there is a relevant xkcd comic showing the heat of the earth since humans have been able to record it...the last half inch is humans...
this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2024
132 points (100.0% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5328 readers
467 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 20 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
I was in the audience at Web 2.0 Summit in 2008 when Al Gore said on stage that according to scientists this would happen "within five years".
He added: “Some of the models suggest to Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski that there is a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years.”
Gore cited findings from climatologist Dr Wieslav Maslowski, a research professor at the Naval Postgraduate School (here).
However, it appears he mis-stated the forecast, according to reporting at the time.
In an interview with The Times published on Dec. 15, 2009 (here), Dr Maslowski said: “It’s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at. I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.”
According to the report, Gore’s office acknowledged after his speech that the 75% figure was used by Dr Maslowski as a “ballpark figure” in a conversation with the vice president several years before COP15.
No, this is not the statement I refer to. Youtube link exists in a comment for all to verify.
I guess the models and estimates changed. Science is like that: it responds to new discoveries. It's only a minor difference in the time scale though: whether it's 2013 or 2030, we're in serious trouble now.
It's the difference between scientific consensus and doomists.
Scientific consensus isn't that the north pole sea will be ice free in the summer in the next few years.
Pretty amazing to see all these downvotes on a purely factual statement. Watch it yourselves:
Then maybe you should pay more attention to the actual climate scientists then politicians.
Oh I do. That's the whole point. This whole thread is about doomists screaming about what's not the current scientific consensus.
What to you is the current scientific consensus then?
To me? It's what you find in IPCC AR6. You read the IPCC reports right?
For stabilised global warming of 1.5°C, an approximately 1% chance of a given September being sea ice free at the end of century is projected; for stabilised warming at a 2°C increase, this rises to 10–35% (high confidence).
Well I was asking you specifically since your comment made it seem like you didn't think it could be possible. So I was just asking to see what what measure of "doomerism" in particular you followed cuz it all sounds pretty bad to me.
My guess is that I'm the only person in this thread that reads the IPCC reports. "Maybe at the end of the century" is way different from "the next few years".
(PS: The IPCC also states that only half of the reduction of the ice is due to human emissions, so, don't go buying property at sea level regardless of how well we do at stopping said emissions)
Do note the article is about a comment in 2009 while I describe something from 2008. You would expect him to make that mistake once - not repeatedly :) Feel free to check the Youtube clip. The words "quick fact" are relevant.
I was being nice to Gore. The polar ice cap includes a lot more than just the summer sea ice.
He tried to describe research, and got it wrong. That's going to happen some of the time when a politician (or any other non-expert) tries to describe science. It's not a big deal unless they're doing it consistently or intentionally.