Originally posted at ClimateREALISM
This week a number of mainstream and online media outlets have run alarming headlines warning of imminent “catastrophic climate tipping points,” citing a recently published paper that warns of the immediate danger of passing the 1.5°C mark of planetary warming. The claim is false. Not only has objective data shown that mark has already been passed with no effects whatsoever, the claimed dangers are based on climate model projections, not actual cause and effect connections demonstrated by data.
For example, The Guardian blares the headline: Earth on verge of five catastrophic climate tipping points, scientists warn, while Politico writes Catastrophic climate ‘tipping points’ may be imminent.
According to The Guardian:
Many of the gravest threats to humanity are drawing closer, as carbon pollution heats the planet to ever more dangerous levels, scientists have warned.
Five important natural thresholds already risk being crossed, according to the Global Tipping Points report, and three more may be reached in the 2030s if the world heats 1.5C (2.7F) above pre-industrial temperatures.
…
The tipping points at risk include the collapse of big ice sheets in Greenland and the West Antarctic, the widespread thawing of permafrost, the death of coral reefs in warm waters, and the collapse of one oceanic current in the North Atlantic.
At Politico, the doomsday news is even worse:
The melting Greenland ice sheet is the single largest contributor to global sea-level rise — and some experts are warning it could soon cross the threshold into a slow but irreversible death spiral.
A sweeping new scientific report, with contributions from more than 200 researchers, finds that continued warming could trigger not only the collapse of the Greenland ice sheet but a wide variety of tipping points in the Earth’s climate system. Once crossed, those thresholds would have unstoppable consequences.
…
Greenland is one immediate worry. While it’s still unclear exactly how much warming it would take to push the ice sheet over the edge, some experts say it could be as little as 1.5 degrees above preindustrial levels. Temperatures have already risen between 1.1 and 1.3 degrees.
It is worth noting at the outset that the sweeping new scientific report upon which these news articles are based is not a peer-reviewed scientific report, but rather simply a white paper published on a website. Further, the entire project was funded by the Bezos Earth Fund, aka Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon.com which has pledged to make its products and their delivery “climate friendly.” On this basis, one could be excused for thinking the paper is nothing more than a feel-good marketing ploy to virtue signal Amazon’s support for the doomsday-oriented climate narrative.
Further undermining the idea that this is an objective scientific document is the fact that the authors themselves describe explicitly political ends as the reason for talking about tipping points. Their goal is not providing knowledge for consideration but rather explicitly about motivating political action, as stated in introduction pulldown preview section:
Why we need to talk about tipping points
This report is for all those concerned with tackling escalating Earth system change and mobilising transformative social change to alter that trajectory, achieve sustainability, and promote social justice. [emphasis mine]
This political advocacy calls into question the scientific claims made in the report.
Addressing the specific claims, the assertions concerning Greenland’s Ice Melt are wildly overblown, as seen in Figure 1 from Climate at a Glance: Greenland Ice Melt:
What’s true of the Greenland claim, is equally true of the other supposedly imminent tipping points assertions made in the report. The documents consistently fails to reference existing climate data, observed processes, or provide key context, preferring instead to focus on computer climate model projections of the future.
Most importantly, the authors missed is the fact the longest existing temperature record on Earth suggests that temperatures have already increased 2.0°C “above preindustrial levels.” Despite this, no worsening weather trends or damage to human societies from this have been measured.
Europe possesses the best, longest-running temperature records on the planet, those temperature records show warming has already exceeded 1.5°C, as can be seen in Figure 2 below from Berkeley Earth.
Yet even with 2°C of atmospheric warming since about 1820, the claimed catastrophic climate tipping points have not occurred. As discussed at Climate at a Glance and in dozens of posts on Climate Realism, existing data refutes claims that the warming experienced so far, or that can be reasonably expected in the coming century, has or will cause worsening weather or increased natural disasters.
The various projections of future tipping points resulting from rising greenhouse gas emissions are not based real world data, but are generated by deeply flawed computer models that don’t portray past temperature trends or present temperatures accurately.
The tipping point claims focus on the purported 1.5°C “warming limit” climate alarmists within the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and in the mainstream media and NGO community have claimed since 2010 posed an amount of warming that would bring catastrophic, irreversible consequences. The big worry is that at 1.5 degrees, “tipping points” in the climate will occur. As Climate at a Glance: Tipping Points, shows there is no evidence that any such tipping points exist.
The Climate Realism article, Media Can’t Agree on the Number of Climate Tipping Points, Much less When,” noted that the same five tipping points were listed as cause for alarm. The article also pointed out that this sort of scare story has been going on for at least 20 years. We’ve been warned of climate tipping points before, so much so that they’ve racked up an impressive record of non-performance.
For example. Google search shows well over a hundred, here is just a few of them:
- “Global Warming Tipping Point Close?”– ClimateArk.com, Jan. 27, 2004
- “Warming Hits ‘Tipping Point’ “– The Guardian, Aug. 11, 2005
- “Earth at the Tipping Point: Global Warming Heats Up”– Time, March 26, 2006
- “Global Warming ‘Tipping Points’ Reached, Scientist Says”— National Geographic.com, Dec. 14, 2007
- “Twenty Years Later: Tipping Points Near on Global Warming”– Huffington Post, June 23, 2008
- “Global Warming: Those Tipping Points Are Closer Than You Think”—Wall Street Journal, April 29, 2009
- “Must-Read Hansen and Sato Paper: We Are at a Climate Tipping Point That, Once Crossed, Enables Multi-Meter Sea Level Rise This Century”– ThinkProgress.org, Jan. 20, 2011
- “Earth: Have We Reached an Environmental Tipping Point?”—BBC, June 15, 2012
- “In spite of the continued released [sic] of 90 million tons of global warming pollution every day into the atmosphere, as if it’s an open sewer, we are now seeing the approach of a global political tipping point.”–Al Gore, interview with Washington Post, Aug. 21, 2013
It seems there is always a climate tipping point in our future. Every year we are treated to a fresh set of dire predictions, with time frames within which one disaster or another will occur, always somewhere in the future, but never certain. For the tipping point claims that have provided a timeline or date after which significant problems were to projected to occur, none of them have come to pass. Despite this record of failure, climate alarm and hype concerning future tipping points seems to be a constant feature of the media.
Copious peer-reviewed studies confirm tipping points have not happened in Earth’s distant past in response to atmospheric carbon dioxide changes.
A significant paleoclimate study from the University of Washington says tipping points aren’t likely to ever happen from increased carbon dioxide in our atmosphere.
The press release for the study, titled “Atmospheric carbon dioxide buildup unlikely to spark abrupt climate change” says this:
There have been instances in Earth history when average temperatures have changed rapidly, as much as 10 degrees Celsius (18 degrees Fahrenheit) over a few decades, and some have speculated the same could happen again as the atmosphere becomes overloaded with carbon dioxide.
New research lends support to evidence from numerous recent studies that suggest abrupt climate change appears to be the result of alterations in ocean circulation uniquely associated with ice ages.
Asserted disastrous “tipping points” may make for good headlines and story ledes, but there is no evidence any exist. Attribution “science,” is not science at all, it is prophesying or fortune telling, using computer models instead of crystal balls.
Humanity has displayed tremendous adaptability and resilience during its existence on Earth. Including adaptability and resilience to changing climate conditions across the course of time and widely varying environments. With technological innovations, humans have flourished in environments as varied as the frozen arctic, arid deserts, rainforests and coasts, mountains, and open plains, and amid changing climate conditions, such as mini-ice ages and glacial retreats, decades-long droughts and extended periods of heavy precipitation, as long as societies have existed.
There’s no reason to worry. The media is just doing what it has always done – promoting the climate catastrophe claim du jour, in support of the consistent narrative that humans are destroying the climate, ignoring inconvenient facts undermining the narrative along the way.
The tipping point occurred 15 thousand years ago.
And the next tipping point is glaciation, hopefully pushed off a bit by our fossil fuel burning.
DMac,
And another event 8,000 years ago?
That 8k event was observed in geology. I would not label it a tipping point because it was a gradual and predictable process.
It is important because after it, sea level change became constant, with undetectable effects from CO2.
A realist would not expect future sea levels to change from this 8,000 year trend, from any of the fanciful, recent, scare-rich trends pushed by a rash of scientifically illiterate pop scientists in that ragbag of IPCC Assessment Reports, Summary for Policy Makers.
Geoff S
It is sad that the media and warmist/alarmists chose to be pathetically ignorant and stupid since the evidence for climate disaster doesn’t exist at all.
FACT: NO Hot Spot exist after 30 years of waiting for it.
FACT: NO Positive Feedback Loop exists either.
The AGW conjecture which predicts these two prediction/projections models have failed thus needs to be thrown in the trash can.
There have been quite a few studies since 2013 that claim to have measured the hot spot, with a warming rate double the surface warming rate in the tropics.
So there are two sides to this story.
The hot spot is not a unique greenhouse signature and finding the hot spot doesn’t prove that humans are causing global warming. Observing the hot spot would tell us we have a good understanding of how the lapse rate changes.
The rate of warming in the troposphere exceeds that at the surface.
This is mainly because water vapor does not condense (and release latent heat) equally at all altitudes.
It tends to do so more in the at altitudes where the pressure is around 200mb (a few km above the surface) than it does at the surface.
This leads to faster warming at these altitudes in the troposphere than at the surface, and produces a negative lapse rate feedback.
Honest Climate Science and Energy Blog
I am well aware of the “studies” which have been long addressed as JUNK SCIENCE and that the NOAA to this day never accepted the bogus Radio Sonde temperature data corrections promoted by Sherwood and others who paraded their junk science openly.
The current data doesn’t show any hot spot either.
I wrote that there were two sides to te hot spot story. I did not say which side I believed.
When there are arguments on both sides, based on my reading, my conclusion is no one really knows.
We do not need the absence of a hot spot to prove the climate models are wrong.
They just predict whatever they are programmed to predict, which is usually a scary climate prediction desired by the governments that fund the models.
Average model 70 years prediction from the 1970s, using RCP 4.5, have been accurate so far. The 400 years predictions with the same models, using RCP 8.5, have double the warming rate of 70 years at RCP 4.5
It is my opinion that models are worthless computer games that can not predict anything.
If a prediction appears accurate, it is most likely just a lucky guess.
I will speculate that long term climate predictions are no more possible than predicting whether or not it will snow in London on January 1, 2025.
There is no logical reason to believe the climate in 50 to 100 years can be predicted or should be predicted.
The climate in 50 to 100 years could get better or worse.
If you were a typical pessimistic leftist, you would believe the climate can only get much worse in the future, which is one of five general possibilities:
(1) Much Worse climate in the future
(2) Slightly Worse
(3) The Same
(4) Slightly Better
(5) Much Better
Leftists seem to ruin everything they touch. If they take charge of the climate, they will probably make it worse.
Translation:
What Sunsettommy wrote is correct; there is no hot spot or positive feedback loop existing.
They are two of the biggest predictions/projection that have massively failed thus bringing up that failure is reasonable.
Cheers.
Last time I looked at tropical troposphere data it showed there was a “hot spot” but it was barely detectable and not of the magnitude predicted by climate models.
This means that the models are fundamentally wrong and exaggerate the effects of “global warming” driven by CO2.
Models can be manipulated to roughly match recent warming trends by selective tuning of poorly constrained parameters in the model. One way to see whether this is matching the real global climate system is to see how well it follows things other than just the physically meaningless “average temperature”.
If it they are accurately modelling climate they will correctly reproduce things like the “hot spot”. They don’t, they exaggerate it. So we know they are of no use for current climate and thus even less use for future climate projections.
There is a more likely conclusion when it concerns climate: one side is lying. The “science” is not science but activist propaganda.
I’ll let you work out which is which.
Richard Greene,
The rates on land and in the atmosphere are the same,vas you can see when their uncertainty brackets are properly calculated and shown.
Geoff S
400,000 year record from Vostok shows there is no doubt that any tipping point would result in colder climate, not warmer.
Trump takes aim at John Kerry: ‘What an idiot’
Take the Guardian’s Global Tipping Points report. They cite 5, all false:
1) It did melt part way down but never collapsed during the much warmer (+ 3C warmer) Eemian interglacial.
3) Permafrost used to be down south around the 42-46 N which means most of France was once under permafrost cover and down into Mid America too then it melted away releasing CH4 in varying amounts in just a few thousand years with no big problem shown.
4) Corals survived the rapid sea level increase as shown in the first comment.
I especially like the Antarctica melting claims (of 150 gigatons ice mass melting a year) … when the total estimated ice mass on Antarctica is 24.4 million gigatons. The 150 could just be a rounding error in the estimate.
At the current rate of melting, which will obviously stop when the current interglacial ends fairly soon, Antarctica ice will be completely melted in 1.63 million years.
Which means it’s not too early to start building an ark to save your family.
Paper – Error Assessment of GRACE and GRACE Follow-On Mass Change
The actual uncertainty of GRACE/GFO estimated mass change averaged (or totaled) over a given region as in most GRACE/GFO applications is affected by many other error sources, which include: (a) leakage error due to the truncation of GRACE/GFO Stokes coefficients and spatial filtering applied to GRACE/GFO gravity fields, (b) errors in other geophysical signals that need to be removed from GRACE/GFO measurements (e.g., GIA effect in ice mass balance studies, soil, snow and surface water estimates in regional groundwater, steric correction in sea level or large lake level change, etc.), and (c) uncertainty of GRACE/GFO low-degree Stokes coefficients and geocenter series. The 4–6 cm RMS in the above Caspian Sea level change example can be attributed to residual leakage error of GRACE estimates, lack of adequate data for assessing steric effect on Caspian Sea level change, and/or uncertainty of altimeter measurements.
NASA/German Aerospace Center’s twin Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites indicates that between 2002 and 2016, Greenland shed approximately 280 gigatons of ice per year</i>
280/2,600,000 = 0.00107% But Gracey & GraceyFO can measure to 4 significant digits with the 4 to 6cm uncertainty?
The currents of the North Atlantic are driven by two things. The temperature difference between the arctic and the tropics and the Coriolis Force. The former is due to the tilt of the earth’s axis with respect to the plane of the ecliptic. The later is created by the rotation of the earth on its axis. Neither has anything to do with the composition of the atmosphere. .
All climate catastrophes have been coming in 10 years … for the past 50 years
ha ha
Follow the mortgage payment. If the goals stop moving, it will be seen for what it is…nonsense. Then the grant money dries up, and the “Climate” scientists can’t make their house payment!
The climate tipping point is as useful as a number pulled out of a hat. You might as well reach inside the hat, pull out the label with the hat size, and announce: “The climate tipping point is 6 7/8 degrees F.”
But there will be a very important tipping point for Nut Zero.
I call it the Flounder Limit for each electric utility. Monckton called his preferred theory the Pollock Limit. Wrong fish.
Each electric utility that keeps expanding the use of windmills and solar panels will eventually reach a percentage of unreliables that makes their electricity production vulnerable to usually bad weather conditions (little or no sun and little or no wind during a breakfast hours or dinner hours peak electricity consumption period).
Then that utility will flounder and there will be a regional (at least) blackout.
The Nut Zero tipping point will be reached when an electric grid can no longer handle unusually unfavorable (for wind and solar energy electricity production) weather conditions.
It does not appear that any utility can afford 100% battery backup for their wind and sun “farms”. Nor does it seem like they will have 100% spinning reserve natural gas backup.
It may take a long time before a specific electric utility gets overwhelmed by unfavorable weather condition that coincide with peak electricity consumption hours, but that day will eventually come.
Invest in flashlights, candles and gasoline or natural gas-powered generators for your home and business.
Leftists ruin everything they touch. They should never be allowed to touch electric grids.
Two-thirds of the Republicans under thirty support the climate change agenda, 42 percent of Republicans support it overall as well as 61 percent of Americans and 90 percent of Democrats.
The brainwashing has been very inclusive.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
First of all—Pew Research—what’s that smell? Nothing from that source can possibly be valid.
Secondly, as long as there’s some abstract idea that doesn’t involve any personal sacrifice, people answer with what they know is the pious response.
Now ask them how much more they are willing to pay? How likely they are to switch to public transportation? How much colder they can tolerate their homes in winter? How many days without electricity would per tolerable each year?
ANother problem with all phone interviews is that people are reluctant to give what they believe to be unpopular answers to complete strangers. Conservatives have been trained for years to keep their opinions to themselves because you never know when someone will try to use them against you.
Good points
When asked about how much money they would be willing to give to fight climate change, whatever that means, most Americans are extreme cheapskates. They’s give from $1 a month to #1 a week.
These are anonymous polls where people have an opportunity to virtue signal and claim they would be willing to pay (through taxes) lots of money to fight climate change.
The bias is to over report your true beliefs, yet Americans still act like climate cheapskates when polled. This suggests to me that Nut Zero will fail when the high costs start hitting people’s wallets. The cost of Nut Zero is too high to keep hidden.
As a libertarian / conservative, I don’t answer polls.
If a pollster asked me how much I would contribute to fight climate change, my honest answer would be: “I’ll send you a bag filled with dog doo doo”.
If I ever did answer a climate poll, I would probably virtue signal and say “I will donate my entire net worth to fight climate change”.
I would not reveal that my entire net worth consists of my copper penny collection and a book of forever stamps.
If that were true then why do a majority of Americans vote for a Republican Congress and a majority of GOP governors and state legislatures who oppose the “climate agenda”? Why does the President with the biggest cheerleading of warmunism have an approval rating this week of just 37%? Why do virtually ALL polls that ask Americans to rank the biggest problems America faces always put climate change at the very bottom of the list? And why are vast numbers of Americans moving out of the states run by warmunists (like CA, NY, MA, and IL) and instead moving to states which are run by anti-warmunist Republicans (like FL and TX)?
That’s the seventh time in 4 days that you’ve posted that link.
I’ll give you the same answer I’ve given on each and every occasion:
Which probably means “we’ve skewed the data to give the answer we want people to see”
Stop spamming.
An interesting fact about electricity generation from renewables is that they also seriously weaken any grid when they represent a high proportion of total supply and not just high demand winter months.
The last major UK regional blackout was in August 2019 on a very windy but also sunny summer weekday late afternoon. The high proportion of generation providing little/no inertia, inadequate reactive power level control and bugger all short circuit level ride through fell down when lightening struck and a wind farm tripped offline. Grid frequency dropped dangerously low within milliseconds. A cascade started made worse by the usual ploy of disconnecting area demand exacerbating the problem by simultaneously disconnecting generators connected at low voltage (mostly solar). A national blackout was only averted when the pumped storage hydro units (which luckily were free spinning in anticipation of the p.m. rush hour demand) were able to come up to power very quickly.
All these battery packs being so proudly boasted are only being installed to micro manage frequency variations that conventional generators previously supplied free of charge from large spinning gensets. Batteries will never protect against supply intermittency of weather dependent generation. It is worth remembering that international interconnectors offer no effective grid management services but by going down present a very great uncovered risk in themselves..
As far as the UK is concerned a major outage can happen anytime of the year now. Worse still it a total blackout could actually be engineered by a mass deliberate but unpredicted (yet covertly organised) simultaneous switch on of high power domestic units (electric showers, heater, ovens etc) by “motivated individuals”.
It’s only a matter of not very much time before we get a total grid collapse that will take days or even weeks to recover from.
My first post on here. May I add for any non UK readers, The Guardian is considered trash here in Britain, its circulation in print form is virtually non existent, it does NOT submit to any press complaints or control system in the UK, perpetually loses money and only continues to exist courtesy of benefactors such as Bill Gates. And if you ever wondered why there are nearly always references to the Guardian in Wikipedia articles it is simply because Jimmy wales is a Director of the company.
“My first post on here.”
Also the best post in this thread
Please return here!
It may help if I could spell better. Wonderful typo of “Lightening” which is defined as
“a drop in the level of the uterus during the last weeks of pregnancy as the head of the fetus engages in the pelvis.” Which is somewhat different from “Lightning” though I guess the latter ends with a bang whilst the former starts with one!
This comment is probably in bad tase, but if you let the leftists touch the grid there won’t be so many of them afterwards.
I wrote to my CongressIdiot to propose shipping all American leftists to Cuba
Unfortunately, Rashida Talib did not respond to my letter.
Perhaps we’ve already passed a tipping point, the one where supposedly intelligent adults who, as children, learned the lessons of chicken little, the boy who cried wolf and the wizard behind the curtain in OZ, have grown up forgetting that those characters were to be reviled for their stupidity and deception, not emulated as prophets. Now a large proportion of our elected leaders and unelected elites have decided that tipping points and catastrophic projections are the only things worth celebrating. And they promote this view even though all evidence shows us it is the route to certain destruction. Every civilization that reaches the “tipping point” of believing things that objective experience tells us are not true, is a civilization on its way to the grave.
No reason to worry about tipping points but lots of reason to worry about people worrying about tipping points. Consider all the people who read the Guardian, Politico, et al articles and believe them. That is truly scary because these people are collectively dangerous.
People actually read the Guardian? That’s truly scary…
Did they mention the tipping points following peak renewables electricity production in Europe in 2017, marked by a chain of bankruptcies of renewable manufacture and installation companies that continues to plague this sunset industry up to the present (now the biggies Oersted and Siemens Gamesa are in trouble). Investors have backed away from funding this crumbling industry. Maybe I missed it.
The history of our climate is one of remarkable stability. It’s not a tipping point if the climate keeps returning to a life friendly state.
The “tipping point” they are worried about is when the people stop listening to their “sky is falling” routine and stop paying for more $$$ climastrology.
The only tipping point I worry about is falling off a bar stool after drinking too much.
The only imminent catastrophe is our Parliament, elites and institutions
This is really important and needs to be widely distributed. It is written in plain language everyone can understand. It addresses one of the things I think is really important the 1.5C and 2.0C thresholds. I have never put any stock in the idea that catastrophe lies just beyond these two figures. The graphs of Greenland ice melt are just as important. These two pictures need to be added to the side bar on the home page of WUWT so we see them every day.
Nice work Anthony.
The whole notion of a climate tipping point tied to an arbitrary essentially unknown global temperature dating to 1850 is utter nonsense. Really. Seriously nonsense. There is no known historical or geohistorical record of any such phenomenon, nor any known scientifically defined process that would make the “world climate” – whatever the hell that could be – go to hell over a 1.5 deg C warming over 173 years of not very accurate or precise or geographically widespread temperature records.
Utter nonsense, all of it.
Besides – warming is good and cooling is bad.
Cooling at our present cold interglacial temperatures would be very bad.
Those interested in coral should visit Jennifer Morahasy’s site.
Photos are fantastic.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiMmay_hIaDAxVyEDQIHaDPAmgQFnoECA8QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fjennifermarohasy.com%2F&usg=AOvVaw3TDEWvFf9SU7K4NV1tCozq&opi=89978449
…. thanks google , for this “short” link
😉
In 1989 the UN warned that entire nations could cease to exist because a climate tipping point would be reached by or before 2000. This would involve rising sea levels flooding huge coastal areas so that agriculture would be adversely affected which in turn would cause widespread agricultural failures and food shortages. All this would be responsible for widespread population displacements so that eco-refugees would overrun adjacent regions that couldn’t accommodate them. More than a third of a century has passed since that claim, so when is this all going to happen? I haven’t heard of any large-scale precautionary measures being taken, just warning of more tipping points.
Unless you’re a Viking and as unaware of cycles as the current crop of policy leaders and media oligarchs.
The Grand Solar Minimum is more likely to be some kind of tipping point than anything human CO2 could do.
When humans reduced their CO2 emissions in 2020 because of the pandemic and its lockdowns, the rate of CO2 increase didn’t change a bit. https://www.co2.earth/monthly-co2
The world did not close down in 2020.
There was a business slowdown for three months
People stayed in their warmed / cooled homes and spent a lot of time watching electric screens. We shopped at grocery and other large stores just as before 2020. Definitely less gasoline usage, down by about -14%
Electric Power Consumption
in United States of America
(2019 – 2020, GWh)
2019 3,811,153 GWh
2020 3,663,746 GWh
down only -3.9% from 2019
Total energy consumption decreased only -7.5 percent nationwide in 2020 compared with 2019 as the COVID-19 pandemic led to lockdowns, business closures and employees working from home, according to a new study.
Has anyone consulted much-cited Rep Hank Johnson (D. GA) about “tipping points?
https://methodshop.com/guam-in-danger-of-tipping-over-video/
If these tipping points existed, we would have hit them during the Medieval, Roman, Egyptian and Minoan warm periods. We would have smashed them to pieces during the Holocene Optimum when temperatures were 3 to 5C warmer than it is today for some 7000 years.
If going above 420ppm was an existential crises for life on this planet, then surely life was totally wiped out some 80 million years ago when CO2 levels were between 5000 and 7000ppm
Holocene Climate Optimum temperatures
“were 3 to 5C warmer than it is today for some 7000 years
Total Misinformation
The Holocene Climate Optimum lasted from 9000 to 5000 years ago, which is 4000 years, not 7000 years.
The global average temperature is estimated to have been as low as +1 degree C. above the past decade, not +3 to +5 degrees C. warmer for a global average.
All other warming periods in the past 5,000 years have average climate reconstructions that can not prove their temperatures were higher than in the past decade.
Averaging climate reconstructions reduces their temperature variations to below +1 degree C. (often reported as +0.5 degrees C. warmer than the past decade, which is statistically insignificant with a reasonable +/- 1 degree C. (at least) margin of error.
Do we call the start of rain a tipping point or a random but anticipated event? The latter has to be true since there are many places where a few drops of rain fall and nothing else. Humans have tipping points which is why there are so many mesmerised by a continuous outpouring of untruths by the alarmists. Our tipping points are often irrational. Nature has no such issue since She is completely in random mode..
The BBC has a false story about olives and droughts in Spain and gets away with publishing it because there is no one in authority brave enough to control the egregious activity of this corporation. Of course that makes all the so called authority figures guilty of neglect and worthy of our contempt.
Extraordinary climate tipping points have occurred with some regularity over the last million or so years of Earth’s history: they are widely recognized as the transitions from a glacial (aka stadial) worldwide climate to an interglacial (aka interstadial) worldwide climate.
Over the last million years, the interval from start-of-glacial period to interglacial period to start-of-next-glacial has been around 100,000 years on average. Homo sapiens, arguably dating back as far as 300,000 year ago, would have experienced and lived through five or six such tipping points, albeit without benefit of fossil fuel use. 😉