Wacky claim: Planet now at risk of heading toward ‘hothouse Earth’ state

From the Stockholm Resilience Center and the mind of Hans Joachim Schellnhuber comes this nutball press release.

Keeping global warming to within 1.5-2 degrees C may be more difficult than previously assessed, according to researchers. An international team of scientists has published a study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) showing that even if the carbon emission reductions called for in the Paris Agreement are met, there is a risk of Earth entering what the scientists call “Hothouse Earth” conditions.

“Human emissions of greenhouse gas are not the sole determinant of temperature on Earth. Our study suggests that human-induced of 2 degrees C may trigger other Earth system processes, often called feedbacks, that can drive further warming—even if we stop emitting ,” says lead author Will Steffen from the Australian National University and Stockholm Resilience Centre. “Avoiding this scenario requires a redirection of human actions from exploitation to stewardship of the Earth system.”

Currently, global average temperatures are just over 1 degrees C above pre-industrial and rising at 0.17 degrees C per decade.

The authors of the study consider 10 natural feedback processes, some of which are “tipping elements” that lead to abrupt change if a critical threshold is crossed. These feedbacks could turn from being beneficial, by storing carbon, to a source of uncontrollable emission in a warmer world. These feedbacks are permafrost thaw, loss of methane hydrates from the ocean floor, weakening land and ocean carbon sinks, increasing bacterial respiration in the oceans, Amazon rainforest dieback, boreal forest dieback, reduction of northern hemisphere snow cover, loss of Arctic summer sea ice, and reduction of Antarctic sea ice and polar ice sheets.

Global map of potential tipping cascades. The individual tipping elements are color-coded according to estimated thresholds in global average surface temperature (tipping points; 18,43). Arrows show the potential interactions among the tipping elements, based on expert elicitation, which could generate cascades. Note that although the risk for tipping (loss of) the East Antarctic Ice Sheet is proposed at >5 degrees Celsius, some marine-based sectors in East Antarctica may be vulnerable at lower temperatures.

“These tipping elements can potentially act like a row of dominoes. Once one is pushed over, it pushes Earth toward another. It may be very difficult or impossible to stop the whole row of dominoes from tumbling over. Places on Earth will become uninhabitable if ‘Hothouse Earth’ becomes the reality,” adds co-author Johan Rockström, executive director of the Stockholm Resilience Centre and incoming co-director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, says, “We show how industrial-age greenhouse gas emissions force our climate, and ultimately the Earth system, out of balance. In particular, we address tipping elements in the planetary machinery that might, once a certain stress level has been passed, one by one change fundamentally, rapidly, and perhaps irreversibly. This cascade of events may tip the entire Earth system into a new mode of operation.”

“What we do not know yet is whether the climate system can be safely ‘parked’ near 2 degrees C above preindustrial levels, as the Paris Agreement envisages. Or if it will, once pushed so far, slip down the slope towards a hothouse planet. Research must assess this risk as soon as possible.”

Cutting greenhouse gases is not enough

Maximizing the chances of avoiding a “Hothouse Earth” requires not only reduction of carbon dioxide and other , but also enhancement and/or creation of new biological carbon stores, for example, through improved forest, agricultural and soil management; biodiversity conservation; and technologies that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it underground, the paper says. Critically, the study emphasizes that these measures must be underpinned by fundamental societal changes that are required to maintain a “Stabilized Earth” where temperatures are ~2 degrees C warmer than the pre-industrial era.

“Climate and other global changes show us that we humans are impacting the Earth system at the global level. This means that we as a global community can also manage our relationship with the system to influence future planetary conditions. This study identifies some of the levers that can be used to do so,” concludes co-author, Katherine Richardson from the University of Copenhagen.


“… the climate system can be safely ‘parked’ near 2 degrees C above preindustrial levels”

What a load of BS, especially since we’ve been told all sorts of terrible consequences will occur at 2C and it is “officially unsafe“. Now apparently it’s “safe”. Got that folks? The climate pays attention to our history and the whims of the Schellnhuber pronouncements.

Note to my Internet stalker “Sou” aka Miriam O’Brien: I know you’ll want to jump all over this, please, be my guest. Make my day.

Of course they don’t bother to give a link to the paper in PNAS, and given the absurdity of the press release, I’m not going to bother looking for it. It’s not worth reading.

Advertisements

222 thoughts on “Wacky claim: Planet now at risk of heading toward ‘hothouse Earth’ state

      • Yep, we will never hear about climate change again after they force the world back into a feudal system where they enjoy a life of luxury while everyone else lives in abject poverty.

          • Still need enough for diversity in the gene pool, and they give that number right on the Georgia guidestones. Something like 10% of today’s population.

          • Shockingly, you miss the point Ryan. The Soviets called their regime the workers’ paradise, but it was anything but that. The party apparatchiki were functionally the lords of the manor. The proletariat were the peasants. But since it was mandated to address each other as comrade, rather than to acknowledge the reality that the party had absolute power exceeding the tsar, you want us to think that the analogy to feudalism is absurd. Or have I misrepresented your view?

      • Rather an alarming prospect considering the great success of that filthy oil-rich state Venezuala, that can’t put food on the supermarket shelves despite being resource rich!

    • Note that watching “Hunger Games” gives you a true example of the elite mindset. I found the films engrossing, but the message was a lot different than what they thought they were pitching when they wrote the scripts.

  1. “… there is a risk of Earth entering what the scientists call “Hothouse Earth” conditions.”

    Just like it has happened many times before, right?

    • The last Hothouse Earth episode lasted from the Cretaceous Period through the first two epochs of the Paleogene Period. Life was good. Animals, plants and fungi large and thriving. Except for that unfortunate celestial event at the end of the Cretaceous.

      Or fortunate if you’re a mammal.

    • And…interestingly during none of those instances did the temperature “run-away”. Well, if it did it didn’t run too far because it seems to have run off in the other direction until it found its way back 🙂

      • Runaway arises when they try and explain Venus within the misappropriated contexts of feedback and amplification.

        If Venus is runaway anything, it’s runaway cloud coverage. Its clouds are thermally disconnected from the surface, unlike Earth clouds via the water cycle. As a result, Venusian clouds are in an independent thermal equilibrium with the Sun and once a temperature is established for the cloud top, the temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere at 90 bar is dictated primarily by pressure and not the GHG effect. Of course, the GHG effect is still present between the Venusian cloud tops and space.

        • I did some simple number crunching a few years with Charles and Boyles laws and discovered that if Earth’s SLP was the same as Venus’s surface pressure we would be only about 40deg F cooler than Venus. That 40deg can be accounted for solely by its proximity to the sun. I.e. the CO2 on Venus has nothing to do with its temperature, and there is no danger of runaway heat on earth.

          I notice the warmistas deliberately suppress the information that for over 70% of the history of the earth the mean temperature of the Earth was over 80F (27C)-16deg C above the current mean!! If life wasn’t ended by the heat then it won’t be ended by a measly 2 deg C change now!

          • ‘over 70% of the history of the earth the mean temperature of the Earth was over 80F’ If you don’t count temperatures during ices ages.

          • No, even the Ice Age temperatures count. Has only taken up the last 1 million to 2.3 million years (depending on whose research you check), with an interstadial thrown in every hundred thousand years or so for the last million years. And the age of the Earth is how many billion years? So, yeah, 70% of the time on this old Earth has been smokin’ hot!

        • And they attempt to explain away disconnects with paleo temperature change and CO2 concentrations on Earth by invoking the conveniently dynamic faint sun hypothesis. It’s just ignored that the faint sun hypothesis is paradoxical to empirical data, and is also contradicted by independent studies from several disciplines.

          • There is also a problem with Mars.

            It is thought that Mars had running water many billions of years ago, but this was when the feint sun is said to exist.

            If the feint sun causes problems explaining then past climate of planet Earth, just think about how these problems are exacerbated when considering the early evolution of Mars.

          • The sun always feints when it’s going for the hoop.

            The sun was faint when it was young. 🙂

    • That’s why they had to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period, the Minoan Warm Period, and the Holocene Climatic Optimum. During the present interglacial the temperature has been warmer than now during ten warm periods. link We haven’t seen evidence of any tipping points. The projected temperature increase keeps shrinking. The chances are that we’re not going to see temperatures we haven’t already seen. The probabilities of a tipping point are around the same as the probabilities that my cat repels dragons.

      • But Bob, we are living in a new era, the Adjustocene. We are just imagining that we read about those Periods. What we have to do now is show proper horror at the new temperature regime. And if the dear leaders don’t think we are showing the proper emotion towards ‘ climate change’, well it’s a stadium full of people and a few antiaircraft bullets to the head for you.
        Welcome to the new Orwellian world.

    • “Just like it has happened many times before, right?”

      Extremely unlikely to happen irrespective of CO2 level. The last hothouse ended when Antarctica became thermally isolated and the oceans changed to icehouse conditions (=high latitude deep water production). It won’t return until Antarctica moves away from the Pole, or a continent or island chain interrupts the circumpolar circulation.

  2. Anthony, Was it you that said the current temp was rising at the rate of 0.17C per decade? if so was that based on UAH for July 2018?

    • Anthony,
      I had the same question as Alan Tomalty.
      What are the decadal increases in temperature asserted by-
      NASA GISS,
      Hadcru,
      RSS,
      UAH?
      And what do the Sea Temperature records indicate as the decadal increase?
      I thought Karl’s “ pause buster” paper was asserting 0.11 degrees C per decade against a lower Argo buoys recording.

    • UAH Latest and Greatest is +0.128 C/decade. That’s TLT, of course.

      A Shout Out to Roy Spencer and team for updating the data sets so quickly this month.

  3. “… may trigger other Earth system processes, often called feedbacks …”

    Apparently he doesn’t realize that the wildly inflated effect claimed to arise from CO2 emissions already requires an absurdly large and physics defying amount of feedback.

  4. Avoiding this scenario requires a redirection of human actions from exploitation to stewardship of the Earth system.

    What the international team of … “scientists” … mean to say is, “Avoiding this scenario requires elimination of human actions from existence altogether, thus acting as good stewards of the Mother Earth system.”

    Homicide on a mass scale is just good for the planet. Every time we hear of a mass shooting, therefore, we should be thankful that some lone gunman has acted in the interests of Mother Earth. Likewise, every war is a blessing. Drunk driving is of great value in reducing human numbers.

    The more killin’, the better. Starve out the poor. Impose “carbon taxes” so high that Chinese and others in the … “hottest heatwaves ever” .. cannot afford to pay for energy to run their air conditioners. Stop raising livestock in China, despite massive increased demand for meat — Jus’ keep ’em eatin’ rice and those other viddals ov’ ‘air, while those of us in ALREADY developed nations slurp down our steaks and drive our SUVs and stuff. We were here first, so other countries be damned.

    More killin’, less grillin’. Off to make the T-shirt now.

    • It’s quite disturbing reading the Guardian. It’s funny how a lot of commenters, who call for massive reduction in human numbers, never seem to include themselves or their loved ones in the ‘cull’. They seem to think it will be the ‘bad’ people, like conservatives, who should go. True evil, everyday, in the Guardian.

      • Dr. “John” Schellnhuber got his CBE personally from the Queen in 2004 at the Berlin Embassy, for exactly that- getting rid of 5 billion people. The Guardian pales to farce beside such high crimes.

      • Not Conservatives, it is all the have-nots of the world they want to eliminate, because if they join the haves the world will die!! (racism by any other name is still racism)

  5. How badly had the “Hot House Earth” run away the last time it was 6 °C warmer?
    Seems it didn’t run away too far or too long because Earth is obviously at a lower temperature now than then.

    • Perhaps you should read the paper. It states that:

      “After peak warming, transient changes in alkalinity balance following the dissolution of deep-sea carbonates (on about a 10,000-year timescale) and silicate weathering (on about a 100,000-year timescale) would eventually reduce the global mean surface temperature back to pre-industrial levels”

      • So in other words these C-rate science activists think that those two slow variables are the only feedbacks in the system, and a change of a few tenths ppt CO2 will overwhelm sea floor spreading rate, geographic arrangement of ocean basins and continents, as well as orbital forcing?

  6. Speaking of dominoes, the whole CAGW edifice is like a house of cards; take one out of the bottom, and it all collapses in on itself.

  7. Summer and seasonal heatwaves are a crisis that “you never want to go to waste”, just like winter polar vortex, and floods, and droughts. It’s Rahm Emanuel Climate Science by design.

  8. Haven’t any of these guys ever been told the story of the boy who cried wolf, or chicken little?

    How many bad predictions can a group get away with?

    • “In the context of the summer of 2018, this is definitely not a case of crying wolf, raising a false alarm: the wolves are now in sight,” said Dr Phil Williamson, a climate researcher at the University of East Anglia.

    • Look at itger religions and their false contrived claims.
      Humans have a huge appetite for scary stories.

    • told the story of the boy who cried wolf

      Thing is nowadays, insane as it is, you can get paid handsomely for crying wolf, if you cry it loud & often enough.

      • “Brief Introduction to Stratospheric Intrusions
        Stratospheric Intrusions are when stratospheric air dynamically decends into the troposphere and may reach the surface, bringing with it high concentrations of ozone which may be harmful to some people. Stratospheric Intrusions are identified by very low tropopause heights, low heights of the 2 potential vorticity unit (PVU) surface, very low relative and specific humidity concentrations, and high concentrations of ozone. Stratospheric Intrusions commonly follow strong cold fronts and can extend across multiple states. In satellite imagery, Stratospheric Intrusions are identified by very low moisture levels in the water vapor channels (6.2, 6.5, and 6.9 micron). Along with the dry air, Stratospheric Intrusions bring high amounts of ozone into the tropospheric column and possibly near the surface. This may be harmful to some people with breathing impairments. Stratospheric Intrusions are more common in the winter/spring months and are more frequent during La Nina periods. Frequent or sustained occurances of Stratospheric Intrusions may decrease the air quality enough to exceed EPA guidelines.”
        http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat_int/

    • “very low minimum temperatures in Australia”

      Thanks ren… not !

      I much prefer summer, y’know !!

    • It’s a high ren, we get one every week or two. This one will bring a cool snap, but nothing unusual – certainly nowhere near record. Its called weather, what’s your point?

      • Now that’s funny. Just a few days ago you and your fellows were proclaiming how a heat wave is proof of global warming.
        Now cool waves are just warming.
        Typical hypocrisy that we have come to expect.

        • They also don’t understand the fundamental difference in the climate/’weather argument. Observations of hot weather constitute ‘white swan’ events. Given that we are supposed to be warming, aren’t more extreme cold weather events more akin to a ‘black swan’ event. Or is my reasoning wrong?

    • I think they must be talking about the Tivoli. I once spent a pleasurable day there which improved my resilience no end. Forgot against what.

  9. I just read about this on the bbc and found none of it new, informative or helpful. It seams they’re trotting this out because of the heatwaves.

  10. Our study suggests..

    In other words, they don’t have a clue and it’s another “study” to keep the crime going and the money coming in.

  11. Alarmism at its worst… Global temperatures and atmospheric CO2 _are relatively low now, was some 6 deg C higher 9000 years ago..

  12. HotHouse earth, huh? I think I will keep a cold beer at the tipping point, and occasionally over-tip it.

  13. there’s no such thing as run away global warming….

    The question they can’t answer is why does it stop and go the other way

  14. “Maintain a ‘Stabilized Earth'”

    yep – till where I’m sitting here in Indiana is back to it’s more normal climate state of being under 1 mile of ice.

    These people really are clueless and believe their silly pontifications.

    • “Maintaining a stabilized Earth” you must understand may require something similar to the ‘normalization of the situation’ as was comrade Brezhnev’s characterization of Soviet tanks rolling into insubordinate Czechoslovakia in 1968, which KGB defector Yuri Besmenov clearly explained over 3 decades ago along with so much else of his own former participation in concerted efforts to gradually undermine the west at:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wakec06NlA .

  15. The previous interglacial period, the Eemian, was warmer than this one with more ice cap melting and higher sea levels yet none of these tipping points happened. Based on the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, one can conclude that the climate change we have been experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and plenty of scientific rational to support the idea that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero, If the future is anything line the past warming and cooling cycles will continue and longer term warm periods and cooler periods will continue as the current interglacial period gradually ends and the new ice age gradually begins to develop. The whole process will take tens of thousands of years and mankind does not have the power to change it. At best all we can do is adapt to the gradually changing climate. This is all a matter of science.

    • “gradually changing climate” I hope that it remains gradual. There is strong evidence that the change from relatively warm interglacial to full-blown glacial conditions can occur in less than 50 years and vice versa. If we did have such a disaster, I guarantee the “watermelons” would still say CO2 is to blame and we must fundamentally change society.

      • But they wouldn’t be out marching in 10ft of snow, making a racket in their pink tw@t hats.

      • The interesting thing to me is that glacial periods last between 90-130,000 years, & interglacials appear to last only 10-12,000 years +/-. The current Holocene started around 11,500 years ago, suggesting that we may be living on borrowed time!!!!!

      • I agree the change coming out of an ice episode into an interstadial can be as rapid as 50 years, maybe as rapid as 10 years, decline back into an ice age seems to take much longer, with fits and starts thrown in for good measure. And I’m too tired right now to look up and link to those graphs.

  16. I thought this was the most stupid statement I’d ever heard:

    “What we are saying is that when we reach 2 degrees of warming, we may be at a point where we hand over the control mechanism to Planet Earth herself,” co-author Prof Johan Rockström, from the Stockholm Resilience Centre, told BBC News.

    Until I read the next sentence, which topped it:
    “We are the ones in control right now, but once we go past 2 degrees, we see that the Earth system tips over from being a friend to a foe. We totally hand over our fate to an Earth system that starts rolling out of equilibrium.”

  17. That is great news.
    After 50 million years of slow decline, the planet is finally returning to normal temperatures. That mutation in those tailless apes that allowed them to choke while eating seemed like a stupid gamble at the time. But the ability to sing turned out to be beneficial in the end. Now if those apes will just re-open the Suez and the Nicaragua straights, then the deep oceans can regain a bit of heat.
    /s

  18. To be sure to reach a Hothouse State you need to reallocate the continents, you need to warm all deep oceans with some 5 degrees Celsius or more and you must reverse the main oceanic circulation:
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/06/15/how-the-earth-became-a-hothouse-by-h2o/

    We are living in a short warm interval within the coldest period of nearly 300 million years. All of our deep oceans are filled with ice cold water, just some degrees above zero. 95% of the 1.3 billion cubic kilometres of ocean water is ice cold. Some more wind during a longer period is enough to get [more of ] the cold water to the surface to restart the next cold period. ‘Man’ does not control wind.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/12/26/warming-by-less-upwelling-of-cold-ocean-water/

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/26/warming-and-the-pause-explained-by-wind-upwelling-and-mixing/

    • Yup, to have a Hothouse Earth, you need precisely the things of which we now have so few, such as many shallow, epicontinental seas (of which there are even fewer during glaciations), lots of water vapor at high latitudes, globe-circling tropical oceanic currents and thermal expansion of the oceans from more active seafloor spreading volcanism and physical expansion from underwater mountain building.

      And flatulent gigantic sauropod dinosaurs or slightly less giant rhinos. (Just kidding.)

  19. I always like the research that indicates that even if we followed the Paris agreement that this is not enough to avoid climate Armageddon. The inevitability and the confidence of that occurrence means that the proper action is not to decarbonise further but to stop all programs and use those funds to enjoy life and make our last days of existence as comfortable and as enjoyable as possible. Global warming disease is like a cancer, after traditional efforts don’t work one progresses to experimental nutcase solutions. The problem is that you still die but the kids inheritance is severely damaged. Once things are inevitable and action is futile it’s better to enjoy your last days as comfortable as possible and leave as much of your wealth as you can to your kids. Unfortunately the quacks who benefit on the gullibility of humans will always try to con the naive and desperate out of their hard earned fortunes.
    Any suggestions by warmists that tipping points are passing that it’s now too late are the signs to me to put things into palliative care. Futility make any expensive actions unnecessary.

  20. Oh the wonders of TheMagicMolecule™!
    Where any claim can be validated by invoking its mystical powers.
    They know there are tipping points all around us. Why? Because they say so. They wrote a “study” with a figure showing the Earth with arrows and names of things all over the place. It must be true.

    • No Trump is forcing them to quit Russian gas, as a national security issue, America are going to generously supply Europe with gas.

      Win for Trump….= win for Americans.

  21. Given that for much of the time during the Holocene the Earth has been warmer than that 4C above pre-industrial levels and 2C above current temps…And that we aren’t currently in a “Hot House Earth” environment…I would say that the Feedbacks inherent in the Earth System will not allow for any runaway conditions. Now that doesn’t say anything for potential sea levels with potential additional polar melt, odds are, throughout history, the sea level is quite capable of being higher and far lower than it is now just by natural processes. Eventually we will need to do something to protect our cities that we built far too close to the waters edge. We can’t just pick up a 50 story condominium and move it inland.

    Might be time to start that coastal Sea Wall and Lock system

  22. Maybe they have never heard of an interglacial period. Maybe they have no basic understanding of geological history or knowledge of long-term celestial mechanics. Or maybe they are bad actors, as some earlier posts suggest, deliberately making these absurd claims to further the cause of global socialism. Whichever it is, these nut jobs are all over the media at the moment.

    This morning on the BBC’s Today programme there was some Israeli nut job breathlessly explaining to the credulous presenter that Neolithic man was actually happier than humans are today. “Have you got that?”, I called to my wife upstairs: “When we were freezing to death in our caves, and dying from pestilence and starvation, and having our skulls caved in by the neighbouring tribes, and being eaten by sabre-toothed tigers we were actually HAPPIER than we are today when all we have is warm housing, healthcare services, plentiful food supplies, systems of justice and protection plus all the cultural benefits of civilised society. Who’da thunk it?!?”

    How can apparently educated people be so irredeemably stupid?

      • There is a scene in the animated movie, Early Man, where they divvy up the playing positions. The the grizzled old tribal chief is assigned as goalie so he doesn’t have to run around so much. “That’s right”, he says, “don’t forget, I’m nearly 32!”

    • John,
      Maybe you should read the paper or even just look at Fig 1 at
      http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/07/31/1810141115/tab-figures-data
      it clearly shows the interglacial period and where the earth is in relationship to that.

      And as for happiness it doesn’t depend on material processions or wealth but comes from a state of mind so there is no reason to suppose that Neolithic humans were unhappier than we are. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that people are happier and less stressed when living in a equitable society so they may well have been happier in the past when there were fewer rich people to be envious of.

      • Dr. Schellnhuber CBE (Commander of the British Empire) openly states 1 billion might be tolerable to his highness. 99% of those with short brutal lives, never seeng their grandchildren have very little time for pursuit of happiness.

        Pursuit of happiness is incompatible with such an, unfortunately traditional , oligarchy.

        There is evidence people are generaly not happier in the presence of such genocidalists.

    • Yes even Professors seem that way too.
      I used to admire Prof.JimAl-Khalili, but then he goes & tweets this non-science today:

      ‘Credit where it’s due. @BBCr4today had an item on climate change this morning and didn’t feel the need to have a denier on in the name of ‘balance’. Both contributors agreed it was happening and each had something intelligent to say. No conflict required.’

      Prof.BriCox another presenter in UK also bangs this CAGW drum recently on the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p01d56f7/in-search-of-science-2-method-and-madness

      No wonder ordinary folk believe this CAGW non-science when 2 major players will ‘full access’ to the airwaves tell all it’s the case.

  23. How *do* these people get around? How do they get through doorways or even manage to get up out of a chair?

    The chips on their shoulders are simply gargantuan.

    • It’s not just the chips.

      It’s also their swollen egos that impede their passage through doors, down streets, and block interaction with normal folk.

  24. The lead author, Will Steffen, is a utter socialist nutter. Always needs to be at the centre of attention, but no one in their right mind could ever find the time to give him a serious job. In the old days (95-99) he was a sad lost fish out of water in Stockhom without a friend. The academic community avoided him like the plague, and “even” the student community considered him a simpleton. A lightweight chemical engineer dreaming of being the Tsar?

  25. To get 2C above the pre-industrial level due to CO2, all else remaining equal, the atmospheric concentration must reach ~1120 ppm, to get 4C the concentration must reach to ~4480 ppm, given the current known reserves of fossil fuels that is impossible.

  26. Ludicrous X-Box climatology seems destined to create a parimutuel betting category that I would be happy to play on the no worries side of the bet. Even if they hedge their bets by using a less extreme model output it would be like taking candy from a baby.

    The “vigorish”, which will perforce come out of the pockets of the X-Box losers could go to pay the carbon tax. Id be all for this personally enriching situation. Everyone could he happy about the price of carbon and those betting on saving the planet would be paying for it. We would have to have a well paid third party with no skin in the game to curate the goal posts and record in advance what constitutes a win. Whats not to like?

  27. Obviously “Hothouse Earth” is just another “Wacky Claim” but it’s an important part of the Al Gore climate narrative and therefore will receive the desired media coverage. As is always the case with AGW, perception trumps reality.

    The following is a quote from last Sunday’s editorial in the Toronto Star criticizing Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s proposal to fight the Federal Government’s Carbon Tax.

    “In the real world, not acting on climate change will lead to catastrophe. The Trudeau government is putting Canadian jobs and families first by taking measures to curtail the devastating effects of climate change, such as rising sea levels, droughts, fires, flooding and species extinction”

    Wow, just wow…unless we pay more taxes a man-made humidification apocalypse will destroy the planet.

    • Yes, but think of all the Canadian jobs lost to species extinction! Wait, how does that work gain?

    • “The Trudeau government is putting Canadian jobs and families first by taking measures to curtail the devastating effects of climate change, …”

      Climate change is a global phenomenon; what Canada (or the U.S.) does to mitigate it doesn’t matter given the developing world’s much greater increasing emissions. If the cost were minor, it wouldn’t matter if we made a futile gesture, but the cost is high, and the risks of grid failures is another downside.

  28. I’m sick to the back teeth with all this cynical, opportunistic scaremongering from the global warming hoaxers: It seems to be on every newsfeed at the moment.

    A bit of hot summer weather across parts of the NH, and all the spittle-flecked thigh-rubbers are shrieking about Catastrophic AGW again. It’s so 2007.

    }:o(

    • Dreadnought
      Agree – totally.
      However, I suspect that another ten years (perhaps fewer) will show [Some of] the CAGW watermelons the error of their models.

      For the populace as a whole, REAL cooling will – always – trump modelled warming.
      Especially as so much of the ‘West’ is living on borrowed money [In the UK, thanks to the horrific money-spraying of the Brown-Blair regime, with annual deficits exceeding 100,000 million pounds . . . . ; that has to be reined in, then minimised.
      And, eventually, refinanced or repaid.]

      A terrifying inheritance for the nation.

      Auto

  29. Didn’t we just get rid of a Potsdamer nut through retirement. The real tipping point is the Institute sliding into an insane asylum with symptoms like this.

    • I think that Kristi or somebody once told us that the sun was, like, 200 times dimmer back then, basically just a dim star in the darkened sky 🙂

  30. “… tipping elements… once a certain stress level has been passed, one by one change fundamentally, rapidly, and perhaps irreversibly. This cascade of events may tip the entire Earth system into a new mode of operation.”
    — It doesn’t sound like much of a balance, with all these dominoes just waiting to fall in a cascade.

  31. Get in line fellas. The number of folks predicting doom based on nothing but brain farts stretches around the block. Get to the end of the queue and wait your turn.

  32. And of course the Australian ABC ran this nutball piece with great glee in their morning news bulletins today. Fits in well with the “worst ever drought” we are currently experiencing oops we really meant worst in 50 years.

    • Keith, I had the displeasure this morning of waking up to that little piece of propaganda on the ABC. Unfortunately it’s going to get worse here if El Niño thresholds are reached which is looking to be likely the case.

  33. Scientists need to realise, that the entire earth is NOT warming at the same rate. “Global” warming is NOT “Global”, it is “Regional”.

    I divided the earth up into 8 regions, of equal area, by latitude. They are:
    – 90N to 48N
    – 48N to 30N
    – 30N to 14N
    – 14N to Equator
    – Equator to 14S
    – 14S to 30S
    – 30S to 48S
    – 48S to 90S

    As you move from north to south, the warming rate decreases consistently. From
    +3.98, to –(most Northern)
    +2.53, to
    +1.99, to
    +1.63, to
    +1.61, to
    +1.29, to
    +1.07, to
    +0.26 ——(most Southern)
    (all in degrees Celsius per century).

    The most Northern region (1/8 of the earth), is warming at a rate 15.3 times faster, than the most Southern region (1/8 of the earth). Nearly 16 times faster!!!

    Isn’t CO2 meant to be a well mixed gas? The CO2 concentration should be just over 400 ppm everywhere. Why is the CO2 in the southern hemisphere, not having the same effect as the CO2 in the northern hemisphere?

    Look at the brightly coloured Global Warming Contour Maps, which show the decreasing warming rates from north to south, as colours. They go left to right, and top to bottom. Look at the legend, to see what warming rates each colour represents.

    https://i1.wp.com/agree-to-disagree.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Regions-8-equal-sized-areas-by-latitude.png

    There are full sized versions of these global warming contour maps on my website:

    https://agree-to-disagree.com/regional-warming

    Here is the legend:

    https://i0.wp.com/agree-to-disagree.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/legend.png

  34. All those high rise condos along the coasts, just live in the upper floors and park your submarine-car in the bottoms floors.

  35. Stop assuming these people are either out of their mind, stupid, climate change fanatical, or poor excuses for scientists. Start assuming they are after control of your energy and life. Now does it make sense?

  36. Farming entire Antarctica, Greenland and Siberia would not be so bad outcome in return for a little bit of flooding elsewhere.

  37. My studies show, that any day now, my dogs are going out of balance and will start shaking back and forth uncontrollably.

  38. Can we arrange for Schellnhuber to going on a speaking tour of China, India and the Third World? I am certain (ha!) those countries would all change their behavior immediately after hearing him pontificate about “hot house earth.”

    Again why haven’t such idiots ever taken any history? It is like the Earth only came into existence the day they were born.

    • “Can we arrange for Schellnhuber to going on a speaking tour of China, India and the Third World?”

      In one of his books, PJ O’Rourke suggested that any such speaker had better have a rescue helicopter on call to save him from mobs angered at being told there was no upward mobility for them.

  39. “What we do not know yet is whether the climate system can be safely ‘parked’ near 2 degrees C above preindustrial levels…

    As the great Skeletor once remarked, I could write a book about what they don’t know.

  40. Maybe I should buy a house near the California coast so I can watch people surfing on the “progressively” higher waves coming in.

  41. Here is the link and guess what: we need to pay for it… $10 to read about the end of the world… LOLBut thanks to the MSM, they got it and publish it all over the world…
    http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/07/31/1810141115

    Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene
    Will Steffen, Johan Rockström, Katherine Richardson, Timothy M. Lenton, Carl Folke, Diana Liverman, Colin P. Summerhayes, Anthony D. Barnosky, Sarah E. Cornell, Michel Crucifix, Jonathan F. Donges, Ingo Fetzer, Steven J. Lade, Marten Scheffer, Ricarda Winkelmann, and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber
    PNAS August 6, 2018. 201810141; published ahead of print August 6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1810141115
    Add to Cart ($10)
    Edited by William C. Clark, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, and approved July 6, 2018 (received for review June 19, 2018)

    This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.

    Abstract
    We explore the risk that self-reinforcing feedbacks could push the Earth System toward a planetary threshold that, if crossed, could prevent stabilization of the climate at intermediate temperature rises and cause continued warming on a “Hothouse Earth” pathway even as human emissions are reduced. Crossing the threshold would lead to a much higher global average temperature than any interglacial in the past 1.2 million years and to sea levels significantly higher than at any time in the Holocene. We examine the evidence that such a threshold might exist and where it might be. If the threshold is crossed, the resulting trajectory would likely cause serious disruptions to ecosystems, society, and economies. Collective human action is required to steer the Earth System away from a potential threshold and stabilize it in a habitable interglacial-like state. Such action entails stewardship of the entire Earth System—biosphere, climate, and societies—and could include decarbonization of the global economy, enhancement of biosphere carbon sinks, behavioral changes, technological innovations, new governance arrangements, and transformed social values.

  42. Maybe if they typed in all caps and added more exclamation points we’d understand the urgency better.

    • A Real improvement would be to leave out all the ”could” ”may” inserts, they really take the edginess away.

      Oh just call co2 Carbon,
      Carbon pollution ………………..

      These people really believe humans are Carbon pollution.

      It is a sickness, co2 is the genesis molecule, 1 part human 2 parts human sustenance.

  43. An oldie, but goodie. The domino effect. Isn’t that how we got into Viet Nam? And trying to breathe new life into an issue I thought was dead… tipping points! Any day now the cheese is going to slip off the cracker and raise sea levels by meters!!! I’m holding my breath!! It’s going to happen any second —10 years ago now. I just know it!!!

    How many ppm/v does it take to raise the temperature 1 C? Let’s not forget about the exponential rise in temperatures from increasing amounts of co2.

  44. Lead author Will Steffen from the Australian National University and Stockholm Resilience Center: “Avoiding this scenario requires a redirection of human actions from exploitation to stewardship of the Earth system.”
    ___________________________________________________

    nurses and caretakers are searched everywhere. That would be a job for Will Steffen, and co-author Johan Rockström, executive director of the Stockholm Resilience Centre and incoming co-director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research –

    but maybe they would do too much harm in a hospital or nursing home.

    • Better take the deck chairs in ren.

      That will be a co2 enhanced special, i will bet the lads at Potsdam are chuffed, wild fires hurricanes heat waves etc.

      2018 has it all and i already know Gavin cant wait till december to anounce hottest year eva! eva eva!, so he will tell us in october.

    • Even if it recurves north seawater temperatures around the islands are to low to maintain hurricane-strength winds.
      The same goes for the hurricane off Baja. It will weaken before it reaches California.

      • ””. It will weaken before it reaches California.””””

        Now that’s a crying shame.

    • The authors include Will Steffen, Johan Rockström, Katherine Richardson, Timothy M. Lenton, Diana Liverman and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber. They have published together variously on this theme for some time, common to all is Schellnhuber and his Potsdam Institute. The list is not exhaustive. Rockström is now taking over as Co-Director of Potsdam with Ottmar {Climate Change is now Wealth Distribution] Edenhofer.

      February 2005
      Breaking News – Only huge emissions cuts will curb climate change
      https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6964-only-huge-emissions-cuts-will-curb-climate-change/
      “To have half a chance of curbing global warming to within safe levels, the world’s greenhouse gas emissions need to fall dramatically to between 30% and 50% of 1990 levels by 2050, a new study suggests.” This was actually Meinshausen, who then joined Potsdam in 2006. Formerly worked for Greenpeace and WWF as a “consultant”, has been the Director of the Australian-German College [Potsdam] at The University of Melbourne since 2012

      February 2008
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18258748
      Lenton TM, Held H, Kriegler E, Hall JW, Lucht W, Rahmstorf S, Schellnhuber HJ.

      “Here we introduce the term “tipping element” to describe large-scale components of the Earth system that may pass a tipping point. We critically evaluate potential policy-relevant tipping elements in the climate system under anthropogenic forcing, drawing on the pertinent literature and a recent international workshop to compile a short list, and we assess where their tipping points lie. An expert elicitation is used to help rank their sensitivity to global warming and the uncertainty about the underlying physical mechanisms”.

      March 2009 Pre-Copenhagen
      https://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/press-releases/files/synthesis-report-web.pdf
      Rapid, sustained, and effective mitigation based on coordinated global and regional action is required to avoid “dangerous climate change” regardless of how it is defined.

      Weaker targets for 2020 increase the risk of serious impacts, including the crossing of tipping points, and make the task of meeting 2050 targets more difficult and costly.

      Authors include: Katherine Richardson, Will Steffen, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Diana Liverman

      April 2009
      Climate chaos predicted by CO2 study
      “If we continue burning fossil fuels as we do, we will have exhausted the carbon budget in merely 20 years, and global warming will go well beyond 2C,” said Malte Meinshausen of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, who led the study, published in Nature.

      More pre-Copenhagen – September 2009
      A safe operating space for humanity
      https://www.nature.com/articles/461472a#author-information
      Authors include:
      Rockström, Johan
      Steffen, Will
      Lenton, Timothy M.
      Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim
      Hansen, James
      Liverman, Diana
      Richardson, Katherine

      Anthropogenic climate change is now beyond dispute, and in the run-up to the climate negotiations in Copenhagen this December, the international discussions on targets for climate mitigation have intensified. There is a growing convergence towards a ‘2 °C guardrail’ approach, that is, containing the rise in global mean temperature to no more than 2 °C above the pre-industrial level.

      Now Only Two Years Left
      July 2017 – “Three years to safeguard our climate”
      http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2017-07-02-three-years-to-safeguard-our-climate.html

      Johan Rockström, Christiana Figueres, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Gail Whiteman, Anthony Hobley and Stefan Rahmstorf

      They will never give up as long as the funding is there.

      • They are a dearh cukt like Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge ir Jonestown’s Jim Jines.
        Only much more dangerous since they are lustened to by Popes and Presidents.

    • Yet there is no such thing as the “Anthropocene”, according to geologists who are in charge of naming geological periods.

  45. Schellnhuber has it all wrong, he must listen to Mann:

    “The price on carbon needs to be set such that it leads to a reduction in carbon emissions of several percent a year for the next few decades. If we do that, we can avoid a catastrophic 2C (~3.5 F) warming of the planet.””

    See that, Hansie? 2C is catastrophic, it is too late by then, forget your cascades, you are already on the tip.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/06/michael-mann-wants-to-give-capitalism-a-chance-to-solve-climate-change/

  46. “Currently, global average temperatures are just over 1 degrees C above pre-industrial and rising at 0.17 degrees C per decade.”

    Looking at the most recent 2 decades of satellite data from RSS and UAH, the trend is closer to about 0.06° C per decade, about 1/3 of the quoted 0.17° C per decade. We’re still essentially in a global warming hiatus.

  47. The quotation is actually “What we do not know yet is whether the climate system can be safely ‘parked’ near 2 degrees C above preindustrial levels”

  48. Why don’t they just say:’cutting greenhouse gasses is not enough, most of us have to die’. Not will die, but have to. Then at least the agenda would be clear.

  49. BBC radio 4 in the UK are promulgating this fake science as the top news item and stating ‘we’ now need to suck Carbon (not Carbon Dioxide) out of the atmosphere!

  50. Champagne Socialism at its dangerous deviousness! Mother Nature rules not Climate Change grant grabbers.

  51. “Such action entails stewardship of the entire Earth System—biosphere, climate, and societies—and could include decarbonization of the global economy, enhancement of biosphere carbon sinks, behavioral changes, technological innovations, new governance arrangements, and transformed social values.”

    Yeah, yeah.

  52. The ABC in oz are really promoting this as well. I listened to the news this morning about the current drought in NSW which is allegedly the worse since the 1960s ( l personally think that the millennium drought was far worse) but the BOM are saying that there is a 50 percent chance that this coming summer will be dryer than average. They are really ‘half glass full’ people! I would interpret tis as there is a good chance that this summer’s rain could be wetter or normal.

  53. Gosh, tipping points, dominoes falling, aggravating feedbacks. It all sounds so 1990’s. I thought we had all moved on from this sort of nonsense. Still there has been a hot summer in parts of the Northern Hemisphere so let’s use that as a prop for our alarmism.

    • “It all sounds so 1990’s. I thought we had all moved on from this sort of nonsense”

      We have moved on….. this is all a re-hash for the youngsters.

  54. “Avoiding this scenario requires a redirection of human actions from exploitation to stewardship of the Earth system.”

    Tell it to Xi.

  55. I hope your ‘stalker’ Sou does jump over you on this Eric – as you full deserve it. This report has a lot of merit to it and its forecasts should be paid attention to. Yet again you like to ridicule a scientific study that fails to fit in with your sceptic view. Its obvious that this planet is steadily warming in line with increased anthropomophic CO2 emissions but the sceptic community continues to deny this correlation. Global heat temperature records have been broken in many locations around the world, wild fires are devastating many countries, oceans are warming, severe and more intense droughts are causing devestation to farmers who require compensation – when are you and the sceptics going to get real?

      • Try reading the later comments by N Stokes, and a comment by someone saying that he’s the only one keeping the place sane.
        In short, that is not the reporting station. It reports hourly which thermometers in Stevenson screens do not. Also it has very resiliant grass.

    • “Its obvious that this planet is steadily warming in line with increased anthropomophic CO2 emissions but the sceptic community continues to deny this correlation.”

      No it doesn’t. It doesn’t deny AGW, just CAGW.

      • There is no correlation Roger, ……….. None,………. both you and he need to get real.

        • “There is no correlation Roger”

          Of course there’s a correlation—they’re both moving up. As for causation, the prominent skeptical scientists concede that man’s CO2 emissions have played some role in the rise in temperature, and maybe even a major role. Their objection is to the positive feedback hypothesis of the warmists, which converts AGW into CAGW. See Dr. David Evans’ 12-minute YouTube presentation on this point, here: https://youtu.be/0gDErDwXqhc

          • I wouldn’t do any private-party wagers. I used to make lots of climate-related bets on the Intrade site when it was operating.

            As for correlation, I realize that there is no close correlation between CO2 levels and temperatures, as warmist theory says there should be. CO2 is supposed to have an instantaneous effect. But there is a gross correlation over the decades, which lukewarmers concede (perhaps in some cases only for the sake of argument).

          • “CO2 is supposed to have an instantaneous effect. ”

            “Not on surface temperature it’s not, due the thermal inertia imparted by the oceans,”

            How about on the land temperatures?

  56. They forgot the negative feedbacks including cloud cover (ask Willis) and more greenery from increased CO2.

    As usual, everything is bad and always “worse than we thought” and “more difficult than previously assessed”.

    Why would we listen to any of these ‘experts’ who got it so wrong in the past?

  57. First they tried to scare us with “Global Warming”. When that didn’t work they changed it to “Climate Change”. As we have steadfastly refused to be scared the latest tactic is now “Hothouse Earth”. What will follow in a year or two?

  58. dunny pixels;-)
    steffen an absolute gem aint he?
    and were stuck with him it seems
    abc will be all over this like a rash!

  59. This must be “send us more money” paper. We are more likely to have a super volcano eruption or get hit from large meteorite.

  60. Oh dear……..well its being reported in countless reputable journals and publications…….maybe this crackpot one needs to wake up and smell the roses…..or is that wake up and smell the burning carbon?

  61. I saw this on the BBC this morning where they included 60 metre sea level rises as part of this.

  62. Is the author that disgraced alarmist who was run off for academic fraud?
    Or is this author merely looking for new eays to beclown himself?
    There will never be a runaway hothouse on Earth due to manmade CO2 and so-called feedbacks.
    It is not physically possible.
    It is not even good science fiction.
    And the climate slimeballs want to censor us fir disagreeingvwith them.
    How disgusting they are.

  63. Every article by alarmists should include the definition of “alarmist”:

    “someone who is considered to be exaggerating a danger and so causing needless worry or panic.”

    The article is “alarmist”.
    The authors are “alarmists.”
    Thise who believe “alarmists” are “fools”.

  64. Anthony.

    The BBC covered this ‘story’ this morning – about which I’ve just complained!
    Never complained before but their ongoing bias has finally pushed my over the edge….my complaint text follows:

    BBC Radio 4, Today Programme. 7th Aug 18:
    “In this morning’s interviews, 0639hrs Matt McGrath, and later interview – 0751hrs with Johan Rockström & Ovais Sarmad, the contributors gave a litany of catastrophic consequences resulting from Anthropogenic Global Warming, quoting the recent paper from the Stockholm Resilience Centre, “Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene” which starts: ‘We explore the risk that self-reinforcing feedbacks COULD push the Earth System toward a planetary threshold that, IF crossed, COULD prevent stabilization…’. [MY CAPITALS].
    There were a number of problems with the radio piece which are concerning – all of which merit a response.
    – There was no balance to the piece; it simply posited what now appears to be standard BBC ‘climate change propaganda’, without any apparent scepticism. A significant, and rising, majority of the UK population know that climate science questions remain unsettled, but by pushing the AGW agenda the BBC discredits its own value & this reinforces the rising perception by Mr Public Joe Soap that the BBC is biased. Either the hierarchy in the BBC is collectively biased & ignoring the impact that following this line is having on the public’s perception of them, or those in positions to effect a change are being badly advised by their resident scientists and environmentalists.
    – No one provided a scientific basis for global warming resulting from increased CO2.
    – No one offered a sceptical view that the report might be wrong – it was simply accepted as fact.
    – There are many climate papers produced annually – why has the BBC publicise what appears to be the most dramatic yet?
    – It cannot be a coincidence that a ‘hot weather oriented’ Thought for the Day piece proceeded it, followed swiftly by the ‘hot’ weather report. This smacks of tactics similar to James Hansen’s alarmism to Congress in 1988, where Hansen famously turned off the air conditioning and opened the window prior to his doom & gloom report which has now been widely discredited.”

    I ran out of space for more. We’ll see where it goes.
    Perhaps a complaint will also be forthcoming from Paul Homewood – whose posts I also follow.

    Keep up the good work!
    Dominic

    • It sounds like the BBC is the Brit’s version of CNN, only they have the misfortune of being forced to pay for it.

  65. NCEP global temperature is 0.145 c above the 1981-2010 average.This is a cold hothouse!

  66. We are in an Ice Age. The likelihood of veering madly off into Hothouse conditions is slightly above zero %. These idiots are just creating a new set of talking/study points out of thin air and gullibiity. They should be put to work picking up trash in ditches.

  67. Someone should break it to them that it stopped warming 18 years ago and is actually cooling now.

  68. ““… the climate system can be safely ‘parked’ near 2 degrees C above preindustrial levels”

    What a load of BS, especially since we’ve been told all sorts of terrible consequences will occur at 2C and it is “officially unsafe“. Now apparently it’s “safe”. Got that folks?”

    Misreading

    Safely parked at 2C, means only that there is no additional warming, not that 2C is safe

    Safely modifies parked.

    jeez

    The study is silly but the criticism is sillier.

    • “Safely parked” = “terrible consequences” ??
      You make no sense..your comment is the silliest !!

    • Will that horrific 2c rise in 250 years get us out this dang tiresome ice age we are still in…..

      Will it make us inter-glacially endowed Mosher ?.

      Inter-glacial-ist deniers.

  69. Loss of arctic sea ice is a net negative feedback. It allows the relatively warm ocean to emit a huge amount of energy to space, and to lose it by latent evaporation.

    The reduction in albedo isnt great, old sea ice is not shiny white, and at the low levels of incidence in the arctic water is quite reflective. The region also has a lot of cloud cover in summer, so there isnt much solar energy at the surface anyway.

  70. Oh to be benevolently guided by well meaning Marxist scientists in a future of enforced poverty, 3rd world conditions, and early deaths of privation in the re-education camps.

    What’s not to like?

  71. “Keeping global warming to within 1.5-2 degrees C may be more difficult than previously assessed, according to researchers.” I don’t think so.

    The following graph is an estimate of the global temperature trend over the near term. The rate of change (first derivative) of the global mean temperature trend-line (6th degree polynomial fitted to HadCRUT4 monthly database) has been constant or steadily decreasing since October 2000. The HadCRUT4 temperature anomaly has decreased by nearly 40 percent from March 2016, the El Nino peak, to July 2017. The rate of change of the trend-line will likely become negative within the next 20 years, reaching the lowest global mean trend-line temperature in almost 40 years. Lower temperatures could persist for decades.

    https://i.imgur.com/nvAq9cH.jpg

    Since October 2000, global mean temperature trend-line has decreased from 0.20 degrees C per decade to 0.12 degrees C per decade. Based on near-term estimates, global warming over the next 100 years could very likely be much lower than 2.0 degrees C.

    Will Steffen says, “Avoiding this scenario (“Hothouse Earth”) requires a redirection of human actions from exploitation to stewardship of the Earth system.” Really? Who on Earth has the qualifications and a large enough ego to be steward of earth? I would argue she has yet to identified. And as far as I know, there has been no Second Coming.

    draft ref: An-Analysis-of-the-Mean-Global-Temperature-in-2031 at http://www.uh.edu/nsm/earth-atmospheric/people/faculty/tom-bjorklund/

Comments are closed.