6 ms·

It's a well known "dirty" secret that aerosols drive (short lived) cooling effects and that this effect is very significant [0]. In fact, the climate models use

It's a well known "dirty" secret that aerosols drive (short lived) cooling effects and that this effect is very significant [0]. In fact, the climate models used in the OP nature paper would not be useful if they didn't account for these aerosols in a meaningful way. Scientists measure aerosols using a mix of different tricks (optical density sensors - AERONET, satellites with hyperspectal sensors, local air pollution sensors, etc). In my work in industrial air quality we occasionally joke that we are doing a good job if we exacerbate global warming. 0. https://skepticalscience.com/images/Radiative_Forcing_Summary.gif https://skepticalscience.com/images/Radiative_Forcing_Summar...

swed420 1y ago
Further reading for the curious https://medium.com/@samyoureyes/the-busy-workers-handbook-to-the-apocalypse-7790666afde7 https://medium.com/@samyoureyes/the-busy-workers-handbook-to...
- hammyhavoc 1y ago
  Anything from somewhere more credible than Medium?
  - andyjsong 1y ago
    https://www.economist.com/interactive/asia/2025/05/28/if-india-chokes-less-it-will-fry-more?utm_medium=social-media.content.np&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=editorial-social&utm_content=discovery.content&fbclid=IwY2xjawLAijFleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFVRWFwNTF0QUxRTGZnSXVHAR6A70oL6J7Llv150x430tVjVhmih5-A2NovxmIYYyhnDxrbI7SBrSc2Khbfhg_aem_pzWy1n5s7cheIbyaiZkGiA https://www.economist.com/interactive/asia/2025/05/28/if-ind... TL;DR India should be hotter, but due to sulfur dioxide emissions at ground level the rate of warming is a third less. For reference, the current rate of warming is ~0.25C per decade.
    - SlowTao 1y ago
      And yet again, in a weird way, India lives up to the adage of being disappointing to both pessimists and optimists.
  - swed420 1y ago
    The article is well cited with external references if you're interested in validating the claims made.
    - defrost 1y ago
      FWiW I've been in geophysical exploration, mapping, and modeling since the 1980s and have no issue with the IPCC's reports on AGW. (I'm also responsible for posting this submission after reading the paper linked). From your linked medium article: By 2050 total human population will likely be under 2 billion. Humans, along with most other animals, will go extinct before the end of this century. These impacts are locked in and cannot be averted. are all things I don't agree with. How can you validate (ie prove) these claims? NB: Climate aside, the current "birthrate crisis" that the natalists scream about will see a flattening of population growth by 2050 .. that leaves ~ 8 billion to vanish to reach the 2 billion asserted.
      - swed420 1y ago
        The statement directly following your lifted intro quotes is > Everything in this article is supporting information for this conclusion. So, > How can you validate (ie prove) these claims? By reading the rest of the article and its references. As you probably know, not many things in this realm can be proven with 100% certainty.
        defrost 1y ago
        Which falsifies These impacts are locked in and cannot be averted. trivially.
        swed420 1y ago
        It's not as outlandish as you're attempting to paint it as, considering the author is assuming that capital interests remain in control when making such a claim. And under that assumption, it's a bit crazy to think anything but depopulation will happen. Everything points to it being in their playbook; the blatant mishandling of COVID (which is far from over) by the uniparty being one of many glaring examples.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- getnormality 1y ago
  I skimmed the piece. Despite the repeated claims, no evidence is given for agricultural failure on any timeline. The very first sentence says: > Climate change will cause agricultural failure and subsequent collapse of hyperfragile modern civilization, likely within 10–15 years. No evidence is provided for this. The closest thing is some very brief discussion of saltwater increasingly interfering with rice cultivation in some areas of Southeast Asia. Everything else is ungrounded speculation. And regarding those poor rice farmers, apparently a lot of them are switching to more lucrative shrimp farming when salinity is high: https://www.voanews.com/a/rising-salinity-threatens-rice-crops-on-southeast-asia-s-sinking-coast-/6729518.html https://www.voanews.com/a/rising-salinity-threatens-rice-cro... This is not to say that climate change is great. Just that this is not a reliable source.
  - defrost 1y ago
    Agriculture will shift .. which is different to fail. Eg: Long established wine grapes in both France and mainland Australia have seen production falls already as local climates change in response to global parameters. Brown Brothers (IIRC, an Australian wine label) has opened new vineyards further south (closer to the south pole) in Tasmania. Another expected change is Cowboy Siberia; rodeo's, rodeo clowns, and vast cattle ranches on former tundra taking up the slack from US ranches as they bake and suffer from probable water issues.
    - SlowTao 1y ago
      I was not aware of Brown brothers new site, their site in Milwara is the definition of cozy. Next time I am in Tassie will have to check it out. Due to the climate shifts, 'New Zealand wine' is becoming a swear word within the wine industry here as they significantly out do our quality.
    - arbitrary_name 1y ago
      shiraz grapes replacing pinot in Tasmania the past few years as well.
    - selimthegrim 1y ago
- SlowTao 1y ago
  While I appreciate things like this that have a lot of references, and I have been aware of this piece since it was published two years back, it is one of those essays that tends to swing far too pessimistic on its claims. Not saying that there isn't an issue but things like 6-7 billion dead in the next 25 years, that is a bold claim. It reads similar to the works of Guy McPherson & James Kunstler in that they are continually pushing back the doomsday date as they miss again and again. But I think they do love the attention of publishing these dramatic predictions because it can make people feel like their lives are like that of fiction based drama. Alas normal life it much more humble and slow, at least for the most part. I do think we will hit a long term equilibrium of about 2 billion people like claimed but over more like 150-300 years as we balance out from overshoot and ecological blow back. But that is a very different real world experienced scenario to what they propose.
  - Tadpole9181 1y ago
    The fact is that we just do not know. But what we can actually observe is... Quite grim. And we are not even taking the smallest, tiniest steps we can possibly take to fixing it. We are basically doing only what is STRICTLY dictated by economy. And we know that it is simply not enough. Whether in 2 decades or 10, billions of human beings are going to die from the direct or indirect effects of climate change. And that is... Incomprehensible.
    - tomxor 1y ago
      > Whether in 2 decades or 10, billions of human beings are going to die from the direct or indirect effects of climate change. And that is... Incomprehensible. Just for some perspective... at the current global death rate, 2.4 billion die in two decades, and 12 billion die in 10. So it's not that incomprehensible. We have short lifespans, it seems more likely the human population will shrink to match loss of habitable land mass and ecological damage through simply expiring, rather than suddenly through some kind of dooms day event (granted I'm certain climate change will hurry it along). I'm going to use this bleak comment to suggest anyone reading make sure they go outside and smell the fresh air, life is short man, really short.
    - 1y ago
epolanski 1y ago
Large swaths of India are notably cooler than 30 years ago due to the aerosol effect.
- rr808 1y ago
  I never heard of this. A quick good shows its warming less faster, not sure about cooling. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/climate-change/indias-cooling-paradox https://www.downtoearth.org.in/climate-change/indias-cooling...

swed420 1y ago

Further reading for the curious https://medium.com/@samyoureyes/the-busy-workers-handbook-to-the-apocalypse-7790666afde7 https://medium.com/@samyoureyes/the-busy-workers-handbook-to...

hammyhavoc 1y ago
Anything from somewhere more credible than Medium?
- andyjsong 1y ago
  https://www.economist.com/interactive/asia/2025/05/28/if-india-chokes-less-it-will-fry-more?utm_medium=social-media.content.np&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=editorial-social&utm_content=discovery.content&fbclid=IwY2xjawLAijFleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFVRWFwNTF0QUxRTGZnSXVHAR6A70oL6J7Llv150x430tVjVhmih5-A2NovxmIYYyhnDxrbI7SBrSc2Khbfhg_aem_pzWy1n5s7cheIbyaiZkGiA https://www.economist.com/interactive/asia/2025/05/28/if-ind... TL;DR India should be hotter, but due to sulfur dioxide emissions at ground level the rate of warming is a third less. For reference, the current rate of warming is ~0.25C per decade.
  - SlowTao 1y ago
    And yet again, in a weird way, India lives up to the adage of being disappointing to both pessimists and optimists.
- swed420 1y ago
  The article is well cited with external references if you're interested in validating the claims made.
  - defrost 1y ago
    FWiW I've been in geophysical exploration, mapping, and modeling since the 1980s and have no issue with the IPCC's reports on AGW. (I'm also responsible for posting this submission after reading the paper linked). From your linked medium article: By 2050 total human population will likely be under 2 billion. Humans, along with most other animals, will go extinct before the end of this century. These impacts are locked in and cannot be averted. are all things I don't agree with. How can you validate (ie prove) these claims? NB: Climate aside, the current "birthrate crisis" that the natalists scream about will see a flattening of population growth by 2050 .. that leaves ~ 8 billion to vanish to reach the 2 billion asserted.
    - swed420 1y ago
      The statement directly following your lifted intro quotes is > Everything in this article is supporting information for this conclusion. So, > How can you validate (ie prove) these claims? By reading the rest of the article and its references. As you probably know, not many things in this realm can be proven with 100% certainty.
      - defrost 1y ago
        Which falsifies These impacts are locked in and cannot be averted. trivially.
        swed420 1y ago
        It's not as outlandish as you're attempting to paint it as, considering the author is assuming that capital interests remain in control when making such a claim. And under that assumption, it's a bit crazy to think anything but depopulation will happen. Everything points to it being in their playbook; the blatant mishandling of COVID (which is far from over) by the uniparty being one of many glaring examples.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
getnormality 1y ago
I skimmed the piece. Despite the repeated claims, no evidence is given for agricultural failure on any timeline. The very first sentence says: > Climate change will cause agricultural failure and subsequent collapse of hyperfragile modern civilization, likely within 10–15 years. No evidence is provided for this. The closest thing is some very brief discussion of saltwater increasingly interfering with rice cultivation in some areas of Southeast Asia. Everything else is ungrounded speculation. And regarding those poor rice farmers, apparently a lot of them are switching to more lucrative shrimp farming when salinity is high: https://www.voanews.com/a/rising-salinity-threatens-rice-crops-on-southeast-asia-s-sinking-coast-/6729518.html https://www.voanews.com/a/rising-salinity-threatens-rice-cro... This is not to say that climate change is great. Just that this is not a reliable source.
- defrost 1y ago
  Agriculture will shift .. which is different to fail. Eg: Long established wine grapes in both France and mainland Australia have seen production falls already as local climates change in response to global parameters. Brown Brothers (IIRC, an Australian wine label) has opened new vineyards further south (closer to the south pole) in Tasmania. Another expected change is Cowboy Siberia; rodeo's, rodeo clowns, and vast cattle ranches on former tundra taking up the slack from US ranches as they bake and suffer from probable water issues.
  - SlowTao 1y ago
    I was not aware of Brown brothers new site, their site in Milwara is the definition of cozy. Next time I am in Tassie will have to check it out. Due to the climate shifts, 'New Zealand wine' is becoming a swear word within the wine industry here as they significantly out do our quality.
  - arbitrary_name 1y ago
    shiraz grapes replacing pinot in Tasmania the past few years as well.
  - selimthegrim 1y ago
SlowTao 1y ago
While I appreciate things like this that have a lot of references, and I have been aware of this piece since it was published two years back, it is one of those essays that tends to swing far too pessimistic on its claims. Not saying that there isn't an issue but things like 6-7 billion dead in the next 25 years, that is a bold claim. It reads similar to the works of Guy McPherson & James Kunstler in that they are continually pushing back the doomsday date as they miss again and again. But I think they do love the attention of publishing these dramatic predictions because it can make people feel like their lives are like that of fiction based drama. Alas normal life it much more humble and slow, at least for the most part. I do think we will hit a long term equilibrium of about 2 billion people like claimed but over more like 150-300 years as we balance out from overshoot and ecological blow back. But that is a very different real world experienced scenario to what they propose.
- Tadpole9181 1y ago
  The fact is that we just do not know. But what we can actually observe is... Quite grim. And we are not even taking the smallest, tiniest steps we can possibly take to fixing it. We are basically doing only what is STRICTLY dictated by economy. And we know that it is simply not enough. Whether in 2 decades or 10, billions of human beings are going to die from the direct or indirect effects of climate change. And that is... Incomprehensible.
  - tomxor 1y ago
    > Whether in 2 decades or 10, billions of human beings are going to die from the direct or indirect effects of climate change. And that is... Incomprehensible. Just for some perspective... at the current global death rate, 2.4 billion die in two decades, and 12 billion die in 10. So it's not that incomprehensible. We have short lifespans, it seems more likely the human population will shrink to match loss of habitable land mass and ecological damage through simply expiring, rather than suddenly through some kind of dooms day event (granted I'm certain climate change will hurry it along). I'm going to use this bleak comment to suggest anyone reading make sure they go outside and smell the fresh air, life is short man, really short.
  - 1y ago

epolanski 1y ago

Large swaths of India are notably cooler than 30 years ago due to the aerosol effect.

rr808 1y ago
I never heard of this. A quick good shows its warming less faster, not sure about cooling. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/climate-change/indias-cooling-paradox https://www.downtoearth.org.in/climate-change/indias-cooling...