4 ms·
It applies because the article exclusively discusses a 2 degree temperature rise. A 2 degree temperature rise is not enough to cause widespread crop failures,
by aeternum 3y ago
It applies because the article exclusively discusses a 2 degree temperature rise.
A 2 degree temperature rise is not enough to cause widespread crop failures, significantly increased natural disasters, nor the other things you mention.
Everything in life has pros and cons, here a 2 degree temperature rise will result in 5 million humans saved, it's pretty disingenuous to not to at least mention that.
I even generally agree that a large temp increase 10-20+ degrees super risky and not something we should experiment with, but this fear mongering about 2 degrees is ridiculous and not based in science.
- magicalhippo 3y ago> It applies because the article exclusively discusses a 2 degree temperature rise. You are correct in pointing out that the headline is, at face value, incorrect. The context is that the 2 degrees C is a global average temperature increase compared to some fixed baseline. As an average it doesn't say anything about the variance. To illustrate, the average value of 4, 4, 5, 6, 6 and 1, 1, 5, 9, 9 are the same, 5. Our climate models however show that an increase in average temperature will most likely be accompanied by a fair increase in variance, meaning both much hotter and much colder weather. And it's this increase in variance that's the main issue.
- machina_ex_deus 3y agoThere's no research whatsoever connecting CO2 to increase in variance. This is pure speculation.