swirling systems of matter have a natural tendency to emerge in the face of energy gradients. This recurrent phenomenon may even have been the driving force behind life's origins.
This idea is not new, and is certainly not mine. Nobel laureate Erwin Schrödinger was one of the first to articulate the hypothesis, as part of his famous "What is Life" lectures in Dublin in 1943. More recently, Jeffrey Wicken, Harold Morowitz, Eric Schneider and others have taken this concept considerably further, buoyed by results from a range of studies, particularly within ecology. Schneider and Dorian Sagan provide an excellent summary of this hypothesis in their recent book, "Into the Cool".
The concept of life as energy flow, once fully digested, is profound. Just as Darwin fundamentally connected humans to the non-human world, a thermodynamic perspective connects life inextricably to the non-living world. This dangerous idea, once broadly distributed and understood, is likely to provoke reaction from many sectors, including religion and science. The wondrous diversity and complexity of life through time, far from being the product of intelligent design, is a natural phenomenon intimately linked to the physical realm of energy flow.
Moreover, evolution is not driven by the machinations of selfish genes propagating themselves through countless millennia. Rather, ecology and evolution together operate as a highly successful, extremely persistent means of reducing the gradient generated by our nearest star. In my view, evolutionary theory (the process, not the fact of evolution!) and biology generally are headed for a major overhaul once investigators fully comprehend the notion that the complex systems of earth, air, water, and life are not only interconnected, but interdependent, cycling matter in order to maintain the flow of energy.........
https://www.edge.org/response-detail/10674
So while the second law of mechanical thermodynamic science is persistent, the web of life is insistent and persistent also.
Here’s to the last quantum dot!
There’s more going on here than we, perhaps can know.
Yes - more people know than most would believe. But various stages and degrees of denial and bargaining are rife - even more so among the climate science/activist crowd.
When discussing the IPCC, it's imperative to understand that it is a corporate construct or as my friend and former colleague Professor Guy McPherson frames it" The designed to fail IPCC."
Additionally dive into my blog post titled:" Scientific Mal-Practice from the Mann Himself", calling out Mann and his bare faced lies.
https://kevinhester.live/2018/08/08/scientific-mal-practice-from-the-mann-himself/comment-page-1/
https://kevinhester.live/2021/09/06/its-time-to-acknowledge-the-spectacular-success-of-the-ipcc/
I recall, many years ago, reading how IPCC conferences worked. The scientists would present their views in conference, and discuss them in various specialist meetings, and eventually come up with a scientific statement for the Conference. That would go then to the politicians and their advisors, including lobbyists for fossil fuel sectors, and they would then edit and rewrite the scientific statements to better suit their political views. This iteration may go on for a few days until the statement was approved and released - by the politicians!
Once I understood that, I realised the IPCC would NEVER be allowed to speak the scientific truth and, even worse, that ambitious scientists would quickly learn that their careers and future research funding would be dependant in fitting their views, research, publications and public statements to fit the politics that would otherwise censure them.
Trump's denial of climate science is simply the latest and most blatant version of something that has been going on for decades, and it is no surprise to me that most scientists have self-censored to fit the zeitgeist, and that they are left expressing constant 'surprise' that events are moving far faster than their modelling.
Yes - what you’re highlighting also applies to the crucial ‘Summary for Policy Makers’ issued with each IPCC report i.e. the only thing anyone normal ever reads. This is a politically/corporately influenced process - when it shouldn’t be - and, as per the article, is anyway already doomed-to-fail because the scientific papers being summarised themselves are way out-of-date/invalidated by the time of publication and/or later IPCC review. The whole system needs a radical re-design with the long-term studies in the background and a new focus on more-or-less ‘live’ expert commentary for governments and the media being provided instead.
All this, plus Trump's determination to defund climate science in the USA, means at the very least a few years of 'climate science shortfall' as scientists and teams (hopefully) decamp to other countries to continue their research.
And that means we'll have major gaps in the information we need, just at this most crucial time to work out what comes next. Europe is, I think, still well supported, but the USA will be especially impacted without comprehensive storm forecasting because of its older and more vulnerable infrastructure.
Loved this! Reposted. Great work mate. <3
Thanks for mentioning the nonsense that is 'climate overshoot'. An un-useful term that muddies the waters around extreme human ecological overshoot which is actually a real thing with ecologically scientific veracity. Feel it's important also to note that - even if we could simply wave climate change away with a magic wand, we humans would nonetheless still be utterly fubar due to various other symptoms of ecological #overshoot including existentially diminished carrying capacity, peak-resources, spermageddon, trophic ecological collapse, toxic overload etc... Collapse is inevitable. Justice is not.
Thanks for the well deserved take down of the IPCC reports. I track the "Climate Pulse" page at C3S and that has another page for "anomalies" compared with all of the months and years since 1950. Up until 2 1/2 months ago, and consistent with the recent Hanson, et.al., paper, "Global Warming Has Accelerated:..." 2-3-25, we were on a sharp up-trend for GAST, but now are experiencing a 2 1/2 months long down-turn, much to my surprise.
I highly recommend an interesting read, which was on Obama’s 2020 reading list. Kim Stanley Robinson’s Ministry of the Future.
Lots of information packed into a bit of speculative fiction. Even has an extremely short chapter highlighting a first person view of a proton, leaving the sun.
It's interesting that the conspiracy theorists complain that climate scientists are alarmists who are trying to control us with climate policies when actually they're downplaying the crisis!
For me the impact of 'covid' cannot be underestimated. Before this mad time it was cool to be vegan and the environmental movement and a less consumption type of ethos was growing in strength: something had to be done... and boy was it.
The crazy 'covid' measures were immediately linked (by the Heartland Institute) to The Great Reset and climate lockdowns. Climate denialism and scorn of Thunberg and ER was all over social media. The vast majority fell for it. There's now a climate crisis denier in the White House (in public; Washington knows all about the Artic sea routes melting- that's why they have designs on Canada and Greenland) and Reform is growing in popularity in the UK while spouting complete scientific illiteracy.
The Greens have also linked themselves to the trans issue. They can be (rightly) criticised for not even knowing what a woman is (a biological female entitled to essential protection under the Equality Act) so how can they possibly know about climate science?
People hear what they want to hear and the fossil fuel and animal ag industries are absolute experts at social media manipulation.
Yes indeed to a lot of this - which represent only even more reason for senior climate scientists and the IPCC to get their communication-act together - especially when it comes to targetting the influential.
BS - We share the same DNA and are part of the same tree of life that began 5.2 billion years ago. There are many varied kinds of intersex for human beings as you will discover if you read the science. You demonstrate very clearly that you are a nasty vicious bigot. At the end of the world this is the hill you choose to die on? You are less than pond scum. https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/intersex-variation#:~:text=The%20most%20common%20intersex%20variations%20are%20due%20to,syndrome%202%20Turner%20syndrome%203%20triple%20X%20syndrome
BS - you are a vicious science denying bigot. Are you seriously claiming these incidences are not real biological phenomena? (Klinefelter (XXY) syndrome
Turner syndrome triple X syndrome) And why does it matter to you? You made the very spurious claim that I am a misogynist because I don't support your anti-science bigotry. Big claim - zero evidence. Spend some time at the bottom of a lake and get to know your spiritual relations. Pond scum.
You appear to think you know better than at least 100,000 PhD Earth Scientists from a range of disciplines. What you say is garbled nonsense. The basic science of climate change is incredibly simple, has been settled for decades and is about as challenge-able as the laws of gravity. All I can advise is you do a bit more reading. Something that makes sense this time.