Are you talking about Greta Thunberg, I would think so, I don't know enough about her, what do you recommend from her?
I fail to see what or why she is important, we are past good speech in terms of ecology, what actions does she recommends?
I fail to see what or why she is important, we are past good speech in terms of ecology, what actions does she recommends?
> what actions does she recommend
She recommends we listen to the science. Nothing more, nothing less.
Consensus is a probability distribution.
Greta talks about the 'findings' of approximately 4% of the IPCC scientists conclusions, on one extreme of the consensus.
Obviously none of the models are available to examine, so we'll take their word for it, like a child would.
I'm going on a limb here to be charitable despite the anti-credibility marker in your last sentence.
Even a 2°C average increase is very, very bad, with intense weather events every year, countries like India not being able to support their population density, tropical rainforests turning into savannahs. It is also a mass extinction scenario.
“Business-as-usual” is not the most likely outcome. It completely neglects technological development trajectories which make something like 2.5 deg absolutely achievable by simple market forces without radical action. But in any case...
> This is means billions of people migrating across national boundaries and/or dead, extinction of most species, a dramatic reduction in farm land, tropical rainforests ceasing to exist. I doubt humanity's technological advances can be sustained when we can't even feed ourselves.
All of that is rampant speculation. THIS is what I’m calling out as non-consensus.
> Even a 2°C average increase is very, very bad, with intense weather events every year, countries like India not being able to support their population density, tropical rainforests turning into savannahs. It is also a mass extinction scenario.
That’s a strange thing to say. How do you reconcile that statement with the fact that higher temperatures mean more rainfall, higher CO2 levels mean better plant growth, and geologic record which indicates that when the earth was previously that much warmer it was covered pole-to-pole with lush tropical rainforests?
Is she? I've only watched her "how dare you" speech and have read a couple of hit pieces about how she doesn't like Trump (granted, it's not necessarily her fault that journalists focus on this part), but I haven't been exposed to any actual content about climate change because of her.
At that time we had only 10 years to fix the problem, now scientists graciously give us 12 years.
Fortunately, we did something in those 10 years, as the article pleaded.
wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol