These denier scientists are not stupid people, they are terribly frightened people. They can see what you see Richard, then they go to work to "unsee" it.
I used to think they did it just to protect their careers, and in some cases maybe cash payments from the fossil fuel cartels. Not so much anymore. They're scared.
I'm a lawyer (when I feel like doing that) and I can tell you when my case is looking really bad based on the undisputed facts, I start to dispute the facts by covering them in "legalize" which is our own special way of telling lies by confusion.
I'm seeing that now in the abstracts you quote and what strikes me is the underlying sense of fear I feel reading them. How about something that has been an almost perfect correlation with global temperatures for 160,000 years now being questionable because it screams "disaster?" Nobody is influencing them to muddy the waters. They are too scared to face the obvious. Watching this I sense any hope of meaningful response to be gone. They will deny reality right into the ground.
Theres this fundamental flawed premise a lot of people have that is just wrong - the premise that governments are open, direct, and honest. They most definitely are not. You have to "read between the lines".
Well, we don't know what the RoW is right now. All we can do is estimate it based on the amount of warming we are seeing and the EEI behavior.
Think of it this way.
During the 2000 to 2009 period the EEI was about +0.2W/m2 and the RoW for the decade was +0.18C/decade.
During the 2010 to 2020 period the EEI was about +0.5W/m2 and the RoW for the decade was +0.36C/decade.
Since 2020 the EEI has increased to about +1.5W/m2. These years have each been hotter than the one before. Culminating in the jump in 2023 of +0.8C in a single year.
So far 2024 has been HOTTER than 2023 but by a much smaller margin than 2023 was over 2022. Indicating that the temperature may by stabilizing at a "New Normal" of around +1.8C over the GISS/IPCC baseline.
SO, based on that information, what's the Current RoW?
Worst case, it's +0.36C/decade times 3. Or, roughly +1C PER DECADE.
No one seems to think that.
The range of numbers seems to be Hansen at +0.45C/decade. Up to estimates of +0.54C/decade (based on +0.18Cx3).
GISS/NOAA/IPCC are all sticking with a "we have to wait and see" position. One where they emphasize that the rate of warming DOUBLED between 2010 and 2019 to +0.35C/decade.
I noticed that you refer to depopulation quite a bit in regards to these models. For example:
"Bad, but manageable over that timeframe with minimal (20%+/-5%) depopulation."
Can you expand on this a bit more? What population- the population of the entire world? Local areas? Do you have a source or is this implied by multiple sources?
It sounds like while you don't think we will go extinct, it's still gonna be really, really bad.
It'd be great if you could expand on the idea of potential depopulation in a future post.
These denier scientists are not stupid people, they are terribly frightened people. They can see what you see Richard, then they go to work to "unsee" it.
I used to think they did it just to protect their careers, and in some cases maybe cash payments from the fossil fuel cartels. Not so much anymore. They're scared.
I'm a lawyer (when I feel like doing that) and I can tell you when my case is looking really bad based on the undisputed facts, I start to dispute the facts by covering them in "legalize" which is our own special way of telling lies by confusion.
I'm seeing that now in the abstracts you quote and what strikes me is the underlying sense of fear I feel reading them. How about something that has been an almost perfect correlation with global temperatures for 160,000 years now being questionable because it screams "disaster?" Nobody is influencing them to muddy the waters. They are too scared to face the obvious. Watching this I sense any hope of meaningful response to be gone. They will deny reality right into the ground.
Theres this fundamental flawed premise a lot of people have that is just wrong - the premise that governments are open, direct, and honest. They most definitely are not. You have to "read between the lines".
Is there recent estimate of the most current to today rare of warming number? It is much higher than 0.3s ya?
Well, we don't know what the RoW is right now. All we can do is estimate it based on the amount of warming we are seeing and the EEI behavior.
Think of it this way.
During the 2000 to 2009 period the EEI was about +0.2W/m2 and the RoW for the decade was +0.18C/decade.
During the 2010 to 2020 period the EEI was about +0.5W/m2 and the RoW for the decade was +0.36C/decade.
Since 2020 the EEI has increased to about +1.5W/m2. These years have each been hotter than the one before. Culminating in the jump in 2023 of +0.8C in a single year.
So far 2024 has been HOTTER than 2023 but by a much smaller margin than 2023 was over 2022. Indicating that the temperature may by stabilizing at a "New Normal" of around +1.8C over the GISS/IPCC baseline.
SO, based on that information, what's the Current RoW?
Worst case, it's +0.36C/decade times 3. Or, roughly +1C PER DECADE.
No one seems to think that.
The range of numbers seems to be Hansen at +0.45C/decade. Up to estimates of +0.54C/decade (based on +0.18Cx3).
GISS/NOAA/IPCC are all sticking with a "we have to wait and see" position. One where they emphasize that the rate of warming DOUBLED between 2010 and 2019 to +0.35C/decade.
So +0.35C is the "official" number.
I noticed that you refer to depopulation quite a bit in regards to these models. For example:
"Bad, but manageable over that timeframe with minimal (20%+/-5%) depopulation."
Can you expand on this a bit more? What population- the population of the entire world? Local areas? Do you have a source or is this implied by multiple sources?
It sounds like while you don't think we will go extinct, it's still gonna be really, really bad.
It'd be great if you could expand on the idea of potential depopulation in a future post.
Yeah, should we just shoot so many people based on how hot it was last decade?