A truly terrible and inaccurate paper has been presented on Real Climate (a site that I abandon some time back because of their collective failure to deal with reality). Titled “Why global emissions must peak by 2020“, scientists Stefan Rahmstorf and Anders Levermann pretend that by offering lies and deceptions, everything is going to be ok.
Well, it’s not. The paper is horribly wrong on every point presented. It’s doubtful my commentary will appear (I’m widely censored everywhere) so here is my comments regarding this paper:
This was a truly terrible article. Inaccurate, presumptive and fanciful thinking (I’m being generous here).
a) The alleged ‘landmark’ Paris Agreement has accomplished almost nothing in the real world.
b) Current temperature increases have already exceeded 1.4°C.
c) Global emissions ‘peaking’ by 2020 is based on pure imagination (zero facts). No country on Earth is going to do this.
d) Lag time temperature increases are uncounted and ignored.
e) Critical tipping points have obviously already occurred.
f) Fusion is imaginary salvation and does not address the energy consumption of civilization (perpetuates consumption).
g) Warming ‘below 2°C’ is factually not stoppable by any means.
h) There is no carbon budget left – as accelerated warming factually demonstrates.
i) It is not possible to meet the Paris temperature goals – and never was.
j) Alternative energy creates carbon emissions too – perpetuating civilization’s consumption, growth, resource use. Alternative energy creation remains heavily reliant upon fossil fuels and always will.
k) If this is the best ‘science’ can envision, we’re in severe trouble. This article is grossly inaccurate and misleading. Intentional? Ignorance? Naivety? Or?
I fail to see the point to this article at all. It’s simply wrong – on every single point. Because it was written by scientist, this is truly alarming.
It’s become very clear to me that voices of reason and truth are being silenced. They DO NOT WANT THE WORLD to awaken to the terrifying truth of climate change. You can discuss this with inaccuracies and hopium, but you cannot discuss this in terms of devastation and extinction.