A recent article in The Guardian, “Change course now: humanity has missed 1.5C climate target, says UN head,” claims that the planet is in grave danger of passing climate “tipping points,” as it is now inevitable that 1.5°C warming will be breached. Although 1.5℃ of warming may be locked in if not already surpassed, the claim that it signifies a dangerous milestone is false. Not only is the tipping points narrative bunk, but there is no evidence that 1.5°C warming is any particular threat. The purported temperature threshhold was chosen arbitrarily and for political reasons rather than scientific ones.
The Guardian’s story focuses on comments made by United Nations Secretary General António Guterres, who in advance of the COP30 climate summit in Brazil, warned that it is “inevitable” that 1.5°C of warming will be breached, and it will result in “devastating consequences” for the planet. The Guardian says Guterres “urged the leaders who will gather in the Brazilian rainforest city of Belém to realize that the longer they delay cutting emissions, the greater the danger of passing catastrophic “tipping points” in the Amazon, the Arctic, and the oceans.”
There is no scientific basis for any so-called tipping points, and claiming otherwise is just fearmongering for political gain.
Beginning with the Amazon rainforest, the location of the next climate summit in November, Guterres reportedly warned that it could become a “savannah,” or a dry grassland. There is no evidence for this absurd claim. Like Guterres’ previous “boiling oceans” comment, it is purely fanciful hyperbole lacking any basis in fact. Guterres is referencing a period of drought suffered by parts of the Amazon basin in recent years, but that drought has not been historically unusual, and the recent localized areas of drought have not been more severe than previous drought periods. As discussed in the Climate Realism post “Media Outlets Continue Spreading False Amazon “Record Drought” Claims,” the Amazon has experienced periods of heavy rain and extended drought in the past that were worse than those we see now. Historic records do not show any worsening of drought in the Amazon. The threat that impacts tree cover is deforestation and clear cutting, not climate change.
The Arctic is also not approaching any dangerous tipping point. Should warming continue, ice extent will likely shrink, but it has not been happening at nearly as fast a rate as alarmists claim. Arctic sea ice extent has been stable since about 2010, indicating a new ice extent regime, and there is no telling how long that will last. If the past is any guide, sea ice might begin expanding again, as it has waxed and waned historically.
Finally, the ocean tipping point Guterres is referring to is the claim that coral reefs will die out as a result of ocean pH changes and higher temperatures, but again, science and paleo-history shows that corals are resilient to changes that are much more extreme than the modest warming of recent decades. As discussed repeatedly at Climate Realism, the world’s oceans are not at risk of becoming acidic and coral reefs are expanding their range and setting records for growth.
It is true that the “1.5°C threshold” is likely to be passed. But that does not mean anything, certainly nothing catastrophic. The 1.5°C warming limit was already passed in 2024 because of the El Niño conditions—with no cataclysm. This should not be of concern to anyone, because that limit is not a scientifically established value. The Guardian fearmongered about it in the past, which Climate Realism addressed here, and seems to have learned nothing. The 1.5°C number was arbitrary; established by an 11 member German political advisory board containing only one meteorologist. It is not a hard scientific threshold the way the boiling point of water is, though alarmists inappropriately treat it that way.
Guterres’ comments are not based on science, data, or even history. He is simply attempting to worry the public, with The Guardian’s complicity, in order to gain political leverage for negotiations at COP 30 even as a growing number of countries are downplaying climate concerns in the realistic assessment that other issues are more pressing and fossil fuels, for now, remain vital to prosperity.
The only tipping point I’ve passed is confidence in anything coming out of the United Nations.
I would consider the Great Oxygenation Event the only tipping point that has actually happened. And we wouldn’t be here were it not for it.
It is actually pretty interesting what Pete Ridd has presented below. The background is, “acidification” is absurd, because even with 1000ppm of atmospheric CO2 it would drop to a PH of about 7.8. It is no issue.
However, there comes the next line. With lower PH, there would be a substantial decline in CO3, or carbonate, which is true. And corals would need CO3 to link it with Ca to produce CaCO3, calcium-carbonate. If you google it or ask an AI; that is what you will be told.
This would be odd, because if so, corals would be very sensitive to lower PH values and it seems questionable how they could have survived for so long. Turns out, they are not using CO3, but HCO3, or bicarbonate. Evolution was smarter than alarmists, because HCO3 is insensitive to changes in PH in is always there in abundance. There is just nothing to it.
I have witnessed very healthy and abundant coral where CO2 is literally and very visibly bubbling out of the sea bed in the Pacific Islands. I can’t imagine how high the CO2 concentration is in such waters, but it’s certainly much higher than it can ever become from atmospheric CO2 concentration.
Corals started to exist at a time when co2 levels were 5000 ppm +.
It’s literally impossible for them to have problems now with 430ppm rates.
The 2nd problem is that there is way more than 10 times more carbon in the oceans
than in the atmosphere.
There is barely anything of relevance a 430ppm atmosphere will add to the system.
On top of that we have the boiling oceans.
The warmer the oceans get the less co2 they can “carry” .
Warming oceans should result in lower co2 concentrations.
The 3rd problem is that a climate as fragile as our is supposed to be, with tipping points all over the place would have made any form of longlasting complex life impossible.
Yet here it is, 500 million years and going strong surviving meteors, solar fluctuations and outbursts and everything else – and 99.99999% of that time there was no technology to protect them.
Which means climate is very robust and selfregulating – and life has adjusted to all kinds of anomalies and the legend about a fragile climate is just a legend that we are being told since the 70ies.
At least saturated, probably super-saturated compared to the partial pressure of the atmosphere.
In sea water, the proportions of CO2, HCO3^1- and CO2^2- are:
0.5:89:10.5 which is buffer system of pH 8.1. When CO2 is absorbed
by sea water a large amount is rapidly used by phytoplankton and by seaweeds and seagrasses. The CO2 converted to HCO31^- is by corals to make their structures of CaCO3 as do shellfish and snails.
Microorganisms of the genera Cocolithophores and Formimifera use HCO3^1- to make their outer shells of CaCO3. When these die, the shells sink to the ocean floor. After millions of years the shell are transformed into limestone. All land formations of limestone were once under the oceans.
Good to hear. The peak of Mount Everest, (8848 m or so), is composed of limestone, and contains marine fossils.
Shows that sea levels have dropped by at least 8848 meters, doesn’t it?
I suppose “climate scientists” are fouling their britches, worrying about sea levels rising by fractions of a millimeter! Probably even silly enough to believe that adding CO2 to air makes thermometers hotter!
A symptom of insanity is the inability to accept reality. Are all “climate scientists” insane, or just ignorant and gullible?
Did you forget the sarc tag?
Sort of reminds me of a video I saw a few years ago of a geologist standing in the middle of Wyoming and stating that the equator use to run right through where he was standing. Sure… sea level use to be at the top of Mt. Everest. How else would them marine fossils have got there?
Many so-called “climate scientists” are not “scientists” at all, they are just “activists” preaching a secular religion which has been dressed up to look like “science.”
Eisenhower warned the US of the danger of science becoming politicized in his farewell address before I was born. And here we are.
And one might ask how terrestrial mollusks (snails) manage to form shells when rain which they are frequently exposed to typically has a pH less than 6.
Calcifiers protect their shells with mucous internally and chitin externally. When they die, they obviously stop producing the protective coatings and are subject to decomposition and solution.
There’s a TON of buffers in the ocean waters for each pound of CO2 absorbed.
What is the chemical composition of the oceans? The runoff of all the minerals the rivers and rains feed into it.
I suppose if ALL of the CO2 in the atmosphere could be suddenly injected into the oceans, the pH might shift significantly .But even then, it may never actually measure below a pH of 7.00.
(Only Man is capable of attempting to do something that stupid to ‘Save the Planet!.)
Naw… but would make a rather salty scotch and soda :<)
_________________________________________________________________________
So far Bill Gates has more or less climbed aboard that train. So there’s that.
The weight of ice in the Arctic is not controlled by temperature alone. Another significant factor is the weight of rain and snow falling there, for rain and snow become ice if it is cold enough where it falls. There would be no effect to speak of for 1.5C of global warming if there was no arctic rain or snow.
This precipitation can be carried long distances by winds, so temperatures at distant places also affect the amount of Arctic ice on a given day. We are dealing with an input/output balance with incoming precipitation making ice and outgoing sea water containing melted ice. The difference is maybe the sought result, one that is governed by much more than a global temperature guess of 1.5C.
Finally, the area of ice is not the best indicator. Thickness needs measurement, to allow volume of ice to be estimated.
Simpleton science that Guterres speaks damages proper science.
Geoff S
If such mythical tipping points existed, they would have been passed with any warming for any reason. The fact that they never have,is absolute evidence that they don’t exist. I don’t understand how intelligent, educated people cannot see this obvious fallacy of the doomsayers.
Tipping points at such low levels and such a fragile climate would have made complex life impossible.
But this would at least explain the Fermi Paradoxon.
If climates crumble at the lowest of impacts, let’s say 1/10000 change in the system(while lower than the tolerance of the most accurate high precision tools we can make) there can not be extraterrestrial life.
Supercomplex,selforganizing systems don’t exist in supervolatile environments.
Which means we don’t exist if the AGW scenario is real.
The only “tipping point” is what we are experiencing now …. people are realizing AGW is a scam to destroy Capitalism.
Rather than an egg on the edge of a table, climate is more like this.
Free to roll around a bit, but inherently stable.
You are more scientific than Comrade Guterres.
What is he doing about Russian “special military operation”?
Wearing his brown trousers?
I like the analogy.
I’d say the egg should be in a bowl with high sides.
Very nice Linnea.
the United Nations is simply following their stated intention of de industrialisation of the West, and re distributing its wealth. It should be de funded as soon as possible.
With Guterres at the helm spouting his “tipping points” nonsense, you know the Alarmists have gone full retard.
They’re tipping right over the edge alright with the scientific method-
‘Leftism destroys everything’: St Vincent’s Hospital blasted over its ‘race-based directive’
Nordhaus and Gates have wisely had an epiphany but the woke madness is beginning to resonate with laypeople and the dooming is inextricably linked to it. The left won’t be able to dissociate it from wokeness so it will likely go down with the crazy ship rather than the science. Still a rose by another name will still smell sweet as a rush for the exits picks up.
Seems that leftie doctors have to swear the hypocritic oath from now on..
Or maybe, just maybe, no matter wether you are in Australia or USA or England or Canada,
you will get to the conclusion that all these places are run by the same dark destructive entity that is always targeting the same people wherever it can.
Women drove woke but they may be regretting it if you read the signs-
Over 11,000 Londoners want women-only Tube carriages — but are they a ‘gimmick’?
Seems the antithesis of welcome aboard all cultures and all that conspicuous empathy
While more are coming out with impure thoughts in the bastions of woke-
How Women Contribute to Societal Collapse: Solid Ground #138 Feat. Guest Dr. Dani Sulikowski
They LIED for 60 Years – Eric Kaufmann Exposes the Progressive Myth
It would appear Trump and Co have unleashed a counter revolution against wokeness and all that sail with it.
Discrimination is bad, except when we benefit from it.
We have imperfect but pretty good notions of Earth’s climate in general for the past 700 million years. The only “tipping points” we’ve seen have been on the low side, not the high side. http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm. Continental glaciers apparently only formed three or four times in geologically “recent” history. Twice around 700-600 million years ago. Possibly in the late Pennsylvanian 300 million years ago. And finally in most of the past few million years. I think a kilometer or two of ice over New York City qualifies as a “tipping point”. Seems likely to be bad for property values.
One of the problems with the Tipping Point meme is that the definitions are not consistent. It is usually described as a state from which Earth cannot recover. It would seem that the name was chosen for the mental image of a tree or tower crashing down. Such an event is a Humpty Dumpty event. Whereas, climate seems to always recover despite being temporarily locked into a ice house or green house state. The only true Tipping Point that is unrecoverable, that I am aware of, is the Great Oxygenation Event a couple billion years ago.
No problem; Mamdummy will give out “free ice.” It would be the one thing he doesn’t have to rob the taxpayers in order to give it away.
Strictly self-serve, though. You’ll have to chip off what you want and bring it back to your cardboard box.
The tipping point is the other direction: Not too much CO2 in the atmosphere, it’s been AT LEAST 17x higher while life thrived on Earth, but too little CO2, and ALL life dying. The latter is inevitable, because CO2 is pulled out of the atmosphere and turned into rock, from which little will reemerge. The part that goes into fossil fuels can be released back to the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels. The CO2 which returns to the atmosphere will help life continue for millions of more years.It helps to know a little about the history of life on Earth BEFORE you make declarations about its sustainability.
I always bristle when the Climate Fascists start talking about “sustainability,” while promoting electricity generation that requires massive build out all of which needs replacement every 20 years.
And STILL requires 100% backup.
All one has to do is mention The Guardian, Guterres and the climate in a single sentence, and it’s a guarantee of what’s to follow; namely, alarmism, doomsday scenarios , exaggerations, and, above all, calls for some sort of taxes, restrictions, laws, and mandates to combat a supposedly existential problem. Except the problem doesn’t exist and and never did until the alarmists saw an opportunity to create it in the hope of extracting more tax revenue and imposing overpriced green products on consumers. Fortunately those consumers and manufacturers have been recognizing the scam for a long time now and are going about their business ignoring the imaginary climate change threats.
You forgot incompetence and scientific fraud, and usually at least one slogan which would look idiotic if it wasn’t so sinister.
Also forgot hyperbole.
There is no global climate, no global average temperature.
That aside, if there is a global climate, what is the optimum?
Given past historical records, one could accurately conclude that we are heading towards a climate, such as the Roman or Medieval.
Until the optimum is establish with accurately defined and testable metrics, all of this tipping point nonsense is just so much hot air.
Optimum is warmer. Clearly and unambiguously. They didn’t call the warmest period during the current epoch, the Holocene, the “Holocene Climate OPTIMUM” for nothing.
The only real tipping point, and real is debatable, is the depletion of CO2 from the atmosphere (and environment) to levels where plants can’t grow.
Why debatable? When the plants die, the decay and release CO2. Once man is gone and his CO2 vacuum cleaners stop, the planet recovers. Seeds can stay ready for very long epics and earth will start to green again, even if the hairless apes are extinct.
There wass a case in WWII. A bomb in England exposed Roman era seeds that then grew into previously unknown plants.