2023: A Year In Climate Change
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 дек 2023
- A lot happened in the world of climate in 2023. Let's talk about it. Thanks to GiveWell for supporting the video. Get your first donation matched at www.givewell.org
Sign up for my monthly newsletter: www.simonoxfphys.com/newsletter
Skeptical Science weekly roundup newsletter: skepticalscience.com/subscrib...
You can support the channel by becoming a patron at / simonoxfphys
REFERENCES
www.simonoxfphys.com/blog/2023/12/22/references-for-my-2023-review-of-climate-change-news
--------- II ---------
More about me www.simonoxfphys.com/
My second channel - / simonclarkerrata
Threads - www.threads.net/@simonoxfphys
Instagram - / simonoxfphys
Twitch - / drsimonclark
--------- II ---------
Music by Epidemic Sound: nebula.tv/epidemic
Some stock footage courtesy of Getty.
Edited by Luke Negus.
In this video I talk about the biggest climate news stories of 2023, covering the big climate news of the year: new scientific papers, temperature records being broken, COP28, human impacts of climate change, and the progress made this year to decarbonise the global economy.
Huge thanks to my supporters on Patreon: Daniel Chen, Gary Stark, Martina Alini, Vernon Swanepoel, Adam Scott, Felix Winkler, CC, Ivari Tölp, Thomas Charbonnel, Mark Moore, Philipp Legner, Zoey O'Neill, Veronica Castello-Vooght, Heijde, Paul H and Linda L, Marcus Bosshard, Dan Sherman, Matthew Powell, Adrian Sand, Dan Nelson, The Cairene on Caffeine, Cody VanZandt, Igor Francetic, Daniel Irwin, bitreign33 , Thusto , Andy Hartley, Lachlan Woods, Dan Hanvey, Andrea De Mezzo.
Tristan Schefke, Theo coz 1-letter-name invites ridicule, Gunnstein Lye, Trevor Scheuing, Andy Giesen, Tony M Parker, Mathias Hüttenmüller, RomanConsul, Ave Jonathan Cahyadi, John Bate, Diaffixx , Kevin Gillard, Chris Conrey, Christian Weckner, Frida Sørensen, Ned Funnell, Aleksa Stankovic, Meagan, Indira Pranabudi, Sekhalis, Chaotic Brain Person, Simon H., Ben Cooper, Mark Injerd, dryfrog, Justin Warren, Angela Flierman, Alipasha Sadri, Calum Storey, Mattophobia, Riz, The Confusled, Simon Stelling, Gabriele Siino, Bjorn Bakker, Ieuan Williams, Tom Malcolm, GordonV47, Leonard Neamtu, Brady Johnston, Louise K., Rapssack, Kevin O'Connor, Timo Kerremans, Thomas Rintoul, Lars Hubacher, Ashley Wilkins, Samuel Baumgartner, ST0RMW1NG 1, Morten Engsvang, Cio Cio San, Farsight101, Haris Karimjee, K.L, fourthdwarf, Stormchaser007 , Sam Ryan, Felix Freiberger, Chris Field, Kolbrandr, Vinni, Shane O'Brien, Alex, Fujia Li, Jesper Koed, Jonathan Craske, Albrecht Striffler, Jack Troup, Sven Ebel, Sean Richards, Kedar , Alastair Fortune, Mat Allen, Krisztián Török, Colin J. Brown, Mach_D, Keegan Amrine, Simon Donkers, Kodzo , James Bridges, Liam , Wendover Productions, Kendra Johnson. 
Наука
The fact that the first bit of good news was basically "we now know better what will go wrong" was a real punch in the gut. But I suppose knowing our models better is a good news anyway
The science types are pretty good at mapping what's going on.
Shame doing what the science types say would mean slightly less money going to already wealthy people. So our corporate overlords have unilaterally decided to not do anything the science types say.
@@Praisethesunson it would also mean a big change of the lifestyle of many people. Mass transit would be much cheaper than cars. Appartements much cheaper than singlr family homes. Meat much more expensive than vegeteriam food. In my opinion a positive change, but that s where we see the popular resistance against these policies.
There are aspects which wouldnt change human way of life though, like electricity generation and heating.
@@mohamedaminekoubaa5231 "Meat much more expensive than vegeterian food." If this means meat getting considerably more expensive, no thanks. If it means vegetarian food becoming cheaper, sure ig.
@@CarlosAM1meat is massively subsidized to keep it this cheap. Vegetarian food would get a bit cheaper though with economies of scale.
Don't forget the "good news" about China's solar panel farms.....that videos originally posted to China's social media showed were not even being plugged in....."Potemkin village" is the closest thing that describes the CCP's "green technology" developments. (to be fair, it's the entire country like that by this point) They have whole FIELDS of EVs (both ones for bikes, and ones for cars) just sitting out in the weather because they were only built to pad the numbers.
Man, the emperor penguins story is sad as hell 😥😭
Yeah, I really wish we could get them to shelter on land.
One of the islands around Antarctica would be great.
Unfortunately I don't know if the animals are capable of making that change unassisted.
And they haven't got the understanding of how unjust their situation is. That another animal has caused them this incredible loss of life. :(
I wish you would realize productions like this use "baby penguins" in the exact same way Powell used "babies in incubators" to take us to war over false pretenses. Actual science wouldn't need theatrics in the exact same way a vaccine to a pandemic doesnt need a free cheeseburger to incentivize it.
It can't be true. EVERY penguin chick died? They all drowned? Sorry, when you make statements like that, you lose all credibility. There may be ice loss. There may have been chicks that died, but when you exaggerate your claims to play on people's emotion, you expose your dishonesty.
@@borissmolden5040
No one said it was every chick, however the ice melted before the chicks fledged in 4 out of 5 nesting sites.
1 nesting site isn't enough for the species to survive in the long run if this keeps happening.
Tomorrow is Xmas eve in Northwestern Ontario, and we can still go physically touch grass in our front yards! Everything is fine!!
My brother took his boat out to go fishing today in the region.
@@swaggery we do have our lakes iced over, but barely… growing up we would have had 3’ of ice by now, instead last week we had 8” on a small shallow lake(freezes faster)
Yesterday went for a nice bike ride in 11 degrees Celsius. Western Canada. This is usually the snowiest, almost coldest time of year...where I'd need to wait for March for such temperatures.
I can still physically go and touch grass, still no snow
@Bundysvideos In Wisconsin we would have 3-5'. We got 6" max.
Rather than just mentioning that James Hansen´s work is not in the mainstream of climate science, I´d love to hear your opinions on his work and why You don´t agree. I actually HOPE he is wrong, but haven´t found any good arguments against his work so far...
Dr Michael Mann criticized some of Dr Hansen's work. From what I understand Dr Mann didn't like to do it, but science is science.
Mann's response was thoroughly unconvincing to me. Most of his points hinge on the current climate models predictions disagreeing with Hansen, but central to Hansen's case is that climate models are underestimating aerosol forcing, so obviously they're not going to agree.
Maybe Hansen's approach is flawed, but having read Hansen's case that there's significant warning in the pipeline, and the rebuttal, I'm much more convinced by Hansen, as are many, though probably still a minority, of climate scientists.
It’s Dec.23rd here in northern Michigan and there is literally no snow on the ground. I sure hope this opens people’s eyes to the reality of climate change.
Western swede here, we havent had a propper winter in a decade.
When I were young we had a snowy christmas every year, now we have a few days of snow and the rest is slush...
South Indian (Tamil) here, Got the worst floods in the history of Meteorology, one in my state Capital,Chennai, another one in the southernmost tip of India, where it rained 1000mm in 24 hours. That was THE RECORD FOR 24 HOURS RAIN AT THE Southern India. People are starting to wake up to climate Crisis
Southern Spain here, winter just straight up doesn't exist here anymore, it's a constant never ending summer
@@saipremkumar4787
Christ, and I complained about not having snow.
Stay safe bud!
Same in East Europe. The storm Pia which has a big potential for precipitation, because of the warming the snow is just for the high mountains. Low altitudes just rain.
And for Christmas the announced temperatures will reach 18C max.
And this scenario repeated in the last winter seasons..
While the scientific consensus may be that climate change is proceeding in line with expectation, those who invoke the
spectre of irreversible damage should not be dismissed out of hand. While the climate system may yet possess some resilience, the same cannot be said of our ecosystems, some of which have already suffered irreversible degradation, even collapse. In an era of convergent environmental crises, the framing of our predicament is crucial. Climate change is just one consequence of our unsustainable socioeconomic behaviours. Those who frame our precarious position primarily in terms of a climate crisis are missing the bigger picture.
Well said. The climate crisis is just one of many environmental problems of the anthropogenic mass extinction, and the various solutions to these may be contradictory, e. g. plastic packaging uses less emissions than paper, but causes more harm to marine life.
So do you save the polar bears, or the sea turtles? Sally LePage made a great video on this topic.
I believe claims of irreversible damage are usually dismissed more because they don't encourage people to act as much as if the irreversible damage is something in the future. It's a PR balance between hope and the gravity of the situation.
Yeah, there's a real effort to kindle hope in the newest generation, as they are more depressed than any other before. We need to make them have a hope their world can be saved, otherwise they'll just give up trying - and a lot of them are really doing that.
The United Nations do not say we are in an extinction period. Eco systems have come and gone ever since the world was formed. The earth has been around for 14.5 billion years and has seen high CO2 low CO2 high temps low temps etc etc. It is NOT FRAGILE. How can you think a gas in such minute quantities can cause the earth any problems at all. get real and start by not listening to this paid for mouth.
We are headed to a time of the pre cambrian i think it's called, mass extinction where it stayed a hot house earth for ten million years and killed 96% of all species, what is this talk of resilience? The earth has had five mass extinctions and in between a different organism was top dog, we either have a choice now, to stop driving or the next species that survives on the earth most probably won't be us.
A sixty litre tank of diesel has 636 kw's of energy in it, according to my last bill that would be 5.2 months of my electrical energy, a huge amount of energy to go for a sunday drive. Stop driving, for pleasure, is the only thing we can do immediately and has the greatest affect. With 20 years for this amount of energy to be able to work itself through the system there is no " hope" for the next generation, every day we keep going in this way the glass keeps overflowing.
While our system is responsible for this, any " ism" would have still used the amount of energy that was available from oil, it's the inability to change that we find ourselves and again and other ism would have the same but let's not forget, our precarious position right now is primarily a climate one, otherwise, pray tell what is the bigger picture?
We may have to cease using the monetary system we have, directly because of the climate, surely that's pretty big?
A future video on the climate doom movement/sentiment sounds like it would be interesting
While I do feel some doom, It has the effect of making me fight HARDER.
It has never made me want to give up.
“I accepted to come to this meeting to have a sober and mature conversation. I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist. There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C.”
- Sultan Al Jaber, President of COP 28, also CEO of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company
Seems more and more likely, scenario SSP5-8.5 of the IPCC assessment may come to fruition (or at least the higher end of the spectrum). I say enjoy what you can, while you still can; pity the generations to come.
I'd be interested in a focus on how climate doom intersects with the interests of the fossil fuel industry.
This issue is serious. Better tax the population a lot more.
@@karmageddon9136 Trust me, if it's taxes that are the concern, there is no need to look to climate policy for that. That's what the "defense" budget is for.
And if you're really worried about what's being lifted out of your wallet every month, you might want to have a look at those oil companies that are posting Billions in profits. After all, it's you who are paying for those mega-yachts that the oil executives like to vacation on, after they get their $20 Million each year.
At the edge of extinction only love remains.
Nature bats last 😮
Ok guys time to get serious. My new years resolution for 2024 is to try and make a real positive impact (not just in behavior, veganism, recycling etc.). Donating a portion of my earnings to charities that help with climate justice and resilience, helping friends and family with growing food at home and planting native species of plants and maybe even try some politics stuff if i figure out how to do that with the most impact.
I encourage you all to try your best, instead of giving up. I know its hard against all the bad stuff, but we have to try our best.
It's a hard fight, I would recommend developing a product which does something essential that's eco friendly I've been fighting for a few years now it's a up hill battle. please join in the fight we need more soldiers.
Sooo I believe we are Ducked!!!
The best way to fight climate change is on the industrial level. You won't make much of a difference. The best thing you can do is to make this a bigger problem for politicians. They just react to us. The more pressure we put on them the more they will eventually listen. And also try to convince others members of the public but that is easier said than done.
@@STJukes We didn't stop abusing horses because of PETA, it was because cars where better. We didn't stop killing whales for blubber because it was wrong,bkerosene was better. The world changes when better products come to market and they are embraced. Most Commercial industry runs on 4% margins loss of market share changes industry or they die let's exploit that weakness by developing and supporting better products that just happen to be eco friendly.
@@STJukes and let's be honest government is in bed with big business. We have all the power people just need to realise we do.
I’m saddened to hear about the loss of the penguins. 😢
And that is just the start
@@xaviermaster1popstart star
Polar bears are next, very likely killed by home owners, as their ice is becoming water.
HOW on earth did i not get to hear about those baby penguins drowning!?! :O That is truly heart-breaking! and really hits home just how bad things have been getting but on a scale thats not too big for me to comprehend, while being totally devastating! and hitting me on an emotional level.
I do try my best to keep up to date by watching several climate focused youtube channels (no tv). Every week i'll have watched between 2-20 vids
I think if this information was wide-spread it would hit home to people in a way that numbers and facts just cannot -an entire year's worth of new-borns!
There is more of a threat however of baby penguins freezing to death since their downy covering doesn't repel rain!
If it is any consolation 1 of the 5 nesting sites did have at least some surviving chicks.
1 of 5 isn't enough if this happens every year.
main stream media doesn’t tell the truth, to many self interested billionaires to tell the truth, sadly.
@@jimthain8777 small consolation indeed. I hope the adult penguins can adapt -keep their chicks on solid ground, cos even if humans did everything we should be doing 100% from today, it'll still take time to reverse the climate from where it is and i can easily predict population collapse at such a low rate of survival
Sadly, bad things are happening on a scale way too big for the emperor penguins to understand.
In a recent video the lecturer pointed out that yes it's positive news that renewables are going on line faster than ever, but the switch over to renewables has had almost no measurable impact on the volume of fossil fuel extraction. Not good as the only serious way to effectively address climate change is to leave fossil fuels in the ground.
So the increased renewable capacity was consumed by growing energy demand. Jevon's paradox at work.
@@deus_ex_machina_ Jevon's paradox is not generally applicable. It's doomer fuel.
The electrification of ground transport has resulted in a significant drop in oil use. 1.8 million barrels per day compared to what it would have been without electrification. Half the coal mines in America have closed in ten years. The grid is getting cleaner. Massive changes don't happen overnight. In a couple years, half of all new cars will be electric. It will take longer for the entire fleet to change over, but it will eventually happen. By 2040 there will be relatively few hydrocarbon burning vehicles on the road. Gas stations will close.
@@incognitotorpedo42 Good news, but globally 1.8 million barrels per day is barely a rounding error. If it were just the U.S. then it would be a significant 10% drop. At minimum we need to leave all the coal that's still in the ground in the ground. As good as that sounds I'm still skeptical anything significant will happen especially since the fossil fuel producers are both doing everything int heir political and economic power to make sure nothing meaningful actually happens and are working very hard to find alternate markets for their petroleum products such as tripling plastic production well before 2040.
Yes, massive changes don't happen overnight, but they need to and there are powerful political and economic forces actively working to make sure that cash cow is alive and kicking long after any critical threshold is crossed. The way economics works supply and demand could actually make it harder to cut fossil fuel extraction by becoming a cheap and readily available alternative for both governments and industries, and loopholes will always be put in place.
The ultra rich are convinced their wealth protects them from any negative fallout of climate change and are only interested in protecting their standard of living.
As greenhouse gas producers become more desperate their tactics will follow. It's not just the oil and coal producers, it's the shippers, agricultural interests, construction, and other greenhouse gas generators that also have to get on board. Greed, power and short term gain are far more persuasive than the image of the world future generations will inherit, always has been. To make fossil fuels go away requires finding something that makes huge volumes of easy money, and what ever that might be itself will have its own ecological consequences.
Renewables are still accelerating. Models put this year (if not last) as the year of maximum emissions. Then emissions will start to go down.
Will they go down fast enough to limit warming to 1.5 degrees? Certainly not. To limit warming to 2 degrees? Maybe not. But the idea that our emissions are accelerating out of control and everything will only get worse and worse faster and faster is very incorrect.
So an issue I take with this good news is that it does downplay how urgent this crisis is. Most people will think “oh not a crisis then? Fuck it let’s keep doing what we are doing then”
As a farmer, I saw hints of climate change loooong time ago, and hearing climate deniers... I was responding, do you ever go outside? I can grow pumpkins now, before it was impossible :D
Thanks for the summary, Simon! And also for mentioning the weekly New Research compilation published on Skeptical Science by Doug Bostrom & Marc Kodack!
I get that nuclear isn’t a quick fix, but I can’t imagine why we’re still not expanding its use.
Regulatory and NIMBYs
Nuclear is expensive. A lot of the renewables are turning out to be quite cheap, so the case for nuclear has grown weaker. But if nuclear makes sense (and can be proven to be safe, eg no Russian plants without containment buildings and no Japanese plants near major earthquake fault lines), it should be considered.
@@jitteryjet7525 The initial investment is expensive, running costs are lower. Also there's proposals to replace coal plants with fission plants due to most of that equipment being the same so cheaper. Also fission is proven to be safe, less people have died as a result of fission reactors per watr than have in the mines in order to build more renewables per watt.
@@jitteryjet7525
That's a lie.
@@oldineamiller9007 Everything I say is a lie ;-)
Another outstanding piece, however, I agree with @rebdomine1 on the disappointing way that you characterized Hansen's findings. - although I'll remind that your piece on the history of climate science gave due respect to Dr. Hansen - who has and continues to be a model for conscientious, evidence-based scientists. What we need is a full segment on where Hansen's findings differ from the current consensus.
Simon, you do a thorough, excellent job of summing the situation we are experiencing. Your channel is one of many inspirations for mine and I wish you (and our planet) all the best in 2024.
Climate change is one of the symptoms of overshoot, along with environmental pollution, deforestation, decline in biodiversity, resource depletion and so on. Our impact on the planet's ecosystems are too big: we are consuming more (also renewable) resources than the Earth can regenerate and are producing more waste than the Earth can process, in other words, we exceed the bio capacity of planet Earth. The three main factors involved are population, affluence and technology. We cannot hope to solve the problem of overshoot by focusing only on one of these factors and leave the others unchecked. We cannot think we can innovate our way out of this while at the same time striving for eternal (exponential) economic growth on a finite planet, which we still do.
I'm very pessimistic however that we can turn the tide and here's why: because of evolution this tendency to consume all available resources and invade all available habitat is deeply ingrained in us, as well as other species. All species have a tendency exploit their environments to the best of their abilities, because evolution favors those species that are best at procreating. If a population is being kept in check by disease, food scarcity, predators and so on a relative stable population can last for a long time. If these constrains somehow are overcome, or (temporarily) fall away, a species population will explosively grow and develop into a plague. That is not a conscious action of (individuals of) the species, it's just the overall result of those individuals doing what they always do, or try to do. If the regeneration capacity of resources the environment are exceeded, sooner or later the resources will be depleted and the environment can no longer support the large population that has emerged, and the population will implode.
This is simply what's happening to our species right now. We have become ridiculously good at overcoming natural restraints like food scarcity, disease, and predators. This was not born out of bad habits or an evil plan, this situation just developed our evolutionary drive to survive and thrive that is within all 'successful' species. The only other thing than resource depletion that could stop this from happening is regulation, in our case self-regulation (I don't see any other agent powerful enough to regulate us). We are as close to that as any other species that ever lived, but not close enough. Only a minority of individuals of our species are even more or less aware of the situation, and we are far removed from actually properly managing the situation. I don't think that's because we are intrinsically evil, I think it's because we lack the ability. There's no shame in that, no other (Earth) species ever managed to do it.
So I think this whole overpopulation/overshoot (and future population implosion) saga of humanity is simply evolution playing itself out, and that it is and has always been inevitable. I'm not saying we are mere passive passengers on a train though and we should just sit tight and see where the train goes, we are on a ship without a captain and we all have a tiny little bit of influence on it's course. It's just not that we can turn the ship 180 degrees around just like that. But there's always bad, worse, worst and we should always try to aim for the best.
Creative Society studies and dreams 😮😊
Good points here, but I'd like to shift the emphasis somewhat. The consumption of the wealthy drives overshoot more than population growth does. (I say that as someone who would love to see a non-coercive reduction of our global population.) Overconsumption by the wealthy, as we currently have it, is not an evolutionary inevitability; it's cultural. Greed is universally human, yes, but some cultures manage it far better than others. Many Indigenous cultures have managing greed as a central moral teaching of their stories and worldviews. And it's worked. Many of those cultures have survived sustainably for tens of thousands of years. Yes, they've done so with lower technology and higher infant mortality, but I would not underestimate the role of culture in shaping behavior. We've even seen that it in recent decades in the radical shift in how many children it's seen as "normal" to have across most of the world. If we work on changing the cultural systems that are driving destruction, I do think destruction is not inevitable. Modern Homo sapiens has already made it for over 200,000 years; we are resilient and adaptable.
The crucial underlying problem is our use of fossil fuels, and we now appear to have reached peak oil, with shale oil being the last gasp.
@@klondike444 It's indeed fossil fuels which made it possible unleash previously unimaginable amounts of (cheap) energy to do work we used we used to to ourselves, or with the help of animals, and work that was previously impossible. This has enabled us to dramatically increase production, extraction of other renewable and non-renewable resources etc. which made the human enterprise and population grow exponentially, and now we are in overshoot. Now we are largely dependent on fossil fuels and it's very hard to move away from using them.
@@cmonc1984 Yet move away we will, like it or not. Transitioning to "green energy" is a fantasy. If not already familiar with it, see the work of Simon Michaux on energy and mineral resources. We have painted ourselves into a corner, and getting out of it won't be fun.
Thank you so much for your hard work, and all videos. Have a happy new year🎉💫🚀💥🫶🏼
Still object when people claim "1850-1900" was "pre-industrial". The second half of the nineteenth century was highly industrial in Europe, the US (and Canada), and even Japan once the Meiji Restoration got underway, as well in various smaller countries around the world.
The story about the emperor penguins ripped my heart out
Last year the end of December was about 12 °F (-11 °C) in my neck of the woods. This year we're staying between 40 & 50 °F (4.5 °C - 10 °C).
One or both of those years was an anomaly. I'm not a denialist, but climate change isn't happening that fast.
exactly as my thought@@incognitotorpedo42
May I request a video on James Hansen’s paper? You mentioned that most climate scientists do not believe it to be accurate, but in this very video you attribute changes in ocean temperature to changes in shipping habits. Sulfur emissions from bunker fuel are one of the primary issues that Hansen speaks on.
You are a great voice and educator, have a good holiday.
Love your videos Simon! I look forward to them every month.
This is a great video with solid analysis. I have to say though, the releasing critical information about the world ending apocalypse we face in newsletters is the reason scientists are losing the messaging battles in the media.
No snow. Im in Canada. Im so tired
Fossil fuels (in the form of gas-fired power stations) contributed only 16% of Britain's total electricity generation over the past week. Renewables (mainly wind) contributed 59%. For mid-December this is pretty remarkable.
It has been exceptionally blowy this week. I think renewables (wind/solar/hydro) may actually have surpassed fossil fuels for the first time ever this year.
Please up video quality to 4K60fps :)
I think someone telling you a lie
You can't have "renewables" without fossil fuels, and you can't run an industrial economy on electricity alone.
@@klondike444 Not yet.
That penguin story is so heartbreaking... The people who sowed fear surrounding nuclear power did so much damage.
There is no carbon neutrality without substantial investment in nuclear energy.
i think the accidents such as fukushima, sellafield, 3mile and chernobyl did the most for people's fears
@@kimwarburton8490 It all comes down to proper management and safety measures which have only gotten better since the days of 20th century reactor failures. Per gigawatt hour, nuclear is the least deadly form of electrical production we’ve ever had
@@PlanetZeroVideos i understand all that, i keep up to speed. Most people dont challenge their beliefs once cemented. the link to danger is too strong in the general public imo for a SMR roll-out and i think thats the only version of nuclear which can be built at the speed required
Wow, such a good insight, thanks for sharing!
Global Warming in the Pipeline was the best climate paper this year. Hansen doesn't say that we're going to experience run-away climate change in the next few years. He's talking about climate sensitivity, long feedback loops, loss of sea ice, stratospheric cooling, the aerosol effect, the same things you talk about. If his tone is too alarmist for you, maybe the science community needs a bit more of that right now. We're facing an existential threat in the coming decades. If Hansen's figures are a degree or two out, its still catastrophic, throw 2100 out the window.
And given Hansen's 40-year track record of being ahead of the pack and right about AGW, not taking his newest paper seriously is risky.
but also him postulating geoengineering sucks ass. we have to transcend this system so this doesn't ever fucking happen again as our ability to inflict change on planet further increases with technological progress. we have no mechanisms consensus on local, let alone global level in the world and if we don't get cooked, ever increasing resource extraction rising 1:1 with GDP by weight will slowly create more and more problems.
Hansen is an Astronomer and a lifelong NA$A administrator. Like Doom Pörn shock-journo McKibben, and now debunked Hockey-Schtick Michael Mann, Hansen has neither credentials nor the science career to be stating anything.
NA$A forced him to retire after he used his position to pimp a $1.3M Green award, that he failed to declare. You or I would be in an IRS prison!
Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious Scienter frauds. Cunning linguists. *Like Greta Thunberg $millionare Paid Child Actress.*
@@robertmarmaduke9721 You're an internet hack, throwing out baseless accusations.
@@TheDanEdwards Do you Deny China is having the Deepest Cold in 50 years? Do you Deny Mexico has 17°F frost-destruction of crops? Do you Deny Hong Kong was 40°F the other day? Do you Deny In'dia was 50°sF South to Bhopal? Do you Deny Hansen was forced to retire for violating the Hatch Act? Do you Deny that Greta Thunberg is a paid child actress, or that politician Gore with his 'Carbon Cap & Trade Scheme' (legal name) _is an extortionist!_
Your unelected and self-appointed Carbon Caliphate is in truth Bunko Fraud. EGS EFTs the most heinous Ponzi since Dot Con. And Biden's 'Renewable Energy!' Slush Fund is a egregiously criminal lootfest!
As one of the first Ivy-League degreed environmental scientists and former EPA department head, I have more sci-cred than Mann, McKibben, Hansen, Nye, Gore or Thunberg, _combined!_
It's almost the end of the year and it was 23°C outside today. In Italy. What the hell. The past three years of weather have been mad. Don't get me wrong, climate change has been going on for decades. But at least here, it's as if a sudden shift in circulation occurred in 2021 and we've been having hot spells non-stop since.
Yeah the recent constant Atlantic anti-cyclones are very weird and the reason we've been having such warm and dry weather so often, No idea what causes it, only taht climate change is probably involved in making the pattern more common and that in 2021 things kicked off
Climate change is an exponential process, with positive feedback loops increasing the rapidity of change.
Climate is a BIG thing. Big things take a long time to respond to change.
Eventually the do respond. I think that is what we are seeing now, and in the near future.
Where do you live exactly? Because I’m Italian too and it’s 5 degrees here (north east). It’s definitely warmer than in the past, of course.
far south @@deaththekid3998
Extremely informative, interesting, clear and concise. God work boy.
Suggestion:
Try using large fonts for slides being shown.
simon I want to thank you so much for what you do. words can't describe how invaluable your channel is I wish you and your family a great new year.
Thank you, Simon, for these very important videos!
Still no earthworms or fly larvae in Rome, Ga
Jimmy Greer aging Horticulturist and it is basically 70F on Christmas and been a few 80F Thanksgivings. Hardly any birds or bugs…it’s very very quiet especially for such a warm day.
But no one is freaking out except me…alone,..very alone. Even w family maybe more so…
Thank you for all you do and your studies I’ve followed.
Bravo to you
Cheers
Good luck in the future
and Merry Christmas!
Simon is one of the best RUclipsrs out there. Thanks for this video. Keep making art. Cheers.
Thank you for the summary👍
In Mexico a cad 5 huracane forme and hit ground in les that 24 hours, resulting in catastrophic damage to acapulco and the state of Guerrero
Yeah, that was insane!
I sure hope that was a rare event, or we're in a lot deeper trouble than we think we are.
May I ask, are you in Mexico?
Do you know how the situation has gone.
It looked DEVASTATING to the buildings, population and infrastructure.
"Explicit carbon prices remain a necessary condition of ambitious climate policies” - IPCC SR15. Let's all talk about the need to price carbon, and work together to make our governments use Carbon Fee and Dividend to do it. Every future COP that fails to set a global, steadily rising carbon price floor is an absolute failure. Carbon pricing is only half the solution, but without it we will fail.
Outstanding Presentation! I am commenting to help your channel with the algorithm.
You're doing your part, thank you.
One of your best videos! I really like your predictions. Been wanting to hear them for a long time.
Oh. So you like to hear fear mongering stories?
@@oldineamiller9007 No, I like science, truth and logic. I also want to hear my favorite climate scientists predictions.
@@Campaigner82
Here on this channel there is no scientific information availible, but sure enough a lot of fear mongering.
Another outstanding video Simon. Your clarity and objective Outlook is essential listening for many people. Having returned from COP28, I do fear that the fossil fuel industries will never yield to the science, so we may continue to face continued distractions and delays into 2024. Still, I'm hoping that the relentless adoption of renewable energy will supplant fossil fuels in the coming decade.
A good read for you would be Bright Green Lies by Jensen, Keith and Wilbur.
Even a transition away from FFs requires use of them, and we do not have the time t scale up, to say nothing of the continued environmental damage caused by extractive industries.
Other interesting thinkers to check out on this topic include Ugo Bardi and Vaclav Smil
@@chris4973 I thought fossil fuel industry was an extractive industry.
Thanks for all the info
Happy Christmas, Simon!
Wishing You and Your Little Family all the very best for 2024.
Cop28 is just a disaster. Your Climate Videos are stunning.
They served MEAT at the meeting this year and invited no speakers on plant-based eating which has been shown to be the single most significant way for all of us to massively reduce our carbon emissions. It's all empty virtue signaling at this point.
@@rasputozen That's for us normal people. The people at COP have control over the really huge emission causes.
I'm vegetarian and take transit, but I'd rather those people eat an all steak diet if they fix policy instead.
No. There's no hero to save the day in this type of problem. We all contribute to this thing and it's important for us all to hold ourselves (and others) accountable. Also, vegetarian is no better than a typical omnivore. Look into the dairy and egg industries. They're as bad as the meat industries, both in terms of emissions and animal cruelty.@@tristanridley1601
@@tristanridley1601thank you for acknowledging the different priorities at different scales, even if we can all do better ultimately…
Berkeley Earth observatory says: 2023 will be over 1,5C with 99% probability... November was 1,77C higher than 1850-1900 baseline...
and yet the world gets safer, more abundant in resources, man continues to prosper, predators are propagating all over the planet.
@@RobertMJohnson Safer for whom? Less wars, perhaps. But have you not seen multitude of climate related catastrophies that have been ravaging this planet. And yes, we have more early warning systems. But the aftermath is still devastating. And many livilyhood and life losses comes years after the actual disaster. Bilion bucks climate driven disasters are rising rapidly.
Prosper on the continuous havoc against all nature. We are over planetary limits with multitude of observed trends. We have been in ths situation just 100 years or few decades, so we have still resources left. But we are bleeding them out at growing rate.
Check what is said on all periodic table elements. Few decades left in many cases. And ever worse in climate and wildlife areas. There are many planetary boundaries studies... Please check what you can find on this issue.
Thank you for these videos
Thanks for the video
The universal we - “our activities” etc - is rly misleading. We all know it’s certain people in certain countries. This is not humanity’s fault, it’s capitalism/colonialism.
Cry about it
Hansen does not say that we are doomed. Just analyzing the temperature change is higher than IPCC predicts. Specially IPCC's aerosol calculations are wrong and therefore the hidden warming is not seen yet. Hansen argues that parts of this can be seen in SO2 emission reductions from shipping. SO2 is a droplet maker, that creates specially low lying clouds. And that also explains why northern oceans have warmed so much after shipping SO2 bans.
Doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere rises temperatures by 3C +-1,5C (IPCC), but now Hansen says this is value should be 4,8C+-1,2C. This means a loads warming in the pipeline after we stop adding acidic SO2 to the atmosphere.
Hansen is basing his claims to satellite observations. It is also worth noting that there have been loads of discussions if IPCC's 3C prediction is too low.
Overall we are still heading toward 3-5C warmer world. Just mentioning fossil fuels in COP, does not stop the emissions.
Great work as always
Thanks for this summary
@6:25 it's fascinating how the amount of crops and livestock that are lost to climate is articulated (in the original article and here repeated by simon in the same terms) is portrayed as a financial value rather that as - for example - a number of meals, the number of people who can be sustained by that food, by the raw physical quantity of that food.
While some may say that the dollar value is consistent -- it's not, look at natural gas prices - the dollar value as per the record will not mean the same when prices are inflated in 2024.
But the fact that so much of the climate system is judged by financial profit or loss, kind of highlights why we're in this catastrophe. It's not "3,000 people can't eat for a month due to crops being destroyed" it's "300 million USD of crops was lost". The emphasis is on the money rather than the utilitarian practicalities of the farming and food production.
We should have:
Survival first.
Money second.
Hottest year in human history, so far.
But on the plus side. Our corporate overlords are deliberatly driving the world into mass heat death to make a few already wealthy ghouls slightly richer.
Imagine what they could do to help if they actually wanted to help.
Ironically if they did it the right way, they could probably get a lot richer too.
You can be wealthy and stupid it seams.
It's incredible isn't it? The sociopaths that run corporations are more interested in their bottom line and retirement funds than caring about the only home for humans we have.
@@jimthain8777 Oh absolutely. it's both being uncaring and stupid all at once. Being exceptionally wealthy, just like climate change, is a positive feedback loop of being a continually worse person.
Do you really believe this shit you just wrote?
@@oldineamiller9007 I don't need to believe it. It's literally what is happening. You'd know that if you had any capital.
03:29 Thank you for saying this. The heating is everywhere. I think the shipping issue is somewhat of a red herring.
Many thanks to you, Simon, for your superb contributions to our knowledge and understanding of science. You rock, mate! 🎉😊
You may not like some of Hansen's wording about the severity and imminence to a dramatic (historically) warming, but you did not properly represent the totality of his (and colleagues') published paper. His assertion about the impact of the decrease in aerosols is indeed what you mentioned about aerosols. I suspect that large swaths of the climatology community are a bit shell-shocked about the *culture war* in which you find yourselves. Encourage you to more directly address this culture war.
Here in Brazil its only getting worse, they will anihilate all biomes
Pretty much, I'm a doomer by now, I don't think there is enough will to do anything to mitigate climate change by the people with actual power.
Have the programs reinstated by Lula made no difference this year? Amazon deforestation is finally decreasing after years of Bolsonaro, is that not an improvement over 2022?
Mopeio.. biome..
@@PlanetZeroVideos Yes, the programs really decreased deforestation. But the real threat against the Amazon is the global increase in temperatures. Higher temperatures causes stronger El Niños, which are responsible for blocking rainfall formation in the forest region. Several rivers dried this year in the Amazon, which is worse than deforestation, as it is not possible to reforest a biome if there is no water available in the ecosystem. He becomes a desert. In addition, if temperatures approach 50 ° C over native trees (which is a possibility for the coming decades), the stomata (leaf perspiration channels) of the plants close permanently, killing a large number of trees at once and quickly. So even if all deforestation ended today and never returned, the forest would still be in danger. And we would be in even more danger because:
1. Several decaying plants would throw billions of tons of CO2 and methane in the atmosphere.
2. The forest is a very important agent of the South America rainfall regime. Without it, there's no rain in the majority continent. And everybody knows what lack of water would cause for society and agriculture...
To know better about the Amazon vs Higher temperature problem, you can read this article from my university: (use page translator) jornal.usp.br/ciencias/aquecimento-global-traz-risco-de-danos-irreversiveis-as-arvores-da-amazonia/
Hi Simon, I've just subscribed to your channel and am enjoying your content! I just wondered whether you could give your thoughts on Hansen's upcoming paper on aerosol emissions and climate sensitivity? It has a lot of people very worried but clearly the scientific mainstream disagree with the paper's findings; why?
Great video!
Sir I think you should address Mr. Hansen's points seriously. "Extinction in the next couple of years" is a very misleading caricature and "most climate scientists don't believe his paper" is a very shallow rebuttal. You should explain why they don't.
just say it,.....
Stop Burning Oil and Gas.
Simple as that.
we sold 13 million barrels yesterday, a new record
So,....No
actually 13.7 million, but hey,.. whats 700 000 barrels a day here and there.
It'll depopulate the highly populous countries. Burn more fuel 😂
great vid man
I remember it snowing many inches in November when I was younger but now it’s December and no snow, but tornados happened and in my area we hadn’t had one in a long time
I'm not sure dismissing Hansen's warming in the pipeline work with a passing comment does it or the criticism of it justice. So far Hansen's case that aerosol forcing is higher than currently assumed, and that there's potentially significant warming to come even at present GHG concentrations is a lot more convincing to me than the rebuttals of his paper have been.
Hey, hey, guys, I invented a new carbon-capture solution! I call this new invention Trees
Nice idea, but unfortunately more of them are going to be cut down or burnt in fires than are planted. Also the fossil fuel industry has already decided that you and I will have to pay them for CCS as they insist their incomes must keep rising even if we drastically reduce the use of their products.
Trees doesnt work on a grand scale, as it is more efficient just to reduce fossil fuel usage.
Trees are great, but I'm backing team phytoplankton.
That's the trouble with an economic system dependant on profit & growth. We need to produce more every year than we did the previous year. More room for us, less for nature.
@@zaarkeru3391Trees only work at a grand scale. That's the problem. Humanity is unwilling to reforest back to pre-colonial levels.
We are all ducked been nice knowing you all!
Maybe you're right, but I'm NOT going down without a fight!
Literally Drowned, Bro the news about the Penguins is just so Sad
the decrease of nuclear power production hurts my soul, at the very least, doesn't prematurely shut down perfect fine nuclear reactors and replace them with coal
Honestly, I would've rathered a boom in nuclear mixed with renewables but guess who suddenly cared a lot about the environment an the dangers of nuclear, oil companies, of course
Nuclear power would be great if we had eternal civilizations..But reality is that every civilization to ever exist has collapsed and died..The last thing we need is over 400 nuclear plants melting down because our civilization collapsed, engulfed in fire, spreading ionizing radiation everywhere, which is inevitable...Nuclear power in it's current form is a symptom of human hubris and insanity, given the consequences..We often think that our civilization is stronger than all the others because of our technology, but the very opposite is true..The consequences of our technology and complexity ensures collapse thoroughly and quickly..
@@realeyesrealizereallies6828 nuclear meltdowns of the really dangerous kind are really not that common nor problematic actually, and I say this as someone who thinks we will need to eventually phase those out as well, reactors like the one in Chernobyl and Fukushima are no longer made and work in a much safer way, it's more interesting to think how will we make sure to keep nuclear residue hidden for a society that might've forgotten what it is
@@Solstice261 Ofcourse they are not common, that is why the real threat is civilizational collapse..Just a world war like world war 1 or world war 2 would certainly cause the meltdown of many nuclear plants..And there are several other real threats like Earth quakes, tsunami's, asteroid, terrorism, and the inevitable collapse..Only a pathological species would boil water, to create steam, to turn a turbine, with nuclear power, in it's current form, it's just obvious reality..The consequences are immense, and just a matter of time IMO..
2023 is sort of like 1997-98 maybe? Or perhaps 2012. I am speaking very generally. I hope we don't lose the Great Barrier Reef before the global temperature spike calms down a bit.
I also wish but that is very unlikely as things are going, however with new discoveries of corals and such, I suspect we won't lose corals in general so maybe in the future we will be able to rebuild it
You do realize the Great Barrier has had a thriving growth these last years, right? Half these useful idiots say is catastrophism onanism.
@@mudemmeonick "thriving growth these last years" - best citation please. The point is if the water gets too warm for a period of time, the coral bleaches no matter how healthy it is, it is a fact.
@@Solstice261IPCC SR15 warns 1.5°C of warming will lead to 70% - 90% global loss of warm water corals. 2°C will result in a 98% - 100% loss this century.
The IPCC also warns: "Explicit carbon prices remain a necessary condition of ambitious climate policies” - IPCC SR15
Carbon Fee and Dividend with CBAMs is a beneficial, powerful way to do it.
@@johngage5391 definitely lost in the wild but I hope we can keep some in captivity, science and all that
thank you
Shoutout to givewell!!! Theyre the best!!!
Give us a little help preparing for 3° of warming please, I'm grasping at straws.
Vote for government that want chsnge for the better.
Other than that, not much we can do
@@zaarkeru3391I mean where is relatively "safe", how to find food security in this changing world.
@@vaga4239
No where really.
When a billion climate refugees comes knocking we will see societal struggles which make ww1 and ww2 look like a rough weekend.
And no amount of anti immigration policy will stop it.
Honestly, the best way to deal with it is somehow to get very rich.
Or maybe look into sustainable hydropondics.
Thats not a safe solution though.
@@vaga4239 Hahahhahahaha, "safe"
@@vaga4239North oceanic climates will generally be available for foraging, but the reality is the agriculture system as we know it is bound to collapse under itself
Thank you so much for your videos, Simon. They are so valuable. There are no words for the fate of the penguin chicks...
Even though Climate change is the No1 issue its the last on the click list... We need to change this is 2024
The emperor penguin thing at 2:50, man that needs to be in the news.
The planet will be fine, humanity on the other hand probably not so.
And it isn’t not just James Hanson, Guy McPherson has been a doom sayer for years (almost certainly too much but hey)
Guy McPherson’s outlook on the state of the climate is about as helpful as business as usual. Doomerism is the last attempt for fossil fuel companies to make more money before they’re eventually shut down. Get everyone to stop caring since we’re all doomed and keep extracting till there’s nothing left.
Yep. Some people are attracted to doom, and nuance-free reasoning more generally, and the PR companies employed by the fossil fuel industry are aiming to make full use of their predilections.@@PlanetZeroVideos
And what about Creative Society studies 😮 ?
"The planet will be fine, humanity won't" is always a rediculous thing to say.
You really need to look at things in terms of earths "spheres", biogeochemical cycles and other earth cycles like ocean circulation. "The planet" doesn't mean shit, what do you mean? The geosphere?
Our effects are going to be (and already are) extremely damaging to the biosphere and we are seeing things like a weakening of the AMOC which will only assist in disrupting ocean circulation and upwelling of phytoplankton which are the basis of marine food webs, so therefore causing further marine extinction.
The geosphere will be fine, the biosphere will be fucked, the hydrosphere will be very altered, and the atmosphere will be very altered. We are also essentially changing the dynamics of the carbon cycle by activating positive feedback loops of marine carbon release because the warming of the waters releases carbon, decreases density so therefore expands mass causing rising water levels which will harm ecosystems.
The planet will not be fine, unless you define "the planet" in a rediculous reductionist way to merely mean the geosphere.
A video about clinate doomerism would be great! As a young person I find it incredibly hard not to internalise the feeling that the entire future is resting on our shoulders alone and that we are the ones that must fix things, which is incredibly hard to do when everyone in power is much much older than us and often seemingly doesnt care. Especially local to me in Manchester, the council are STILL building on top of greenspace, and fighting against that really felt like the only thing i had any power to. At least it did until i realised the systems for challanging urban development in the council are designed to not listen to criticism. Every letter, every email, every council meeting goes nowhere.
The reason Im saying all this is to give insite into how easy it is to fall into, not even doomerism but a completely inabling feeling of despair at the seeming realisation that any power i thought i had to change things was a mirrage, a facade. And i know thats not true and there are still things i can do but compared to what needs to happen to fix the entire climate, which is a lot more than leaving greenspace alone, and compared to my own carbon footprint, i really feel like my drop in the water will be completely overwhelmed by the ripples of industry and power and the sheer ammounts of carbon which we have been socialised and are expected to rely on.
And then this is made worse by the fact that everyone seems to hate climate protesters now. Because protest really feels like the only thing i have left but the fear of social isolation over protesting for the climate is really strong, and i just cannot understand how the wider population feels like protest for this is a bad thing.
At the end of the day i just have a lot of strong emotions relating to this and to my future and combining those with acurate information about the climate and the feeling that my positive impact will never even outweight my own carbon footprint, let alone those of the corporations which are still to be held accountable for their actions, it just becomes so much easier, for the sake of my own mental health, to shut down and to fall into doomerism.
And so really, any video you can do about doomerism will be greatly appreciated. Even if it doesn't address anything ive talked about here. Any way i can understand this mindset and how it plays into society is something i can use to better understand myself, and how i can have a more positive impact
You really are a victim of the Global Warming narrative.
Edit you are a very good writer, clear and eloquent.
I think it would help you if you internalized the fact that it's not your job to solve climate change single handedly. Just voting correctly puts you in the top half of the country for doing something about the problem.
20% of our energy is electricity, so we could all stay home and not work at jobs that just support the debt based system we have turning and live different ways, a better way for us as a species and drop global warming immediately. A sixty litre tank of diesel has 636 kw's of energy in it, according to my last bill that would be 5.2 months of my electrical energy, a huge amount of energy to go for a sunday drive. Stop driving, for pleasure, is the only thing we can do immediately and has the greatest affect. De-growth should be an easy sell to ordinary people, it works immediately and richer countries should go first. There isn't a lot of money needed once food, shelter and clothes are taken care of and society itself has to change and for that to happen, individuals have to go first.
Oil is in all of our lives, look around you, how much is there? The only goal we have for the future is how to raise general wellbeing and remove all oil from your life, if you can achieve that, you have cracked it.
I mitigate doomerism by studying atmospheric science, climatology, oceanography, biology, geology etc, so I can make a more educated assessment of the findings myself instead of focusing on random tidbits of climate news. The foundational knowledge is very important to get a grasp on, and learning earth systems, largely apart from human effect, is not as negative.
Do you have any titbit's that you'd like to share or did you just want to appear knowledgeable? @@whatabouttheearth
I hadn't heard the news about emperor penguins dying out, and now I'm devastated. It's been bad enough that humans have been dying because of climate change, but I cannot stand for this to happen to penguins.
Nuclear energy need to increase dractily!!
Fossil fuel execs have names and addresses
Impossible, you think they don't know the masses hate their guts?
@@vaga4239 you think they don't... have names and addresses?
Problems with the climate? That's okay....COP29 will fix everything, right? LOL. Thanks for this Simon. Cheers.
“I accepted to come to this meeting to have a sober and mature conversation. I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist. There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C.”
- Sultan Al Jaber, President of COP 28, also CEO of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company
Seems more and more likely, scenario SSP5-8.5 of the IPCC assessment may come to fruition (or at least the higher end of the spectrum). I say enjoy what you can, while you still can; pity the generations to come.
As far as I know the CO2 level is still going up at the same rate of 2.2 to 2.4ppm every year all the way since the existance of the IPCC. So what exactly did the last 27 COPs achieve so far?
I’m still so angry about the penguins
And I will be angry until the day that I die
Dec 23 2023, in Northern Italy it's around 20-22° Celsius. What the fuck
@@SimonTmte that's nice, when I was a kid it used to snow here. We'd get -3° to 2 ° Celsius, so now going to a Christmas party with just a sweater because it's 20 ° is kinda worrying
At the end of the nineteenth century most physicists thought that almost everything there was to know in physics was already known. Consensus of experts is not always an indicator of reality!
No, but it's one hell of an indicator of when something is true, and should be listened to when designing policies, unless that is, that you think the opinion of a couple companies that just want to earn all the money are more reliable
"At the end of the nineteenth century most physicists thought that almost everything there was to know in physics was already known"
Silly and pointless claim, not to mention wrong.
This channel peddles hopium for the masses. Trying to dismiss the more extreme conclusions made in some papers is quite irresponsible. We've seen time and time again that the conservative consensuses of "most scientists", based on inadequate models that fail to incorporate crucial factors, are vastly underestimating what bears out in reality. There is no escaping the fact that the ocean system has absorbed colossal amounts of excess heat energy, so far saving the atmosphere from heating to a much larger extent, despite this year of record anomaly, but that heat will be emitted back into the atmosphere sooner or later. There's no getting away from that, unless someone can come up with a plan to funnel that 350 zeta joules of excess heat energy back into space, etc etc etc, to give but one example.
You make a lot of claims. Best citation please, especially about "are vastly underestimating what bears out in reality."
@jitteryjet7525 unbelievable! my completely reasonable and informative reply giving u multiple citations is not just hidden, but completely deleted and not even visible to me. I give up.
@jitteryjet7525 I suppose I'll just say Jason Box / Dr Gilbz / Hansen's GW in the pipeline will explain further.
Creative Society studies 😮
@LivingNow678 what do you mean? Box is a field researcher. Gilbz is a PhD reporting field research. Hansen's paper is more of a review of previous mathematical modelling.
2023 was the hottest year on record (so far)
Matt Taylor the main BBC meteorologist said something quite interesting last week, he said people had been asking why many stories & paintings of the Charles Dickens era showed snowy winters & markets being held on the Thames & most rivers & lakes frozen over in Winter & Matt said it was during that period there was very little acktivity on the sun & scientists even called it a mini ice age. Now we know in the last 20 years there has been enormous activity on the sun which is our main source of heat, do you possibly think that this scenario could have something to do with climate change?
The sun's output has actually diminished over the past forty years, according to NASA. The sun goes through normal atcive and inactive cycles, roughly every 11 years, but the amount of warming added is slight and temporary. It has nothing to do with global warming over the long term.
"The Climate Crisis"
*LOL*
Unbelievable how anyone could be this nakedly unscientific.
Talk to us about climatology, @firecloud77.
You heard it here first folks science is now unscientific
@@darthmaul216
You heard it here folks -- dogmatic fear-mongering is now scientific.
@darthmaul… no, actually I’ve heard it elsewhere and previously (but I get your point)
@@TheDanEdwards
Go ahead, tell us why you believe the climate is in a state of crisis. Keeping in mind that arguments from authority are not valid.
Could you do a video about why Hansens paper is not plausible?
Not 1.4 above pre-industrial.
It's 1.4 above 1850-1900, which is 150 years into the industrial era. An era that saw massive and global deforestation releasing lots of carbon.
It's well above 1.5 above pre-industrial.
It passed 2 above 1850-1900 for a few days. So that barrier has been broken, with a couple of days 2.2 above pre-industrial.
I often wonder who was running around checking the ocean temperatures before the industrial age. Just some food for thought😊
Such a quick dismissal of the paper by Hansen and his colleagues. Can you do a more in depth video on it?
“I accepted to come to this meeting to have a sober and mature conversation. I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist. There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C.”
- Sultan Al Jaber, President of COP 28, also CEO of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company
Mukhtar Babayev will be the president for COP 29; he is also a former executive of the State Oil Company of Azerbaijian Republic.
Seems more and more likely, scenario SSP5-8.5 of the IPCC assessment may come to fruition (or at least the higher end of the spectrum). I say enjoy what you can, while you still can; pity the generations to come.
Comenting from Romania where normaly should be -4 celsius now is +13, well -2 to -10,was like 10 years ago
at 4min your comment on James Hansens latest paper, can you do a review of his paper and why its controversial? is it the CO2 sensitivity you find unconvincing, or is it the total impact of shipping aerosols that you find issue with. others seem to be much more conviced.
I have your book, very useful.