It’s almost enjoyable to watch the “no warming for 17 years” crowd predictably fail to update their priors.
Meanwhile let’s hope that “no global warming since 2016” will hold for a while.
It’s almost enjoyable to watch the “no warming for 17 years” crowd predictably fail to update their priors.
Meanwhile let’s hope that “no global warming since 2016” will hold for a while.
I’ve been invited to participate in a new Bray and von Storch survey of climate scientists. The questions seem structured to de-authenticate climate models. [more]
Comments are re-enabled on new posts. [more]
Only a month ago – this changes slowly so it’s pretty much what is happening now.
Yes, as far as I understand, it is indeed a highly unusual configuration.
Between 2011 and 2016, Planet 3 has had about 300 articles by about 2 dozen contributors. We are in the process of redesigning the enterprise, taking account of lessons learned.
If you’d like more info or would like to help, please contact mt@planet3.org .
A “Best of Planet 3” volume is in preparation. [more]
I know, you’ve seen it already, but, wow…
mt writes on Only In It for the Gold
The new “ecomodernist” push implicitly restates the BTI position that getting to carbon zero follows from technological innovation alone. … to the extent that the ecomodernist manifesto does not take account of the real-world obstacles to that goal, it ducks the very question it claims to be addressing.
Curry in over her depth without going in very deep at all. See the fireworks on the revived Only In It for the Gold blog. [more]
Muller:
If you say ‘it’s something else and I don’t know what it is’ my answer is ‘something else that happens, by accident, to perfectly match the carbon dioxide increase? Are you serious?’
Earth to Muller: no, they aren’t. Never have been. Are you surprised?
Naomi Oreskes: “When applied to evaluating environmental hazards, the fear of gullibility can lead us to understate threats. It places the burden of proof on the victim rather than, for example, on the manufacturer of a harmful product. The consequence is that we may fail to protect people who are really getting hurt.” [more]
Rebecca Solnit and Nafeez Ahmed have thoughtful essays on our quandary writ large. [more]
Suggested topic – What online resources do you find most valuable in support of thinking about our common future? Which writers do you follow?