Home | About | Donate

'Terrifying' New Climate Models Warn of 6-7°C of Warming by 2100 If Emissions Not Slashed

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/09/17/terrifying-new-climate-models-warn-6-7degc-warming-2100-if-emissions-not-slashed

1 Like

Nothing to worry about as there is probably a more than a 50/50 chance all life will have vanished from this abused lovely planet by that time. All for money too! The 50/50 number is just a pure guess but based largely on Guy McPherson’s predictions which are much much worse.

http://guymcpherson.com/

1 Like

The worst-case scenario of 6.5-7.0°C of warming assumed continued economic expansion driven by growth of fossil fuel production. (article)

“I suspect, when all is said and done, we’re probably looking at something in the range of 3-4°C and no higher, at least for near-term warming,” Mann added. (also from the article)

I have always made decisions in the mountains with the worst case scenario in mind. It works.

Since three to four degrees is already catastrophic, six to seven is something rarely even talked about publicly by climate scientists, because this is then probably a true mass extinction even on par with the Big Five of the Phanerozoic, i.e., this is currently the ‘worst case’ scenario.

Ergo - Greta is right on track.

4 Likes

September 20 and 27 be out in the streets.

We have the capacity to make a new world but we must need to see our unity with all of Life and drag along the ignorant, the climate “deniers” who do not really deny climate but use their extreme separatist ideologies to allow millions to die at sea and in horrific border facilities.

5 Likes

Today, Tuesday September 17, also happens to be the first day in months we’ve had such a crystal clear view of nearly the entire icecap, via Worldview. Recent compaction has smoothed out the edge on the right-hand side, while long-term dispersion has roughened the other edges, but you can make out nearly the entire outline of the icecap by eye.

Zoom in and you’ll clearly see, even in the places where contraction should be bunching the ice (such as north of the Canadian Arctic) mainly rubble everywhere. This is what a dying icecap looks like, still dwindling past mid-September. This icecap is in hot water.

4 Likes

I really don’t know what Michael Mann is thinking with his 3-4C increase limit as if that’s much better than 6-7C. We’re not even at 2C and the ice caps are melting as well as the permafrost and fires are raging even above the Arctic Circle Cat5 hurricanes are becoming regular occurrences regions for growing food are diminishing due to heat and floods etc. It’s already pretty bad so I really don’t think there we be many humans around by the time it hit’s 3C. This all assumes that many of the world’s nuclear reactors continue to operate safely in spite of the growing lack of skilled operators and infrastructure to maintain and operate them. If several of them have accidents and melt down then this will be an entirely different situation but not for the better. These need to start being shutdown but I don’t like the chances of that happening anytime soon.

8 Likes

Michael Mann reassures us that we’re “probably” in the 3-4 degree range.

Dude, that is so not reassuring.

4 Likes

He knows thatb for God’s sake.

I’m not sure why everyone is worried about climate change. You’re going to die from massive amounts of radiation or the ensuing nuclear winter long before the climate has a chance to kill you. The idiots in the Pentagon are ramping up talk of “winning” a limited nuclear war because Trump wants to have a war with Iran and even the fascists know a conventional one is unwinnable. Don’t worry about 6 degrees over time, it’s the one million degrees kelvin in an instant that will get us.

1 Like

Chances are that even Greta won’t be alive in 81 years. So this is about Her grand children.

Problem is that Republicans and the ‘centrist’ 3rd way DINO’s like Biden, Pelosi, Chuckles don’t think that far ahead and just don’t give a damn

Another article way underestimating the climate catastrophe, never mentioning the bigger catastrophe–anthropogenic mass extinction caused by human population overload and growth.
Taboo topics, even for so-called progressives: there are too many of us, too many babies being born, our species is eating up the biosphere, destroying the lives of billions of other sentient beings, killing peace and quiet, beauty and blue skies.

3 Likes

Kevin Anderson and others have estimated the consequences of losing the icecap will likely draw the human population down to < 1 billion, if that cheers you up.

2 Likes

Another article citing year 2100 as a reference. The proverbial shit is hitting the fan NOW at only 1.7C above year 1750 baseline. 3C to 4C of warming is an extinction event outcome. I’m afraid we are a cooked goose. Just waiting for the lag time to catch up and end this human experiment…

3 Likes

The correct answer isn’t net zero greenhouse gas emissions. The correct answer is that we want to get back below 300 ppm asap.

4 Likes

How fast can an oak tree walk north? This problem puzzled climatologists in the 1970s when most of them didn’t yet have climate change to worry about.

The pessimists said that a squirrel could carry a new generation of oak tree about 100 feet north every 20 years or so. Then somebody discovered blue jays, acorn eaters that could bury an acorn a mile or more north every generation.

Can an oak tree walk 6 degrees Celsius north in 80 years? No way. We’re going to have lots of dead sticks for forests, all over the planet. Then we’re going to have fires.

1 Like

I just realized that all these folks who talk as if the human race deserved to be wiped out, probably haven’t truly accepted the reality (as it applies to them personally) of such an apocalypse. While they are ‘cheerfully’ waxing eloquent about population overload and so forth, it is likely that they blithely continue their own role in all of it without any real intention of doing something about it themselves (except ranting)! What do those who rant (endlessly) about overpopulation expect people to do about it exactly? Aside from not procreating there isn’t much left to be done (unless Trump the King gets his war…I mean gets his way) about it. Guy McFearson’s exaggerated claims of a soon to be catastrophe notwithstanding, Mann’s tortoise and the hare calmness about the pace of climate change notwithstanding, either way we are in trouble and need to be on the streets on the 20th and 27th.

I’d miss us if we were gone!

3 Likes

Ain’t happening with Trump in the White House. Probably won’t happen with the Roberts five on the Court either.

If we don’t slash the military budget, you can kiss the planet goodbye!

Your comment appears to be directed at my comment, but too bad you don’t have the courage to post your drivel as a direct reply to my original comment.
I’ve done what an individual can do to not contribute to the ruinous increase of human population by not reproducing, fighting for women’s reproductive rights, volunteering at abortion clinics, etc.
There are plenty of things that our species could do to slow down the rate of population increase, including free, safe, universal access to abortions, vasectomies and contraceptives worldwide, as well as de-incentivizing babymaking and explaining to every human on the planet that making children is not only ecologically destructive, it’s also creating yet another suffering sentient being that never had to exist.
Making new children is to consign yet another conscious being to a life of suffering and eventual death.
People like you lack conscience. Your ideology is specieism–the ultimate hubris, the idea that humans are the greatest species ever, and we get to do to all other species whatever we want.
You haven’t the capacity to feel empathy, guilt or shame for the billions of animals killed by humans each year, for vivisection, for the mass extinction event we’ve created. Your kind of prideful humans-first arrogance is how we got into this mess in the first place!

Wagging the dog for re-election. You can predict that the next, new-and-improved war–NuclearLite!–will be initiated according to a “money ball” statistical model set to maximize oil futures and the probability of Trump’s re-election, abetted by Biden. “We can’t change leaders in the middle of a war.” Oldest trick in the book (pending further instructions from Mohammad Bin Salman, of course).