….https://phys.org/news/2023-09-planetary-boundaries-exceeded.html
By Jo Nova
Earth’s Blood Pressure is too high now
Modern Science looks more like a Medieval Guild every day
Back in May humans did the first ever study quantifying Earth System Boundaries, which was incredible luck. After two hundred thousand years of homo sapiens stretching the bounds of the planet, we barely discovered “Earth System Boundaries” in time to find out we hit the limit 12 weeks later. What are the odds?
It’s almost as if a whole twig of science was invented in order to write scary press releases? It’s another unauditable, unaccountable collective of Experts who can never be wrong, only “useful” to the bureaucratic machine. They call themselves scientists but their predictions will never be tested, only marked against the Department wish-list.
We can all appreciate the talismanic symbolism (and marketing value) below, where segments of the sacred arcs are tainted blood red, as Earth progressively descends into the anthropogenic abyss year upon year.
https://phys.org/news/2023-09-planetary-boundaries-exceeded.html
Red Agate pendants cut-to-match will no doubt be ready for Christmas.
Meanwhile the same climate models that can’t predict any of the last two thousand years, or next months floods, droughts and rains — can somehow tell us exactly what the limits are on these complex systems.
Only 7,000 years ago humans survived sea levels that were one to two meters higher than today, and they did it all without a single satellite, iphone or Planetary Boundary Advisor.
It’s all about respect apparently — pretty soon we’ll be carving Venus figurines to protect us.
Six of nine planetary boundaries now exceeded
University of Copehagen, Phys.org
A new study updates the planetary boundary framework and shows human activities are increasingly impacting the planet and, thereby, increasing the risk of triggering dramatic changes in overall Earth conditions.
For over 3 billion years, the interaction between life (represented by the planetary boundary, Biosphere Integrity) and climate have controlled the overall environmental conditions on Earth.
Respecting and maintaining interactions in the Earth system so that they remain similar to those that have controlled Earth conditions over the past ~12,000 years are critical for ensuring human activities do not trigger dramatic changes in Earth conditions—changes that likely would decrease the Earth’s ability to support modern civilizations.
The Earth’s ‘blood pressure’ is too high
The trend of increasing transgression of the boundaries is worrying explains Katherine Richardson, professor at Globe Institute, Leader of the Sustainability Science Center at the University of Copenhagen, and leader of the study, “Crossing six boundaries in itself does not necessarily imply a disaster will ensue but it is a clear warning signal. We can regard it as we do our own blood pressure. A BP over 120/80 is not a guarantee of a heart attack but it increases the risk of one. Therefore, we try to bring it down. For our own—and our children’s—sakes we need to reduce the pressure on these six planetary boundaries.”
Like some people with high blood pressure, human civilization needs to go on a diet: we need fewer bureaucrats, and less government funded witchcraft.
REFERENCE
Katherine Richardson, Earth beyond six of nine Planetary Boundaries, Science Advances (2023). DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adh2458. www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458
Venus of Willendorf — Wellcome Collection Gallery. CC4.0
What nonsense.
They disguise their witch doctory as “science”, the mal-educated masses don’t know the difference, and then everyone panics and begs for more totalitarian control, as indeed is The Plan.
Fundamentally this is about pagan Gaia worship, the replacement for Judeo-Christian religion (which sees appropriate use of earth’s resources as for the benefit of mankind) and the basis of the moral foundation of Western Civilisation, both of which the Left despise.
Now we are told to leave resources in the ground and for non-Elites to freeze in the dark and eat insects.
421
The good news is the “bottom” is rising fast. Freedom now means free money. Money “floats”. Government “stupifies” the plebs with THE BIG PRINT RUN.
When we all hit bottom and the world has flipped. Which way is up? Has logic been reversed? Will Gaia care?
Has Gaia’s parasites all caught a terminal version of…… the STUPID! Fed by free money and belief in GUV.
Or will it all end badly? Hyperinflation, bankruptcy, poverty, dictatorship and war.
Pull out the History Book and we ALL know where this is going.
232
This brings to mind H.L.Mencken’s well known quote:
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
110
Just read today of a lady involved the Nuffield Scholarship Australia involved in doing research on insects for human consumption . The insects were crickets. Around about 2017. Yummee?
10
David, this is the next fear mongering ratbagery that we have been waiting for. Wow, they are now coming up with a newer, crazier one nearly every week. I guess it is in answer to the hundreds of scientists who called the climate mob out saying there is no Climate Emergency. Ha, wonder what next weeks’ enthralling episode will be in the great race of the most outrageous climate hoax!
10
I’m guessing this will form the basis of upcoming “climate lockdowns”, possibly to coincide with the US Presidential elections along with the release of a US Election variant of the ‘rona.
This will enable the Demon-rats to harvest more fake mail-in ballots.
290
Quite right David! This is just the softening up process and is precisely how they duped us with wuflu!
210
2 weeks to flatten the curve LOL.
60
This is no longer a word salad. Now it is a scientific word-and-picture salad.
150
… there,…fixed that little slip for you !👍🤫
110
Nothing 1 giant suppository can’t fix!!
For the “Scientists” of course!!
🙂 🙂
110
It would be so wonderful to be still living in the Age of Enlightenment or at least with its values, rather than the Dark Ages, a period of intellectual, cultural and economic decline and superstition which we are rapidly reverting to.
330
Sad, but a sign of our times, that this load of old cobbler’s comes pouring out of our universities at such an alarming rate. Luckily, I chose not to attend one of these places of indoctrination for the purpose of study, although I taught at one later in life and observed first hand the utter lefty bias permeating the whole place. Looniversity indeed.
180
follow the money.Who paid for this so called study.
180
Exactly. And see my comment #16 below.
80
Your last comment is the key to sanity in the future. Less government, not more. Fewer bureaucrats not more. And definitely much less grants going to second and third rate PHDs who ignore science but simply ask “tell me what you want me to find and I will find it but I will need a few thousand dollars to do it”. We have to fight back and making fun of them is very effective. I do note that this sort of garbage science does not receive the attention in the MSM it once did. People are sick of it and they have greater and much more immediate concerns. They probably also look around them and see a wonderful world that has not changed in their lifetimes.
230
Good summary Lawrie.
The most pressing problems for humanity at the moment revolve around the oppression that derives from the misuse of trust in the “democratic” system of government.
We need a few PhDs to investigate how the human rights of so many decent people have been trashed over the last four years.
The U.S. is a prominent example of citizen abuse by programmes such as the BLM violence, forced injections of a still poorly defined VaXXine, forced obeisance to the god of Global Warming and the Gender Drama to mention a few.
Europe, the U.S. and Once Great Britain have all suffered societal collapse and wealth plunder and redistribution to more deserving “immigrants”.
Could a PhD work this mess out and suggest a solution.
70
BLM was/is run from the Chinese Consulate in San Francisco
30
If you do a Goolag search for “climate lockdowns” without quote marks the top research results will direct you to the Official Narrative, that such lockdowns are a right wing conspiracy theory and such like.
But the thinking community already consider climate lockdowns to be a very real strategy of the Left, especially as just about everything the Left says is the opposite of the truth of what they plan.
Look at the articles at:
161
Climate lockdowns are already here : ULEZ and ’15 minute cities’.
It has the advantage that the richer people can afford it.
40
“Novel entities” ?? …..I’m taking a punt and assuming that’s not about books. Is it about Dreamtime spirits ? Is it a grab bag of what’s left over in spirit guides minds and shaman drug induced visions that can’t be collected and packaged in any other way? Are they entities like ghosts and Bigfoot? Perhaps influences on our planet from extra-terrestrials channeling earths harmonics to travel seamlessly about at well above breakneck speed?
120
And all of their lunacy is now taking place at the highest point of Human flourishing for 200,000 years and yet none of these delusional fools understand the data?
So how have we come so far since 1950 and yet none of these junk scientists understand the data and evidence?
And all of the data is available for free online, but these delusional fools can’t spend a few minutes to check it?
They’d rather waste TRILLIONS of $ for decades and achieve nothing, but they will deliver TOXIC, UNRELIABLE, DILUTE energy from W & S and then repeat their idiocy every 15 years.
132
This is why SETI has been unsuccessful and found no other extraterrestrial civilisations. A civilisation gets to about our level of development and then destroys itself around 100 years after the development of radio (to enable interstellar communications).
130
Another piece of inclusive claptrap from science.org.
110
“Only 7,000 years ago humans survived sea levels that were one to two meters higher than today”
Two meters?
That’s child’s play.
Between the end of the end of the last glacial maximum in 10,000 BC and today, sea levels rose 400 meters. Stone Age Europeans and Britons lived in what is today the English channel. Even as recently as 5,000 BC, portions of that land area were still inhabited and above sea level. Today, a little more than 7,000 years later, the deepest portions of the channel are 180 meters deep. That’s around a 200 meter change in 7,000 years, and stone age Britons and Europeans managed it just fine.
The Dutch figured out how to reclaim land from the sea nearly 800 years ago with their system of sea walls and windmill-powered pumps.
Venetians figured out nearly 400 years ago to build their ‘floating’ city in the middle of a lagoon.
Yet, we are supposed to believe that 21st century humans with all of our technology will be helpless to mitigate the coming climate apocalypse.
240
Furthermore, a great deal of early modern man’s archeological remains are now buried under the that (up to) 180 metres of ocean, making archeological work difficult to impossible and few people are investigating them.
Also, unfortunately warmists think the environment is unchanging and “always has, always will be” the same which the thinking community realise is not true. So, there is due to that false belief a lack of interest or knowledge that there might be ancient archeological sites deep beneath the sea.
170
Steve, 400 metres?
I think that was supposed to be 400 feet.
Last glacial maximum about 20,000 years back the seas were 125 to 130 metres lower than now. To confuse things even more, at the end of the big melt about 8,000 years back there was an overshoot and seas were up to 7 metres high than now.
The oceans have been falling, admittedly in an oscillating pattern, since that top out.
No doubt Noah’s flood was in there somewhere.
Lower seas are indicative of more ice and cooler planet.
The 1850s chill out was just a small blip in the overall picture of world cooling over the last 7,000 years.
130
🙂 🙂
“Today, a little more than 7,000 years later, the deepest portions of the channel are 180 meters deep. That’s around a 200 meter change in 7,000 years, and stone age Britons and Europeans managed it just fine.”
Amazing. Where did this come from?
400 ft is 121.92 metres which is within a metre or so of the accepted rise to current levels.
During the last Glacial maximum New York was under an ice field that was about 1500 metres deep. That’s a lot of downward pressure. Was England similarly loaded with ice that created a lift of the homeland after the ice melted.
70
You are correct, I meant feet. The metric system and myself are often at loggerheads. I’m even worse when it comes to mixing up my Celsius to Fahrenheit measurements.
As far as where it came from, Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland
90
Don’t worry, even NASA has trouble in this area.
One of their rocket systems was unfortunately designed with a mix of metric and old system units.
70
Not to mention the “Gimli Glider”, an aircraft crash due to fuel exhaustion caused by inappropriate metric/Imperial measurement conversion.
140
“No doubt Noah’s flood was in there somewhere.”
It’s no coincidence that darn near every culture on earth has a ‘great flood’ mythology. It’s probably from stories passed down through oral traditions before written history. I’d imagine that living near a coastal area or a river during that time period must have seemed like the world was ending.
120
Yet coral atolls are still at sea-level!
40
There is no question of earth’s blood pressure, but mine is increasing to dangerous levels reading BS like that.
190
I hadn’t read all the comments before making mine at #35. We are of like mind here!
50
😀
20
In 1800 the majority of people had to work on farms, but today wealthy countries require very few farm workers.
The workers employed on the land have also dropped over the last 30 years and China has also seen a big drop. Look it up at the link.
Of course this just proves again that their so called dangerous climate change is just more BS and FRAUD.
And those few farm workers today feed and clothe 8 billion people and yet few people seem to understand this amazing change.
So how has this amazing change taken place in just the last 0.1% of Human existence?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-the-labor-force-employed-in-agriculture?tab=chart&country=COL~CHN~JAM~ITA~POL~FRA~NLD~ETH~DEU~JPN~NZL~OWID_NAM~ZAF~SWE~CHE~GBR~OWID_WRL~AUS
120
At the OWI Data link we find that China’s farm workers etc have dropped by about 34% from 1991 to 2019.
And the World’s farm workers etc have dropped by 24% over the same period.
And the population of the world had increased from 5.4 billion in 1991 to about 7.8 billion by 2019, or an increase of 2.4 billion.
Check the data at the link.
90
A little factoid I picked up a few years ago. -“….the share of land devoted to agriculture (37% of world land surface) hasn’t changed since 1990, according to a 2015:2030 FAO/UN perspective report. We have been able to feed 34% more people in that time and feed them better than ever, using the same amount of land”.
80
I think that this “report” should have been in “Science Retreats”.
70
“Earth System Boundaries, ”
Reading yesterday’s article about the geology students complaining there were no handicapped facilities on field trips and too many rocks, I’m sure a lot of those scientists have never seen “The Earth”, in fact never been outside their own country except to go to a conference in some exotic tourist resort.
You can SEE the IQ dropping generation by generation…
120
Absolutely.
190
Sorry David, they saw you coming. Average IQ is always 100. By definition.
40
I assume they didn’t renormalise the results in the study.
80
“Average IQ is always 100”
Ah,but the average of who?? The 1000 people you tested that week? The 730000 in that study?? The world??
..or do you average the IQs you have just measured and the results from 30years ago??
If you’re using the same tests, is it a valid measure between different populations and different time periods?
70
That only implies that half the population is less intelligent than the other half.
The real test of intelligence is the ability to survive.
On that scale, most likely 90% would find themselves extinct.
Show me a modern child or adult who knows how to grow their own food, find and process drinking water, mine minerals, forge steel, preserve food, or otherwise have useful knowledge.
Intelligence is a measure of something that has little relationship to survival. Unskilled and ignorant “smart people” wouldn’t survive a week.
Survival takes all kinds, but politicians and activists are not part of that equation.
81
Lance,
If we went back to hunter gathering like the “First Nations” most of us (and them…) would starve . We get supplied everything neatly packaged in plastic , whenever we want it . How many people could field dress anything that they catch ? A degree in gender studies won’t help much….
30
AGGHHHH! Caused by gerbil warming no doubt! (sarc)
40
In addition, an April study shows the spike protein causes cell death in the brain. Double/Triple vaxxed and you start to produce junk science like this LOL
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.04.04.535604v1#:~:text=Our%20results%20revealed%20the%20accumulation,direct%20effect%20on%20brain%20tissue.
90
If you look at the world map at https://phys.org/news/2023-05-world-safe-planet-quantifying-earth.html showing all the ESBs (earth system boundaries) that have been supposedly transgressed, you will see relatively few in China.
China is one of the most environmentally destructive places on earth, so why do you think they barely rate a mention? E.g. the world’s largest CO2 emitter by far and rapidly increasing. (Not that CO2 matters, but the anti-energy lobby say CO2 is destroying the planet.) Plus they are responsible for much of the plastic in oceans and much other destruction in China and their colonies in Africa and elsewhere.
I think the answer is obvious.
Obviously someone is promoting them for their supposed environmental virtue. We even have some on this blog.
200
The easiest way to reduce CO2 in the West is to export industry to China.
China says they will only take action on CO2 when they produce the same PER CAPITA as the West! [They have a lot of capita!]
40
Soon all that people will be worried about is feeding their children and avoiding arrest.
100
I thought that the oceans becoming more acidic was one of the excuses they are using now to try and prove CO2 bad and changing the climate .
60
The annoying thing about that subject is that the oceans are not becoming more acidic. They may be slightly less alkaline, but are buffered and the pH has always bobbed around depending on global climate.
70
Yes Ross,
That’s right, we always hear about oceans becoming more acidic and it is a complete misnomer the oceans are all alkaline but it’s like global boiling, it’s what sounds most dramatic and frightening:-
= ha?? and??
or
== the sky is falling
100
I amjust so over all this garbage! What has happened to our schools and universities that they produce this twaddle?!
No wonder adolescents are suffering anxiety anddepression at high rates when all they are fed is doom and gloom.
Grrrr!
120
My 10 yr old daughter was forced to write a letter to PM Sleezy the other day that pleaded with him to ‘do something’ about climate change. With rolling eyes, she explained that her teacher was incensed that islands in the Torres Strait were “disappearing and people were losing their culture”. I shook my head and told her to ask the teacher “What is an ice age and what causes them to end”? The next day, she did just that and the teacher said, “I don’t know, why don’t you research it yourself”.
Back at ya, teach’.
100
Years ago I read about a six year old Australian girl who became hysterical with all this doom and gloom and wanted to ‘decarbonise’ herself.
Childhood is not what it used to be.
60
Interested to see that ozone is fine. In the 1980s, when the USA was the heaviest user of freon refrigerants, they discovered the ozone hole. Now in 2023, where China is the heaviest user of modern refrigerants (no freon) there is no ozone hole. But, in the USA refrigeration engineers are currently required to collect old refrigerant and not release it into the atmosphere, while in China there is no such law and refrigeration engineers do it the old way, just release refrigerant into the atmosphere as it is quicker and cheaper than collecting. In addition, the laws in the USA will be changing the refrigerants yet again, planned for the next decade, to help the ozone layer.
I simply do not believe anything that comes from government, billionaires or their paid lackeys.
130
Another part of the fluorocarbon scam was it resulted in the banning of highly effective BCF fire extinguishers, the old yellow ones. I wonder how many lives have been lost because of their less effective replacements?
Some years ago when I did some work for the Australian Department of Defence I became aware that the US military still used the old BCF extinguishers, especially in aircraft, because they were so effective despite bans, but in Australia, being an especially woke country, even the military banned them.
120
Assuming you mean Halon 1301 and Halon 1211. All of the Halons are a means of delivering a Bromine atom into a combustion event. Bromine interrupts the -OH radicals and stops the combustion reaction. 1301 is 1 C, 3 F, 0 Cl, 1 Br. 1211 is 1 C, 2 F, 1 Cl, 1 Br.
Other than a theoretical catalytic reaction between Br and O3, there has not ever been an actual measurement of Br or Cl degradation of O3.
A lot of propaganda, backed up with very little data. CFC 12 and CFC 113 comprised 95% of all CFC emissions. Tossing out all the other substances was politically motivated and unfounded by fact. HCFC 22 only had an atmospheric lifetime of 7 years. But it was very efficient and cost effective. There is still no proof that any of this Ozone damage speculation is founded by science, but lots of alarmist speculation does exist.
There is a limit to the possible fluorocarbon structures. Some 940 are possible. Most are toxic, corrosive, carcinogenic, or flammable. The fluoroethers are the last step. There are no more structures remaining. Fluorine stabilizes carbon atoms. That’s why Teflon Polytetrafluoroethylene, and PVDF polyvinynldifluoride, as well as the HFC, and HFE refrigerants are non reactive, non conductive, non corrosive, non carcinogenic, non flammable, etc.
After that series, HFEs, there are no options remaining. So, no refrigeration, no aircons, and back to 1850, because everything but ammonia and the butanes/propanes, etc, are ” ozone depleting”. I’m OK with CFC12 and -113 phaseouts. Alternatives exist. But beyond where we are now, there are no alternatives. Life is going to suck, big time, if the ecofreaks pursue this to total elimination of fluorocarbons.
90
Ozone [O3] is unstable and reverts to O2 and so need to be constantly replenished by sunlight in the ozone layer. It does not strike me as odd that there are holes at the poles where sunlight is oblique.
I did read that some ‘scientists’ sat round a desk for one afternoon and decided the holes were man-made and due to CFCs. That’s it. Science had spoken. Billions were spent!
50
I’m sure leading Teal Climate Alarmist, Zali Steggall, will be quoting the report, with scary picture, as soon as she sees it. There is no critical thinking in that one, not one question asked, just blind allegiance to the cause.
101
Its a shame they could not push the OA a little bit more to give them 7 of 9 and thus full filling these geeks Star Trek wet dreams (think big bang theory level of geeks behind this cult movement)
32
AGAIN why is the Human Development Index so high today? Here’s the index and the OWI Data SUMMARY.
Note Australia has a very high number today.
But I presume our blog donkeys don’t understand the HIHD data and would rather BELIEVE in their delusional make believe and Witchcraft?
“Historical Index of Human Development, 1870 to 2015.”
“The Historical Index of Human Development (HIHD) is a summary measure of average achievement in three key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and having a decent standard of living.”
AGAIN compare the Index to 50 or 70 or 100 or more years ago.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/human-development-index-escosura?country=GBR~USA~KOR~IND~CHN~BRA~CPV~AUS~SWE~CHE~JPN
20
The image at the top looks like a pin-wheel that has encountered a strong wind. Similarly, a strong wine blows in one ear of the doomsters and out the other. That turns things in the passage to mush.
50
Strong wine, more than once, has turned my mind to mush: not too eager to try your method of imbibing, however, John.
Apart from that, cultish claptrap and befuddling bollocks. The planet ain’t goin’ anywhere – we are (apologies to George Carlin, RIP).
50
That boils it right down and explains clearly the mass hysteria over CC.
31
The aim is population reduction. And the fools who are the loudest on the bandwagon (mainly living in Western countries) think they will be able to buy their way to safety when the stuff hits the fan – they’re in for a rude awakening…
70
Re the 2009 – 2023 image:
Why did ‘Radiative forcing’ suddenly hike in 2023 ?
They split the ‘CLIMATE CHANGE’ sector in 2022 into ‘CO2 concentration’ and ‘Radiative forcing’ in 2023.
So in one year the ‘CLIMATE CHANGE’ sector expands outwards considerably (if the scale has remained the same).
The scale of the central ‘Safe operating space’ (presumably a Wokie enclave) seems to remain the same 2022 – 2023 but notice how the ‘NOVEL ENTITIES’ and ‘BIOSPHERE INTEGRITY’ boundaries go fuzzy and ‘BIOCHEMICAL FLOWS’ shrinks.
Seems to be an indeterminate scale change from 2022 to 2023 as if they zoom in for the 2023 graph which makes ‘CLIMATE CHANGE’ look doubly worse in just the course of one year.
Doesn’t explain the ‘BIOCHEMICAL FLOWS’ shrinkage though.
Can anyone enlighten me as to the correct interpretation of the 2022 – 2023 changes ?
70
Here’s the graph again:
Planetary Boundaries 2009 – 2023
https://scx2.b-cdn.net/gfx/news/hires/2023/six-of-nine-planetary-1.jpg
Can’t find the original with caption key but on the face of it this:
There was essentially no change for over a decade then suddenly 2023 is portrayed as a radical change outwards for some sectors (esp. the 2 fuzzy boundaries and Radiative forcing) but shrinkage in 1 sector.
Makes no sense. I think someone is lying with graphs.
70
>Makes no sense. I think someone is lying with graphs.
>Can’t find the original with caption key
Just this:
The Planetary Boundaries over time. Credit: Azote for Stockholm Resilience Centre, based on analysis in Richardson et al 2023.
Can’t find “Azote” at Stockholm Resilience Centre but here’s their team:
Stockholm Resilience Centre – Meet our team
https://www.stockholmresilience.org/meet-our-team.html
Will Steffen 1947 – 2023 (deceased). The Planetary Boundaries concept goes back to 2009 and Will Steffen was co-author of the original paper:
Planetary boundaries
https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-boundaries.html
Same Will Steffen as can be found featured at JoNova.
50
>”lying with graphs”
On the Planetary boundaries page at Stockholm Resilience Centre I clicked on the graph which is only a 2009 – 2015 – 2023 series. Took me to this page:
Planetary boundaries 2023, 3rd update
NAME, UPDATED, SIZE
Planetary Boundaries 2023 inverted.eps Yesterday by Johannes Ernstberger
4.7 MB
Planetary Boundaries-over-time.png Yesterday by Johannes Ernstberger 229.3 KB
Planetary Boundaries 2023.jpg Yesterday by Johannes Ernstberger 682.8 KB
Planetary Boundaries 2023.png Sep 8, 2023 by Johannes Ernstberger 636.4 KB
Planetary Boundaries 2023.eps Sep 7, 2023 by Johannes Ernstberger 4.9 MB
The bottom graph explains the “fuzzy boundaries”:
Planetary Boundaries 2023.eps
https://stockholmuniversity.app.box.com/s/sr0nfknm95oydnnsm1zj0c526qzjn1vs/file/1300844420749
From that graph you can then click left arrow to the preceding png graph:
Planetary Boundaries 2023.png
https://stockholmuniversity.app.box.com/s/sr0nfknm95oydnnsm1zj0c526qzjn1vs/file/1300850987278
The eps graph is the original scale and the central ‘Safe operating space’ is considerably smaller than in the 2009 – 2023 composite.
So,
1 >”I think someone is lying with graphs”
Confirmed.
2 >”notice how the ‘NOVEL ENTITIES’ and ‘BIOSPHERE INTEGRITY’ boundaries go fuzzy”
The original eps graph shows the full extent of the sectors. Full extent is neglected in latest version. This is scientific malfeasance.
3 >”Seems to be an indeterminate scale change from 2022 to 2023 as if they zoom in for the 2023 graph”
Confirmed. It is a schematic i.e. there is no actual ‘Increasing risk’ scale.
They zoom in for the latest 2023 version but they retain the diameter of the ‘Safe operating space’ which is then at a different scale to the underlying ‘Increasing risk’ scale of the original. Also scientific malfeasance.
The 2023 graph in the 2009 – 2015 – 2023 series and the 2009 – 2015 – 2022 – 2022 – 2023 series has been manipulated to create an illusion.
50
>”Took me to this page: Planetary boundaries 2023, 3rd update”
Missing link:
Planetary boundaries 2023, 3rd update
https://stockholmuniversity.app.box.com/s/sr0nfknm95oydnnsm1zj0c526qzjn1vs
40
>”They split the ‘CLIMATE CHANGE’ sector in 2022 into ‘CO2 concentration’ and ‘Radiative forcing’ in 2023″
Thing is, “radiative forcing” (RF) is a concept contrived by the IPCC i.e. it is theoretical – not proven fact.
In 2022 total theoretical TOA RF was 3.222 W.m2 (see link).
But Trenberth and Cheng estimate Earth’s Energy Imbalance (EEI) is only 0.9 W.m-2:
A perspective on climate change from Earth’s energy imbalance
Trenberth and Cheng (2022)
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2752-5295/ac6f74
Theory says increasing GHGs are steadily increasing RF at TOA but observed EEI is just fluctuating at a much lessor level. Obviously reconciling is problematic so we find the questions asked like this (data now out of date):
Connection between radiative imbalance and radiative forcing
https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/21107/connection-between-radiative-imbalance-and-radiative-forcing
Answer:
Except there is no proof that TOA RF is the cause of rising ocean heat content (OHC). That too is speculative theory.
50
>”Obviously reconciling [RF and Obs] is problematic”
IPCC’s latest reconciliation:
Figure TS.13 | Estimates of the net cumulative energy change (ZJ = 1021Joules) for the period 1971–2018 associated with (a) observations of changes in the global energy inventory, (b) integrated radiative forcing, and (c) integrated radiative response.
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/figures/IPCC_AR6_WGI_TS_Figure_13.png
Obviously the major component of observed energy (d) is Ocean. To reconcile Total RF with Global Energy the IPCC MUST claim Ocean Heat (OH) otherwise their theory is stone cold dead.
But the IPCC’s claim on Ocean Heat is scientific malfeasance. They have no physical proof that theoretical TOA RF causes OH rise. Their own Surface Energy Budgets preclude any speculative radiative air-to-sea flux. Their net radiative surface flux is outgoing (OLR).
50
>(ZJ = 1021Joules)
Should be – (ZJ = 10^21Joules)
30
Richard, you have spent an admirable amount of effort here explaining that basically:
What they are saying is a load of bollocks!
00
Agree. Furthermore, the radiative theory for temperature to explain weather/climate is flawed. One only needs to look at movement of mass ie PV proportional to nRT.
10
The same conclusions could almost certainly obtained from a study of the entrails of a black rooster at midnight on the full moon !!!!
80
What a cargo cult, climate science with the UN has become. All this doom and gloom, with the handout.
60
‘ … remain similar to those that have controlled Earth conditions over the past ~12,000 years …’
Since the end of the Younger Dryas, very convenient, surely they have heard we are living through an interglacial which has passed its used by date.
50
If ‘interglacial’ was a gender or a pronoun, EVERYONE would’ve heard about it by now. Sadly, it’s history.
60
Fear not, dauntless one.
The WEF and its armies of ignorant minions are here to inform the people of these threats, saving us from the doom we would otherwise inflict on ourselves, by openly displaying and possessing the things that WE must avoid.
Thank you WEF and minions!
/sarc
And just like contemporary witchdoctors with their Covid-rattles known as masks, collectively known as the medical profession, the believed realities of blood pressure numbers and causes are often totally wrong. Like doctor, like climatologist…
I think I’ll spend Saturday at the local shopping center asking people how much CO2 is in the atmosphere.
20% you say! Wow!😆
70
I find the use of the word ‘novel’ as in NOVEL ENTITIES on the pie chart, an indicator of waffle
and sham science ahead. It’s use is probably legigimate grammatically, however, I think its use by Katherine Richardson is hackneyed and pretentious.
70
AGAIN here’s the OWI Data info for the percentage of land area used for cropping, pastures etc from 1961 to 2020.
In 1961 34.55% and by 2020 36.5% (just 1.05 times) and much more calories per person today even though the population has increased from 3 billion to 7.8 billion or 2.6 times. THINK.
AGAIN can anyone tell us what has gone wrong with the climate over the last 60 years? But you have to THINK about very simple SUMS to understand.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-land-area-used-for-agriculture
40
Perhaps I should do the very simple calculation for our blog donkeys.
Today we feed 4.8 billion MORE PEOPLE than we did 60 years ago on the same area of land.
70
Cropland per capita has approximately halved over that time. Problem is there has been an accumulation of wasted cleared land. Unproductive land is dumped for newly cleared land in too many places.
211
Now you are just making that up, there was an agricultural revolution at the end of last century and greater productivity was the result.
By the way, the Western Pacific Warm Pool chills out and BoM is correct in not calling El Nino..
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/ocean/surface/currents/overlay=sea_surface_temp_anomaly/orthographic=-222.63,8.27,2120/loc=-165.051,7.199
51
I literally wrote that producivity went up
That doesn’t mean there isn’t a bunch of degraded land that no one is farming.
00
Gee, so we are producing far more food on less farmed acreage. Thanks for pointing that out. Guess that means climate and mans ingenuity are getting better.
Best we keep doing what we are doing – we’ll get more food from even less acreage if we keep with science, and chemical sprays and herbicides and fungicides and all the things that keep us alive. Well done human domination of the pestilence of nature.
20
I agree
00
I blame graphic artists
50
>”I blame graphic artists”
Exactly. See #27 thread for the deceptive manipulation of the 2023 graph in respect to the others.
I use the word “graph” loosely because the charts are of indeterminant scale i.e. schematics rendered with artistic licence:
50
>”the charts are of indeterminant scale”
The ‘Increasing risk’ scale (see vertical black arrow and label) seems arbitrary for starters. What are the units?
50
>”What are the units?”
Seem to be derived from this table in the paper:
Table 1 Proposed safe and just (NSH) ESBs (visualized in Fig. 1)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06083-8/tables/1
Example:
Domain: state variable
Climate: global mean surface temperature change since pre-industrial (1850–1900)
Safe and just ESB
1.0 °C at high exposure to significant harm
Current global state
1.2 °C
# # #
So the scale is relative i.e. proportional factor above or below “Safe”.
Apparently the IPCC’s 1.5 °C “limit”, which has not yet been breached on a sustained basis, is not “safe” but 1.0 °C is “safe”. We are now 0.2 over their self-determined limit but 0.3 under the IPCC’s limit.
I’m getting mixed messages.
30
>”We are now 0.2 over their [Stockholm Resilience Centre’s] self-determined limit but 0.3 under the IPCC’s limit”
In absolute terms:
IPCC
1.5 C “limit”: 14.8 C (or 15 depending on basis)
Stockholm Resilience Centre:
1.0 C “safe”: 14.3 C
Daily 2-meter Air Temperature
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/?dm_id=world
World has been above 14.3 C from late March to late October (7 months) every year since 1979 (44 years).
I don’t think the “researchers” at Stockholm Resilience Centre have thought this through. IPCC ditto.
40
“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.
So what is the goal of environmental policy?
“We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.
For those who want to believe that maybe Edenhofer just misspoke and doesn’t really mean that, consider that a little more than five years ago he also said that “the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated.”
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/another-climate-alarmist-admits-real-motive-behind-warming-scare/
CONTROL!
CONTROL!
CONTROL!
90
The BEEEG, Global, Socialist push from the global elites – and remember it always goes with a dictatorial government because the people rebel when you touch their stuff – people are only socialists as long as it’s other people’s stuff that’s being redistributed.
50
The fundamental intelligence test for this claptrap is to state why each segment of this graphic is roughly equal in angular size.
Like someone has determined that the relative importance of each of them to be about the same … how, by what analysis, in whose judgement, etc?
That graphic would look a lot different by just adjusting the relative angular sizes … such a basic piece of mathematical knowledge.
I still think Will Happer’s point that if you have to put the word “Science” in your discipline – it just isn’t really science.
71
I dunno about the earth’s blood pressure being too high. I know mine rocketed at seeing that ridiculous diagram.
90
It’s the writers strike Boambee the poor buggars have not had any work for weeks
10
How does that diagram work anyhow?
If they lock in the 7th symbol does the stargate open?
20
They say “For over 3 billion years, the interaction between life [] and climate have controlled the overall environmental conditions on Earth” and “Respecting and maintaining interactions in the Earth system so that they remain similar to those that have controlled Earth conditions over the past ~12,000 years are critical …“. So their ‘~12,000 years’ is wrong. We should be ‘Respecting and maintaining’ etc to stay in line with the last 3+ billion years, not the last ~12,000 years. For that, we need to stay between about +30 and -10 deg C compared to today. I think it will be a while before we get to either of those limits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoarchean
Nip back just another billion or so years ago, and you can add the best part of another 200 deg C to the upside. Now that’s global boiling, not the pathetic <2 deg C that so terrifies Antonio Guterres.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadean
30
The alarmist trolls (Fitz, Simon and Gee A) seem very subdued of late. Must be running out of talking points.
It can’t be reality dawning, because their religion denies the existence of reality.
100
It’s the writers strike Boambee the poor buggars have not had any work for weeks
30
Subdued because are post are blocked.
00
Says Gee Aye now up to his 3,534th published comment.
20
That seems to miss the point
00
Why? I have not stopped a single scientific criticism from any of you. The problem is that you are largely repeating the same illogical arguments we debated to death 10 years ago. Look at Fitzroy at #2 on the Pyrenees cave stalagmites, and all he can do is waste time saying I’ll wait for peer review?
You at least tried to discuss a newer paper — Neukom 2019, which was a respectable effort, even if it was a cherry-picked compilation that ignored most proxies. It was worth discussing…
Obviously, if my post on “planetary boundaries” was mere namecalling, it would be easy for critics to point to all the successful predictions of the modelers. They could point to maps of seasonal rainfall six months in advance saying where the floods would be, with warnings that saved lives, or point to ENSO predictions, and their discoveries of the drivers of the PDO…
30
Look over there. Oh, everyone has. Delaying posts and not permitting them is what you do. Delaying is censorship in this format.
And I know you are going to bring up that you disallow other posts but you also allow plenty that are far more frivolous/off topic/insulting/etc than the ones I post.
10
Remind me again how much you pay for this service?
If I had funds I could employ moderators, and your comments could be approved as speedily as possible. Some of the most prolific writers here, of all political kinds, have delayed comments. Sometimes because of a software glitch, or a blacklist somewhere that we have no control over, and sometimes because they are prolific.
So you can claim “censorship” due to delay, and if so I will claim you equally censor me because you use my time and offer no compensation. You pay the ABC to produce misinformation, and possibly you subscribe to some of the junk journalists I like to correct.
If I wanted to censor you, I would ban you, just like that. Anytime you want to post up that evidence that the models are right about their main feedback amplifier or that there is any reliable evidence that CO2 causes global atmospheric significant warming, be my guest. You’ve had 3,536 chances and failed.
30
Again a bunch of deflection
I answered Boambee John truthfully. Sort of where that topic ends for me but I’m sure there is an interesting discussion to be had about all the other things some day.
01
Says Mr Deflector himself.
00
Climate ‘scientists’ are like bad fortune tellers.
They say ‘Something bad will happen’, but they can’t say what or where or when’. Obviously when something bad happens and they ‘Aha, told you, and YOU are to blame’!
80
It seems we stood and talked like thi-is before,
… but who knows whe-e-ere and when?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnRSM3dLSTk&ab_channel=trooper7h
10
It seems we stood and talked like thi-is before,
… but who knows whe-e-ere and when?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnRSM3dLSTk&ab_channel=trooper7h
10
Jo calls this the ‘first ever study quantifying Earth System Boundaries’, but the metric was developed in 2009. Criticism is helpful, but only if it is informed.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1259855
04
Simon >”the metric” [Earth System Boundaries developed 2009]
According to “the metric” (see #34.1.1.1 and following upthread for application), “safe” is half a degree less than the IPCC’s “limit”:
But when expressed in absolute terms the world has been “unsafe” for 7 months of the year for at least the last 44 years.
So you’ve probably been living in “unsafe” conditions all you life.
How did you survive ?
20
Simon >[link to Steffen et al 2015]
Out of date data but they say in “Updates of the individual boundaries”:
Addressed this upthread at #27.3. Obviously TOA RF and EEI do not reconcile and that is where the IPCC’s scientific malfeasance is exposed.
Already detailed that at #27.3 and #27.3.1 so no point repeating it all here.
20
Scientists issue ‘stark warning’, say conditions on Earth moving outside ‘safe operating space’ for humanity
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2023/09/climate-change-scientists-issue-stark-warning-say-conditions-on-earth-moving-outside-safe-operating-space-for-humanity.html
Corroborates the struggle I had with the “measures” (units) at #34.1.1 and following upthread.
10
Earth and the functioning of ecosystems are basically impossible to linearly destroy. I can’t believe ecologists (if that’s what they are) think in such linear terms. At least they put it in a circle but the doom projects linearly outwards.
For the fantasy of destruction to be real, you have to think of extreme hypotheticals. Such as we will tip toxins into the rivers and kill everything and make life in the waters impossible. The scale of which makes it pretty much impossible to do, even if you were Dr Evil, and this is extremely unlikely to occur. There are examples of countries like India who have killed their rivers, but life goes on, under extreme pollution. I guess Queenstown in Tassie is an example of linear destruction? But simple laws are imposed to stop these obvious acts of degradation to environment, which are most likely fantasy anyway.
Ironically, probably the only Dr Evil way of actually destroying life is bio engineering to block sunlight, which climate scientists propose – if not being done already.
20
They have done the usual switcheroo on Lead Author, I haven’t heard Katherine Richardson’s name since Copenhagen, 2009, but this is cited as Richardson et al. In fact this is another enterprise from Johan Rockström, who took over as Co-Director of the Potsdam Fear Factory with the retirement of John Schellnhuber. There are 13 Potsdam authors for this piece, including the ever present Stefan Rahmstorf. There are also dual affiliations with the Stockholm Resilience Centre, which is where Rockström was kingpin before his new job. Also included is the late Will Steffen, who died in January this year and was also heavily involved with the Stockholm Centre.
Click on the science link and check out the authors. This is Rockström’s entry: “Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association, Potsdam, Germany.Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Institute for Environmental Science and Geography, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.
Roles: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, and Writing – review & editing.”
Worth re-visiting Tony Thomas’s 2015 piece on the infiltration of Australia by Potsdam: https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2015/04/german-greenshirts-parachute-parkville/
20
NASA recently spotted climate change on Neptune.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2023/hubble-neptunes-disappearing-clouds-linked-to-the-solar-cycle
How long before some climate modeller says that is anthropogenic too?
20