4 ms·

Or never

vkou 3y ago
We're currently at 1.2C, and almost every new year, we emit more carbon than we have in any other year in human history.
- oezi 3y ago
  The developed countries have made tremendous strides to reduce CO2 while continuing to grow. China is also investing heavily in reducing their dependency on fossil imports.
  - leesalminen 3y ago
    > China is also investing heavily in reducing their dependency on fossil imports. Sure they want to import less LNG because of increased cost and unstable geopolitics. But they are continuing to build huge amounts of new coal plants (which is largely domestically sourced).
- gary_0 3y ago
  If I'm reading these charts right, it's more CO2 per year than at any point on the geological record.
  - netjiro 3y ago
    iirc: we are changing atmospheric CO2 many times faster than the PT Extinction! ... quick search [1] [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22298-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22298-7
waboremo 3y ago
What's the purpose of denying recorded averages[1]? It's a given 1.5 will happen, as none of the drastic measures have been acted on and most goals have not been hit. [1] https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/...
- revelio 3y ago
  Denying recorded averages in this case is unfortunately very reasonable, because temperature graphs don't show recorded averages. That is a common misconception that governments are happy to encourage. Modern temperature graphs are the output of models. The raw data isn't reported. This results in strange artifacts like record breaking temperatures that later become un-record breaking due to revision of historical values. In fact, the "recorded" temperature for every month in history changes every month: https://retractionwatch.com/2021/08/16/will-the-real-hottest-month-on-record-please-stand-up/ https://retractionwatch.com/2021/08/16/will-the-real-hottest... NOAAGlobalTempv5 is a reconstructed dataset, meaning that the entire period of record is recalculated each month with new data. Based on those new calculations, the new historical data can bring about updates to previously reported values.
- gibsonf1 3y ago
  I think the track record of climate predictions using Co2 etc have been all wrong, so a reasonable person would assume that the chance of additional predictions being wrong is quite high. Additionally, the actual science (by objective scientists) demonstrating human generated cO2 having any impact on global temperature has not been found, and arguably, the theory not behaving in the way the promoters of it have predicted over the last decade with all the models being wrong is quite good evidence for the theory not being true. Its hyper political actually, so a good question for this would be why? Similar things happened with the science of Covid, it also went political, and again, why?

Or never

vkou 3y ago

We're currently at 1.2C, and almost every new year, we emit more carbon than we have in any other year in human history.

oezi 3y ago
The developed countries have made tremendous strides to reduce CO2 while continuing to grow. China is also investing heavily in reducing their dependency on fossil imports.
- leesalminen 3y ago
  > China is also investing heavily in reducing their dependency on fossil imports. Sure they want to import less LNG because of increased cost and unstable geopolitics. But they are continuing to build huge amounts of new coal plants (which is largely domestically sourced).
gary_0 3y ago
If I'm reading these charts right, it's more CO2 per year than at any point on the geological record.
- netjiro 3y ago
  iirc: we are changing atmospheric CO2 many times faster than the PT Extinction! ... quick search [1] [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22298-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22298-7

waboremo 3y ago

What's the purpose of denying recorded averages[1]? It's a given 1.5 will happen, as none of the drastic measures have been acted on and most goals have not been hit. [1] https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/...

revelio 3y ago
Denying recorded averages in this case is unfortunately very reasonable, because temperature graphs don't show recorded averages. That is a common misconception that governments are happy to encourage. Modern temperature graphs are the output of models. The raw data isn't reported. This results in strange artifacts like record breaking temperatures that later become un-record breaking due to revision of historical values. In fact, the "recorded" temperature for every month in history changes every month: https://retractionwatch.com/2021/08/16/will-the-real-hottest-month-on-record-please-stand-up/ https://retractionwatch.com/2021/08/16/will-the-real-hottest... NOAAGlobalTempv5 is a reconstructed dataset, meaning that the entire period of record is recalculated each month with new data. Based on those new calculations, the new historical data can bring about updates to previously reported values.
gibsonf1 3y ago
I think the track record of climate predictions using Co2 etc have been all wrong, so a reasonable person would assume that the chance of additional predictions being wrong is quite high. Additionally, the actual science (by objective scientists) demonstrating human generated cO2 having any impact on global temperature has not been found, and arguably, the theory not behaving in the way the promoters of it have predicted over the last decade with all the models being wrong is quite good evidence for the theory not being true. Its hyper political actually, so a good question for this would be why? Similar things happened with the science of Covid, it also went political, and again, why?