I suggest you don't put things in quotes that I have not said. It's duplicitous.
Slowly, step by step, so you might understand, I'll give a shot at clarifying things for you:
If we continue to take the actions that governments and private enterprise have started, to change our energy and transport systems, and we make the sort of progress that I expect we will, over the next 30 years and more, then I think we will hold warming to 2 degrees. There is a chance we will hold warming to 1.5 degrees, but I expect that will take some tech that can remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
That warming will play out over 70 years or more. To some extent it will affect me, and to a greater extent my kids, nieces and nephews, et al.
And that warming and it's consequences will cause significant disruption in some locations, and require significant adaption, but overall we'll get by. Here in NZ we are more fortunate than most.
If we take no action, as people like you appear to be advocating, we will hit much higher temperatures, over that 70 year and longer future time frame; and civilisation will be in serious trouble.
I am reasonably confident that the opinions of yourself and jopo and the handful of other science deniers here are now a minority and will be largely ignored by governments and large investors. And we'll get on with solving the problem. I think the new technologies coming along are also cleaner and less polluting than the old, as well as resolving the greenhouse gas issue. And I don't see them costing us much at all, over time.
Nevertheless the noisy denial camp deserves to be rebutted, and I've made it a bit of a hobby, and from way back, when those voices were politically stronger in Aus, around ten years ago. That process of looking into denial arguments also provides me with a small fact check against my investment strategy. It also helps avoid a bigoted unanswered denial voice getting hold again here (which was the case) and potentially confusing too many peoples' views. So my posting is also a small investment in influencing public and political understanding and opinion. There are the hardcore deniers here that are not too likely to change, but it's good to balance their views here with science.
So no, its not imminent. And what we get depends on what we do. And I am confident that we will avert the worst.
Now, it seems clear that you are not as smart as you think you are, but there is a chance that even you can understand that. And perhaps you can stop misrepresenting my position on this.
Climate change is not imminently dangerous, in any immediately catastrophic sense, though it is already having costly effects and contributing to an increase in dangerous weather events.
It could be very dangerous and potentially catastrophic over time if we fail to re-engineer our energy and transport industries quickly enough. But I expect we will make the sort of progress we need to.
And the changes we can already expect over the next twenty or thirty years or more as it continues to warm, aren't too bad here in wellington, in particular. And have an upside. I'm enjoying a gorgeous week here so far. Probably a bit cooler than you'd like. But pleasant enough.
Expand
