The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
You acknowledge the climate disruptions (changes in precipitation, rising temperatures etc, you seem unconcerned about sea level...) but you conclude that these are not a major worry, because lack of data and confounding factors don't yet point to clear causality to catastrophic weather events.
I'm happy for you, I guess.
I'm being hit repeatedly over the head with a sledgehammer, but it's OK, because the medical tests don't give conclusive proof of brain damage yet. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
as you apparently do, that the AR5 allows us to stop worrying about the climate...
you seem unconcerned about sea level...)
you conclude that these are not a major worry, because lack of data and confounding factors don't yet point to clear causality to catastrophic weather events.
All false.
I suggest, again, that you contest me on what I write, not on what you think I 'apparently' write.
With the AR5 the scientific ground for alarmism has noticeably shrunk - although there's plenty left for political activists on other topics. I'm open to suggestions that I should start worrying more about economic collapse.
I'm open to suggestions that I should start worrying more about economic collapse.
So you seem to find that the AR5 gives you reason to worry less about climate change. (Or where you being ironic?)
For example : you seem to be equating absence of evidence (or inconclusive evidence) with evidence of absence. Because there is not a clear worldwide trend to increased drought, or increased flooding, you conclude we should worry less.
But I wonder why you think the absence of clearly measurable worldwide trends demonstrates anything at all : this smells like a strawman. I don't know anyone who has claimed that "global warming will cause worldwide drought", or "global warming will cause worldwide flooding". On the contrary, global warning is expected to cause disruptive climate change in every region. Intuitively, I would expect that overall warming would increase both floods and drought; but I wouldn't be surprised if, for example, increased flooding in certain regions coincided with decreases in other regions. And I expect that various regions are experiencing disruptive climate change which is currently poorly measured, or which is measured but lacks a history of measurements to detect trends.
As we have previously discussed with respect to flooding, various confounders such as land use changes make trends difficult to prove, even in areas where relatively good records exist. These also tend to be the wealthier regions, which are better at mitigating the effects anyway. As an anecdotal example : a decade-long drought in Texas hardly causes a blip in economic output; a third world nation which experienced something similar might experience collapse of subsistence food production, mass starvation and failure of institutions.
So, I will certainly be interested in discussing the regional analyses when they are released. Perhaps they will trouble your Panglossian calm.
On the other hand, I have no objection to you worrying more about economic collapse (one can never worry too much!) It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
So you seem to find that the AR5 gives you reason to worry less about climate change.
you seem to be equating absence of evidence (or inconclusive evidence) with evidence of absence.
Still false.
I observe that 'the scientific ground for alarmism has noticeably shrunk' for climate extremes and abrupt climate scenario's, which I think the IPCC reports demonstrate. If this reading is incorrect, then I welcome to hear about that.
I appreciate your passion on this subject, and your attention for detail, which also affects my writing, turning more and more science orientated, and thus more emotionally detached.
I live in the Netherlands. If I were 'Panglossian calm' (nice!) about climate change, of course I would not be writing about it.
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 1 6 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 3 11 comments
by Oui - Sep 6 2 comments
by gmoke - Aug 25 1 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 21 1 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 22 55 comments
by Oui - Aug 18 8 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 12 25 comments
by Oui - Sep 7
by Oui - Sep 62 comments
by Oui - Sep 52 comments
by gmoke - Sep 5
by Oui - Sep 41 comment
by Oui - Sep 47 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 311 comments
by Oui - Sep 211 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 16 comments
by Oui - Sep 114 comments
by Oui - Sep 171 comments
by Oui - Sep 11 comment
by gmoke - Aug 29
by Oui - Aug 2818 comments
by Oui - Aug 271 comment
by Oui - Aug 262 comments
by Oui - Aug 2626 comments
by Oui - Aug 251 comment
by Oui - Aug 254 comments