Essay by Eric Worrall
Like a bad slasher movie which dissipates its original promise with one lousy sequel too many.
Global warming set to break key 1.5C limit for first time
By Matt McGrath
Environment correspondent
Our overheating world is likely to break a key temperature limit for the first time over the next few years, scientists predict.
Researchers say there’s now a 66% chance we will pass the 1.5C global warming threshold between now and 2027.
The chances are rising due to emissions from human activities and a likely El Niño weather pattern later this year.
If the world passes the limit, scientists stress the breach, while worrying, will likely be temporary.
…
Going over 1.5C every year for a decade or two would see far greater impacts of warming, such as longer heatwaves, more intense storms and wildfires.
But passing the level in one of the next few years would not mean that the Paris limit had been broken. Scientists say there is still time to restrict global warming by cutting emissions sharply.
…
Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-65602293
What are they going to do, when the limit is breached, and nothing unusually bad happens?
The reality is, they set the limit too low for proper dramatic effect. They needed an imminent target, so people didn’t get bored waiting, but now the limit is upon us, their predictions of the consequences have gone all vague and diffuse.
“longer heatwaves, more intense storms and wildfires” – this is the best they have to show, for all the billions spent on climate research? We could all save so much money: a few dollars given to a carnival fortune teller could provide us with that level of predictive skill.
Perhaps before spinning their 1.5C narrative, they should have read some advice from legendary horror fiction author Stephen King (from Danse Macabre):
… The artistic work of horror is almost always a disappointment. It is the classic no-win situation. You can scare people with the unknown for a long, long time, but sooner or later, as in poker, you have to turn your down cards up. You have to open the door and show the audience what’s behind it. …
Stephen King is a Democrat voting climate alarmist left wing liberal, but surely even he must be having some concerns about the quality of the green narrative. My prediction, sooner or later the great author will recognise the global warming scare for what it really is – poorly constructed, low quality horror fiction.
Heat waves are, by definition, a period of time where temperatures exceed a certain amount above the average temperature of an area.
If the world gets warmer, then the average temperature for a given region will also get warmer.
So by definition, if the heat wave also goes up by the same amount, then the heat wave will, by their own definition, not be more intense.
And to think, these clowns actually believe that they know something about climate.
BTW, regarding storms and fires. By their own declaration, we have almost reached the magic 1.5 degree increase, and we are still waiting for these prophesied bigger storms and fires. Well where are they, are you going to claim that the last 1 or 2 hundredths of a degree will magically make them start appearing?
As a further aside, most of that 1.5C warming occurred long before CO2 levels started rising dramatically.
Of course if the warming is 60% data manipulation, there will be almost no perceived effect except more hype until the CACC people are properly tarred, feathered, and runout of town on a rail!
Data manipulation and corrupted temperature stations. Nobody really knows what the actual temperature record outside of built-up urban areas because there are few stations there. If the data from balloons and satellites is to be considered then we may have entered a cooling period already.
The Phoenix Arizona of my childhood in the 60s is cooler that the Phoenix I see today. I don’t have to look at global warming to explain what might be happening. The population is 5 or 6 times greater resulting in an urban effect. The 60s seemed to be a cool snap as because over a few years, we had multiple nights in the winter that dropped below freezing. The cooler nights were also tied to more and longer rainstorms indicating a shift in the jet stream. Another factor is evaporative coolers. Air conditioners weren’t big so everybody used coolers. Because they need to exchange the air in the house once every minute or two, everybody left their window open pouring water cooled air outside. Fortunately theft wasn’t common so the open windows weren’t an invitation to give away everything you owed.
Maybe the climate has warmed a little but there are other changes that need to be included in the picture.
Here in Colorado, I had to turn on a space heater last night because of the cold weather. This is unusual for so late in the season. On the plus side, spring skiing will go into summer.
https://www.arapahoebasin.com/the-mountain/webcams/
Here in Cassis, France, close to the Mediterranean, the maximum temperatures scarcely are reaching 16-17°C and less than 10°C in the night.
My wife asked me to re-start the boiler I stopped one month ago, but I feign being deaf…
Planting ocotillo underneath open windows is always a good deterrent.
As far as I can see, logic and maths have no place in this discussion.
People will panic when they are told to by the mass media. A lack of heat waves and forest fires is irrelevant.
We recall that it was two degrees at Paris until the alarmists realised it was too easy and we’d be under it anyway. So hence Special Report 1.5 from the IPCC – entirely arbitrary and just in time for the failed Katowice COP. Much excoriated as a political instrument and not scientific. I have read much of it. Have you? It’s awful . How can grown ups believe this stuff?
And now, what are they going to do when 1.5 degrees is reached?
Plead for nuclear? I don’t think so, looking at Germany.
Germany will wake up once it’s prized industries start leaving en masse.
…And as soon as they will realize they are obliged to purchase a lot of french nuclear electricity every year.
Germany’s Federal Network Agency Plans To Ration Electricity As Electric Power Crisis Heightens
How can adults believe in Adam and Eve and Noah’s Arc? Amazingly, some do.
Where did he keep his Arc in the Ark with all those critters everwhere?
He didn’t have electricity. How would he strike the arc?
I had in mind something along the lines of Arc de Triomphe
Or should I say Arche de Triomphe?
Actually i don’t care about Adam..
but I do believe in Eve, very much so.. She is here with me and not going anywhere.
I did ask her about wearing fig leaf and got told the fig leaves were old testament. 😀 😀
Actually she looks much better than the silly pictures.
So you are among those that will make no claim to being endowed with certain unalienable rights from a Creator.
it all depends on how you define Creator- not that I want to get into a theological discussion- other than to say Creationism is a weak theory
The story exist in other cultures and religions including the American Indians. The flood might have been local, the size of the boat might be much smaller and the number of animals more limited but it appears there is something to the story. Because it existed as word of mouth for a long time, there was probably some embellishment before it was recorded.
My view of the bible is not so much the stores but the wisdom behind the stories. If the advice is good, I accept it no matter what the source is. Bad advice is plentiful and best ignored.
Noah’s Arc? Was that the rainbow they saw after they left the Ark?
The 2C “limit” is just as arbitrary as the 1.5C limit. The switch occurred when they realized the planet was unlikely to ever reach the 2C limit. Even with the data manipulation.
I was at a political meeting last night making a point that needed to be made about solar energy sites to a local Tory MP. This MP is central to the current government’s ‘Climate Change’ policies.
I was raising the concern about industrialising prime agricultural land here in the UK at 52.4 north latitude. His response was. The plan is to increase the UK solar arrays from 14GW current capacity to 70 GW over the coming years. That is needed to meet Net Zero commitments promoted by the Tory Party . He felt using land designated B3 or lower (agricultural grading) was reasonable, pointing out, the increase in solar area would still be less land than the space taken up by golf courses in the UK.
My obvious response being, golf courses are far more attractive to wildlife and the countryside in general, than solar panels are. Not one to miss his opportunity, the MP quickly replied a recent biodiversity study at a solar site in Cornwall had shown it to be the most diverse nature site in the county. This was due to the grass being allowed to grow longer around the panels, apparently??.
That sadly is the level of lunacy now in active play, here in the UK energy sector.
That MPs logic suggests, get more biodiversity, just carpet the farmlands in the UK with solar panels. Who needs trees anyway?
I saw a similar report on a local, to me, retired mechnical engineer (i think that was what he was) who is now a beekeeper. He claimed that his highest yielding hives were close to a solar array. No data on by how much. But it doesn’t seem unreasonable. A very large area with a perimeter that’s not touched or perhaps even grazed The area around the panels is presumably also left largely alone apart from cutting down brambles.
The annual production of all hives, majority just not solar panel, was 3 tonnes about 7,500 400gram jars.
This seems to be one of the environmentalists pushbacks when questioned about the loss of land. Well there’s more wildlife and insects. Yes but will that feed us,and keep us warm?
It’s the same rationale as “carbon taxes increase economic prosperity “.
But if that were the case in reality, all a government would have to do to provide untold prosperity to all citizens is levy 100% taxes on them.
They are working on the 100% taxation idea. Our current Tory administration already hold the record for the highest level of taxation in peace time….
Back in the 50’s and 60’s, the US Federal tax rate topped out at 90%.
A lot of liberals point to how much better the US economy was back then, and they want to go back to those kinds of tax rates.
Of course they completely ignore all the other differences in the world between now and then.
During the 50’s, most of the 1st world was rebuilding from the devastation of WWII. The US had one of the few 1st world economies that was still functional.
So of course we dominated the world’s economy for a decade or so.
Another point was that the cut in point for that 90% rate was so high that only a dozen or so people hit it every year.
Don’t mock it, there are a lot of socialists who believe that the more money you give to government, the more perfect society becomes.
A lot of them would love the idea of setting tax rates at 100% for everybody.
From everybody according to their ability, to everyone according to their need.
The odd thing is regardless of income, most of them believe their’s is the appropriate level of income, so they shouldn’t contribute to others.
I’ve seen multiple surveys regarding charitable contributions.
Every one of them has found that conservatives give much more to charity than do leftists.
So it appears that leftists are only charitable with other people’s money.
“longer heatwaves, more intense storms and wildfires”
After 3 wet years, we should get some pretty good fires again over the next couple of summers if the hazard reduction measures are neglected or blocked to the usual extent.
Bound to happen.
I believe they are deliberately trying to create a situation that will allow massive fires to occur. After which they will proclaim that the large fires must have been caused by global warming.
It’s far more complicated than that, but the end result is large, devastating fires in Eucalypt forests which were formerly a managed fire ecology.
The cause of the large forest fires, and the measures required to prevent them, have been known for over a century, and reiterated with monotonous regularity.
Unfortunately, there are policy incompatibilities which seem to prevent these preventative measures continuing in the medium term.
Along with that, the big fires tend to occur sufficiently infrequently that too many people relax their vigilance. Similar things happen with major floods
and here it is people (what I’ve raved about since forever as the root cause of this) Chronic Depression
Quote:“Britain is at risk of talking itself into economic decline because of a growing sense of “insidious” and “corrosive” negativity, Jeremy Hunt has warned.
Moggy is also on the case, in his inimitable way.
Britain is not the only place doing so, as we all know.
Telegraph 19th May
Attached is another reason for what’s going on – everywhere around us.
Although, are folks using the stuff:
to escape ‘The Scream’?or is it the cause of The Scream?But = Not Good either way is it – it really stuff that makes Zombies
Just how much of that shyte does the average US citizen get through every day?
Add that onto the story I pointed to about Botox destroying your nervous system,
Other nerve poisons being:
Ethyl Alcohol (also wood alcohol)Vitamin B deficiency (esp B12 and Folate)Sugar and smoking (in combination with Vitamin C deficiency)Laughing gasAny and all Organa-Phosphorus compoundsPyrethroids, natural and syntheticCannabisLead, Aluminium Mercury (petrol, vaccines dentistry)Myriad stuff created by moulds, fungi and yeasts<add your own>
This is an absolute beauty – if you see beauty in Beasts – where’s that King joker on this…
It came from something that puzzled me for a very long time – about how (human) sewage sludge contained soooo much of a particular heavy metal poison.
I just wondered: How the hell did that get there and in such quantity?
(I came to know because, as a farmer, sewage sludge was always being offered to farmers, for free, as some sort of fertiliser)
Here goes: Some while ago, the media, science and Government went delirious about using plants to clean up polluted ‘brown-field‘ sites within and around the towns and cities.
i.e. Where polluting and dirty factories had been, where they were no more and where planners/speculators wanted the land to build houses on.
Seemingly, certain plants have an affinity for certain (toxic heavy) metals and if you grew these plants on your BrownField, they’d suck up the pollution.
Then you would ‘harvest’ the plants, take them away and……
Bingo: BrownField becomes= GreenField
so far so good
It seems that, if your BrownField had been poisoned with, or simply contained any amount of Cadmium, this is the beauty bit, there are 2 particular plants you might choose to selectively remove the Cadmium:
Namely:
TriticumOryza SativaBut what happens if your BrownField wasn’t a Brownfield at all – what if it was is an OrdinaryFarmersField?
How do the plants ‘know’ which field they’re in?
And that is how so much Cadmium comes to be in Human Poo – not because so many people were cheerfully pushing cart-loads of old batteries into their toilets.
go figure, or scream as you deem appropriate
It’s a funny thing is Science – how such random and disparate things, in both time and space, suddenly ‘gel’
Using plants can make soils improve, but then the plants become the problem
So now in addition to your “sugars” wheat (triticum) and rice (oryza), we must add paracetamol to your syllabus of errors?
If I have been paying close enough attention, your diet consists of lard and butter on bacon (mind the excess protein!) with scads of vitamin capsules. All washed down with water (or maybe heavy cream?). Is that about right?
Looks good to me.
Well, apart from the vitamin capsules.
I was reading about a study a few weeks ago that found that conservatives were on average a lot happier and a lot more optimistic about life in general, than were liberals.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/conservative-teenagers-are-generally-happier-than-their-liberal-peers-study-finds/ar-AA1b8zs0
From the article
If the heating is global why are we being left out?
“””When will the weather get warmer? Why it’s so cold in the UK and latest Met Office forecast for May 2023”””
https://inews.co.uk/news/weather-when-get-warmer-why-cold-uk-may-2023-met-office-forecast-2301390
“If the heating is global why are we being left out?”
Yeah, why has the United States been in a temperature decline since the 1930’s, if CO2 is heating things up?
Only it hasn’t.
After MANIC adjustment., fudging,
Leaving a farce that is totally unrelated to anything remotely REAL. !
Reality is like this…
That’s the problem with you hand wavers. You cry foul but you can’t actually say where the specific foul is? And you might have a point if the data sets varied widely but they are pretty much in agreement.
LOL, After so much “adjustment”, infilling, urban stations and airports.
You KNOW that graph is TOTALLY FAKED, don’t you.!
Admit to that, at least.
Or more likely like this..
Re: “Only it hasn’t”
I suggest you look at the US Climate Reference Network – US Surface Temperature anomaly chart.
Temperatures in the USA have been flat to slightly down for the last 17 years.
Global Temperature: – Watts Up With That?
It’s a miserable 16c overcast day here in Connecticut. You know, on the brink of a UK heat wave.
Update: it’s raining. Now it’s perfect.
Well, let’s see. The highest temperature in the satellite era (1979 to present) was 2016, which was 0.1C warmer than 1998.
NOAA claims that 2016 reached a temperature level of 1.1C above the NOAA average since the end of the Little Ice Age.
So this most recent claim that we will reach 1.5C above the NOAA average by 2027 means that we will be 0.4C warmer than 2016. I’m skeptical this is going to happen.
Currently, the temperatures are 0.6C above NOAA’s average, so we have a ways to go to reach 1.5C.
And, Hansen said 1934 was 0.5C warmer than 1998, so, at least in the United States, we have been here at the 1.5C “tipping point threshold” before, and we’re still here. Fancy that.
Leftists are upset that the world has warmed up since the end of the Little Ice Age.
No Mark, they are concerned, particularly so given there is no good reason why we have warmed. If you have one let’s hear it.
Here’s a good reason why we warmed: Mother Nature/Natural Variability.
Notice on the Phil Jones created chart below that Phil show three periods when temperatures warmed at a simliar magnitude.
There was much less CO2 in the air during the first two warming periods, yet the warming magnitufe is the same for all three periods, so something other than CO2 is driving these temperatures. Do you still think CO2 has much to do with warming?
Are you taking to position that unless someone comes up with an explanation that you are willing to accept, then everyone most accept your explanation that CO2 is the cause?
We know that the world has both warmed and cooled over and over again over it’s history. The vast majority of these we can’t explain.
What caused the Minoan, Egyptian, Roman and Medieval warm periods?
What caused the Holocene Optimum?
All of these were warmer than present, and none of them could have been caused by CO2.
Why must I assume that the modern warm period is not being caused by the same thing that caused these other warm periods?
“Are you taking to position that unless someone comes up with an explanation that you are willing to accept, then everyone most accept your explanation that CO2 is the cause?”
No.
“We know that the world has both warmed and cooled over and over again over it’s history. The vast majority of these we can’t explain.
If you say so. But…. a big chuck of it we do understand. And those factors are not in play at this point.
Actually it is what you are saying, it’s just that you are either not man enough, or not smart enough to realize it.
What are those alleged factors? If you say Milenchovic, then you are merely demonstrating how little you actually know about this subject.
Your claim that we know most of the factors that caused the previous warm periods is little more than another of your pathetic lies.
They routinely lower past temperatures, so we can pass 1.5C even if it’s cooling.
Good point! 🙂
“Hansen said 1934 was 0.5C warmer than 1998″
If that is True Tom then I’d like to see a quote for that? Do you have one?
Tom are you there?
Never fear, Simon, I’m here. With your answers.
Here you go Simon. Here’s what James Hansen said about 1934 in ocmparison to today. Notice Hansen’s lame excuse for why the U.S. temperature profile is different from the global “temperature” profile. Hansen must think the rest of us are idiots. Notice also that this link is to the Wayback Machine because NASA, for some reason, decided to delete this page from their website. I wonder why?
https://web.archive.org/web/20050112211708/http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/
And of course, there is the U.S. temperature chart created by James Hansen (Hansen 1999) that clearly shows 1934 as being 0.5C warmer than 1998, and also, in the climategate emails, a colleague of Hansen’s says his records also show 1934 as being 0.5C warmer than 1998.
Tom your link was published in 1999. That is a very long time ago and a lot has happened since. Your link also did not back up your statement that “Hansen said 1934 was 0.5C warmer than 1998″… or if it did, I couldn’t find it.
It did however offer some specific insight into why the US (to that point) had not warmed like the rest of the planet…..
“…suggests that the U.S. cooling is associated, at least in part, with cooling in the North Atlantic Ocean. Climate model simulations tend to confirm this, yielding cooling in the U.S. during the past 50 years when driven by observed ocean temperatures”
And…
“However, North Atlantic cooling is also a predicted consequence of the transient growth of greenhouse gases. Climate models (Manabe and Stouffer, 1995; Russell and Rind, 1999) driven by increasing greenhouse gases yield increased precipitation at high latitudes, decreased ocean salinity in the North Atlantic, and thus a weakening of the ocean conveyor belt that transports heat to the North Atlantic.”
But then went on to say…
“In the meantime, we can venture two “predictions” on “whither U.S. climate”. First, regarding U.S. temperature, we have argued (Hansen et al., 1999a) that the next decade will be warmer than the 1990s, rivaling if not exceeding the 1930s. The basis for that prediction is the expectation of continued greenhouse warming and probable slackening of regional ocean cooling.
And here is the updated version of your graph and they were 100% correct …. The warming did in fact increase….
That conversation in the link was dated 2007.
What’s the matter, can’t you read Hansen’s chart. Or you want Hansen’s actual words? I might go to the trouble of finding his actual words, if I thought you actually wanted to learn something. But I don’t. Witness your reply to my evidence, here. You just reject it out of hand. That signals to me a closed mind.
The U.S. cooling doesn’t have anything to do with the pacific ocean, or at least, if it does, then this same phenomenon affects the whole Earth since unmodified surface temperature charts from around the world show that, just like the United States, these other nations were as warm or warmer in the Early Twentieth Century as they are today, so there is no unprecedented warming going on.
Here’s an Australian Tmax chart to show that it was just as warm in Australia as it is today. No unprecendented warmth in Australia.
Your bastardized Hockey Stick chart is a joke. A real bad, destructive, expensive joke.
“What’s the matter, can’t you read Hansen’s chart. Or you want Hansen’s actual words? I might go to the trouble of finding his actual words, if I thought you actually wanted to learn something. But I don’t. Witness your reply to my evidence, here. You just reject it out of hand. “
You seem grumpy today Tom. Yes you said “Hansen said”…. I thought you meant “he said…..”
But I acknowledged that at that point in time the US wasn’t warming as quickly as the rest of the planet, but your article clearly says they think they knew why that is and as it turns out their predictions of the US heating up later were right.
And Tom you well know the hockey stick has been reproduced so many times by different people… so it is not really bastardised… I’d say it’s parents are well and truely married by now.
More TOTALLY FAKED once-was-data from the simple one.
He KNOWS he is posting fake data,.,
… but he just can’t help himself.
Well come on Einstein… where is the fake part, or is it just more hand waving?
At the end of 2016 NOAA was +1.22C above its pre-industrial average (defined as the period 1850-1900, which in NOAA global is -0.17C below its 20th century anomaly base).
At the end of 2022 this had risen to +1.35C above pre-industrial (using annual figures). Currently 2023 looks set to be warmer than the last 2 years at least, so it will likely bring the warming since 1901 to around +1.38C or so above pre-industrial. It’s by no means out of the question that we’ll see > +1.5C above pre-industrial within the next 5-years in NOAA.
Note, to calculate this warming figure they don’t just average annual figures. They calculate the linear warming trend for each successive year starting from 1901 and deduct this figure from the pre-industrial average.
For instance, the 2022 value (+1.35 above pre-industrial) is found from the linear trend between 1901-2022, multiplied by the number of years in that period (123, if you’re interested), minus the pre-industrial value (-0.17C).
Using data that essentially meaningless because it has been so “adjusted”, “homogenised” and tainted by urban expansion as to be TOTALLY UNFIT for any measure of “climate”.
We’ve been through this a couple of threads back. WUWT insists that NOAA’s USCRN data is pristine while the ClimDiv data it uses for US surface temps is adjusted to make it warm.
When you compare CRN with ClimDiv over their common period of measurement, CRN has the warmer trend. It seems that any adjustments NOAA make to the ClimDiv data are making it cooler, not warmer.
USCRN has brought the corruption of US data to an end.
How STUPID would they look if they let ClimDiv climb rapidly from their adjustments. !!
How STUPID are you that you don’t understand that ClimDiv is now being controlled by USCRN.. hence.. no warming any more!
How STUPID of you that you can’t see that the very slight trend comes from the 2015/16 El Nino bulge!
Ignorance seems to be your only mode of comment.
Well, then it is NASA that says 2016 was 1.1C above their average, and NOAA says 1.2C.
It doesn’t make much difference to my argument.
But it’s now 2023, not 2016, and there has been a continued accrual of linear warming in all the data sets. As mentioned above, NOAA now has +1.38C post-industrial warming.
GISS has a different pre-industrial period because it only starts in 1880, so I don’t think the 2 can’t be directly compared in this respect.
As far as I know, the WMO uses an average of HadCRUT5, NOAA and BEST.
“ average of HadCRUT5, NOAA and BEST.”
ALL of which are manifestly corrupted b y the AGW agenda. !
None of which is remotely real.
“we have been here at the 1.5C “tipping point threshold” before, and we’re still here”
We can’t be … the end days were catastrophic, even the oceans were boiling, don’t you remember ?
We all died & went to Heaven or Hell (depends where you live);
Trouble is my bit of paradise is so bloody cold we’ve still got the heating on in May … wish I’d gone to hell for the fire & brimstone !!!
Yeah, I had to turn the heat on this morning in Oklahoma! it’s chilly out there.
“we will pass the 1.5C global warming threshold between now and 2027.”
And NOBODY will notice a single thing different !
(Except the manic yelping of a few mindless, insane climate clowns. )
Arrhenius and others seemed to think the average global temperature was 15C around 1900. Today it’s about 14C.
Either way, add 1.5C and it’s still cold on average.
There might just as well be a bingo call to decide “average global temperature”.
Mind you, there is more mathematical expertise applied in bingo calls than global Temps calls.
“And NOBODY will notice a single thing different !”
Well certainly no one with their head stuck up their arse.
Remind me again where we are in the current Milankovitch Cycle.
They have been crying wolf, and all that shows up is a Chihuahua.
Yappy.
Was the chihuahua’s name Simon?
Simon and FN are like a pair of de-sexed chihuahuas, behind a 6ft fence.
Constant yapping, pertaining to nothing.
That was funny! 🙂 And so true.
Don’t things usually heat up after an ice age which we had in the early 1800s – so warmer is better compared to a mini ice period
The Little Ice Age was the coldest period in the last 10,000 years. 1.5C from that is highly beneficial to life.
“If the world passes the limit, scientists stress the breach, while worrying, will likely be temporary.”
That ought to give Matt McGrath at the BBC, and many others, pause for thought when the world doesn’t come to an end.
Like the UK Met Office’s prediction over a decade ago, of a “Mediterranean Climate” and “Barbecue Summers”, this is one prediction they may come to regret. Not least because it is a short term prediction.
“What are they going to do, when the limit is breached, and nothing unusually bad happens?”
and when good results occur!
They will make some lame excuse. They are not going to admit they are wrong.
They don’t ned any more or worse natural disasters. They just need to make a bigger deal of the ones we normally have and it will seem so much worse.
I think that’s what they are in the process of doing, telling scarier stories.
Those scary climate change stories come to WUWT to die.
In general climate/weather events rarely get to the levels predicted. But because the advanced hype lasts weeks, or months and now years it’s not the actualité that is remembered but the hype. The predicted temperature not measured, the predicted rain not the actual and the predicted wind speed not the actual. Now various weather and climate prediction agency try to outdo each other, safe in the knowledge that no MSM will question them, I’ll take your 1.5’C and raise you to 1.6’C.
They’ve made a terrible tactical mistake, publishing a verifiable/falsifiable prediction just a few years hence.
I thought they’d learned that only predictions of disaster after everyone currently living has moved on are useful foe apocalyptic movements.
It’s what I heard called “The Hale-Bopp Comet mistake”. I mean, the comet was going to come and then go and the world would still be here——hence the religion comes to an end.
“It’s worse than we thought but we can still save you. But, it will cost you twice as much.”
— Any random climate hoaxter
What are they going to do, when the limit is breached, and nothing unusually bad happens?
What they will do is go into a media frenzy about every weather event that could be remotely described as extreme. Of course, such events will be the same as we have seen in the past, but the media frenzy will be far bigger anything we have previously experienced.
There is a problem with taking averages around the world of temperatures in diverse places, given that a small change somewhere because a normal weather event can affect the average. It’s rather like saying that, on average, the human population has one breast.
Never mind that the Holocene Thermal Optimum was on average 2C+ warmer than today for 4,000 years and gave rise to civilizations world wide.
The psychotically deluded believe we will become extinct from crossing the 1.5C theshold!
The sooner the better but that won’t shut these monsters up. They will move the goal posts, claim they were misunderstood or change to a new disaster. I don’t like these people.
The good news is that none of alarmist predictions of disaster, heatwaves, intense storms and wildfires have been utter tosh.
Sounds like hero worship and is just as much speculative as McGrath’s alarmism.
The 1.5C pertains to this year and only because a predicted El Nino. A really, like, intense, one though, man. But, 10+ years of El Nino’s in a row? There isn’t any other way to maintain the alleged 1.5C.