Catastrophic Climate Change: If you sugar-coat the poison pill, it will still kill you.
Models vs. Reality
The point of models is to allow for forecasting and planning while reducing the cost or risk of working
through various scenarios and options. However, when the models and reality don't agree, reality always
casts the vote that counts. If the weather and current data don't align with the model, the model is wrong.
I am a big supporter of using models, but not of falling in love with them. The problem with the IPCC
modeling, in my opinion, is that it is based on historical data, and our climate is no longer like the
historical data we have from recent decades. In many cases, the curves drawn assume a linear trend, but
there is really no reason to believe that the trend line of arbitrary meaurement units like temperatures
will behave in a linear way. Given what we do know of tipping points, thresholds, feedback loops and increasing
amounts of greenhouse gas emissions, an exponential curve seems more likely to me than a linear prediction
of the future. Which means, we have less time to change course than the IPCC says. And as of the end of 2018,
the IPCC says we have 12 years. My opinion: we don't have nearly that much time to make a 180-degree turn
on our fossil fuel consumption behaviour. And we're going to have to make some other changes if we truly
want to minimize the damage that's coming.
I'm not alone in this opinion; consensus is growing.
January 2019 -
A Planet in Crisis: The Heatís on Us (Dahr Jamail in Truthout)