13 8

After we have calculated all of the nationally determined commitments (NDCs) in the Paris Agreement, we are still left with a gap of 10 to 35 gigatons of CO2, [the latter of] which is about the global emissions in 2017.

So again, we should not be surprised at the end of the year when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change tells us later this year that we have a very, very little chance to achieve the Paris Agreement and its targets.
We are very unlikely to achieve a 1.5- or even 2-degree warming limit, and we are more likely end up in a 3-degree world.

Three degrees may be the “tipping point” where global warming could run out of control, leaving us powerless to intervene as planetary temperatures soar. America's most eminent climate scientist, James Hansen says warming has brought us to the "precipice of a great “tipping point”. If we go over the edge, it will be a transition to “a different planet”, an environment far outside the range that has been experienced by humanity. There will be no return within the lifetime of any generation that can be imagined, and the trip will exterminate a large fraction of species on the planet" ["Wild" magazine, April 2007].
Rugglesby 8 June 3

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


Greed & short-sightedness may finally be catching up to us in ways that can't be avoided or ignored. Between nearing the potential "tipping point" & the poisoning of the ecosystem we are hurrying ourselves to an unsustainable future. The Earth will survive, life will survive, even if not near the diversity we have now, but will the human race survive? & if so in what reduced circumstances?

If we need any proof that the wealthy are not interested in change.
Be sad if the very people who gained the most by destroying the planet are the ones that survive.


Yet the wealthy do not give a dam just give them money. I hope they choke on it.


The pseudo-science behind the Paris accord does not impress me at all. The world's temperature has not increased materially since 1998, while atmospheric CO2 levels have still been increasing steadily. The computer models that predict higher temperatures due to more CO2 in the atmosphere have all been refuted, and have no scientific value. More CO2 in the atmosphere does speed up the growth of photosynthetic plants, which greatly benefits mankind. In actual fact, it seems to me that the burning of fossil fuels may be a serendipitous recycling effort that perhaps ought to be encouraged, not condemned. Of course the creation of real atmospheric pollutants, like nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxides, does need to be controlled and prevented by laws and government action. The atmosphere is a common resource that is subject to the "tragedy of the commons", but CO2 is not a pollutant.

The global warming theory is an archetypical example of what the UK's Dr Bruce Charlton MD called "Zombie Science" in his brilliant essay of the same name. [] It is a theory that is dead scientifically but still enjoys strong political and financial support, so so-called scientists pretend it is real to get the government grant money and professional advancement.

As someone who as a youth worshiped science as an ideal pursuit of truth, the obvious existence of zombie sciences like global warming has helped to make me cynical and sad in my old age. But I do appreciate the strong efforts of our current President and EPA administrator to reduce the losses due to this pseudo-scientific scam.


I say - eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we may die......?
Surf and Turf at my place tonight. Drive on over with your gas guzzling SUV.

48 years old, you just might make it out in time before the shit really starts to hit the fan. The people making the decisions now that will effect everybody else's reality will have already left the building, leaving a giant turd for everybody else to deal with.

Just standing in the pile that I fell into from generations before me. Everyone wants change. No one wants to change or lead it.

@CalvinJoe Finding the leaders seems to be the hardest part. I know lots of people willing to make changes, but we are insignificant, our small changes have minimal effect. But all we can do is what we can do,

@Rugglesby - being insignificant means personal choices are the preference?

@CalvinJoe not sure of your question, may be a cultural difference, we are lazy speakers over here.By insignificant, I just mean that myself and the people i know have no influence on anything.

@Rugglesby - agree with you there. No cultural difference really. We as individuals in a sea of 8 billion people will have no effect on the environment or the ocean or by our carbon footprint. IMO we as a species are too numerous and too diverse to collectively make a positive difference on a global scale. Thus, do as we wish to live life to the fullest. Eat, drink, be merry, for tomorrow we may die.


@CalvinJoe yep, that pretty much completely captures it.


While I do my part to minimize my carbon footprint, I think it may be time for Canada to start building a wall to contain all of those environmental refugees that Trump's policies will soon be producing.3 degrees cooler up here. 😉


For all practical purposes we have set our planet's climate on an unstoppable path that is going make our planet increasingly inhospitable to humans. We're not really an intelligent species.

You are probably right, if we stopped using all fossil fuel right now and found an efficient way to sequester huge amounts of carbon we may be able to turn it around, but we will not do any of these things.


Yes and we've entirely missed an opportunity because we've now become distracted by the whole Trump debacle which in the best possible case will be a severe waste of precious time.

I have been calling ours, "The age of distraction" for quite some time. Look what China managed to do while the Royal Wedding was happening.


I'm really sorry to see this happening. They need to come up with an alternative power besides fossil fuel. It's only going to get worse.


We are well on the way to the slime world model which existed here after the devonsian extinction event.

Pretty much, the planet will survive, I think life in some forms will survive, possibly even some people, but not our societies.


Every time I hear the words 'Paris Agreement' I think of the French nuclear testing in the Pacific.

And the Rainbow Warrior.


I'm sure governments will wait until it is clearly out of control before really doing something.

it kinda already is...


The US is in denial and a lot of the world's wealth is in petrodollars.

We are also in HUGE denial over here.




I worked on other UN environment treaties for a decade. I don't understand why action on climate change is so difficult for governments to accept.

As I understand it it comes down to the fact that making changes is going to cost money, that there will be significant corporate losers, that some earth resources which already represent current investments in oil fields and so on will become worthless. In general a socio-economic upheaval, which vested interests will lobby against.

@Denker Yep, inaction now defers costs which someone else will have to meet. It's like having dinner and saying "the next person sitting at this table will pay the bill."

@Denker Actually it could be an economic boom. It is just a matter of the Government having the will to redirect resources and since the existing fossil fuel money is heavily involve in getting those who control the government into power it is very hard to change the direction of the ship of state. Particularly since a large portion of the population is oblivious.

I guess I still hope that information and education is the real key.

@marmot84 I will out myself here - I think the most immediate environmental problem we have is waste. Climate change is based on science. But it's about the future. Right now, right here, globally we have a waste issue.

Is there such a thing as a pro climate change lobby? I hope that there is, and that it does a good job representing scientific thinking. It’s very likely to be a thought-rich, money-poor lobbying organisation relative to Big Oil, but there should be people out there representing sensible thought.

@Denker There are NGOs out there; but they are, as you say, up against the money of Big Oil. Also Big Coal.

considering that governments house the dogsbodies of the powerful & rich i don't find it surprising at all that fossil fuel still gets pushed stronger than any other source of energy. the rich own the land & therefore the oil, the coal, the gas.

Write Comment
You candd include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:97846
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.