As Climate Worsens, a Cascade of Tipping Points Looms

You do realise this is proxy measurement right?[/QUOTE]


Once again you are answering your own questions... I just post the obvious

Earth doesn't give a damn if we are here or not, she will continue to change as she floats through space, to suggest man kind can reverse it some how would require trillions of dollars we don't have

Meanwhile 1,000s of people die in each year in Africa because of smoke inhalation due to NO cheap fossil fuels.


https://africacheck.org/reports/do-fumes-from-cooking-smoke-kill-600000-africans-yearly/

 

And these same deaths could be prevented by cheap renewables
Kenya leads the world in geothermal
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018...oducing-geothermal-power-181209105803315.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/23/business/geothermal-energy-grows-in-kenya.html

https://www.aidforafrica.org/member-charities/solar-cookers-international/

 

Oh please.


European banks refuse to lend money to Africa for cheap fossil fuels, and like I posted 1,000s of people die each year from smoke inhalation.





The European Investment Bank (EIB), the EU's financing department, will bar funding for most fossil fuel projects. The ban will come into effect a year later than originally proposed after lobbying by EU member states. Since 2013, the EIB has funded €13.4bn of fossil fuel projects.Nov 14, 2019

BBC.com › business-50427873
European Investment Bank drops fossil fuel funding - BBC News - BBC.com

 

This is the same crap as poor people subsidizing rich people's electric cars.

 

Yes? So?

I posted alternatives and I can almost guarantee that the
Kenyan Geothermal project IS being funded by Europe because they can see all that lovely cheap energy flowing into an international grid

Meanwhile the solar cooker project gives a method of cheap cooking that does not rely on people paying to have electricity connected or the ongoing costs of electricity

Four minutes between my post and yours? Subtracting the time it took to type means you did not read the entire post otherwise you would have picked up on the solar cookers

 

I thought republican loved funding the rich? After all they pay less tax than you

 

I am retired at 54 ...

 

Speed reader I can gobble up anything in seconds

 

Lets say climate models predicting 'catastrophic climate change' are accurate... so the sea levels rise and the ice caps recede. Won't this make land currently less than habitable due to permafrost more habitable? Is it really worth fundamentally restructuring the global economy just to protect a minority of the population from having to move from their prime beachfront properties to newly-thawed northern Russia or Canada?

 

And we will lose land elsewhere

BTW Aus owns most of the Antarctic and Denmark owns Greenland Russia owns Siberia bit it is a mosquito infested methane emitting swamp

 

You think Antartica will thaw? Well I'm sold. I wanna see whats under all that ice!

BTW you might wanna start bulking up your military a bit. If you find yourself in majority control of newly habitable continent, you're gonna need it. Someone in your neighborhood has been expressing a desire for expansion...

 

No one owns Antarctica, except for some crazy Alien octopus..

This is one heck of a weird conspiracy theory..

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...sm-46-b-russian-army-secret-weapon-russia/amp

 

400 Megawatts. Are you kidding me. Build one coal fired power plant and you get ~ 700 megawatts. Those plants are inexpensive and the technology is very well understood. You actually think that it's in the interest of Kenya to base their power generation on geothermal ?? That's immoral.

 

I think there are two different questions
The one that you appear to be addressing is whether or not there are examples of rapid climate change... and in f there are, could current rapid climate change then be another example of that sort of climate change.... which is a subject I am ready to separately discuss

but I was responding to a posting about how there are examples of High heat and high co2 in which flora and fauna flourished.,,.... which question do you want to discuss?

 

We have bases and have been administering our territory there for years

https://www.ga.gov.au/scientific-to...re-territories/australian-antarctic-territory

 

Following a quote from your supplied link

Korty and colleague William Boos of Yale argue the shifting rain belt alone fails to explain the transformation of the Sahara. Instead, falling precipitation totals likely created a sort of climatological feedback loop that triggered more drastic change in the soil and atmosphere.
​

It appears that you have helpfully provided an example of how some smaller change can provoke feedback loops that wind up creating a much larger and more rapid climatic change... which was EXACTLY the sort of tipping point proposed in the the original posting of this thread. The only difference being the the example that you have provided occurred without human causation. The fact that there are natural tipping points does not exclude the possibility that such a tipping point might be also provoked by human actions. For instance... let’s say that we spread coal dust over all the earths ice.... that would change ice’s reflective properties and in that way create a human caused tipping point of warming.,,

​

 

Link please

 

I dont think we have that trillions of tons of coal dust and plus it's a strawman.


I am just curious why does the AGW crowd always blame fossil fuel, when deforestation of the southern hemisphere is more a likely culprit for the rise in CO2?

 

Sorry no one owns Antarctica

 

Most of the world's population would be adversely affected by a 2 degree C. rise in the GMT. More heat waves and a large increase in river flooding would be widespread throughout the world. A few areas of the planet might be pleasant. Africa and most parts of Asia would probably suffer the most.

A 4 degree Celsius rise In GMT would be catastrophic and it is a possibility if the world's leaders don't respond to the warnings of the climate science community.

This article from the Guardian discusses what it would be like with a 4 degree GMT rise in the year 2100. I view this scenario as unlikely but it emphasizes that humanity must at some point deal with
the problem of high carbon emissions. I copied some of it.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-heating-four-degrees-2100-change-way-we-live

A 4C rise in global average temperatures would force humans away from equatorial regions

Canada, Siberia, Scandinavia, and Alaska - The vast majority of humanity will live in high-latitude areas, where agriculture will be possible

Southern Europe - Saharan deserts will expand into southern and central Europe

Hindu Kush, Karakoram and Himalayas - Two-thirds of the glaciers that feed many of Asia’s rivers will be lost

New Zealand, Tasmania, Western Antarctica and Patagonia - Some of the only habitable parts of the southern hemisphere – likely to be very densely populated

Equatorial belt - High humidity causing heat stress across tropical regions will render them uninhabitable for much of the year. To the north and south will lie belts of inhospitable desert

Oceanic dead zones - Coral reefs, shellfish and plankton will be wiped out by rising acidity and algae starving the oceans of oxygen. Without prey, larger sea life will decline rapidly

Sea levels will be perhaps two metres higher and, more worryingly, we will be well on our way to an ice-free world, having passed the tipping points for the Greenland and west Antarctic ice sheets, committing us to at least 10 metres of sea-level rise in coming centuries. That’s because as ice sheets melt, their surface drops to a lower altitude where it is warmer, speeding up melting in a runaway feedback loop. Eventually, dark, heat-absorbing land is exposed, speeding the melting process even more. By 2100, we will also have lost most low-latitude glaciers, including two-thirds of the so called third pole of the Hindu Kush-Karakoram-Himalayan mountains and Tibetan plateau that feeds many of Asia’s important rivers.

However, most rivers, especially in Asia, will flood more often, according to research by Richard Betts, head of climate impacts at the Met Office Hadley Centre, because the hotter atmosphere will produce more intense monsoons, violent storms and extreme rainfall. His studies predict a wide equatorial belt of high humidity that will cause intolerable heat stress across most of tropical Asia, Africa, Australia and the Americas, rendering them uninhabitable for much of the year. Tropical forests of heat-tolerant species may well thrive in this wet zone with the high CO2 concentrations, especially with the disappearance of human infrastructure and agriculture, although the conditions will probably favour lianas (vines) over slower-growing trees, Betts says. To the south and north of this humid zone, bands of expansive desert will also rule out agriculture and human habitation. Some models predict that desert conditions will stretch from the Sahara right up through south and central Europe, drying rivers including the Danube and the Rhine

 

Global deforestation is responsible for 1/5 of the AGW rise approx

If you had read the ipcc reports you would see that that is acknowledged

 

Global warming is net beneficial up to ~ 3 degrees Centigrade. The cost of air conditioning is what drives the curve negative. You post is pure alarmism.

 

Link please

 

All past warming periods where mankind flourished.

 

Humanity has it engineering and scientific aptitudes we will use those to survive like always, short of a rogue star entering our solar system or something truly horrific we can counter most threats with our best minds using our reason the tool we wee given by God to place us in dominion of the planet.