Guest essay by Eric Worrall
In the face of a complete lack of problems to date, climate scientists appear to be amping up the “woo woo” factor of predicted climate catastrophes. But they are not adding a firm timescale, and refuse to call their warnings “predictions”.
Climate tipping points could topple like dominoes, warn scientists
Analysis shows significant risk of cascading events even at 2C of heating, with severe long-term effects
Damian Carrington
Environment editor @dpcarrington
Fri 4 Jun 2021 02.34 AESTIce sheets and ocean currents at risk of climate tipping points can destabilise each other as the world heats up, leading to a domino effect with severe consequences for humanity, according to a risk analysis.
Tipping points occur when global heating pushes temperatures beyond a critical threshold, leading to accelerated and irreversible impacts. Some large ice sheets in Antarctica are thought to already have passed their tipping points, meaning large sea-level rises in coming centuries.
The new research examined the interactions between ice sheets in West Antarctica, Greenland, the warm Atlantic Gulf Stream and the Amazon rainforest. The scientists carried out 3m computer simulations and found domino effects in a third of them, even when temperature rises were below 2C, the upper limit of the Paris agreement.
…
āWe provide a risk analysis, not a prediction, but our findings still raise concern,ā said Prof Ricarda Winkelmann, at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) in Germany. ā[Our findings] might mean we have less time to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and still prevent tipping processes.ā
…
āThe study suggests that below 2C of global warming ā ie in the Paris agreement target range ā there could still be a significant risk of triggering cascading climate tipping points,ā said Lenton. āWhat the new study doesnāt do is unpack the timescale over which tipping points changes and cascades could unfold ā instead it focuses on the eventual consequences. The results should be viewed as ācommitmentsā that we may be making soon to potentially irreversible changes and cascades, leaving as a grim legacy to future generations.ā
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/03/climate-tipping-points-could-topple-like-dominoes-warn-scientists
The abstract of the study;
Interacting tipping elements increase risk of climate domino effects under global warming
Nico Wunderling1,2,3, Jonathan F. Donges1,4, JĆ¼rgen Kurths1,5, and Ricarda Winkelmann
Received: 26 Mar 2020 ā Discussion started: 03 Apr 2020 ā Revised: 15 Mar 2021 ā Accepted: 07 Apr 2021 ā Published: 03 Jun 2021
With progressing global warming, there is an increased risk that one or several tipping elements in the climate system might cross a critical threshold, resulting in severe consequences for the global climate, ecosystems and human societies. While the underlying processes are fairly well-understood, it is unclear how their interactions might impact the overall stability of the Earth’s climate system. As of yet, this cannot be fully analysed with state-of-the-art Earth system models due to computational constraints as well as some missing and uncertain process representations of certain tipping elements. Here, we explicitly study the effects of known physical interactions among the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets, the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) and the Amazon rainforest using a conceptual network approach. We analyse the risk of domino effects being triggered by each of the individual tipping elements under global warming in equilibrium experiments. In these experiments, we propagate the uncertainties in critical temperature thresholds, interaction strengths and interaction structure via large ensembles of simulations in a Monte Carlo approach. Overall, we find that the interactions tend to destabilise the network of tipping elements. Furthermore, our analysis reveals the qualitative role of each of the four tipping elements within the network, showing that the polar ice sheets on Greenland and West Antarctica are oftentimes the initiators of tipping cascades, while the AMOC acts as a mediator transmitting cascades. This indicates that the ice sheets, which are already at risk of transgressing their temperature thresholds within the Paris range of 1.5 to 2āāC, are of particular importance for the stability of the climate system as a whole.
Read more: https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/12/601/2021/
Imagine if someone was designing a new bridge, and the architect admitted they cannot compute the stability of the bridge or predict the time when predicted events were due to occur, due to “missing and uncertain process representations of certain tipping elements”. Would you take that analysis seriously?
” In these experiments, we propagate the uncertainties in critical temperature thresholds,”
Translation…. In these experiments, we take a deep dive into the wonderful world of fantasy to see what weapons we will have to invent to destroy the monster.
Not accurate description: “propagating the uncertainties” actually does enlarge the field of fantasy speculation; it opens new, not yet used areas, to magical thinking and superstition.
Potsdam Institute once again – I switched off right at that point. I just want to find out what sort of drugs those climate enthusiasts have been taking because they are clearly stronger than the ones their peers can get hold of!
Propagating the uncertainties just makes the uncertainties grow. Usually exponentially.
The less that goes wrong the scarier it gets for them as they it has just gotta happen soon.
“Scarier”: because it is where the bacon on their tables comes from.
My advice to all remains the same. Never open a Guardian article. It gives them click count which is all the alphabet soup they produce is good for. You certainly won’t learn anything from visiting the Guardian. If you want to see what their latest batty ideas are, just listen to the BBC.
I read the Guardian on a regular basis just to keep up to date on what the loonies are saying now. I think of the Guardian as a left wing version of the Babylon Bee but with less connection to reality.
The Grauniad is even funnier than the Babylon Bee, albeit unintentionally.
We are grateful for your dedication and self sacrifice Bill. Let us know when they produce a story that has any science contained within it.
In future, please put a warning on any similar posts: :”If drinking, please swallow before reading“.
(Cola on a keyboard is heck to correct.)
GIGO – Goblins In Guardian Out.
As a general rule you can tell when the Guardian knows it’s talking rubbish by looking at the Comments.
If they don’t open any comments, they know their article is ridiculous.
They will publish it as fodder for the people they are selling to advertisers. Stupid people are worth more to advertisers so stupid articles are good business.
But they know when they are spouting nonsense.
This article, for instance, had no comments open. It would have been torn apart if it had.
Remember, the Guardian doesn’t believe in this rubbish. It’s just peddling it.
“This article, for instance, had no comments open. It would have been torn apart if it had.”
That seems to be the norm. Every time I read an article about Human-caused Climate Change, in any publication that allows comments, it is the skeptics who dominate the conversation.
That’s been a pattern with several other topics as well, and likely the reason that so many “news” platforms have ceased allowing comments altogether.
Don’t worry about supporting the Guardian by visiting their site. It might be worth less than penny to them.
“Typical CPM rates (the amount an advertiser will pay you per thousand page views) might be around $5 or less, depending on the size of your site, your topic and your visitorās demographics.”
https://fizzle.co/attract-enough-visitors-to-your-website-to-earn-a-living/
On the other hand, don’t click on any ads on their pages, because that generates substantially more revenue for them.
“The average [per-click advertising] cost typically falls in the $1 to $4 range”
https://www.costowl.com/b2b/marketing-pay-per-click-company-cost.html
this is chicken licken menatility
the sky is falling in the sky is falling in
oh no its only an acorn
the sky is falling
About 40 years and counting. Pretty impressive for a headless chicken.
And back in Potsdam, the “scientists” all panicked –
“Donna und Blitzen, ve gott anozer headline in Der Grauniad. Quick, someone write somezing to go with zis booolshed”
Shouldn’t the headline read “Climate Scientist confirms climate science isn’t science!”?
The headline certainly shouldn’t include the word scientist.
āClimate confirms climate isnāt!ā
Not sure that works
ļ»æ š¤£
Well their findings certainly raise concerns for me but I’m much more concerned about their medication and are they supervised taking it.
That was a new low in presenting unmitigated hogwash. They’re be-clowning themselves.
“We understand this fairly well but haven’t any evidence on which to base this artfully concocted list of unlikely but scary hypotheticals. However, if on the off chance any one of these fantasies were to trigger another unlikely outcome …. then there might be a tipping point. RUN AWAY!”
Woo Woo is the phrase we need to describe the kind of fear based activism being used as a control mechanism.
https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/29/fear-appeal-bibiography/
What parameters and simplified black boxes (models of atomic&molecular physical processes adapted to suit larger grid of boxes) were they changing to generate that many different model runs? Yesterday our local max temperature was about 4C cooler than they predicted the night before so how accurate could their 36’500 day model be? Sure, averages of averages from predictions around the world might be closer to the actual but they’ve had to adjust past temperatures downward to make current temperatures look hotter to match their models. There are a lot of assumptions & shortcuts in these “models” and cannot be used to verify their chosen parameters (circular reasoning).
Don’t be silly Tygrus! Unshackle your thoughts from this rigid thinking. Let your mind and models wander across the whole untrammelled landscape of possibilities, do not tether yourself to things which have happened in the past – let yourself run free – you’ll find tipping points if you look hard enough, over by the unicorns. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK).
In other words, become Griff.
From 18 months ago..
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/11/27/nine-climate-tipping-points-now-active-warn-scientists/
Greenland recovers ice, Antarctic sea ice coverage is better than the 1980’s average. 1cm/decade MSL rise for geostable sites. But they keep wanting to scare the children & gullible adults.
“Imagine if someone was designing a new bridge…..”
Exactly. In the same vein, with the spaghetti graphs, imagine someone presenting the design of a new bridge to the highways authority, or the health and safety authority. Imagine they are in a hearing. They would say something like this: we are very concerned about safety so we have developed 100 models of this design and run them repeatedly with different assumptions.
We have one model, which was developed by Russian modellers, which has been tested against previous bridge failures, and has predicted them well. According to this model our design is liable to collapse in the next two years.
However we have another 99 models which have failed correctly to predict failures in the same database. These other models also vary very widely in their predictions of safety, some giving predicted failures in 5 years, others in decades, but they are all much more optimistic than the Russian one.
Here is a spaghetti graph of the different predictions. You can see how widely they vary in their prediction of bridge longevity.
Deeply confused by this situation, we have decided to take all the predictions of all of the models, the 99 failing ones and the one successful one, and average them, and the average value is one that justifies a prediction of safety of this design, so we recommend you go ahead and have it built.
The chair wearily shakes his head and asks: why don’t you just use the model with a track record of successful prediction? Why do you average its results with a whole lot of others with a track record of failure? What makes you think that is a safe or sensible way of going about it?
Trouble is nowadays the highways authority nod in agreement and begin an environmental impact study for a solar powered punt across the river.
Yep,
and that is why āscientistsā are not allowed to build bridges without someone elseās signature.
stay sane,
willem
Layman here and certainly no statistician, so please correct me if I’m wrong, but:
If you take the average of those 100 model spaghetti graphs, aren’t you obliged to retain the error bars that contained all model runs?
I was astounded to see published those 100 model spaghetti graphs.
I just figured it displayed the broad model variability.
Have to ask a statistician. I have no idea how you calculate legitimate error bars on an ensemble of different model runs, taken as a whole. I doubt that taking the mean of the runs gives a number of any validity for anything. So I doubt that any estimate of uncertainty for such a procedure is doable. But we need a statistician for an authoritative answer.
Really you should add the error bars together but if you think about it – that’s very quickly going to spiral out of control and give a ludicrously large error range. Most credible scientists would likely average the error ranges and label it as a mathematical probability of error rather than a true error range. Climate enthusiasts appear to neither know nor care what an error range is, nor how they should calculate it.
Logically, there can only be one best answer to a model prediction. If one averages that with all the others that demonstrate lower ‘skyll,’ then the average will have greater uncertainty than the best one. Strictly speaking, the range of an ensemble provides an estimate of the standard deviation. The larger the range, the larger the one or two-sigma uncertainty will be.
I briefly looked at their 20 megabytes of code. They are literally simulating a game of dominoes … then spitting out the climate input they put in. The input is unsourced, afaict.
The scientists carried out 3m computer simulations and found domino effects in a third of them
So, in the majority of the computer simulations there were no domino effects. Isn’t that a consensus?
If a third of the 3 million (!) simulations showed a dramatically different outcome from the remainder, perhaps the authors should ask themselves if their models have any relevance whatever to the real, physical world.
The only relevance to the real world is that running 3M simulations actually advanced the heat death of the universe.
The only tipping point that is known to exist is that which leads into and out of ice ages. But I’m sure they weren’t thinking of that.
More likely is a chain reaction of exploding Guardian heads.
The abstract makes more sense if it is a spoof. N wunderling? R Winkelman? And written by a bloke called Damian?
Damian Carrington is a Grade A green Guardian hack. He’s at the extreme end of extreme, a True Believer. He’s been banging his eco-alarm drum for as long as WUWT have been countering it.
Multiple Carrington events then?
It’s a pack of liies and they know it. As Eric observes, they’re pushing this hysteria precisely because nothing of significance is happening anywhere in the world. If it was, they’d be wailing about it!
The fabled 2C ‘limit’ has zero significance in the real world; it’s merely a fake, contrived ‘target’ designed to give credibility and create a call to action…’before it’s too late’.
Fake, fake, fake, as usual for this fake scare cooked up by frawds and raccketeers.
“nothing of significance is happening anywhere in the world”.
Actually not so factually correct there!
Here in France it was first dry then wet and freezing cold with record amounts of spring snow in the nearby alps throughtout most of may, and it looks like June is not going to be great either, with much the same from here all the way up to Finland. (frankly it’s pretty cold at night!)
Meanwhile Grauniad and meteo France keep insisting how the world is overheating.
Maybe we should be calling them Prophecies and not Predictions. Prophecy: a statement that says what is going to happen in the future, especially one that is based on what you believe about a particular matter rather than existing facts:
Its Calvinism in new clothes.
You have a Garden of Eden before the Fall of the industrial revolution. Predestination to doom. The number of the Elect is small and does not include Westerners.
Justification is by Faith – this is implemented by cancel culture. Those who do not testify, or who testify against the faith, must be silenced because they are testifying to being goats. The important thing is to believe.
And finally we have marks of Grace. For the Calvinists this was often worldly success, but in our case its the works, useless in themselves, but evidence of belief and of being in a state of Grance – the gigantic monuments to renewable energy we erect in the form of wind turbines. And similar useless projects. They have no effect on the climate, but they do show we may be among the Elect.
And you also have the Calvinist disbelief in works as a vehicle for salvation. Because those works which the theory requires are never advocated, and the ones that believers do advocate are in its own terms totally ineffective. The explanation is that their effectiveness is not the point, their value is as testimony to our saved state.
You cannot reason people out of these things. The intensity of their belief will rise in the face of contrary evidence. Read Festinger, When Prophecy Fails. The first results of empirical disconfirmation are more commitment and increased hostility toany skeptics.
Your criticisms of so called “calvinism” are based on equally blind marxist historians who came up with these rather unoriginal theories to explain the 17th century English civil war and the subsequent colonisation of America.
Calvin was aware that heretics (eg. Hugenot families, who subsequently became the very basis of French industrial wealth) throughout Europe were being burned at the stake.
In your hurry to splurge your irrelevant details, you forget to mention the undoubted beneficial influence of the whitfield and wesley revivals, together with their “grand children” believers who abolished slavery.
Do you do this atheist dance deliberately or is it to play to a hypothetical audience?
“Tipping points”, now creatively supplemented with “tipping elements” and “tipping cascades”, along with “forcings”, “runaways”, and other scientifically vacuos terms, are among the BS signals that I follow to stop reading.
Contrary to popular opinion, on BOTH sides of the debate:
What drives Earth’s Climate is NOT complicated.
It is very very simple
Because, as oft stated, its swings and perturbations and ‘variabilities’ are miniscule compared to the greater whole.
It is a very simple very basic heat engine – as so elegantly described by Carnot
Simple machines are robust, strong, stable, long lasting and reliable – if that don’t describe climate, what does?
Take a look at a push-bike for a perfect example
I went to search for a picture to show you – I found, here, the image I thought I wanted.
Just to show what a train-wreck modern education & science have become –
WHO CAN IMMEDIATELY SEE what’s wrong with it (answer below)
(I’ve lost the will to live. again)
If you don’t see it, WTF are you doing in this debate?
(Hand raised and waving wildly) Oh oh pick me! Pick me!
In a tipping tipped-over thermaggedon world, all efficiencies are negative by definition?
Really, all you have to understand is that warming causes cooling and vice versa so that the cold reservoir is hotter than the hot reservoir.
Hope this restores your WTL!
“Simple machines are robust, strong, stable, long lasting and reliable ā if that donāt describe climate, what does?”
Reminds me of the engine in my old F150 pickup, a straight 6 cylinder. Whenever I brought it in to a mechanic, they’d always say how much they love that engine – simple in design, easy to work on, very dependable. The truck rusted out by 200K miles but the engine was still fine.
Reading these stories reminds of a joke. A child cries from the bedroom “daddy, daddy, DADDY! HELP ME!” The dad rushes to the bedroom, finds his child in tears and terror. “What is happening?” the dad asks. “There are monsters in the closet” the child cries. The dad says “Ok, you are afraid. But as I’ve told you many times before, monsters don’t exist. And they certainly do not exist in your closet.” The child insists “But they do, Dad. I know they do and they are coming to get me.” So the dad gets up, walks over to the closet and open the doors. He shows the child the closet, pointing out that there are no monsters there. And the child says: “I know, dad, and that is what is so scary!!”
Youāll note that the āscientistsā say ( translated) global warming while the Guardian says āheatingā and ācrisisā and āemergencyā instead of āchangeā. This is under the direction of the editor (who he?) followed weakly and slavishly, lying on their backs with their paws in the air, the coterie of hacks. Sad, really
<i>āThe scientists carried out 3m computer simulations and found domino effects in a third of them, even when temperature rises were below 2C, the upper limit of the Paris agreement.</i>
OK, so those were the computer games. Now, whereās the science?
Perhaps these “scientists” should have spent their school money getting an education instead of buying 3rd rate scifi novels and pizza.
Of course, if these tipping points actually existed in reality, why didn’t they happen during the Holocene Climate Optimum?
That’s the very best comment against this type of alarmism.
Always refer back to the HCO, when temperatures were 2-3 C higher than today.
It’s always the same old nonsense with the Grauniad
Today’s offering is just as amusing
“Sea ice across much of the Arctic is thinning twice as fast as previously thought, researchers have found.
…
The new research used novel computer models to produce detailed snow cover estimates from 2002 to 2018.”
Arctic sea ice thinning twice as fast as thought, study finds | Arctic | The Guardian
So much for University College London.
Another day, another alarmist yarn.
Climate tipping points could topple like dominoes, warn scientists
When you think about it – that’s about a stupid a headline as you could get. A tipping point is a tipping point, you can’t have a series of tipping points, tipping each other – that would be the definiition of a tipping point. The canonical example being a line of dominoes – where the tipping point starts the process of falling – a single tipping point. So this headline should read “Climate tipping points could be like tipping points”.
They’ve misunderstood the whole concept of tipping points.
This could have come straight from the Onion, they have come to the tipping point of being their own best lampoon – there’s no way back to credibility from there for Damian Carrington. Or the scientists from PIK. The only rational response is ridicule.
hmmm…. has the Onion ever satirized the climatistas? We should suggest it to them. Or write it for them. And maybe something on Saturday Night Live too.
Perhaps they really meant tippling points.
So theyāre saying that our climate is a rigid house of cards and not a dynamic ever changing system always seeming to seek a balance that cannot be obtained? Amazing that life on earth has lasted this long.Eh?
How many of these declared ātipping pointsā have we blown by in the last 30 years?
They’re claiming they know how it works and proving that they don’t
Implementing foolish and rash policies to attempt to engineer climate will one day topple like dominoes and be far more devastating to the economies of many countries than any climate changes ever could.
Well, geezo Pete, the planet didn’t collapse into oblivion during the tempestuous days of the Carboniferous jungle planet, did it?
If only I could get the Doctor to let me borrow the Tardis and drag their sorry personages back to that time…. and no, I would definitely NOT give them respirators to cut the O2 content they were inhaling.
Do you think giant centipedes might spook them?
Seriously, if the planet really warmed up enough to melt all the snows everywhere, we’d have a planet with a measurably higher sea level, measurably higher O2 level, and a lotta big, ugly poisonous crawling things that would scare the living daylights out of them.
Or maybe we already have such things running for office….?
No need for the Doctor, get the ‘Primeval’ team on it!
What a miserable existence the authors must have. Spending endless hours producing one more dooms day science fiction paper among the 10s of thousands of others already produced.
This week as I finish this run I have been doing all week I have been parking along the curb of a quiet dead end street in Marion, IL. to take my 10 hour break. Yesterday the rains of the last couple days ended and returning to here via I 64 across Southern IN the cicada were singing, the sun shinning, and the rain scrubbed air wonderful to feel and breath. When I parked a mocking bird came to serenade me to sleep with his extensive Repertoire.
This truck driver wouldnāt exchange my life for theirs ever.
Interesting that the cicadas are out in Indiana. I’m in SW Ohio and I have yet to hear one.
It’s been much warmer than this 2C “tipping point” in the past.
Do they have examples from history of this tipping point taking place every time the temperatures exceed 2C above the present temperature?
And then one has to ask: What if the warming does not continue and the Earth cools instead? Perhaps these alarmist scientists are assuming too much.
Tom, don’t you realize that this time it’s different? š
Climate claptrap will fall away like dominoes when reality catches up and gets past a host of barriers, ramparts, and policy misdirection plays.
PIC? Did I see PIC? Now that’s scary!
PIK, isn’t it? And yes, they do scare me – it’s like all the seriously nutty crazies are all in one place.
I love the disconnect between reality and their fantasies. As water cools, it becomes more viscous and flows more slowly and, as it warms, it flows faster, being less viscous. So, taking the Gulf Stream, which effectively keeps Western Europe about 11 deg C warmer than is would be otherwise, what happens if there was ocean warming. Well, it means W. Europe would receive more heat and become warmer, as the Gulf Stream flows faster and the water warmer a bit as well.
With ocean cooling, the Gulf Stream would slow down, being less viscous, and not only would less warm water be delivered to warm Europe but the warm water would be a bit cooler as well. This is what happens with a little ice age scenario, as a positive feedback mechanism. The contention that warming would stop the Gulf Stream is not so valid when what the Stream does is ramp up with warming.
The increasingly cold conditions in Europe bespeak that the Gulf Stream might be slowing a little.
A big domino is in fact falling now….
It remains to be seen who in the UK still has any chart reading skills and critical thinking to understand it.
NOAA SST-NorthAtlantic GlobalMonthlyTempSince1979 With37monthRunningAverage.gif (880Ć481) (wp.com)
That’s not a domino, it’s a headstone – just remains to be seen if we can write “RIP AGW” on it in time.
Like any professional grifter the key tenet for Climate Change scammers is: Never give up the con.
Only scoundrels and imbeciles repeat this climate doom nonsense. It is a 50-year-old fraud.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/05/26/michael-shellenberger-evicerates-peter-gleick/#comment-3255502
The ability to predict is the best objective measure of scientific and technical competence.
Climate doomsters have a perfect NEGATIVE predictive track record ā every very-scary climate prediction, of the ~80 they have made since 1970, has FAILED TO HAPPEN.
āRode and Fischbeck, professor of Social & Decision Sciences and Engineering & Public Policy, collected 79 predictions of climate-caused apocalypse going back to the first Earth Day in 1970. With the passage of time, many of these forecasts have since expired; the dates have come and gone uneventfully. In fact, 48 (61%) of the predictions have already expired as of the end of 2020.ā
To end 2020, the climate doomsters were proved wrong in their scary climate predictions 48 times ā at 50:50 odds for each prediction, thatās like flipping a coin 48 times and losing every time! The probability of that being mere random stupidity is 1 in 281 trillion! Itās not just global warming scientists being stupid.
These climate doomsters were not telling the truth ā they displayed a dishonest bias in their analyses that caused these extremely improbable falsehoods, these frauds.
There is a powerful logic that says no rational person or group could be this wrong for this long ā they followed a corrupt agenda ā in fact, they knew they were lying.
The global warming alarmists have a NO predictive track record ā they have been 100% wrong about every scary climate prediction ā nobody should believe them.
The radical greens have NO credibility, make that NEGATIVE credibility ā their core competence is propaganda, the fabrication of false alarm.
Source:
CLIMATE CHANGE, COVID-19, AND THE GREAT RESET
A Climate, Energy and Covid Primer for Politicians and Media
By Allan M.R. MacRae, Published May 8, 2021 UPDATE 1e
Download the WORD file
https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2021/05/climate-change-covid-19-and-the-great-reset-update-1e-readonly.docx
___________________________
I notice the study ( https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/12/601/2021/ ) references IPCC RPC 8.5 models.
Yes, chaos works in the cooling direction with falling sea levels also…..
Underwater ancient cypress forest offers clues to the past — ScienceDaily
Seems like the Guardian counts on its readers to not know history, meaning those readers who swallow this kind of garbage. If there are tipping points being surpassed now, how come there was no unstoppable warming in similar or much warmer periods in history? Why didn’t the earth’s oceans boil away after the Roman (or Medieval) warm periods? Why didn’t the poles become totally ice free then? Why isn’t most of Florida under water now? It’s too bad that most people do not learn history (including natural history/paleo history) in schools. I haven’t set foot inside a grade school in nearly 40 years, and I didn’t know about the RWP and MWP until I started reading WUWT. Relying on ignorance is a great way to propagate lies.
I spent several seconds too many skimming this. I need to read something logical and true now as an antidote. The following leader could have stood alone as an entirely true and meaningless prediction of the future:
ā Analysis shows significant risk of cascading events even at 2C of heating, with severe long-term effectsā
Events will always happen and ācascadeā from one to another. It is how the universe works. It will happen with 2 degrees warming or 30 degrees of cooling. Events always have severe long-term effects for someone or something somewhere. This is 100% drivel.
They carried out 3M simuations and found just a third of them featured a tipping point.
They forgot to mention that in 1/3 of their simulations an asteroid hits the earth š
It is like advertising a cure for a deadly disease that doesn’t exist. People normally would want to see the disease first.
The “Institute for Climate Impact Research.”
Raise your hand if you’re surprised an institute for climate impact research presents a study of scary possible impacts. Anyone? No one?
Clearly, with a such a scary scenario presented, more funding is needed for more study by the institute of climate impact research. Deposit your check in the enclosed pre-addressed stamped envelope.
It’s the Potsdam Institute once again. As Douglas Adams might have said: “They’re crazier than a tree full of monkeys on nitrous oxide!”
Or, “Climate Toppling Points could Tiptoe Through the Tulips. Or perhaps it’s Tippling Points? That can happen if you tipple tee many martoonis.
The Guardian “could” tell the truth once in a while/ But they don’t!
If this is possible, then there should be instances of them in past climate episodes. Perhaps they could identify some.
When it comes to climate change,”tipping points” are much like “last chances” ; if one doesn’t occur, there’s always another that ‘s just over the horizon. Except not only isn’t the public unconcerned, it also stopped paying attention.
The mere fact that not a single one of their predictions has ever come true, doesn’t slow these guys down.
Mathematical onanism. They better stop or they will develop acne.
Or go blind! Wait, they’re already blind.
I remember another domino effect, Vietnam. It never happened.
So it’s back to the good ol’ tipping points, is it? Haven’t heard that term used for a good couple of years now.
News flash! The climate seesaws and humans evolve/adapt-
‘Climate Seesaw’ Spurred Human Evolution in Africa For Millennia, Scientists Say (msn.com)
Careful chaps as this sort of impure thinking could lead to…gulp…the dark side and denial of the human caused dooming with no more grants for you.
If a scientist is WARNING of something, then he is either making a prediction to be tested and challenged and possibly falsified, or he is a priest in a cult, making prophecy for a herd of religious believers.
When the Miller-ites and all the other believers associated with what is now the Seventh Day Adventist church, LIVED through their predicted end of times, they didn’t call it “The Great Relief” or “The Great Deliverance.” No, they called it “The Great Disappointment.” They WANTED to be wiped out by God / Providence.
To the degree that they are serious about their warnings, and not just economic frauds and scammers (which abound in the our governmental bureaucracies and educational cesspools known as research universities), modern day CAGW alarmists are simply additional flavors of irrational doomsayers and predictors of the Apocalypse. They are modern-day Millerites and Branch Davidians and People’s temple cultists, hoping for the end of the world. Because they hate humans and human accomplishment, human thriving. That’s what misanthropes do, particularly Malthusian misanthropes. We need to call out these extreme beliefs among the so-called “scientific” consensus and to label fanatics as cultists when they abandon scientific objectivity in an attempt to pimp their predictions. NPR will hate being called a cult. BBC, MS-NBC will hate it. But we must do it, because we value accuracy and objectivity and history.
The very scientific Monte Carlo approach.
Remember the Chevrolet Monte Carlo? The poor man’s Impala and a competitor to the Chrysler Cordoba. Apparently these old rust buckets have found a second life as an important tool in climate science.
“Tipping Points” is an over-used misnomer.