Original image: Man at bridge holding head with hands and screaming. By Edvard Munch - WebMuseum at ibiblioPage: http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/munch/Image URL: http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/munch/munch.scream.jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37610298

Study: “The battle to limit global warming to 1.5 Celsius by 2050 is doomed”

So we can stop worrying and enjoy life now, right?

World is not going to avoid 1.5 Celsius global warming ‘tipping point’, researchers warn

Rob Waugh
Tue, 28 June 2022, 1:12 am

The battle to limit global warming to 1.5 Celsius by 2050 is doomed, according to researchers who have reviewed data around global warming.

To achieve the goal of limiting temperature rise by this amount, global carbon emissions must reach net zero – where emissions are balanced by carbon absorbed by plants and carbon-capture technology – by 2050.

To meet the goal, emissions will have to fall 43% by 2030, two scientists said in a paper published in Science – but emissions are still rising.

A rise of 1.5 Celsius is considered important, because above that level and there will be more heatwaves, extreme weather events, droughts and greater economic losses.

Previous research had suggested that these emissions had already led to an increase of 1.25 Celsius.

Read more: https://au.news.yahoo.com/world-is-not-going-to-avoid-15-c-global-warming-tipping-point-researchers-warn-151259096.html

The abstract of the study;

Current global efforts are insufficient to limit warming to 1.5°C


23 Jun 2022
Vol 376, Issue 6600
pp. 1404-1409


Human activities have caused global temperatures to increase by 1.25°C, and the current emissions trajectory suggests that we will exceed 1.5°C in less than 10 years. Though the growth rate of global carbon dioxide emissions has slowed and many countries have strengthened their emissions targets, current midcentury net zero goals are insufficient to limit global warming to 1.5°C above preindustrial temperatures. The primary barriers to the achievement of a 1.5°C-compatible pathway are not geophysical but rather reflect inertia in our political and technological systems. Both political and corporate leadership are needed to overcome this inertia, supported by increased societal recognition of the need for system-level and individual lifestyle changes. The available evidence does not yet indicate that the world has seriously committed to achieving the 1.5°C goal.

Read more (paywalled): https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abo3378

I always find it amusing when doomsday predictions are paywalled, but I guess scientists have got to eat while they’re waiting for the end of the world.

The study claims 1.25C warming has already occurred, but look around you. Nothing bad has happened.

So now we’re expected to believe that extra 0.25 warming to reach 1.5C is going to make all the difference?

Given we have plentiful paleo evidence that periods much warmer than today were full of abundance and life, like the Eocene Thermal Maximum, during which our primate ancestors encountered such favourable conditions they spread across much of the planet, I’m not going to lose any sleep about the possibility of breaching 1.5C global warming.

5 26 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Alexy Scherbakoff
June 27, 2022 10:05 pm

Scientists don’t get money via paywalls. Publishers do.

Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
June 28, 2022 1:34 am

Fortune tellers always operated behind paywall, ever since Pythia of Delphi doorkeepers asked visitors to contribute monetary contribution on top of an animal sacrifice, which had to be cooked soon afterwards.

June 27, 2022 10:24 pm

So now that “global average temperature” can’t be contained to < 1.5C anyway, why don't we just drop the whole silly construct of a global average temperature, and let the whole global warming hoo-ha just die a natural death from lack of public interest?

Reply to  Mr.
June 27, 2022 10:36 pm

China will apparently begin to cooperate on lowering emissions after 2030.

Reply to  Dennis
June 27, 2022 11:53 pm

Yeah, right. Stoopid round eyes.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Dennis
June 28, 2022 4:08 am

Until 2030, when that “commitment” will be “reconsidered.”

Willem post
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
June 28, 2022 4:18 am

Because the new highly efficient, ultra-supercritical coal plants, with the latest air pollution control systems, will be on line to keep China (and India) competitive with the EU and US, and enhance their living standards

william Johnston
Reply to  Willem post
June 28, 2022 12:12 pm

“competitive with the EU and US”??? They will be kicking our posteriors soon. At least the US.

Reply to  Dennis
June 28, 2022 6:40 am

Yeah: reminds me of my in-laws. They were always telling us things such as that they had just helped one of their parents to buy a new car – it turned out that they had driven said parents to the showroom!

Allan MacRae
Reply to  Mr.
June 28, 2022 2:12 am

Earth started natural solar-driven global cooling circa 2016-2020 even as atmospheric CO2 continued to increase – just as we predicted in 2002. End of the phony global warming scare.

Time to hatch a new phony scare for the wolves to stampede the sheep. I’m thinking a phony pandemic, and then some costly and ineffective lockdowns, and some toxic and ineffective “vaccines”…

“You know how stupid the average person is, right? Well, half of them are stupider than that!”
– George Carlin

Regards, Allan MacRae

Allan MacRae
Reply to  Allan MacRae
June 28, 2022 10:45 am

Great News! We can go skiing at Sunshine this Canada Day, July 1, 2022 for the first time in 31 years. “Greens blame global warming.”G7 leaders confirm they are brain dead re biofuels. Their buffet tables are full so famine is not a problem.


Reply to  Mr.
June 28, 2022 2:17 am

We have dropped the Y2K, AIDS, no clear after Fukushima. COVID could be on the way out except that Monkeypox is not scary enough replace COVID
No way the AGW could be dropped as long as power and money could be made out of this subject. If AGW is dropped for one reason or another there will always be another topic to scare the people and induce anxiety on the young so they will behave like fanatics following the whims of the hypocrites but never questioning the hypocrisy. Never mind public interest, scientific method, facts and data, statistical analysis. It is the power and money that comes with the spin that counts.

What is next ? megavolcanic eruption and mass extinction? an asteroid hitting the earth? some dictator with a shaky hands over the doomsday bottom? another pandemic ? some aliens from outer space (H G Wells had it already but a rerun or sequel could do)? Artificial intelligence? robots taking over the world?

william Johnston
Reply to  eo
June 28, 2022 12:14 pm

We all need a belief. And I believe I will have another beer, please.

Joe Gordon
Reply to  william Johnston
June 28, 2022 1:15 pm

As long as you don’t reach your tippling point…

Reply to  eo
June 29, 2022 2:03 am

“some dictator with a shaky hands over the doomsday button?” ( assume you meant button in the post?)

anyway – I think we have that one up and running now…..

Reply to  Mr.
June 28, 2022 4:43 am

Can’t just let it go away like that – there is way too much money going to the right pockets to abandon the ruse on something as silly as facts and data…

Richard Page
Reply to  maarten
June 29, 2022 4:07 pm

Until they are made to stop just measuring the UHI they’ll keep the gravy train rolling along.

Reply to  Mr.
June 28, 2022 5:07 am

“…just die a natural death from lack of public interest?…”

Governments are VERY interested. They get to tax the air you breathe.

Stephen Lindsay-Yule
Reply to  Mr.
June 28, 2022 5:08 am

It’s contained at the same level of energy as the sun. Not 1°C or 1.5°C

June 27, 2022 10:30 pm

The Australian State of the Climate Report 2021 claims that Australia has warmed 1.44C +/- 0.24 C since BMO records began in 1910, essentially from the 1850-1900 baseline.
This compares with the WMO global warming figure for 2021 of 1.11C +/- 0.13C from the same baseline ( commonly quoted as 1C warming since 1900).
Now with further CO2 émissions accompanying the post-CoVid recovery may one assume that the Australian warming is on the upside of the figure quoted and Australia has already passed the dreaded 1.5C warming with no perceived adverse consequences?

Reply to  Herbert
June 27, 2022 10:38 pm

Ignoring weather data records earlier than 1910 by the Bureau of Meteorology.

See reports by Dr Jennifer Marohasy and colleagues who have researched and reported on BoM climate modelling and reporting.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 27, 2022 10:47 pm

Try Tasmania.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 28, 2022 12:33 am

Bring a good coat. Summer is between February 3 and 6.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 28, 2022 5:38 am

What summer, we didn’t have one in the last two years.

Reply to  R_G
June 28, 2022 8:18 am

You blinked and missed it.

alastair gray
Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 27, 2022 10:56 pm

Never mind . Get used to it in Australian winter and then come to Britain in November where it will be bracing with blackouts and no gas for heating. WE will be merrily gathering around bonfires of old pallets in oil drums and singing green hymns

Reply to  alastair gray
June 27, 2022 11:17 pm

bonfires of old pallets in oil drums and singing green hymns

If this is your back-up plan then you need to think of another. There is a global shortage of pallets:

A whole host of issues, including natural disasters, the Covid pandemic and the conflict in Ukraine, have combined into a “perfect storm” that has created a shortage of shipping pallets, both nationally and worldwide. 


another ian
Reply to  RickWill
June 28, 2022 2:39 am

The shortage is due to their stockpiling for burning?

Reply to  RickWill
June 28, 2022 6:10 am

How’s the 2×4 or plywood supply?

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Steve Clough
June 28, 2022 7:20 am

All prepared wood today is too expensive to buy to just burn it. Illegal logging is the only way to go.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 28, 2022 1:00 am

A real big bucket, a couple of chep bins more like it

Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 28, 2022 2:55 am

Don’t dismiss it so light-ly, you even could make few bob to buy a pressie or two for yours back home.
comment image

Reply to  alastair gray
June 28, 2022 12:01 am

Will a Druid shaman be leading the ceremony?

Reply to  alastair gray
June 28, 2022 12:47 am

A petrol generator is useful.

Reply to  HotScot
June 28, 2022 2:33 am

If we had a generator, we could keep warm, if we had some petrol.

Rich Davis
Reply to  H.R.
June 28, 2022 4:27 am

If only we could afford any

Old Man Winter
Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 28, 2022 12:22 am

Be careful what you wish for. They told us that global cooling you’re feeling may have been
caused by global warming! 😉

June 27, 2022 10:34 pm

The full paper is here

Reply to  Redge
June 27, 2022 11:38 pm

Yes. Thank you. Not so easy to quickly understand and appreciate all the data presented.
Will take some time to read and understand what is presented.
At least reading it a few times I am trying to understand this article.

June 27, 2022 10:34 pm

Join the dots:

* UN Lima Protocol 1975 agreeing to transfer of manufacturing industry to developing nations, like China.

*UN Kyoto Protocol 1992 to lower “greenhouse gas emissions”.

*UN Agenda 21 – Sustainability 1992

*UN Paris Agreement to lower emissions, emphasis Carbon Dioxide 2015

June 27, 2022 10:42 pm

Every time you see “1.5 degrees since the start of the industrial age”, replace it with “1 degree since the end of the Little Ice Age”.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
June 27, 2022 11:54 pm

Or natural recovery from the LIA, when many people starved..

Rich Davis
Reply to  DMacKenzie
June 28, 2022 4:45 am

There’s an 8C range of forecasted high temperatures in the 10-day forecast for my town. The smallest range of daily low to high is 9C. and these numbnuts are worried about 1.5 degrees rise over 175 years?

We experience at least 6 times the temperature change every 24 hours. How could we ever adapt to a further quarter degree increase?

Reply to  DMacKenzie
June 28, 2022 4:52 am

It seems that blaming 100% of any warming on humans is a social construct.

Tom Gelsthorpe
Reply to  Scissor
June 28, 2022 10:04 am

Sin! Sin! It’s a new religion revolving around sin.

June 27, 2022 10:46 pm

The trend in aggregated non-CO2 forcing (the effect on climate that is caused by all other greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions) plotted in Fig. 2b shows a less clear tendency towards any particular future emissions scenario. There is some indication again here that the highest emission scenario (SSP5-8.5) is the least consistent with observed forcing trends since 2015.

So, climastrologists and the Misleadia, why use 8.5 to offer up scary scenarios?

(It’s a rhetorical question)

Reply to  Redge
June 28, 2022 5:23 am

What would they do without RCP8.5?

Reply to  fretslider
June 28, 2022 5:40 am

Tell the truth?

Reply to  Redge
June 28, 2022 5:51 am

I admire your optimism/sarcasm.

Reply to  fretslider
June 28, 2022 5:55 am

Definitely not optimism, mate

Reply to  Redge
June 28, 2022 6:24 am

Then I still had it covered.

Coeur de Lion
June 27, 2022 10:51 pm

We don’t know what the temperature was in 1850 with its error bars an’ all. Fatuous.

June 27, 2022 11:02 pm

Is this “tipping point” something to do with Catastrophe Theory ?

June 27, 2022 11:11 pm

The study claims 1.25C warming has already occurred, but look around you. Nothing bad has happened.

The claim is based on fiddled data.

Possibly the most important region on the globe with regard weather has cooled during the satellite era despite the flawed predictions from climate models forecasting the physically impossible of ocean surfaces sustaining more than 30C.

June 27, 2022 11:22 pm

Human activities have caused global temperatures to increase by 1.25°C

No. Not according to the Berkeley Earth Land + Ocean data. More like 1.1° C. And that took over a century. Extrapolating the current (42-year) trend measured by satellites of 1.3° C per century, we’d be lucky to warm another 0.4° C in the next 28 years. I’m not sure we’re even going to get there. And that’s with almost the entire planet doing nothing meaningful to reduce CO2 emissions despite all the incessant bleating of the climate alarmist sheep and their useful idiots in government.

Reply to  stinkerp
June 27, 2022 11:40 pm

In fact all the widely used long term measured temperature datasets, HadCRUT, NASA GISTEMP, and Berkeley Earth show about 1 to 1.1 C warming since the late 1800’s. Where did they pull 1.25° from? Their donkeys? Adding another 0.364° C to that (0.28 x 1.3° per hundred years) gets us to 1.464 by 2050, while doing essentially nothing to reduce CO2 emissions, which continue to increase.

Reply to  stinkerp
June 27, 2022 11:56 pm

Thank gawd that extra CO2 is greening the planet, we need the food.

Reply to  stinkerp
June 28, 2022 1:03 am

Take out the urban heat islands and rerun your numbers

Reply to  H B
June 28, 2022 8:33 am

Yes, indeed. I read somewhere that they adjust for UHI. There is a lot of data manipulation to adjust for gaps in data, instrument errors, etc. The UHI adjustments are probably no more than educated guesses. It seems evident from the fact that we are no longer in the Little Ice Age and most glaciers around the world are losing mass (not all, though) that there has been some warming. The datasets I mentioned are attempts to quantify how much but they are fraught with problems as are the more recent global satellite measurements, UAH and RSS. Dr. Spencer has done a fantastic job of explaining the adjustments they apply to produce UAH, and why they do it, to keep the process transparent. I think it’s probably the more accurate of the two. It shows little to no warming since the big El Niño of 1998.


Mark BLR
Reply to  stinkerp
June 28, 2022 7:08 am

Not according to the Berkeley Earth Land + Ocean data.

Slightly off-topic, but …

The last time I was able to access it (the end of May) BEST’s “Land + Ocean (since 1850)” dataset had not been updated past December 2021.

Although they claimed to be “waiting for HadSST4 to be updated”, HadSST4 has been available to (at least ?) April 2022 for a while now.

My latest attempts to check on “progress” at my original link [ http://berkeleyearth.org/data ] have started returning “Error establishing a database connection” messages.

Does anybody have an idea what’s going on there (at BEST HQ), or where they may have relocated their dataset(s) ?

Reply to  Mark BLR
June 28, 2022 8:17 am

I saw the same thing. Still not working today.

Reply to  Mark BLR
June 28, 2022 8:25 am

The biggest problem with BEST was that they threw out any dataset that didn’t match the curve they were looking to prove.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  MarkW
June 28, 2022 12:35 pm

And their second biggest problem was assuming that the measurement device resolution was the uncertainty in a temperature measurement.

Reply to  Tim Gorman
June 28, 2022 1:25 pm

They also assume that all the areas that aren’t being measured match the temperature of the place being measured, to the resolution of the sensor.

June 28, 2022 12:03 am

“Human activities have caused global temperatures to increase by 1.25°C”

No they haven’t


June 28, 2022 12:08 am

To meet the goal, emissions will have to fall 43% by 2030.

Currently the world does about 36 billion tons, of which China does 12 (source IEA).


They will have to fall, on this account, to 21 billion. By 2030 China will be doing around 15 billion, maybe more. India is now doing about 2.5 billion, and will probably get to 5 billion by 2030. Those two alone will be doing almost all the emitting that the paper thinks is allowable. And then there’s Russia…

Obviously 21 billion by 2030 is not going to happen. And as for Net Zero 2050 – what do you think China and India are going to do after 2030?

This is pure fantasy. Even if you believe that reducing emissions have any great effect on temperatures. Which I doubt, never having seen any series in which a fall in global temperatures was preceded by a fall in CO2 ppm. Another story.

June 28, 2022 12:27 am

Don’t know that global temperature is very meaningful. Seems to me that it is like measuring the temperature in your kitchen by averaging the temperature of your fridge and your oven.

Reply to  tmatsi
June 28, 2022 4:50 am

Averaging an intensive property like temperature is physically meaningless.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  tmatsi
June 28, 2022 4:54 am

Climate is determined by the entire temperature profile at a location. That gets lost when they use the mid-point temp, (max+min)/2, to describe a daily temperature. Lots of different max/min combination can give the same mid-point temp, meaning different climates. They then average the mid-pt temps losing even more data in order to get monthly average temps. They then average those to get annual average temps. To make it even worse they then use all those annual temps to create an “average baseline” they use to create anomalies! Those anomalies are then averaged to get an “global average temp” change.

The GAT is useless. It describes nothing related to reality. It’s not even a good metric. It certainly doesn’t describe a “global climate”.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Tim Gorman
June 28, 2022 5:17 am

Plus they fool themselves into thinking the first digit after the decimal point is meaningful.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
June 28, 2022 12:25 pm

So many of the early temperatures wee recorded to the units digit that trying to extend that to he tenths or hundredths digit is a fools errand. Averaging does *NOT* increase resolution which would be needed to use the tenths or hundredths digit as a significant digit.

Reply to  Tim Gorman
June 28, 2022 1:28 pm

They also only took two readings, daily high and daily low.
Only if temperature followed a perfect sine wave could you use high and low to calculate a daily average.

Reply to  Tim Gorman
June 28, 2022 7:27 am

Yes, GAT is as useless a crunching of random fleeting numbers as would be tallying the average volume of p1ss each person in the world does every day.

Joel O’Bryan
June 28, 2022 12:32 am

That Warms my heart by at least 1.5C.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
June 28, 2022 1:31 am

That would definitely be dangerous, however.

June 28, 2022 12:53 am

Whatever’s causing it, mankind’s puny contribution to atmospheric CO2 isn’t enough to do anything but raise global temperatures by ~0.0001°C per year for ~25,000 years, to raise temperatures by 2ºC.

Always assuming CO2 is the problem.

June 28, 2022 1:37 am

Off-topic, disturbing story:

However, stories of electric devices catching fire while charging are still a concern, especially with an e-bike’s battery causing a fire to break out in a London flat recently. So far this year, the London Fire Brigade has attended 56 fires involving lithium-ion batteries, 32 of which were e-bikes and seven were e-scooters.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/features/e-scooters-bikes-may-pose-fire-risk-dont-follow-rules/ [payall]

At least cars are mostly outside (though in garages they will be a potential problem). But bikes and scooters are almost always going to be kept indoors in city apartments.

another ian
Reply to  michel
June 28, 2022 2:47 am

Cadillac’s soon to be $300,000 Celestiq EV.

A mid range EV –

Mid range fire spectacle – somewhere between a Tesla and a bus

Reply to  another ian
June 28, 2022 4:53 am

Lithium battery fires are no joke.


Reply to  Graemethecat
June 28, 2022 6:24 am

No they aren’t a joke. And I don’t see folks here making them a joke.
There is NO joke. There are numerous, dangerously spit and polish researches into various, all equally dangerous bettery chemistries. Putting electronic(failure prone) minimal checks does little to reduce fire risks.

The biggest risk is trying to run the world using batteries instead of much more efficent direct generation.

June 28, 2022 3:57 am

Well they’re working on changing the climate starting off between 4.30 to 6.30 PM-
National Grid will pay households to shift electricity use to avoid blackouts (msn.com)
You have to ease the masses into global cooling.

Reply to  observa
June 28, 2022 6:27 am

Why the he!! try and cool the earth. It’s already barely above an effective long term temperature, at least as far s humankind goes.

Peta of Newark
June 28, 2022 4:00 am

Quote:”So we can stop worrying and enjoy life now, right?

A lovely sentiment we can all agree with and hope for but this simply a rallying call in (yet) another Government War on ‘something’

Like wars on drugs, on pron, on cancer, on obesity.
They never get anywhere and drag on for decades costing ever more time and money.
Not least of course because the Foot Soldiers in these ‘wars’ don’t want the war to ever end.
Else they’d be out of a job. And cushy offices, above average pay, guaranteed work (for life) and a comfy retirement funded by everyone else
Nice work eh

Thus what we have here, A cry for more research, more money, more time & people to be squandered out on the prairies of trivia & irrelevance and digging ever deeper mines of minutia.
And folks with nothing better to do than polish their own knobs will pore over these mountains of rocks in search of miniscule diamonds of truth and relevance.
While the paymasters and employers ## of these miner puppets will reward them with ever more international conferences, swanky offices and laboratories, jobs-for-life and solid gold pensions
## That’s us btw: Taxpayers

There is only really One Hope.
It’s called Vladimir

(Understand now the ever increasing frenzy to get Get Him Stopped?
… because otherwise he is going to put a stop on their Gravy Train)

Iain Russell
Reply to  Peta of Newark
June 28, 2022 6:25 am

Knob polishing… extremely important!

Dave Fair
Reply to  Iain Russell
June 28, 2022 10:41 am

Its now called “Toobin.” You know, along with “The Lewinsky.”

June 28, 2022 4:01 am

“Human activities have caused global temperatures to increase by 1.25°C, and the current emissions trajectory suggests that we will exceed 1.5°C in less than 10 years.”

Human activities didn’t cause a 1.25°C temperature increase, the sun did. The current emissions trajectory is a meaningless abstraction with no influence on climate changes.

comment image

In my 2018 AGU poster, I projected a solar warming period for this solar cycle, where the likelihood of hitting the 1.5°C ‘limit’ will be greatest within a year or so after the maximum, see Fig. 14c, third panel, especially since SC25 is now confirmed to exceed SC24. The start of SC25 in Fig. 14 below was 5 months early, so I now expect the 1.5°C limit to be exceeded by ~2028, within about six years from now. Their battle is doomed.

comment image

Louis Hunt
June 28, 2022 4:32 am

“A rise of 1.5 Celsius is considered important, because above that level and there will be more heatwaves, extreme weather events, droughts and greater economic losses.”

Why do they keep claiming that we are already experiencing more heatwaves, extreme weather events, etc. if those things are not supposed to happen until the 1.5 Celsius benchmark has been reached? Have they been lying to us?

Reply to  Louis Hunt
June 28, 2022 5:09 am

Yes. Didn’t you know?

Reply to  Louis Hunt
June 28, 2022 6:33 am

Right now solariasts are chortling over a successful prediction of the current double warm cycle from the sun. That is projected(historically) on past double positive solar cycles.

Bruce Cobb
June 28, 2022 4:39 am

Human activities have caused global temperatures to increase by 1.25°C…

Bull puckey, and deliberately vague as well. Mankind is responsible for UHI, which is only responsible for skewing the temperature record upward, and for helping people believe the warmists claims. But it hasn’t and cannot raise global temperatures by any measurable amount, which even the alarmists know, but are disingenuous enough to allow people to believe otherwise.

June 28, 2022 4:57 am

But bad stuff HAS happened! Didn’t you get the memo, Eric — every windstorm, every drought, every wet period, every flood, every heat wave, and every cold wave, they’re all the fault of 1.25 deg C of warming experienced over the past 172 years. In fact, before 1850, our world was a paradise, with no weather occurring whatsoever. And then WHAM! On January 1, 1851, the entire world instantaneously went to hell in a climate handbasket, and for the first time in geohistory, bad weather was invented.

Reply to  Duane
June 28, 2022 6:33 am


Carlo, Monte
June 28, 2022 5:09 am

These people should be sacked and their academic credentials revoked.

John Bell
June 28, 2022 5:53 am

Willis E. showed that it has already gone to 2.0 C and no problems, in fact good greening. I am not worried in the least.

David Dibbell
June 28, 2022 5:58 am

Good news from the abstract: “The available evidence does not yet indicate that the world has seriously committed to achieving the 1.5°C goal.”

And even if it wanted to, “the world” is powerless to do any such thing. Natural trends and cycles may push temperatures higher than that before it cools off again. No one knows for sure. But we have good evidence that non-condensing GHGs are not capable of driving the climate to a bad outcome. So let’s hope “the world” never seriously commits to what it cannot possibly achieve.

June 28, 2022 5:59 am

Last night, June 27th into the 28th, the overnight low was 47F (8C). The coming week is forecast decidedly cool in the Central Great Lakes region. A week after the summer solstice. The entire spring was cold. Planting of staple crops was delayed by weeks. I’m no statistician, but that would be in the range of cool normal in the real world I grew up in. But, is it in that same range of normal, or even possible in a “catastrophically warming planet” ? I think not. Will it be an issue in the media? I think not.

June 28, 2022 6:14 am

Under the CURRENT STRATEGY of the IPCC, net zero by 2050 cannot be achieved. It requires the inventions of new technologies which simply cannot be placed on any time schedule. These inventions include batteries made from materials that can be found in sufficient quantities from present resources, efficient carbon DIOXIDE capture and storage methods of long-term duration, fast charging technology, sufficient electrical generation and distribution systems, and more.

There are several technologies that might help achieve this but are now either discouraged or even forbidden. These include large scale construction of nuclear power plants, development of small scale dispatchable nuclear power, vast increases in rare earth mineral and copper mining and processing, Increased hydro power generation, and more as well.

The fact that the Warmists are not advocating any of this and are wasting vast resources on wind and solar power shows that they are not serious about meeting their own targets.

June 28, 2022 8:06 am

According to them, the world is going to warm up by a few tenths of a degree over the next 30 years, and this is supposed to be some form of catastrophe.

June 28, 2022 8:08 am

A rise of 1.5 Celsius is considered important, because above that level and there will be more heatwaves, extreme weather events, droughts and greater economic losses.

An increase of 1.25C since the bottom of the Little Ice Age has had no bad results. However a further 0.25C warming is gonna kill us all.

Human activities have caused global temperatures to increase by 1.25°C,

Are they actually trying to claim that 100% of the warming since the bottom of the LIA is due to human activity?
Of course CO2 didn’t rise in a significant amount until after most of that 1.25C increase had already occurred.

Gunga Din
June 28, 2022 8:19 am

Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow (+/- 12 years) we’re fried!

AGW is Not Science
June 28, 2022 1:51 pm


Battle?! What battle?!

Limiting warming to 1.5 degrees higher than the coldest period during modern civilization is only a “goal” to climate cultists. It’s a number somebody pulled out of their sphincter.

It took 100 years for the temperature to go up about 1 degree, and now they think they’ll see 50% of that in less than 30 years?! Don’t make me laugh any harder! Even if you believe CO2 to be the “driver” of anything, you would get less and less of an effect (purely hypothetically) as the levels climb.

This is what happens when so-called ‘scientists’ disregard all the inconvenient history they don’t like. THERE ARE NO ‘TIPPING POINTS.’ If 7000ppm didn’t do it, 400-something won’t either.

Reply to  AGW is Not Science
June 28, 2022 4:03 pm

you are 100 percent correct

Paul Hurley (aka PaulH)
June 28, 2022 4:44 pm

Wait… they’re calling it “global warming” again?

Andy Pattullo
June 29, 2022 9:41 am

As there are no reported objective findings in the abstract to support the politically convenient conclusions, I will just assume the remainder of the paper is equally devoid of scientific enterprise.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights