Are you banking on not going to alternative energy? Or are you banking on going to alternative energy?
Well, that’s pretty Manichean of you. Try to be a little more subtle in your thinking.
“Experts at Britain’s top climate research centre have launched a blistering attack on scientific colleagues and journalists who exaggerate the effects of global warming.” [Looking at you, Leap]
More like you are missing the point hoping XOM keeps climbing. Nothing more.
We agree that the acceleration is not statistically significant. This means the level of the signal has not risen enough above the noise. So, either a) there is a lot of noise (which is good to know about) or b) the signal is weak.
Either way, our grandchildren are not going to “face all of Florida under water” (to quote Leap’s hyperbole).
The world will need much more energy in the future, both in the developed world and the developing world which points toward an all-of-the-above approach. In addition, the world is warming – a slow process with both costs and benefits, not an apocalyptic one.
In broad terms I think we should now focus on a) adaptation and b) R&D focused on energy production, storage, transmission and the like. Think of the next two or three decades as a learning period for new technologies with (intelligent) trial and error.
We can discuss these thoughts if you wish, either in this thread or new ones.
Only in this paper. However, I try not to base my opinions on a single paper that happens to match my POV (what some call cherry-picking). I think one should try to get an impression from multiple studies.
Another paper using more satellite data than your Kleinherenbrink et al study reports a significant sea level acceleration about 6-fold higher than Kleinherenbrink et al. Consolidating sea level acceleration estimates from satellite altimetry - ScienceDirect
A Chinese study using satellite and ocean temp/salinity data for the period from 2005-2019 also reports significant sea level rise, particularly in the Atlantic. Remote Sensing | Free Full-Text | Basin-Scale Sea Level Budget from Satellite Altimetry, Satellite Gravimetry, and Argo Data over 2005 to 2019
A major study reports persistent global sea level acceleration since the 1960s extending at least through 2015. Persistent acceleration in global sea-level rise since the 1960s | Nature Climate Change
And you think that justifies you going to the opposite extreme?
He really just wants XOM to do well. Dismissing all else. Then fudging about with cherry picking. Now he is setting terms for how I can work within his perspectives civilly. Never mind reality. Everything that contradicts him is apocalyptic just because it suits XOM.
Florida going under water is more than likely. I do not need false studies to ease my mind and enjoy investing in XOM. Pakistan just was under water. Now she is looking at a default and a half dead economy. Easy to say not apocalyptic? Of course just utter those words and you have said it.
I hate the corruption involved.
Climate has been changing since there was climate.
Saw this bumper sticker: “When in the history of the world as the climate not been changing”
True, but what matters right now is the rate of change and our inputs to the process.
Silly bumper sticker.
Out and out dumb…give me twenty