Global Temperature Rise Could Be Double Predicted By Crystal Balls Or Something

Time for some Category 5 scaremongering

Global temperature rises could be double those predicted by climate modelling
Researchers say sea levels could also rise by six metres or more even if 2 degree target of Paris accord met

Temperature rises as a result of global warming could eventually be double what has been projected by climate models, according to an international team of researchers from 17 countries.

Sea levels could also rise by six metres or more even if the world does meet the 2 degree target of the Paris accord.

The findings, published last week in Nature Geoscience, were based on observations of evidence from three warm periods in the past 3.5m years in which global temperatures were 0.5-2 degrees above the pre-industrial temperatures of the 19th century.

Computer models and reconstructions are not observations.

The scientists used a range of measurements to piece together the impacts of past climatic changes to examine how a warmer earth would appear once the climate has stabilised.

They found sustained warming of one to two degrees had been accompanied by substantial reductions of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets and sea level rises of at least six metres – several metres higher than what current climate models predict could occur by 2100.

“During that time, the temperatures were much warmer than what our models are predicting and the sea levels were much higher,” said Katrin Meissner from the University of New South Wales’s Climate Change Research Centre and one of the study’s lead authors.

So, wait, it was supposedly much warmer? What caused that warming, and why are those warm periods different from now?

Meissner said potential changes even at two degrees of warming were underestimated in climate models that focused on the near term.

“Climate models appear to be trustworthy for small changes, such as for low-emission scenarios over short periods, say over the next few decades out to 2100,” she said. “But as the change gets larger or more persistent … it appears they underestimate climate change.”

This can all be fixed with a tax and ceding your freedom to government, you know

“Observations of past warming periods suggest that a number of amplifying mechanisms, which are poorly represented in climate models, increase long-term warming beyond climate model projections,” Prof Hubertus Fischer of the University of Bern, one of the study’s lead authors.

I’d like to see those direct temperature measurements gathered during those times…..oh, right, reconstructions.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

4 Responses to “Global Temperature Rise Could Be Double Predicted By Crystal Balls Or Something”

  1. Jeffery says:

    TEACH: What caused that warming, and why are those warm periods different from now?

    The researchers looked at three documented warm periods, the Holocene thermal maximum, which occurred 5,000 to 9,000 years ago, the last interglacial, which occurred 116,000 to 129,000 years ago, and the mid-Pliocene warm period (2-3C warmer than now), which occurred 3m to 3.3 m years ago.

    In the case of the first two periods examined, the climate changes were caused by changes in the earth’s orbit. The mid-Pliocene event was the result of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations that were at similar levels to what they are today.

    Much of the original evidence related to the mid-Pliocene warming comes from:

    Pliocene Warmth, Polar Amplification, and Stepped Pleistocene Cooling Recorded in NE Arctic Russia
    Julie Brigham-Grette1,*, Martin Melles2, Pavel Minyuk3, Andrei Andreev2, Pavel Tarasov4, Robert DeConto1, Sebastian Koenig1, Norbert Nowaczyk5, Volker Wennrich2, Peter Rosén6, Eeva Haltia5,†, Tim Cook7, Catalina Gebhardt8, Carsten Meyer-Jacob6, Jeff Snyder9, Ulrike Herzschuh10

    Science 09 May 2013:
    1233137
    DOI: 10.1126/science.1233137

    Abstract:
    Understanding the evolution of Arctic polar climate from the protracted warmth of the middle Pliocene into the earliest glacial cycles in the Northern Hemisphere has been hindered by the lack of continuous, highly resolved Arctic time series. Evidence from Lake El’gygytgyn, NE Arctic Russia, shows that 3.6-3.4 million years ago, summer temperatures were ~8°C warmer than today when pCO2 was ~400 ppm. Multiproxy evidence suggests extreme warmth and polar amplification during the middle Pliocene, sudden stepped cooling events during the Pliocene-Pleistocene transition, and warmer than present Arctic summers until ~2.2 Ma, after the onset of Northern Hemispheric glaciation. Our data are consistent with sea-level records and other proxies indicating that Arctic cooling was insufficient to support large-scale ice sheets until the early Pleistocene.

    It is a fact that the current increase in atmospheric CO2 is from humans burning fossil fuels. It’s likely the mid-Pliocene was the last time atmospheric CO2 breached 400 ppm.

    Let’s hope the scientists are wrong in their conclusions.

    • formwiz says:

      Don’t sweat it.

      They are.

      • Jeffery says:

        The “Is Not!” rebuttal works in all circumstances for trump and his band of trumpsters, doesn’t it?

        The new WMP (White Man’s Party) that has killed the GOP has won all the arguments and has solidified its hold on America, so there’s no reason for tRump supporters to even vote in Nov. Stay home as tRump has arranged with Putin for WMP victories.

  2. Jeffery says:

    What other major global conspiracies are we being bamboozled by dishonest scientists and their enablers?

    Gravity?

    The solar system?

    AIDS and HIV?

    A spherical Earth supposedly rotating at 1000 mph at the equator? Shouldn’t there always be a 1000 mph wind there? A man once took a bubble level on an airplane and it stayed level – so why didn’t the plane just fly straight out into space??

    Cigarettes and cancer? Secondhand smoke and disease?

    Can we believe anything the scientific elites tell us?

Bad Behavior has blocked 7441 access attempts in the last 7 days.