Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Those estimates only apply to 2c or less because the models break down. You’ve been told this dozens of times and have yet to acknowledge it.
No they don't — the IPCC explicitly shows to 5.5°C (https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WGIIAR5-Chap10_FINAL.pdf …) and Nordhaus' update shows 10°C (https://www.nber.org/reporter/2017number3/nordhaus.html …)pic.twitter.com/6vc2I6aBOM
With a footnote indicating the critical damage function is invalid past 1.5 - 2C.
Six degrees of warming cuts GDP by a mere 10%? I don't think so! This flies in the face of the entirety of climate science - modelling, paleoclimate, the works.
The models are garbage - top-down arbitrary damage function w no empirical (or theoretical) basis past very moderate warming; there are no bottom up (asset based) estimates of climate risk That BL still talks of 10C as if that risk can be quantified says it all.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
