Indian in the Year 2500 Wearing a Spacesuit. Source The Conversation, Fair Use, Low Resolution Image to Identify the Subject

Study: Climate Models can Predict Life in the Year 2500

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to the authors of a study, if we don’t mend our wicked ways, in 500 years people in India will have to wear space suits when they want to go outside to work the fields.

Our climate projections for 2500 show an Earth that is alien to humans

September 26, 2021 10.19pm AEST

Christopher Lyon Postdoctoral researcher, Natural Resource Sciences, McGill University
Alex Dunhill Research Fellow in Palaeobiology, University of Leeds
Andrew P. Beckerman Professor in Evolutionary Ecology, University of Sheffield
Ariane Burke Professor, Anthropology, Université de Montréal
Bethany Allen PhD Student, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds
Chris Smith NERC-IIASA Collaborative Research Fellow, University of Leeds
Daniel J. Hill Lecturer, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds
Erin Saupe Associate Professor, Palaeobiology, University of Oxford
James McKay Manager, Centre for Doctoral Training, University of Leeds
Julien Riel-Salvatore Professor, Anthropology, Université de Montréal
Lindsay C. Stringer Professor, Environment and Geography, University of York
Rob Marchant Professor of Tropical Ecology, University of York
Tracy Aze Associate Professor, Earth and Environment, University of Leeds

There are many reports based on scientific research that talk about the long-term impacts of climate change — such as rising levels of greenhouse gases, temperatures and sea levels — by the year 2100. The Paris Agreement, for example, requires us to limit warming to under 2.0 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century.

While some climate projections do look past 2100, these longer-term projections aren’t being factored into mainstream climate adaptation and environmental decision-making today. This is surprising because people born now will only be in their 70s by 2100. What will the world look like for their children and grandchildren?

Further, we found heat stress may reach fatal levels for humans in tropical regions which are currently highly populated. Such areas might become uninhabitable. Even under high-mitigation scenarios, we found that sea level keeps rising due to expanding and mixing water in warming oceans. 

Although our findings are based on one climate model, they fall within the range of projections from others, and help to reveal the potential magnitude of climate upheaval on longer time scales.

The Earth of our high-end projections is alien to humans. The choice we face is to urgently reduce emissions, while continuing to adapt to the warming we cannot escape as a result of emissions up to now, or begin to consider life on an Earth very different to this one.

Read more: https://theconversation.com/our-climate-projections-for-2500-show-an-earth-that-is-alien-to-humans-167744

The abstract of the study;

Climate change research and action must look beyond 2100

Christopher LyonErin E. SaupeChristopher J. SmithDaniel J. HillAndrew P. BeckermanLindsay C. StringerRobert MarchantJames McKayAriane BurkePaul O’HigginsAlexander M. DunhillBethany J. AllenJulien Riel-SalvatoreTracy Aze

Anthropogenic activity is changing Earth’s climate and ecosystems in ways that are potentially dangerous and disruptive to humans. Greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere continue to rise, ensuring that these changes will be felt for centuries beyond 2100, the current benchmark for projection. Estimating the effects of past, current, and potential future emissions to only 2100 is therefore short-sighted. Critical problems for food production and climate-forced human migration are projected to arise well before 2100, raising questions regarding the habitability of some regions of the Earth after the turn of the century. To highlight the need for more distant horizon scanning, we model climate change to 2500 under a suite of emission scenarios and quantify associated projections of crop viability and heat stress. Together, our projections show global climate impacts increase significantly after 2100 without rapid mitigation. As a result, we argue that projections of climate and its effects on human well-being and associated governance and policy must be framed beyond 2100.

Read more: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.15871

What can I say – arguably a space suit is advisable for Summer in India in today’s climate.

Their projection for the American Midwest is fun – all tropical and warm. Click the original article to see all nine paintings depicting life in the past, present and future.

Back in the real world, NASA GISS director Gavin Schmidt recently stated climate models are running hot, and admitted they have to figure out why.

… But as climate scientists face this alarming reality, the climate models that help them project the future have grown a little too alarmist. Many of the world’s leading models are now projecting warming rates that most scientists, including the modelmakers themselves, believe are implausibly fast. In advance of the U.N. report, scientists have scrambled to understand what went wrong and how to turn the models, which in other respects are more powerful and trustworthy than their predecessors, into useful guidance for policymakers. “It’s become clear over the last year or so that we can’t avoid this,” says Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

Read more: https://www.science.org/news/2021/07/un-climate-panel-confronts-implausibly-hot-forecasts-future-warming

Given climate modellers are struggling to get a timespan of a few decades right, I’m not going to lose any sleep over what some of them think might happen 500 years from now.

4.6 21 votes
Article Rating
128 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 30, 2021 10:06 am

So, what if the earth is warming again? Two questions for the infamous “modelers”:

 

1.      How many fatalities are projected of the 8 billion in a warmer climate with continued use of fossil fuels?

2.      How many fatalities are projected of the 8 billion without the fossil fuels that were the reason the world populated from 1 to 8 billion in a period of about 200 years?

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  Ronald Stein
September 30, 2021 12:14 pm

If we don’t do something drastic and do it fast to tackle CO2 emissions 8 billion people will die by the end of this century (at the end of a normal average life span). On the other hand if we do everything the green blob tells us to we might be able to speed that up quite a bit when people’s shelter, heat, cooling, food supply, modern infrastructure and security are destroyed by the removal of cheap reliable energy. These people are far too numerous and depressingly innumerate.

Greg
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
September 30, 2021 12:52 pm

Our climate projections for 2500 show an Earth that is alien to humans

Climate models tuned to ( vaguely ) match the 1960-1990 period were extrapolated 500y into the future.

Since we are rigorous scientists we have to point out this is total BS and totally unscientific but what the hell, this is an existential crisis, right? Our model extrapolations prove it.


Last edited 25 days ago by Greg
Tom Abbott
Reply to  Greg
September 30, 2021 3:55 pm

Alarmists tend to think the trend will go on forever.

When it was cooling in the 1970’s, they thought the cooling would go on forever and the world would enter a new Ice Age, and then it started warming in the 1980’s and now the alarmists think the warming trend will go on forever.

They were wrong about the cooling trend. And the warming trend seems to be turning the other direction now.

Sara
Reply to  Tom Abbott
October 1, 2021 5:36 am

Where is the “warm stuff” that you speak of, Tom Abbott?

I have never turned on the furnace at the beginning of September until this year. I am deeply concerned that I missed the plane going to the Warm Stuff. 🙂

DD More
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
September 30, 2021 3:27 pm

8 billion people will die!!!!”

Earth/Population – 7.674 billion (2019)
79 years to 2100
UN estimate a global average life expectancy of 72.6 years for 2019

See your 8 billion dead, without much sweat. Of course, there will still be 8 billion alive and CO2 will still have nothing to do with it.

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  DD More
October 1, 2021 1:56 pm

Exactly! I’ll be in the former number having lived a wonderful life during the greatest era humans have ever known.

SxyxS
September 30, 2021 10:13 am

These guys “don’ t know ” about their own ice age scare nonsense 50 years
and can not predict the weather for 5 days
but they claim to know how life will be in 500 years.

It’ s a bit of a toddler who hasn’t even learned to crawl but claims he will win the iron man triathlon next week.

Scissor
Reply to  SxyxS
September 30, 2021 10:24 am

They have no sense really. Even Simon and Garfunkel knew that 2525 was better sounding.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Scissor
September 30, 2021 11:10 am

They can’t predict (sorry, “project”) one year into the future, what idiot thinks 400 years is possible?

Greg
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
September 30, 2021 12:56 pm

Their laughable assumption is “all else being equal” as though our civilisation will even exist in 400y.

R Taylor
Reply to  Scissor
September 30, 2021 11:17 am

Simon Zager and Garfunkel Evans?

Reply to  Scissor
September 30, 2021 5:30 pm

*In The Year 2525* by Zager and Evans 1969 was covered more than 60 times, including apparently by S & G. 12 weeks No. 1 Billboard Top 100

“Now it's been ten thousand years
Man has cried a billion tears
For what, he never knew, now man's reign is through
But through eternal night, the twinkling of starlight
So very far away, maybe it's only yesterday

In the year 2525, if man is still alive
If woman can survive, they may find
Last edited 24 days ago by Doug Huffman
John Tillman
Reply to  Scissor
September 30, 2021 8:47 pm

Zager and Evans.

G Mawer
Reply to  SxyxS
September 30, 2021 2:01 pm

It seems to me that even the best, most honest modeler falls victim to “compound error”.

Streetcred
Reply to  SxyxS
September 30, 2021 4:42 pm

5 days ? Luxury, the BoM here cannot even get it right for 2 days ! Last weekend in Queensland (Australia) they were crowing on about impending “sorcher” conditions >30C. LOL, day time max never exceeded 28C and a week later it is COLD and WET !

Last edited 24 days ago by Streetcred
Reply to  SxyxS
September 30, 2021 4:56 pm

Ah, do not forget that they are now trying to say that the global warming of CO2 emitted before 1950 caused the cooling trend until 1979. Remember fellow idiots, global warming causes cold periods, Little Ice Ages, and probably even glacial periods. Who would have guessed we had messed up in thermodynamics so egregiously.

H.R.
Reply to  Charles Higley
September 30, 2021 6:53 pm

“Thermodynamics is hard.”

~Barbie

H.R.
Reply to  H.R.
September 30, 2021 6:55 pm

“Shut up, Barbie.”

~Chatty Cathy

Sara
Reply to  H.R.
October 1, 2021 5:46 am

I’m going to get a t-shirt with that printed on it – that, and “How does heat create cold?????”

Duane
Reply to  SxyxS
September 30, 2021 6:02 pm

Why stop at 500 years? Why not extrapolate out to 10 thousand years when earth will be nothing but a smoking cinder in the solar system, while all the rest of the planets will paradises of perfectly cool climate?

SMH

J Mac
September 30, 2021 10:17 am

Should this be classed as a new writing genre? Bad, really bad ecotopian fiction?
“Be afraid! Be very Afraid! Repent your ecosins and give us money!”

Sara
Reply to  J Mac
October 1, 2021 6:15 am

Wait a minute: what if another planet like Earth was found and all the ecohippies and greenbeaners decide to move there because Earth is “DYING!!!” and when they start sending “HELP US! We’re freezing to death!!” messages, the response is to send them peanut butter and jelly?

I can come up with sillier things than PB&J. OK, cat food instead of PB&J.

This little planet of ours does not have a steady-state atmosphere or geology, or anything else like that. There’s another volcano coming online up in Iceland, and the La Palma volcano is really making a mess over there in the Canary Islands, never mind that winter is just around the corner up here in the Northern Hemisphere.

But these silly people think they can predict what things will be like in 500 years without any real-world references to such things, which DO affect the “climate”?

Goody. I’m going to stick with my “300 years from now, we’re in an ice age and people are leaving the planet in droves” idea.

Really, people, Toba has started quivering, and you may recall that Toba did a lot of damage some time back. Damavand (in Iran) last erupted in 5350BC and is still quivering, has a TWO MILLION YEAR eruption history. Most of the South Pacific is full of islands built by volcanoes, ditto those islands off the eastern coast of Asia (Japan, etc.) and – oh, yeah! Kilimanjaro/Kibo is quivering and releasing gases, too, and Fujiyama is making its neighbors a bit nervous…. and (my point is) those people actually think they’re smarter than the planet and can predict what WILL happen?????

If you hear a loud noise, it’s just me falling off my chair, laughing myself into the hiccups.

Thanks, mods, for that post. It makes my day much brighter! And J Mac, yes, it’s definitely a new genre – maybe the “doom on you” chant from the Dodos in the Ice Age movie inspired these “forecasters” – you know, the one with the mammoth, sabretooth tiger and Sid the Sloth.

Geezo Pete, those people are du…… (walks away, still giggling)

Last edited 24 days ago by Sara
David Guy-Johnson
September 30, 2021 10:17 am

It’s beyond hilarious what passes for a scientific paper these days

Scissor
Reply to  David Guy-Johnson
September 30, 2021 10:26 am

It might have some value if printed on soft paper, wound on rolls.

Dr. Bob
Reply to  David Guy-Johnson
September 30, 2021 12:27 pm

As a scientist, I really cannot understand how so called researchers and scientists can all fall for the CAGW diatribe. I guess they were never taught to “Check you own assumptions”. Always Check Your Assumptions (joshuakennon.com)

I will always think if this when talking to CAGW believers:
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. Upton Sinclair It Is Difficult to Get a Man to Understand Something When His Salary Depends Upon His Not Understanding It – Quote Investigator

A true scientist questions everything. I validate all data given me for review with my own calculations just to be sure they did things correctly. Time-consuming, but you can never trust others with your own decisions.

Streetcred
Reply to  Dr. Bob
September 30, 2021 4:46 pm

I have concluded that they, in fact, are not scientists, they are simple academics who have to publish, and publish they will, any cr8p will do, just get published.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Dr. Bob
September 30, 2021 11:39 pm

When a practicing structural engineer (I git good eventually after much practice) I would always perform a quick hand calculation to get a feel for what beam/column size member I should be looking, before feeding data into a computer analysis programme to crunch the numbers. I always told any graduates I was working with to do likewise. That way they would hopefully get a feel for the output from the computer, because if they didn’t get that “feel”, how would they know the output is right-ish!!!

Sara
Reply to  Dr. Bob
October 1, 2021 6:22 am

Follow the money, Bob. Always follow the money.

Paul Johnson
September 30, 2021 10:17 am

Reductio ad absurdum, or rather extrapolation ad ignorantiam.

Reply to  Paul Johnson
September 30, 2021 11:50 am

Where is a reliable weather forecast for a month? A week? 100 hours?

Ron Long
Reply to  Curious George
September 30, 2021 1:37 pm

I prefer to open a window in the morning and look out.

Pat from Kerbob
Reply to  Ron Long
September 30, 2021 2:12 pm

My weather rock is always right

September 30, 2021 10:19 am

Science fiction

Reply to  Hans Erren
September 30, 2021 10:26 am

Science fiction
corrected it for you, there is no science at all.

John Tillman
Reply to  Hans Erren
September 30, 2021 10:28 am

Anti-science fantasy.

September 30, 2021 10:28 am

Why are climate models running way too hot? Could it be, that igoring surface emissivity (or being totally ignorant about it respectively) and overlaps, mainly with clouds, produce a huge error margin? And how smart do you need to be to figure out what is actually obvious? OMG..

comment image

https://greenhousedefect.com/the-holy-grail-of-ecs/the-2xco2-forcing-disaster

DMacKenzie
Reply to  E. Schaffer
September 30, 2021 4:34 pm

As usual, Willis beat us all to your observations long ago
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/12/a-modtran-mystery/

Reply to  DMacKenzie
September 30, 2021 5:56 pm

Thanks for the link. Though at no point Willis was even close to asking the pivotal questions I am answering.

H. D. Hoese
September 30, 2021 10:45 am

According to the last (science.org) link–“For now, policymakers and other researchers need to avoid putting too much stock in the unconstrained extreme warming the latest models predict, says Claudia Tebaldi, a climate scientist at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and one of the leaders of CMIP’s climate projections. Getting that message out will be a challenge.” this seems contradictory.

Doonman
September 30, 2021 10:45 am

Why don’t models ever predict the end of the Holocene?

We know it will happen as re-glaciation has occurred for 2.5 million years. Chicago will be under a mile of ice again. Yet models never predict when. Strange, since models are so accurate these days that researchers use them in studies.

Sara
Reply to  Doonman
October 1, 2021 6:38 am

Chicago will be under ice? Limited thinking!!! The ENTIRE Great Lakes region in all four directions will be under ice, not just one spot on the map. Lake Michigan’s ancient shores go about 45 miles west of its current western shore, never mind that thumb up north called Green Bay. One big gigantic pool of water back then, dug out by glaciers heading south (look up “kettles” and the Ice Age Trail) and melting back. There are enough glacial kames and drumlins north and west of me (and probably SOUTH and EAST, too) to give any rock hunter cheap thrills.

Expand your view. Look up iron concretions and the fossils that they hide. I have some of those, all from the Carboniferous period, found on hikes, and the iron sources start WAY up north in the Mesabi iron range. It all used to be ocean bottom, y’know.

There is nothing that says this little planet of ours cannot go into a prolonged ice age again. It just annoys the “global warming” crowd that any of us think that way.

markl
September 30, 2021 10:48 am

The false AGW narrative that’s been created, supported, and constantly reminded is all pervasive. The Marxists did a good job of buying and controlling the MSM.

Steve Case
Reply to  markl
September 30, 2021 11:47 am

Yes they did. This quote from Maurice Strong is telling:

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

You can read where that quote came from here, skip to the last page. Strong didn’t get to be the Chairman of the World Economic Counsel and a United Nations big wig by having a point of view that was out of step with all the other members. No, those two organizations are infested with Marxists, and they’ve been busy.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Steve Case
September 30, 2021 11:49 pm

Depressing, isn’t it!!!

Terry Harvey
September 30, 2021 10:51 am

Yes, very clever, now go and do something useful.

ResourceGuy
September 30, 2021 11:01 am

Why not just look at the debt clock? or did they take it down because it could not keep up?

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 30, 2021 1:38 pm

These days the ‘debt clock’ is going so fast that I’m using it as a fan…

Pauleta
September 30, 2021 11:01 am

I don’t understand the modesty to just go to 2500. Why not 3000? What is keeping them to dream that far ahead?

fretslider
Reply to  Pauleta
September 30, 2021 11:07 am

In 3000 you can hang out with Bender and Fry

Soggydollar
September 30, 2021 11:04 am

You cant predict $h*t. Tell me where a hurricane is going in 4 days….where were you 4ool$ when “scientist” wanted to place coal dust on the ice caps to WARM earth?? That was in the 70’s

Vuk
September 30, 2021 11:04 am

Possible, not in India but in New York, kind of space suit worn for getting out of the ISS, that is if the current inter-glacial is over.

Vuk
Reply to  Vuk
September 30, 2021 11:51 am

Here is a new NASA-Hubble video about climate change on Jupiter
https://youtu.be/7dIfQIDjtOg

Sara
Reply to  Vuk
October 1, 2021 6:42 am

Are they pounding on that silly ‘Horrors!!! Red Spot is changing!!!’ nonsense again. What are those sillies going to do if Zeus’s Big Red Spot just disappears?
That is just laughable! Thank you for that !!!

fretslider
September 30, 2021 11:05 am

What patent garbage

And a long list of idiots to go with it

Alan the Brit
Reply to  fretslider
October 1, 2021 12:03 am

Yes but they are useful idiots after all!!!

September 30, 2021 11:14 am

Don’t the 13 authors know that most of the people in India died of famine in 1974? Or at least those were the projections.

September 30, 2021 11:17 am

Don’t the13 authors know most of the people in India died of famine in 1973?
Or at least the projections had it so.

Giordano Milton
September 30, 2021 11:24 am

It sounds more like these people need to write fiction. Disney could use some new ideas

Reply to  Giordano Milton
September 30, 2021 1:30 pm

But comparable stories have been written all along.

Bruce Cobb
September 30, 2021 11:25 am

Fantasy-based climate models create wilder and wilder fantasies the further out they project. Who knew?

ResourceGuy
September 30, 2021 11:27 am

Now let’s see the list of academic promotions and salary increases of these select, distinguished modelers and their no-consequence predictions.

ResourceGuy
September 30, 2021 11:28 am

Now let’s see a projection to 2500 of clean water supplies by country.

ResourceGuy
September 30, 2021 11:30 am

Will all women be forced to wear a burqa over their helmet or stay home in 2500?

John Tillman
Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 30, 2021 11:35 am

There will be only one sex in 2500, with 63 genders, reproducing parthenogenically. To save resources. For the children.

ResourceGuy
September 30, 2021 11:31 am

Will the UK be an underdeveloped country in 2500.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 30, 2021 1:31 pm

so long time ? 😀

Robert of Texas
September 30, 2021 11:41 am

“…in 500 years people in India will have to wear space suits when they want to go outside to work the fields.”

Prove it.

Prove that your climate models can accurately predict climate in 30 years… They haven’t so far!

Reply to  Robert of Texas
September 30, 2021 2:19 pm

Can’t imagine growing crops if themperatures are as high a space suits are necessary to go outside. 😀

TonyG
Reply to  Krishna Gans
October 1, 2021 7:28 am

“Can’t imagine growing crops…”

Telling, isn’t it, that they can’t even see the problem with their scenario?

Joao Martins
Reply to  Robert of Texas
October 1, 2021 3:18 am

“…in 500 years people in India will have to wear space suits when they want to go outside to work the fields.”

… Must start to develop and produce space suits for goats and buffaloes, because the poor animals will not stand such high temperatures. A good ivestment, to buy shares of factories of space suits for animals of all sizes and shapes!

Smart Rock
September 30, 2021 11:44 am

Many of the world’s leading models are now projecting warming rates that most scientists, including the modelmakers themselves, believe are implausibly fast……scientists have scrambled to understand what went wrong and how to turn the models, which in other respects are more powerful and trustworthy than their predecessors…

The models have only one purpose, which is to predict future climate states. Since they get the wrong answer for that – what “other respects” are there?

Gavin Schmidt’s excuse for an abject failure of the modelling process – which is the sole foundation that the whole global warming scare is built on – is about as weak as an excuse could possibly be.

The optimist in me would like to think that “they” have painted themselves into a corner. The realist in me says that popular opinion will only begin to turn when the lights go out. Which may start to happen this winter.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Smart Rock
September 30, 2021 3:42 pm

The models have only one purpose, which is to predict future climate states.

I have to disagree with you on that one. The only purpose of the models is to provide a facsimile of science that roughly mirrors reality so they can keep the money rolling in. Gawd knows the real data would leave them unemployed.

Oldseadog
September 30, 2021 12:06 pm

I would like to see the proof of the first sentence of the abstract.

When I was in Port Sudan in September 1970, during the day the temperature in the shade, when you could find any, was 128F. Everyone worked as normal including the dockers who were working down in the hold of a steel ship with the sun overhead. Goodness knows what the temperature was down there, but you could fry eggs on the deck.

If they can predict the weather in 500 years from now, what is going to win The Grand National and The Kentucky Derby next year? That information would be much more useful.

Peta of Newark
September 30, 2021 12:07 pm

All those names from my old school at Leeds makes me feel genuinely really quesy and a thick/dull head overtakes me.

Hey, if you’re really lucky, do I have a Bonus for you. Maybe..
Due to my being an alnmuniaimemunia of Leeds, I get invited to all sorts of nonsense and some such came and went this very morn.
An hour long Zoom meeting, hosted by Leeds on ‘Fixing The Climate of Africa

I missed the first 25 mins but what I did see was computerised brain-ache.
Nervous bumbling computer illiterates with shonky microphones, distorting at horribly mismatched levels and then, they are all experts on Computer Modelling.
er. wot.

That, as far as I could tell, was the gist of it. Computer Models and Smartphone Apps were going to sort out Africa’s Climate.
One slight catch was that their current computers don’t have the resolution to see thunderstorms – thus the last 15 minutes was when everyone lightened up and discussed how they would spend ‘Unlimited Amounts of Money’ – on computers.
Yup, stuff the hapless Africans, as long as everyone at Leeds has got a HAL, Model: MoreBucksPleeze Issue 97 Squillion Revision 97.97
….. then, all will be well with the climate.

A wee African fellow was on just prior to the blow-out bit, bemoaning how ‘Climate’ was making Meningitis worse – how folks got it a lot more in the Dry Season than when the Monsoon was raging. Climate was gonna change the monsoon you see and everyone was gonna get Meningitis

Despite an unintelligible accent and hideous sound quality, we got the message that he too wanted money for computers and smartphones.

Errr, excuse me mister, what about improving folks’ immune systems and general health by organising some decent <expletive> food for them and maybe, just maybe, <whispers> vaccinating them.

Clowns the lot of them – so poor, so very very poor

H.R.
Reply to  Peta of Newark
September 30, 2021 7:12 pm

Recognize anyone of these from your days at Leeds, Peta?
http://rocketcityclowns.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Graduation-768×494.jpg

Andy Pattullo
September 30, 2021 12:07 pm

So often these days people mistake what is clearly fictional parody as something of scientific construction. Journalists, lay people, political leaders and, as in this case, even the authors sometimes make that mistake. Give these sad authors a break and file their paper where it belongs, in the science fiction section along with sasquatch, zombies, time travel, and Klingon telepathy. People who live in the fuzzy head space these writers inhabit can’t be expected to recognize their own ignorance, nor change their socks without assistance.

Mike Lowe
September 30, 2021 12:26 pm

So they didn’t invite any Professor from Glasgow? Bad mistake. Very very bad.

n.n
September 30, 2021 12:29 pm

It will be green (Green in niche markets), warm (hospitable with recurring, irregular extremes), and viable (Baby Lives Matter despite people… persons who doth protest too much).

Joao Martins
September 30, 2021 12:51 pm

Shocking.

Too much money to finance the writing of science-fiction by so-called “scientists”.

PaulH
September 30, 2021 12:52 pm

Is it April 1st already? 😉

whiten
Reply to  PaulH
October 1, 2021 12:05 am

It is April 21st century…. all days long.

cheers

Alan the Brit
Reply to  PaulH
October 1, 2021 12:17 am

In “Climate Science”, it’s April 1st/24-7, 365 days a year!!!

climate believer
September 30, 2021 1:22 pm

“we argue that projections of climate and its effects on human well-being and associated governance and policy must be framed beyond 2100.”

LOL!! yeah right, sure thing…. you guys are out of your freakin minds.

Joao Martins
Reply to  climate believer
October 1, 2021 3:23 am

I do not agree with you: these people are dangerous. Because they are the ideologues that the politicians will happily follow (my guess is that Joe’s syndrome will develop new “variants”, each new one highly transmissible to people of younger age).

Last edited 24 days ago by Joao Martins
ResourceGuy
September 30, 2021 1:31 pm

By 2500 we will have desktop quantum computers to simulate and test all of the failed predictions of the Climate Crusades….in 20 seconds. The Mann model prediction will not be among them because it can’t be checked.

DHR
September 30, 2021 1:32 pm

And just where are the materials and energy needed to manufacture the space suits to come from?

H.R.
Reply to  DHR
September 30, 2021 7:25 pm

Good question, DHR.

I’m not exactly sure how those replicators will work, but I think they start with elemental hydrogen and build up your bagel and Grande latte from there.

September 30, 2021 1:37 pm

Following the link to the original articel on “The Conversation” I find that at the end of the text:

The climate crisis touches every aspect of life on Earth …On The Conversation, we help make the connections clear. Thanks to our global network of 90,000 experts, we have been able to show people just how intertwined the climate crisis is with the major events shaping the modern world. But to keep going, we need the support of readers.

DONATE NOW

Will de Freitas
Environment + Energy Editor

What experts is he talking about ?

Last edited 25 days ago by Krishna Gans
Pat from Kerbob
Reply to  Krishna Gans
September 30, 2021 2:05 pm

Griff and Loydo

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Krishna Gans
October 1, 2021 12:20 am

“But to keep going, we need the support of readers.” = give us your money now!!!

Steve Z
September 30, 2021 1:45 pm

There were many articles in the LameStream Media during the mid-1970’s predicting an imminent Ice Age, so that the climate was probably cooling prior to about 1975. So most of the climate models tried to correlate the temperature rise from about 1975 to 1998 (remember that Trenberth had to “hide the decline” in 1999) to the rise in CO2 concentrations, which had also been rising prior to 1975.

So let’s imagine that the Vikings who colonized Greenland during the 11th century had done the same thing, believing that the relatively mild weather of the Medieval Warm Period would continue to get warmer, and that Greenland would be much warmer and possibly ice-free by the year 1600, so they would bring more and more colonists from Norway to settle on the coasts of Greenland.

The real Vikings of that time knew they would never live to see the year 1600, and didn’t worry about it. But their descendants had to abandon Greenland entirely circa 1400, and continental Europe was already in the grip of the Black Plagues, and the Thames River in England kept freezing over every winter well into the 17th century (all those paintings of winter festivals on the ice from the 1600’s). What would people who lived through the Little Ice Age think of Vikings’ predictions of a warm Greenland? But the people of that time adapted to the cold weather as well as they could, with the technology available at the time.

So how can today’s climate modelers extrapolate the circa 1975-1998 temperature trend to the year 2500? The warming trend of circa 1910 – 1940 ended with a cooling trend circa 1940 to 1970, and the “global average temperatures” have stabilized since 2000, with very little trend in either direction.

Besides, even if the climate did warm significantly by the year 2500, vast areas of northern Canada and Russia which are currently tundra would become arable farm land, and the higher CO2 concentrations would promote faster growth of drought-tolerant crops. What’s wrong with that?

Such a warming (if it occurred) would be much more favorable than the last major ice age, when about half the continental United States and much of Europe was covered year-round by glaciers hundreds of meters thick, and totally uninhabitable by man and beast.

[QUOTE FROM ARTICLE] “Their projection for the American Midwest is fun – all tropical and warm.” [END QUOTE]. Really? When there were snowstorms in south Texas last February?
But that might make AOC happy–she could finally grow yucca plants in Queens!

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Steve Z
October 1, 2021 12:27 am

Ever since I was at school I would gaze at the global world map on the classroom wall, & kept wondering why it was called “Greenland”!!! There was a “good” programme on Greenland, part of a series about the Arctic, I recall narrated I think by the much revered David Attenborough (he wasn’t knighted back then), & they showed the landmass’ Summer, green & lush around the coastal regions, with Spring/Summer wildflowers sprouting everywhere!!! Then of course, the slow return of the snow & ice for months on end until the next year!!!

Mumbles McGuirck
September 30, 2021 1:47 pm

Granted, a little tongue-in-cheek, but if we judge by the past climate of the Early Eocene Optimum…

etundra.jpg
Jeff Alberts
September 30, 2021 1:53 pm

Didn’t the IPCC at one point say that due to “climate” being a chaotic, coupled, non-linear system, that predictions of future climate states are not possible?

Pat from Kerbob
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
September 30, 2021 2:02 pm

typo

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Pat from Kerbob
September 30, 2021 6:02 pm

Lol, I wouldn’t put it past them. Or just plain, “No, we never said that.”

Mr.
September 30, 2021 1:56 pm

I’m not even going to comment on such a ridiculous article.

Arrrgggghhh – sucked in AGAIN!

🙁

Pat from Kerbob
September 30, 2021 2:01 pm

I’m not a climate scientologist, nor do i play one on TV, but how can anyone publish such crap claiming to have some idea of what anything will be like in 500 years, climate or otherwise?
Don’t people have any sense of shame anymore?

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Pat from Kerbob
September 30, 2021 5:37 pm

Apparently there are quite a large number of them … all calling themselves scientists. You can also bet they all want us to kow-tow and address them as Doctor “Poobah” or the like.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Rory Forbes
September 30, 2021 6:03 pm

Grand High Exalted Mystic Ruler.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
September 30, 2021 8:36 pm

Hey, I know one of those. There is a group of old guys I meet with from time to time. If ever I touch on touch topics (like AGW or you know what) this one guy never misses the chance to cut me off with, “we’ll have to agree to disagree and not discuss that” … much to the chagrin of several others. By way of description he’s a great fan of Biden and believed Trump was the Devil incarnate. He fits your characterization.

Gunga Dad
September 30, 2021 3:04 pm

How long before “The Storm Channel” or “The History Channel” adds a show based on this BS to their lineup?
I do remember after “The History Channel” stopped being about history they had a show called something like “Life after Humans”. (It had stuff like (animated) VW-sized saber toothed weasels attacking Bison-sized hamsters in a blizzard.)

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Gunga Dad
September 30, 2021 5:45 pm

I recall that program. If I remember accurately. the film was accompanied by a panel of lab coated [sic] “experts” expounding on and discussing the finer details. I kept thinking how it would have helped to have what they were smoking/drinking to watch their film and not laugh hysterically. I thought, at the time, it would be impossible to out do that balderdash. I was wrong.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Gunga Dad
September 30, 2021 6:05 pm

The only thing I’ve watched on HC in the last decade is The Curse of Oak Island. And they try their damnedest to make it unwatchable, by baiting and switching, making unsupportable incredulous statements, etc. But I’m still curious as to what will eventually happen.

Sara
Reply to  Gunga Dad
October 1, 2021 6:48 am

This is why I no longer have a TV.

TonyG
Reply to  Gunga Dad
October 1, 2021 7:36 am

I don’t remember “Life After Humans” but I recall “Life After People”. If it’s the same program we have quite different memories of it. They would visit real places that have been abandoned for X years and show quite clearly how little impact people have on the planet.

Maybe that’s why it’s not shown anymore.

Gunga Din
Reply to  TonyG
October 3, 2021 3:43 pm

Thanks, TonyG,
I had the name of the program mixed up.
“The Future is Wild” is the one with saber toothed wolverines (I had said weasels.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Future_is_Wild

TonyG
Reply to  Gunga Din
October 3, 2021 6:36 pm

“The Future is Wild” – I have been fortunate enough to have missed that one!

September 30, 2021 3:18 pm

I thought that our fossil fuels will be running out in another century. That would negate their argument if oil output is greatly diminished within a century.

Wayne Townsend
September 30, 2021 3:58 pm

They forgot to include a future China. Of course a landscape totally obscured by smog and toxic fumes might look a little like a messy grey watercolor, but it might be accurate.

September 30, 2021 4:53 pm

I am glad they provided a list of the academics who contributed to this steaming pile of BS. Now we know who to fire or not hire, EVER.

John Bell
September 30, 2021 5:49 pm

In the year 3535 video – we need lyrics just for CC

Tombstone Gabby
September 30, 2021 7:21 pm

The following is from “Science & Mechanics” magazine, August 1974, page 88.

(Quote)

Any attempt to predict the future stands on very shaky ground. In spite of a steady improvement in the sophistication of future-predicting techniques — from cattle entrails to crystal balls to computers — our ability to predict even the short-term future remains poor, indeed. Observe what happened to President Nixon in the four months from November 1972 to March 1973. Anyone who talks about what life will be like in 30, or 100, or 1,000 years from now is talking nonsense.

This is so because of three reasons:

1) There are facts to be discovered about our world which are unknown today.

2) Even if we knew all the facts, there is nobody with wisdom enough to understand how all of them are related and interact with one another.

3) Even if we knew all the facts, and how they interact with each other, there is the additional and most important obstacle to future-prediction: Social, political, economic, legal and military considerations often override the scientific and technological information. This is why America’s vaunted technology, so brilliant in putting men on the moon, is utterly impotent in trying to solve social problems involving people. Humans are individualistic and unpredictable — not at all like electrons or spacecraft that can be manipulated precisely at the experimenter’s whim.

It is for these three reasons that the future 10 years from now really cannot be predicted. But the seeds of the future — the technological, scientific, social and economic factors that can determine it — already are planted today. And some now are beginning to germinate and blossom; they shortly will bear fruit.

So, the nature of our future lies more with moral issues rather than with science and technology. In a convocation address in 1945, Dr. Robert M. Hutchins, then chancellor of the University of Chicago, told the graduating students, “The most distressing aspect of the world into which you are going is its indifference to the basic issues, which now, as always, are moral issues.”

Orwell would have agreed.

(End quote)

Has anything really changed since then? 

Michael Hammer
September 30, 2021 9:11 pm

Are you sure they have not got all their data backwards. I have posted the essay below before but never got a reply or any discussion. Maybe this time?

Earth’s atmosphere generates mechanical work. It raises water to high altitudes powering hydroelectric generators, while wind can blow down trees, raise waves and drive wind turbines. This is powered by thermal energy coming from the sun. The earth’s surface and atmosphere is converting thermal energy from the sun into mechanical energy which is the exact definition of a heat engine. Heat engines are very well understood, the requirements for their operation were first described by Sadi Carnot (1796-1832). 

There are 2 requirements for a heat engine which are relevant to this discussion. Firstly, 100% efficiency of conversion of thermal energy into mechanical energy is impossible. There must not only be a point in the cycle where the working fluid gains thermal energy (the hot junction) but there must also be a point in the cycle where the working fluid loses thermal energy (the cold junction). For example, in a power station the boiler is the hot junction and the cooling towers are the cold junction.

Secondly the hot junction must be at significantly higher pressure than the cold junction. The working fluid heated at the hot junction expands as it moves from the hot to cold junction doing mechanical work in the process. At the cold junction the working fluid loses energy (cools) which means it takes less mechanical energy to recompress it back to the hot junction pressure than was release in the expansion. The mechanical work done is the difference between the thermal energy absorbed at the hot junction and the thermal energy lost at the cold junction.

For the atmosphere, the hot junction is Earth’s surface where the surface, warmed by absorption of solar energy, in turn warms the atmosphere. The cold junction must be at a point of lower pressure and the only possibility is high up in the atmosphere. Since energy is conserved, losing energy means transferring it to somewhere colder (second law of thermodynamics) and for air high up in the atmosphere the only place colder is space. The only available mechanism of heat transfer in that case is by radiation in the thermal infrared (wavelengths between about 4 and 50 microns). Temperatures in our atmosphere preclude significant radiation at other wavelengths (Planks law). But, by definition, any gas capable of radiating in the thermal IR band is a greenhouse gas. That means energy loss to space and thus the existence of a cold junction relies on the presence of greenhouse gases. Without greenhouse gases there cannot be a cold junction and without a cold junction the heat engine that defines our weather and climate could not function. In practical terms the atmosphere warmed at the surface rises but, having risen, it needs to cool in order to descend again completing the convective loop. If there were no greenhouse gases the air could not cool and thus could not descend again.

The lapse rate in our atmosphere is created and maintained by convection. Without convection it disappears and, with, time the entire atmospheric column would end up at a uniform temperature (a vertically isothermal atmosphere). Without the air movement caused by convection there would be no wind. Water vapour also could not condense because condensation requires losing energy and without greenhouse gases there is no way for it to do so, hence no clouds would form. Without condensation the entire atmosphere would become saturated with respect to water vapour and then net evaporation would also stop. Without convection there would be nothing to raise surface dust and what dust was in the atmosphere would eventually precipitate out so the air would become extremely clear. In short, there would be no weather, no clouds, no wind, no rain no dust.  Without clouds, dust or greenhouse gases (a transparent atmosphere) the average insolation at the surface would be very similar to the insolation in near space averaged over the rotating globe ie: around 340 watts/sqM (not the current 234 watts/sqM). The surface would radiate this back out to space as close to a black body giving a global average temperature of 278K or +5C.

As an aside, it is also worth noting that when the surface is warmer than the atmosphere, heat can be transferred to the atmosphere by convection but when the surface is colder there is a temperature inversion precluding convection and thus only allowing to atmosphere to transfer heat to the surface by conduction which is extremely slow. As a result, the temperature of the atmosphere would be close to the maximum temperature of the surface not the average temperature of the surface.

While the average insolation would be 340 watts/sqM the actual insolation at any point on the surface would vary with latitude, season and time of day. In the tropics, for example, insolation would reach around 1340 watts/sqM at noon and down to of course zero at night. The actual surface temperature would vary as insolation varies, with the degree of change depending on the thermal time constant of the surface. Our own observations of just how fast beach sand or a concrete path or even dry ground heats up on a summer’s day tells us this time constant, at least on land, is very short compared to Earth’s 24 hour day – typically less than 1 hour. Thus, at 1300 watts/sqM noon tropical temperature would be close to 116C while night time temperature would be far below freezing. Away from the tropics it would not be quite as extreme but even at latitude 37, insolation at noon in summer is around 1200 watts/sqM corresponding to 110C, while in winter, insolation at noon is around 620 watts/sqM corresponding to 50C. The situation would be similar to the surface of the moon which reaches 127C during the “day” and minus 173C during the “night”. Although because the lunar day/night is longer than Earth’s (28 days vs 1 day) the result on Earth would not be quite as extreme. 

A practical example much closer to home is a closed car out in the sun. It heats up because convection and evaporation are inhibited (although not entirely suppressed), similar to the situation without the atmospheric heat engine that is our climate. The temperature inside the car can easily and rapidly rise above 70C, which is why there are laws against leaving children in closed cars.

Of course, all this is hypothetical, after all we do have greenhouse gases in our atmosphere. So, is the analysis significant? Well, yes it is, because what it shows is that while the presence of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere heats the Earth from +5C to the current 14C (a 9 degree rise); it’s far more major effect is to reduce the high temperature extremes and increase the low temperature extremes. In short to significantly moderate the daily and seasonal temperature excursions, making the climate more equitable. Yet the climate models claim the incremental impact of rising greenhouse gases will have exactly the opposite impact, exacerbating the extremes.  If the incremental impact of a parameter is in the opposite direction to the total impact, it means that at some point there has to be a point of inflection, a point where the action of the parameter reverses. What would cause that for our climate and which side of the point of inflection are we currently at? Why would not the small incremental greenhouse gas impact due to rising CO2 further moderate the extreme temperatures even if it caused a small rise in “average” temperature? And would such a change really be catastrophic or even disadvantageous? Further, if the cumulative total impact of all greenhouse gases is 9C of warming and the impact is logarithmic with concentration, how could a doubling in concentration of one component which is far from the dominant component give rise to incremental warming of 3-4-5 C. 

September 30, 2021 10:15 pm

Why not: “In the year 2525″ ?

J.R.
September 30, 2021 10:42 pm

If we could go back in time and ask people from 1521 what they thought life would be like in 2021, do you think their predictions would be accurate?

whiten
Reply to  J.R.
October 1, 2021 12:26 am

Flying horses was a popular fantasy, mostly futuristic… then 🤓

Rudi
September 30, 2021 10:56 pm

That is far from research or science. It is pure speculation and could be done much better without any computer. Actually only fantasy is required.

Serge Wright
October 1, 2021 5:26 am

If that’s life in 2050, then it means that the climate alarmists were defeated and capitalism and freedom prevailed. A good news story 😉

Sara
October 1, 2021 5:33 am

Oh. here we go: Further, we found heat stress may reach fatal levels for humans in tropical regions which are currently highly populated. Such areas might become uninhabitable. – article

Sometimes, I read that stuff and wonder just what planet those people are living on, and then I realize that they have somehow created they own little world… a world of the Imagination… a world in which The They can control Everything…. or at least they think they can…. which is ludicrous, because the people who concoct this stuff can’t even control the hungry/full centers in their brains.

I really do think it would do them all a world of good if they spent some real time in the real world – is that too many ‘really, reals’? – and had no access to any kind of electronic stuff or air conditioners or fridges… but that’s just me.

500 years from now? If we haven’t found and moved to other habitable planets by then, we’ll more likely be living in a Very Cold Climate, trying to hunt the Jabberwock or take a few quail or pheasant or even chickens that escaped the hatcheries and went off into The Wild. I would truly like to know that these forecasters may be disappointed to find that their dismal forecasts did not come to pass. Pea soup is not very good when it’s cold.

But that’s just me. You all have a nice weekend and be kind to the bees. We need them.

Last edited 24 days ago by Sara
Ed Zuiderwijk
October 1, 2021 5:48 am

Several hundred years ago there was a guy who did a similar effort to predict the future. His name was Nostradamus. Methinks he was not very accurate but more accurate than these clowns will ever be.

Olen
October 1, 2021 7:38 am

Predictions have to be anchored in a starting point like a leaking crack in the dam. So far there is no such evidence to allow predictions shooting out to 500 years. It is certain no one will be around 500 years from now to say sorry, I was wrong.

It is very bold that so many put their names to this claim.

Ulric Lyons
October 1, 2021 8:12 am

Their projection for the Amazon suggests that it must have been much drier there during the Holocene Thermal Optimum, which of course it wasn’t because there were far less El Nino conditions then.

Jim Masterson
October 1, 2021 10:04 am

in 500 years people in India will have to wear space suits when they want to go outside to work the fields.

In 500 years, everyone will be wearing dozens of masks (maybe hundreds), so space suits shouldn’t be necessary.

Michael S. Kelly
October 2, 2021 12:51 am

People in India who go outside to toil in the fields will have to…wear spacesuits? I kinda think that people in a civilization where they possess even one spacesuit per capita aren’t going to be doing a whole lot of toiling in fields. Jus’ sayin’…

Last edited 23 days ago by Michael S. Kelly
Mike Maguire
October 2, 2021 7:35 pm

One of the biggest problems with that is fossil fuels will be running out soon anyway …..if you want to believe the so called experts.

https://theconversation.com/our-climate-projections-for-2500-show-an-earth-that-is-alien-to-humans-167744

Models show continued greening to 2100. When will that slow down?

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/

Screenshot 2021-10-02 at 21-33-53 Global Green Up Slows Warming.png
Mike Maguire
Reply to  Mike Maguire
October 2, 2021 7:45 pm

This should have been the first link in that last post. Graphic showing when fossil fuels will run out.

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/70725/#70747

Screenshot 2021-10-02 at 21-43-55 Green energy - MarketForum.png
%d bloggers like this: