"there is only a dozen years for global warming to be kept to a maximum of 1.5C". we're currently at 1C
-
-
Replying to @VesselOfSpirit
Yes... They're saying if we take action we can keep it to current +0.5c, which would not be an existential threat we compared to the case where we don't take action and we get much more increase. Not sure what your disagreement here is, actually
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @hikikomorphism @VesselOfSpirit
1. It would take like +30c of warming to render the Earth completely uninhabitable to human life. (Premise) 2. That ain't happening. (Premise) 3. Global warming is not an existential risk. (1, 2)
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
1. is a false premise. we don't fully understand complex systems and they are most certainly capable of phase transitions at much lower thresholds than we might believe. 4 degrees (current 100 year projection consensus) might be as catastrophic as 30 degrees in some scenarios.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
4 degrees (which corresponds to 3 degrees above present) is not the current projection consensus
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
what is the current 100 year projection consensus then in the scenario where we take no significant action to reduce carbon emissions?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
i suspect the 4 degrees number comes from the rcp8.5 scenario which is on the pessimistic end of the subset of scenarios where we take no action
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
considering the potential consequences, doesn't it make sense to plan around the pessimistic scenario? if things are better than expected, all that was lost was, hmm, what exactly? a little GDP growth? if things are worse than expected, we get ecological collapse.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
i haven't made a single claim about policy
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
you made a claim about the rhetoric of politicians attempting to make populist appeals with unrigorous language. those politicians are responsible for policies related to this issue. their rhetoric does not necessarily match their policy preferences but its a good clue.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
i know her rhetoric matches her policy preferences, i'm just saying it's not okay to say wildly false things
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.