If this survey is real the messages these young people are receiving are completely wrong.
We need to reduce our impact on our planet but CO2 is a complete red herring. The current ECS (temperature increase for a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere) is centred around 3°C (IPCC AR6). The 2°C will destroy civilisation is simply made up.
Peter Bernard Ladkin:
I mentioned inter alia the unprecendented California wildfire season and the heatdome that built itself up in July.
Even if that unfortunate California wildfire season was unprecedented, the trend does not seem to be global. Old newspaper articles have suggested that wildfires in US, Australia and Siberia have been of lower magnitudes recently than a century ago, satellite observations shed light on the latest decade:
"There was a lower-than-average number of wildfires in 2020 despite hotspots such as California and Australia being hit by blazes of unprecedented intensity, the European Union's satellite monitoring service said Monday. A year of data collected by the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS) showed that carbon emissions from fires were set to be lower than previous years and that 2020 was one of the lowest years for active fires globally.
globally fires had declined consistently since 2003 when the monitoring service began."
phys.org/.../2020-12-below-average-monster-blazes-eu.html
For the record, I don't think such comments have a place in any rational discussion about whether global warming is real, what the evidence is, and what to do about it.
I do agree with you here - although I meant no insult, I did get jollyer than usually for which I apologize (forgot a smiley). The reason for this was being fed up about the fact that with every hint of climate warming, the media screams "look out of the window at CAGW" while any cold events are explained to be just weather. Since the 60 to 65 year trends observable in climate changes exceed typical personal memory capacity, people lack own dramatic experiences and tend to believe that many weather events are extraordinary.
Regarding the "hockey stick season" re-opened by IPCC AR6 SPM graph a) above: one might find analysis of underlying PAGES2K reconstruction by Dr. Stephen McIntyre interesting:
Some of the trump cards of the "warmists" have always been the poor melting polar ice caps. At least in case of the Antarctic glaciers, it is proven beyond doubt by now that underwater volcanoes are to blame, not the atmospheric CO2. If of interest, have a look at most recent research about the Pine Island Ice Shelf (2018) and Thwaites Glacier (2021), melting of which has allegedly previously been attributed to human activities by hundreds of reserch reports. Similar issues can be seen in the Arctic - the ice is melting due to warmer waters, not atmospheric heat. The Iceland and Greenland mantle plumes have been recently studied, but the sea ice is not doing as bad as some have forecasted.
I would suggest an analogy of ground beef handling to describe the situation with widespread CAGW propaganda these days: one does not have to think about poor animals being herded and slaughtered while making meatballs in the comfort of own kitchen; similarly, most of the media figures do not consider how the climate science is made and how much of it is still valid, operating in good faith. What was started based on hypothetical risk assessment as a precautionary principle may be already invalidated by empirical data. I tend to believe in measurement, not modelling, and expect integrity of scientists.
Peter Bernard Ladkin:
I mentioned inter alia the unprecendented California wildfire season and the heatdome that built itself up in July.
Even if that unfortunate California wildfire season was unprecedented, the trend does not seem to be global. Old newspaper articles have suggested that wildfires in US, Australia and Siberia have been of lower magnitudes recently than a century ago, satellite observations shed light on the latest decade:
"There was a lower-than-average number of wildfires in 2020 despite hotspots such as California and Australia being hit by blazes of unprecedented intensity, the European Union's satellite monitoring service said Monday. A year of data collected by the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS) showed that carbon emissions from fires were set to be lower than previous years and that 2020 was one of the lowest years for active fires globally.
globally fires had declined consistently since 2003 when the monitoring service began."
phys.org/.../2020-12-below-average-monster-blazes-eu.html
For the record, I don't think such comments have a place in any rational discussion about whether global warming is real, what the evidence is, and what to do about it.
I do agree with you here - although I meant no insult, I did get jollyer than usually for which I apologize (forgot a smiley). The reason for this was being fed up about the fact that with every hint of climate warming, the media screams "look out of the window at CAGW" while any cold events are explained to be just weather. Since the 60 to 65 year trends observable in climate changes exceed typical personal memory capacity, people lack own dramatic experiences and tend to believe that many weather events are extraordinary.
Regarding the "hockey stick season" re-opened by IPCC AR6 SPM graph a) above: one might find analysis of underlying PAGES2K reconstruction by Dr. Stephen McIntyre interesting:
Some of the trump cards of the "warmists" have always been the poor melting polar ice caps. At least in case of the Antarctic glaciers, it is proven beyond doubt by now that underwater volcanoes are to blame, not the atmospheric CO2. If of interest, have a look at most recent research about the Pine Island Ice Shelf (2018) and Thwaites Glacier (2021), melting of which has allegedly previously been attributed to human activities by hundreds of reserch reports. Similar issues can be seen in the Arctic - the ice is melting due to warmer waters, not atmospheric heat. The Iceland and Greenland mantle plumes have been recently studied, but the sea ice is not doing as bad as some have forecasted.
I would suggest an analogy of ground beef handling to describe the situation with widespread CAGW propaganda these days: one does not have to think about poor animals being herded and slaughtered while making meatballs in the comfort of own kitchen; similarly, most of the media figures do not consider how the climate science is made and how much of it is still valid, operating in good faith. What was started based on hypothetical risk assessment as a precautionary principle may be already invalidated by empirical data. I tend to believe in measurement, not modelling, and expect integrity of scientists.
We're about to take you to the IET registration website. Don't worry though, you'll be sent straight back to the community after completing the registration.
Continue to the IET registration site
