# How likely is this scenario? Global warming at 4C **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 12, 2018, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484 "2018-08-12T18:16:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/81 "2019-03-10T22:09:13Z")
Also curious if we gave anything resembling a concensus on what portion of climate change human activity is actually responsible for? ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/82 "2019-03-10T22:36:45Z")
> [@Littleman](#): > > I’m ignorant of weather related knowledge but I have a few questions. > Why if our co2 count is higher now than it has been in millions of years is the global average temp still well below a great many warm periods? The premise of that question is false. > [@Littleman](#): > > Maybe I’m missing something??? Yes. You’re missing the fact that detailed answers to all your questions are readily available. You could just read the [short consensus of the major world academies of science](http://www.nationalacademies.org/includes/G8+5energy-climate09.pdf) [PDF] regarding necessary climate policies, or for more technical detail, [any of the IPCC Assessment Reports](https://www.ipcc.ch/assessment-report/ar5/). WG1 is the basic science assessment, and it, along with the others, contains both a Summary for Policymakers and a Technical Summary for those who want varying levels of detail without reading the entire report. It’s OK to ask questions, but there is a great deal of established science on the subject, and it’s much more useful than baseless opinionated skepticism. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/83 "2019-03-10T22:53:45Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > And what if scaremongering results in a hardening of attitudes and a ‘boy cries wolf’ scenario that makes it increasingly hard to get people to believe in real risks? > > I prefer talking straight and using facts, not fear. First, prove that scaremongering does that. Second, prove that straight facts produce results. I’m all ears. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/84 "2019-03-10T23:10:13Z")
> [@Littleman](#): > > Also curious if we gave anything resembling a concensus on what portion of climate change human activity is actually responsible for? That’s probably impossible to get a consensus on, but it’s unimportant. What’s important is that, however you want to describe or define “impact”, human industrial activity is incontrovertibly responsible for the earth’s recent warming trend. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/85 "2019-03-10T23:15:55Z")
> [@Littleman](#): > > … > > Things like post #73 seem kind of underwhelming to me since there were a great many occasions in which I was personally responsible for recording WBTs and issuing the heat category during military training and saw heat cat 5s which would be what it refers to. > > 115 million people in the southern US alone experience this kind of condition all the time. > > I don’t deny climate change, but it seems like there is quite a bit of exaggerated scaremongering here. > > … [snip] > > Maybe I’m missing something??? Yes, that temperature refers to a measurement that is not in the usual weatherman report. > [@](#): > > Researchers at MIT warn that if climate change remains unchecked (Business As Usual-scenario = RCP 8.5) over half a billion people will, from 2070 onwards, experience humid heat waves that will kill even healthy people in the shade within 6 hours. The Wet Bulb Temperature (WBT) would exceed 35°C (95°F), at which the body – of any mammal – cannot cool itself, overheats and shuts down. So, what is the WBT? > **[Wet-bulb temperature](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet-bulb_temperature)** > > The wet-bulb temperature (WBT) is the temperature read by a thermometer covered in water-soaked (water at ambient temperature) cloth (a wet-bulb thermometer) over which air is passed. At 100% relative humidity, the wet-bulb temperature is equal to the air temperature (dry-bulb temperature); at lower humidity the wet-bulb temperature is lower than dry-bulb temperature because of evaporative cooling. > The wet-bulb temperature is defined as the temperature of a parcel of air cooled to saturation (10... > [@](#): > > The wet-bulb temperature (WBT) is the temperature read by a thermometer covered in water-soaked cloth (wet-bulb thermometer) over which air is passed.[1] At 100% relative humidity, the wet-bulb temperature is equal to the air temperature (dry-bulb temperature) and it is lower at lower humidity. It is defined as the temperature of a parcel of air cooled to saturation (100% relative humidity) by the evaporation of water into it, with the latent heat supplied by the parcel.[2] A wet-bulb thermometer indicates a temperature close to the true (thermodynamic) wet-bulb temperature. The wet-bulb temperature is the lowest temperature that can be reached under current ambient conditions by the evaporation of water only. > [@](#): > > A 2010 study concluded that under a worst-case scenario for global warming with temperatures 12 °C (22 °F) higher than 2007, the wet-bulb temperature limit for humans could be exceeded around much of the world in future centuries.[10] A 2015 study concluded that parts of the globe could become uninhabitable.[11] An example of the threshold at which the human body is no longer able to cool itself and begins to overheat is a humidity level of 50% and a high heat of 46 °C (115 °F), as this would indicate a wet-bulb temperature of 35 °C (95 °F).[12] > > In 2018, South Carolina implemented new regulations to protect high school students from heat-related emergencies during outdoor activities. Specific guidelines and restrictions are in place for wet-bulb temperatures between 82.0°F and 92.0°F; wet-bulb temperatures of 92.1°F or greater require all outdoor activities to be canceled.[13][14] As I saw in another report, we are not experiencing **constant** high temperature and constant humidity like that… not yet. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/86 "2019-03-11T00:15:20Z")
From another thread, and in the tradition of “a picture is worth a thousand words” … > [@I feel like climatologists need to stop predicting the future.](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-feel-like-climatologists-need-to-stop-predicting-the-future/830731/44): > > > [@I feel like climatologists need to stop predicting the future.](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-feel-like-climatologists-need-to-stop-predicting-the-future/830731/39): > > > > Obligatory [XKCD](https://xkcd.com/1732/) > > That’s a very good graphic, and it’s no mere cartoon – it’s scientifically accurate. I’ve seen it before but forgot about it. The bottom part is essentially the famous hockey stick shape first put into the public consciousness by the paleoclimate reconstructions of Michael Mann et al. This is the sort of stuff that has climate deniers getting all their shorts in a knot, but unfortunately for them, it’s factually accurate. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/87 "2019-03-11T00:19:44Z")
Indeed. We’re not looking at 500 years for drastic change, because we’ve _already_ seen drastic change, in the past 50 years. The last time it changed as much as it has in the past 50 years, that change took 2000 years. ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/88 "2019-03-11T01:21:08Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > The premise of that question is false. > Yes. You’re missing the fact that detailed answers to all your questions are readily available. You could just read the [short consensus of the major world academies of science](http://www.nationalacademies.org/includes/G8+5energy-climate09.pdf) [PDF] regarding necessary climate policies, or for more technical detail, [any of the IPCC Assessment Reports](https://www.ipcc.ch/assessment-report/ar5/). WG1 is the basic science assessment, and it, along with the others, contains both a Summary for Policymakers and a Technical Summary for those who want varying levels of detail without reading the entire report. It’s OK to ask questions, but there is a great deal of established science on the subject, and it’s much more useful than baseless opinionated skepticism. I’m not sure why the premise if the first Q is false…yet In any case, thank you for those links, that’s what i was looking for. I don’t have an opinion though, I do like to play devil’s advocate, and ask questions about things that seem to be assumed. > [@asahi](#): > > That’s probably impossible to get a consensus on, but it’s unimportant. What’s important is that, however you want to describe or define “impact”, human industrial activity is incontrovertibly responsible for the earth’s recent warming trend. To what degree? Honestly I just quickly glanced at some charts and two things seemed to pop out. 1 we were in a warming trend coming out of the little ice age before we industrialized. 2 it seems like each cold trend has a roughly equal and opposite warm trend afterward. Currently we are still a good ways from the opposite of the little ice age. So I thought, how much is us? I’m sure some is but how much. Admittedly these are very very elementary observations and I am not educated on the subject yet. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/89 "2019-03-11T01:41:29Z")
> [@Littleman](#): > > To what degree? > Honestly I just quickly glanced at some charts and two things seemed to pop out. > 1 we were in a warming trend coming out of the little ice age before we industrialized. > > 2 it seems like each cold trend has a roughly equal and opposite warm trend afterward. > Currently we are still a good ways from the opposite of the little ice age. > > So I thought, how much is us? > I’m sure some is but how much. > > Admittedly these are very very elementary observations and I am not educated on the subject yet. It’s not just the warming trend - that by itself wouldn’t necessarily alarm anyone. It’s the degree, the rate at which we are warming that provides evidence of global warming. I’d also add that since at least 1896, there have been professional papers authored that have predicted a correlation between human industrial activity and a gradual warming of the earth’s atmosphere. Thus, it’s not as though we’re observing a warming trend and saying “Aha! It’s the fault of man.” Scientists have been predicting global warming for more than a century, even before actual warming was conclusively observed. This website of climate change myths might actually be a good starter resource: > **[Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says](https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php)** > > Examines the science and arguments of global warming skepticism. Common objections like 'global warming is caused by the sun', 'temperature has changed naturally in the past' or 'other planets are warming too' are examined to see what the science... ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/90 "2019-03-11T01:45:37Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Indeed. We’re not looking at 500 years for drastic change, because we’ve _already_ seen drastic change, in the past 50 years. The last time it changed as much as it has in the past 50 years, that change took 2000 years. This discovery has challenged that > **[Alabama's 60,000-year-old underwater forest spills its secrets in new...](https://www.al.com/news/mobile/2017/06/underwater_forest_discovered_alabama.html?ampredir)** > > The forest appears to be a wholly unique relic of our planet's past, the only known site where a coastal ice age forest this old has been preserved in place. Anyway, im seeing large portions of the northern hemisphere becoming more hospitable, release of unpolluted meltwater, possibly staving off an ice age. Slow enough, it might be beneficial…idk ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/91 "2019-03-11T01:51:32Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > And what if scaremongering results in a hardening of attitudes and a ‘boy cries wolf’ scenario that makes it increasingly hard to get people to believe in real risks? > > I prefer talking straight and using facts, not fear. How about this, if global warming deniers are right, then they’re right. But if they’re wrong, then they should be rounded up and thrown in jail for their injuries and crimes against humankind. ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/92 "2019-03-11T01:58:43Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > It’s not just the warming trend - that by itself wouldn’t necessarily alarm anyone. It’s the degree, the rate at which we are warming that provides evidence of global warming. > > I’d also add that since at least 1896, there have been professional papers authored that have predicted a correlation between human industrial activity and a gradual warming of the earth’s atmosphere. Thus, it’s not as though we’re observing a warming trend and saying “Aha! It’s the fault of man.” Scientists have been predicting global warming for more than a century, even before actual warming was conclusively observed. > > This website of climate change myths might actually be a good starter resource: > > [Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says](https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php) I agree , I’m sure we contribute. I was just curious how much I’ll take a look for sure. I am inclined to agree ( for now) though that the scaremongering seems out of proportion. I am given the impression of some mass Extinction of humanity, but the data just suggests change. To be clear though, I support green energy , in my mind the appeal is that fossil fuels are dirty abd expensive. Why the hell wouldn’t we take advantage of clean, free ( or cheap) energy that’s all over the place. All I can think is complications caused by our previous lack of tech, and laziness to change. I’ve long thought we should just put into housing code that all new construction ( especially residential) has to have some portion of wind or solar incorporated. Also that we need to universalize EV batteries so they can simply be changed by a process kind of similar to automatic car washes, I think it would make them far more popular. ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/93 "2019-03-11T02:10:15Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Yes, that temperature refers to a measurement that is not in the usual weatherman report. > So, what is the WBT? > > [Wet-bulb temperature - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet-bulb_temperature) > > As I saw in another report, we are not experiencing **constant** high temperature and constant humidity like that… not yet. I’m well aware of all the WBT implications, as I said. 12c Change is AFAICT very drastic and so many years off even assuming business as usual and ignoring hundreds of years of future tech that this seems almost irrelevant. WBT over 90 restricts military training heavily, and I’ve seen it a lot. It’s not near as scary as it sounds. I guess it’s these types of scare tactics that most turn me off. It’s a bad thing, but I think maybe it’s bad enough on it’s real consequences to be motivating without the “we’re all gonna die!” Impression I perceive from many reports… ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/94 "2019-03-11T02:31:15Z")
> [@Littleman](#): > > I’m well aware of all the WBT implications, as I said. > > 12c Change is AFAICT very drastic and so many years off even assuming business as usual and ignoring hundreds of years of future tech that this seems almost irrelevant. > > WBT over 90 restricts military training heavily, and I’ve seen it a lot. > > It’s not near as scary as it sounds. > > I guess it’s these types of scare tactics that most turn me off. > > It’s a bad thing, but I think maybe it’s bad enough on it’s real consequences to be motivating without the “we’re all gonna die!” Impression I perceive from many reports… Uh, I’m afraid you are dismissing the part about being **constant** , based on what you said that took place alright, but not all the time as the article mentioned. And we are talking about guys that are trained and can restrict their training, not people that have health issues, children and the elderly. ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/95 "2019-03-11T02:47:45Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Uh, I’m afraid you are dismissing the part about being **constant** , based on what you said that took place alright, but not all the time as the article mentioned. And we are talking about guys that are trained and can restrict their training, not people that have health issues, children and the elderly. I’m not ignoring the constant part. Acclimation has a lot to do with it. Which takes about two weeks. > **[Log into Facebook](https://m.facebook.com/FortCampbell/photos/weve-already-hit-heat-category-5-today-be-sure-to-hydrate-how-do-you-beat-the-he/10154240311726425/)** > > Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know. But 12c change, I mean …that’s huge right? What would it take to get that far? The OP was talking 4c and I get the impression thats pretty big. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/96 "2019-03-11T02:56:13Z")
> [@Littleman](#): > > I’m not ignoring the constant part. Acclimation has a lot to do with it. Which takes about two weeks. > > [We've already hit Heat Category... - U.S. Army Fort Campbell](https://m.facebook.com/FortCampbell/photos/weve-already-hit-heat-category-5-today-be-sure-to-hydrate-how-do-you-beat-the-he/10154240311726425/) Uh uh, kids and the elderly and people that have respiratory problems will acclimatize? I guess when they pass away it will be no problem. /s > [@Littleman](#): > > But 12c change, I mean …that’s huge right? > What would it take to get that far? > > The OP was talking 4c and I get the impression thats pretty big. As it was pointed before, it is likely if we keep business as usual and we do not do much to stop dumping CO2 in to the atmosphere. One more thing: What you and soldiers experience has to be qualified as the low end in the future. As it was pointed, MIT and others are talking about what averages extreme temperatures can reach in regions of the word. However, the extremes soldiers in training encounter will also increase. Unless you can point at a mechanism that will prevent record highs to pop up under a time when the temperatures in the background will already be higher, many will then see even worse than the bad average temperatures in that scenario. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/97 "2019-03-11T03:03:11Z")
> [@Littleman](#): > > I’m not ignoring the constant part. Acclimation has a lot to do with it. Which takes about two weeks. > > [We've already hit Heat Category... - U.S. Army Fort Campbell](https://m.facebook.com/FortCampbell/photos/weve-already-hit-heat-category-5-today-be-sure-to-hydrate-how-do-you-beat-the-he/10154240311726425/) > > But 12c change, I mean …that’s huge right? > What would it take to get that far? > > The OP was talking 4c and I get the impression thats pretty big. You’re very confused about the difference between a _ **global average temperature change** _ and a particular temperature and humidity at a given place and time. Global averages have been remarkably constant for thousands of years, and have cycled in remarkably constant ice age patterns for over a million years, with a correspondingly narrow band of CO2 changes. [A global average change of only 1.5°C would be a serious step towards global catastrophe](https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/). ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/98 "2019-03-11T03:12:42Z")
A 2010 study concluded that under a worst-case scenario for global warming with temperatures 12 °C (22 °F) higher than 2007, the wet-bulb temperature limit for humans could be exceeded around much of the world in future centuries.[10] A 2015 study concluded that parts of the globe could become uninhabitable.[11] An example of the threshold at which the human body is no longer able to cool itself and begins to overheat is a humidity level of 50% and a high heat of 46 °C (115 °F), as this would indicate a wet-bulb temperature of 35 °C (95 °F).[12] Is this study not referring to a 12c global average rise? ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/99 "2019-03-11T03:33:22Z")
> [@Littleman](#): > > 12c Change is AFAICT very drastic and so many years off even assuming business as usual and ignoring hundreds of years of future tech that this seems almost irrelevant. Real world scientists don’t agree with you. Since American right-wingers seem to feel that global warming is a delusion of liberals, it’s instructive to look at what other countries are saying in their news. [Runaway global warming ‘just decades away’](https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/specialreports/runaway-global-warming-just-decades-away-860650.html) - Irish Examiner > [@](#): > > A Hothouse Earth would pose “severe risks for health, economies, political stability, and ultimately, the habitability of the planet for humans”, the international scientists wrote in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences… > > Commenting on the findings, climate researcher Dr Phil Williamson, from the University of East Anglia, said: “In the context of the summer of 2018, this is definitely not a case of crying wolf, raising a false alarm. The wolves are now in sight.” > > Chris Rapley, Professor of Climate Science at University College London said: “Previous research has shown that an increase in the mean global temperature of 11-12C would make more than half of the land area currently occupied by humans uninhabitable. So, a ‘runaway’ warming to a new and uncontrollable hot state would represent an existential threat to humanity and the majority of existing species.” [Global warming imperils clouds that deter hothouse Earth](https://www.france24.com/en/20190226-global-warming-imperils-clouds-deter-hothouse-earth) - France 24 > [@](#): > > Using an innovative approach to modelling the behaviour of the stratus clouds, Schneider and his colleagues calculated that protective cloud cover could break up if CO2 levels reached 1200 ppm, though the “tipping point” might be somewhat higher. > > Passing that threshold – three times present levels – may not be as far-fetched as it seems, scientists caution. > > Even after 30 years of dire warnings about the consequences of climate change, global greenhouse gas emissions are still climbing year-on-year. > > At current rates of CO2 pollution – known as the “business as usual” scenario – “the 1200 ppm value will be crossed by 2104,” Malte Meinshausen, director of the Climate and Energy College at the University of Melbourne, told AFP, citing a study to be published later this year. [Deadly weather: the human cost of 2018’s climate disasters – visual guide](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2018/dec/21/deadly-weather-the-human-cost-of-2018s-climate-disasters-visual-guide) the Guardian > [@](#): > > The UN’s recent alert that the world has at most 12 years to prevent climate catastrophe was a landmark moment. Never before has the threat of irreversible damage been so close… > > According to data from the Centre of Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, in 2018 so far approximately 5,000 people have died and 28.9 million have needed emergency assistance or humanitarian aid because of extreme weather. … > > Data displayed on the map and on the impact counter come from EM-DAT: The Emergency Events Database, Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disaster, Debarati Guha-Sapir. Global warming is not something that will happen in the future. It is happening right now, today, and will only get worse because people refuse to listen to facts and want to play devil’s advocate on a subject they admit they know nothing about. ---
**Author:** ![Littleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ccd318/32.png) [@Littleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Littleman)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484/100 "2019-03-11T03:53:32Z")
The ipcc report makes sense except one thing, it’s entirely in the context of referring to 150 years ago at the dawn of industrialization. Now between industrialization and present we’ve got a .8 rise but if we’ll look at the 150 years before industrialization we see another .8 rise…so We’re on exactly the same path as before industrializing. That’s why I question it. Was it supposed to stop already? How do we know that? And for the co2, again ok it’s higher than in a million years but the last time it hit 280ppm (120k years ago) the global temp spike was +8c compared to present , now it’s at 411ppm but we’re only at a +.8c deviation? I don’t get it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-likely-is-this-scenario-global-warming-at-4c/819484.md?page=6)