Carbon budget for 1.5°C will run out in six years at current emissions levels – new research

submitted by ActuallyNot from theconversation.com

all 10 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]iamonlyoneman 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Fun fact: increasing Co2 doesnt contribute to forcing continually. It levels off around 500-600PPM and at 800 there's no additional forcing.

So it doesn't matter how much there is, it will just make more plants, which will cool the planet LOL

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Fun fact: increasing Co2 doesnt contribute to forcing continually. It levels off around 500-600PPM and at 800 there's no additional forcing.

Wow that is a fun fact.

Venus' greenhouse effect is due to CO2, mostly isn't it?

It's got a black body temperature or -42°F, but the surface is 867°F

How come your fun fact doesn't work on Venus?

So it doesn't matter how much there is, it will just make more plants, which will cool the planet LOL

LOL!

How does making plants cool the planet?

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

  • believes in glowbull warmening
  • doesn't know how plants cool the planet

many such cases

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It looks like you need some basic education.

FYI:

The globe is warming.

https://www.climate.gov/media/15021

What do you think's going on? A conspiracy of thermometer manufacturers?

Plant's don't, in the general case, cool the planet. A mature forest is a positive forcing on the climate because the carbon released is from decomposition which includes methane, which has about 20 times the global warming effect than the same carbon in CO2 over a century.

If a forest is putting on mass, it is sequestering CO2, but that's temporary, and generally only happens if you start with no forest. (And don't have the fires that we're seeing more an more).

Boreal forests also increase global warming because they have a lower albedo than tundra.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Guess these dum-dums don't know what they're talking about eh https://www.epa.gov/heatislands/using-trees-and-vegetation-reduce-heat-islands

The planet is warming ever-so-slightly, at intervals defined by large el nino weather cycles. It is a step change followed by many years of stability. Nobody knows why this occurs, and there is no thermostat on the plane.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Guess these dum-dums don't know what they're talking about eh https://www.epa.gov/heatislands/using-trees-and-vegetation-reduce-heat-islands

No, they're correct. Obviously trees cool locally. They cast shade. They cause evapotranspiration.

It's the dum-dum who said that they cool the planet who doesn't know what he's talking about.

The planet is warming ever-so-slightly

Yeah a dum-dum who doesn't know what he's talking about might characterise the 1°C since pre-industrial times. Of course knowledgeable people like you and I know that 1.5°C was the Paris target, because that's the limit of the impacts that can be managed by adaptation. And we know that most of the remainder is in the post because only about 60% of the warming occurs in the first 25-50 years after the increase in greenhouse gasses.

It is a step change followed by many years of stability.

No, it's an accelerating warming with a random noise.

Nobody knows why this occurs

Yeah they do. That's why models match observations so precisely.

[–]chadwickofwv 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So, after 50 years of failed predictions, you still believe them? Did you pay any attention at all to what their predictions actually were? Of course not. You just listen and believe what you are told, like the good little slave you are.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So, after 50 years of failed predictions, you still believe them?

The global mean surface temperature predictions have been bang on the nose, as has been much noted.

Did you pay any attention at all to what their predictions actually were?

Yes.

I take it you didn't?

You just listen and believe what you are told, like the good little slave you are.

Oh, the irony.

Even 50-year-old climate models correctly predicted global warming

Climate Models Got It Right on Global Warming

Analysis: How well have climate models projected global warming?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Don't worry bro, I'll produce some C02 for ya.

[–]SMCAB 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My $cience says the ozone layer has a big hole in it and you should stop using hair spray.