Writing about worst-case scenarios is useful (I've even done it: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/07/climate-change-earth-too-hot-for-humans.html …). But 4C is not a worst-case; it is where we are headed.
-
Show this thread
-
The upper-end of the UN's bell curve of possibilities puts the planet at 8C warmer by the end of the century—a worst-case outcome of a do-nothing carbon trajectory.
1 reply 20 retweets 45 likesShow this thread -
4C may seem unthinkable, with such horrifying impacts we would like to believe the chances are vanishingly slim we get there. But while I think we will avoid that amount of warming, it is far from a worst case.
3 replies 19 retweets 49 likesShow this thread -
That we often think of it that way is a reflection of just how tilted toward best-case and even beyond-bast-case most scientific research has been over the last few decades, when we did little in response.
1 reply 10 retweets 43 likesShow this thread -
Which is why, at this point, unfortunately, our likeliest outcomes are actually quite catastrophic, and catastrophic outcomes actually quite likely. (x/x)
8 replies 24 retweets 66 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @dwallacewells @KelseyTuoc
David, I agree with just about everything you wrote in this thread (even retweeting 3 of your points). But I take major issue and strongly disagree with your framing of "likeliest outcomes."
@AlexSteffen has a pointed thread on this:2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @emahlee @dwallacewells and
Emily Cunningham Retweeted Alex Steffen
"There is no way in 2019 for American journalists to responsibly make odds on the likelihood of climate action."https://twitter.com/AlexSteffen/status/1093266094989533184 …
Emily Cunningham added,
Alex SteffenVerified account @AlexSteffenI'd like to make what may seem like a small point, but I actually think is a critically important one: There is no way in 2019 for American journalists to responsibly make odds on the likelihood of climate action. https://twitter.com/AlexSteffen/status/1093234590322327552 …Show this thread1 reply 3 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @emahlee @dwallacewells and
Emily Cunningham Retweeted Alex Steffen
Emily Cunningham added,
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emahlee @dwallacewells and
Emily Cunningham Retweeted Alex Steffen
Emily Cunningham added,
Alex SteffenVerified account @AlexSteffenNext, I think these judgments are themselves suspect. I've been working on these issues for decades, and we've never seen a time when the politics of climate change are more obviously subject to big shifts, from accelerating technologies to the Carbon Bubble to green new deals.Show this thread1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emahlee @dwallacewells and
Emily Cunningham Retweeted Emily Cunningham
@JeremyRLent makes a similar point in his must-read essay. We can't predict the "likelihood outcomes" because of the "nature of nonlinear complex systems." Language and precision matter. Saying catastrophic warming is "likely" feeds climate defeatism.https://twitter.com/emahlee/status/1137809277370822656 …Emily Cunningham added,
Emily Cunningham @emahleeMUST READ piece by@JeremyRLent. Our future is not determined. But our actions -- now -- will shape the future we get. "A belief in the inevitability of collapse at this time is categorically wrong. The reason for this is the nature of nonlinear complex systems." https://twitter.com/TricksyRaccoon/status/1137512355531808768 …Show this thread1 reply 4 retweets 4 likes
Emily Cunningham Retweeted Emily Cunningham
Emily Cunningham added,
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.