~"We are starting to lose habitat for the human species," co-chair Hans-Otto Pörtner just *said* in the presser. I was gonna do a summary thread of the IPCC AR6 WG2 SPM, but the words "habitat loss" and "aerosols" don't even *appear in writing* so I don't know if it's worth it.
1/ Burning embers diagrams are turning into burning towers diagrams. Idk what such diagrams are to tell us; systems thinking clearly missing. Report introduces 127 (!?) "key risks" but doesn't prioritize. We have no baseline to adapt to. Good luck I guess.
2/ There is so much we can do. Maybe look for local ecologists, systems designers, and communicators. We can do so much better than this. Start with the oceans. If we don't get this shit under control, Ukraine is but a minor warm-up. SROCC @xr_cambridge:
Good paper. But Putin brings us to the brink of nuclear war and threatens Ukraine with flamethrowers that melt people from inside. IPCC AR6, tomorrow, will receive paltry coverage. And scientists are out there having the same old petty arguments, long since divorced from reality?
Mainstream scientists are in denial of existential climate risk. They retreated into a fantasy world of mathematical models in which they feel safe. A pathetic failure to warn society in the last few years in which we could still act.
Poetic climate action: today 1pm, activists disrupt airport operations in Berlin/Frankfurt/Munich with 99 red balloons. Russia's war already shakes up European security & UK airline operations—what's coming is far worse. Support @Jana_Mest@AufstandLastGenletztegeneration.de/blog/2022/02/f…
What's ahead? Not everyone will want to know, but reality-based analysis helps if we want to change reality.
1/n
2/ Thought experiment, case 1: stabilize at 500 ppm CO2. Very optimistic, but not completely impossible (IMHO).
3/ Case 2: don't stabilize. Go to 800 ppm CO2, and feedbacks will carry you further. Less optimistic. Vital to know IF that's where we're heading so far.
There's a world of difference, wide enough for billions of lives, between cases #1&2.
Peter Wadhams: "It may be too late to save the Arctic, but if it's too late to save the Arctic, it's too late to save anything. What the world needs now is engineers to do what is needed."
Funding needed now. Thread.
2/ We should be blunt because these questions decide our future. As Peter Wadhams says in his book and on @iconickevin's blog: we know that, institutionalized via the IPCC, it has become social convention to make certain indefensible assumptions in models. kevinhester.live/2017/11/10/ful…
3/ Hand waving online and asking scientists and analysts to take the time to read up on the relevant dynamics may help but won't address what is essentially a question of power and institutional architecture, so just to leave this here.