3 ms·

> we could be drastically overestimating Would you mind explaining this bit? Besides [1], which hardly changes the big picture and came out literally last mont

> we could be drastically overestimating Would you mind explaining this bit? Besides [1], which hardly changes the big picture and came out literally last month, what evidence have you seen in the last couple decades of following climate change that suggest to you that the likelihood that we have been "drastically overestimating" the rate is anything comparable to the likelihood that we have been correct (if not underestimating)? From as far back as I can remember, the predictions have only stayed about the same or gotten more dire. They used to say weather patterns would get more intense, with more storms etc., and they indeed have. They say sea levels would rise and I really have no reason to believe they cannot calculate the rise correctly. I would think that if climate scientists had no idea what they're talking about, we could point to their erroneous predictions and prove them wrong? [1] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/03/one-part-of-greenland-ice-growing/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/03/one-p...

ramraj07 8y ago
I definitely am not refuting the estimates by climate scientists about our worsening climate rates; I will totally assume that the rate they suggest is the expected value until proven otherwise. However, I will also not be surprised if things get far worse extremely fast, or if they actually suddenly start getting better (or slowing down). My only rationale for this belief is that as we go into warmer and warmer climate, we are also going into a territory that the scientists themselves have no real data for - literally uncharted territory. I'm sure they have run models to extrapolate their predictions but the actual fact that we are already experiencing climate that has not been seen for however amount of time means any prediction has to be taken with a slight grain of salt. Practically speaking, we always hear of the finding that global warming might release methane bodies or it's turning into a runaway chain reaction. We don't even know how many other chain reaction scenarios exist that have not even been considered. Similarly (though with orders of magnitude less likelihood even for me), there exists possibilities that excessive warming into uncharted temperatures might trigger some feedback that might slow this warming too. I'm not counting on it but I am not ready to % exclude it yet either.
- jussij 8y ago
  > there exists possibilities that excessive warming into uncharted temperatures might trigger some feedback that might slow this warming too. I very much doubt this is the case. What is happening to the world can be explained by science and using scientific principles the changes can be predicted by modelling. The hard part is creating the model, only because the problem domain is very complex. But what we have seen, is over time that modelling has been getting better. Now if there was some possibilities that excessive warming into uncharted temperatures might trigger some sort of cooling effect then surely that would have come out in the modelling.
- sooheon 8y ago
  You're right we're not sure, but splitting the difference like this sounds like you're equivocating the two possibilities. "Oh, it could get worse, it could get better, we just don't know." When the reality might be a 90:10 relative likelihood in a particular direction.

ramraj07 8y ago

I definitely am not refuting the estimates by climate scientists about our worsening climate rates; I will totally assume that the rate they suggest is the expected value until proven otherwise. However, I will also not be surprised if things get far worse extremely fast, or if they actually suddenly start getting better (or slowing down). My only rationale for this belief is that as we go into warmer and warmer climate, we are also going into a territory that the scientists themselves have no real data for - literally uncharted territory. I'm sure they have run models to extrapolate their predictions but the actual fact that we are already experiencing climate that has not been seen for however amount of time means any prediction has to be taken with a slight grain of salt. Practically speaking, we always hear of the finding that global warming might release methane bodies or it's turning into a runaway chain reaction. We don't even know how many other chain reaction scenarios exist that have not even been considered. Similarly (though with orders of magnitude less likelihood even for me), there exists possibilities that excessive warming into uncharted temperatures might trigger some feedback that might slow this warming too. I'm not counting on it but I am not ready to % exclude it yet either.

jussij 8y ago
> there exists possibilities that excessive warming into uncharted temperatures might trigger some feedback that might slow this warming too. I very much doubt this is the case. What is happening to the world can be explained by science and using scientific principles the changes can be predicted by modelling. The hard part is creating the model, only because the problem domain is very complex. But what we have seen, is over time that modelling has been getting better. Now if there was some possibilities that excessive warming into uncharted temperatures might trigger some sort of cooling effect then surely that would have come out in the modelling.
sooheon 8y ago
You're right we're not sure, but splitting the difference like this sounds like you're equivocating the two possibilities. "Oh, it could get worse, it could get better, we just don't know." When the reality might be a 90:10 relative likelihood in a particular direction.