Lensman wrote:Where there should not be a consensus is in claiming that this gradual warming trend will cause a cascade disaster making much or most of the Earth unlivable in the near future.
There can be no consensus this will happen, or that it won't. The possibility of danger mucking around with the atmosphere is real. This is not a chemisty experiment where you can evacuate the building if it goes wrong.
As you are fond of saying, climate modelling is not that good. It never could be because once you leave the current metastasis we know even less about what feedbacks, positive or negative, come into play.
In fact, there is growing evidence of warming and cooling trends of similar magnitude in, geologically speaking, the relatively recent past. There is no evidence that any such cascade disaster has occurred due to temperature swings of similar magnitude. In fact, I don't think it's overstating the case to say the historical and archaeological record proves that such mild temperature swings don't cause any cascade effect.
We don't know Lens. There is no comparable disturbance of the atmosphere (much higher CO2 levels) for a very long time. When CO2 was higher the ecosphere was very different.
No certainty here.
ee-tom wrote:I don't expect, Lens, that you will see the contradiction there. A bit too subtle.
And I expect you will continue to post sneeringly condescending posts suggesting that even the most intelligent people on this forum are incapable of grasping your arguments.
I have never suggested that the most intelligent people on this forum are incapable of grasping my arguments. Certainly not on this thread.
Assumptions: 1) E=1/2CV2
(Only dummies assume this)