Many people don’t realize the IPCC walked back (refined as they put it) some of its most dire scenarios… others may choose to ignore the walkback. Akin to the rocket and feather phenomenon that affects pricing.

▲

altcognito 31 minutes ago | parent [-]

It was based on co2 emissions doubling by 2050.

Though energy output has doubled, as a share coal has dropped in China and the US.

Wouldn’t you expect estimates based on difficult to predict human behavior to change based on new data?

▲

mc32 26 minutes ago | parent [-]

Many people were saying that things were not as dire as they claimed. I’m glad they revised but you had silly people gluing themselves to thoroughfares (cars stuck in traffic waste more energy) and vandalizing what some people consider precious art and or national patrimony in the name of climate change thinking that those most dire predictions were indeed correct and we were all headed to hell in a hand basket.

▲

TheOtherHobbes 12 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Ruined cars piled up in streets waste even more energy - temporarily.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/31/why-were-the-f...

▲

DangitBobby 10 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

So we are no longer worried about catastrophic or runaway climate change based on these revisions?

	▲	mc32 6 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		That’s tough to say. Weather systems are difficult to model. We have minimal understanding of the causes or inputs that control the very long climate cycles. Like we know that some day thousands of years from now we’ll have another unstoppable glacial period. We’ll also have a period free of polar ice. Those are cyclical and independent of CO2. We cannot stop either. We live in a very precious time. I also think we should limit or be judicious as much as we can about what we pump into the atmosphere (or oceans or ground)