Sabine Hossenfelder - 2024-01-27
Want to restore the planet's ecosystems and see your impact in monthly videos? The first 200 people to join Planet Wild with my code will get the first month for free at https://www.planetwild.com/sabinehossenfelder/turtles If you want to get to know them better first, check out their latest video: How 3 Dogs Saved 100,000 Turtles https://www.planetwild.com/sabinehossenfelder/11 In this video I explain what climate sensitivity is and why it is important. Climate sensitivity is a number that roughly speaking tells us how fast climate change will get worse. A few years ago, after various software improvements, a bunch of climate models began having a much higher climate sensitivity than previously. Climate scientists have come up with reasons for why to ignore this. I think it's a bad idea to ignore this. The quiz for this video is here: https://quizwithit.com/start_thequiz/1706049873020x576568516218191900 🤓 Check out our new quiz app ➜ http://quizwithit.com/ 💌 Support us on Donatebox ➜ https://donorbox.org/swtg 📝 Transcripts and written news on Substack ➜ https://sciencewtg.substack.com/ 👉 Transcript with links to references on Patreon ➜ https://www.patreon.com/Sabine 📩 Free weekly science newsletter ➜ https://sabinehossenfelder.com/newsletter/ 👂 Audio only podcast ➜ https://open.spotify.com/show/0MkNfXlKnMPEUMEeKQYmYC 🔗 Join this channel to get access to perks ➜ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1yNl2E66ZzKApQdRuTQ4tw/join 🖼️ On instagram ➜ https://www.instagram.com/sciencewtg/ #science #climate
Researching the issue is difficult because google does not have relevant results for "Hot Models".
Scholar dot Google
Been looking at hot models all day 😏
stop using Google.
Hehe...
@@HarryWHill-GAHe wrote one yt 😅
I think the psychology of the lack of interest is that people will not preoccupy themselves with issues they feel powerless, as individuals, to change.
That’s true, but our individual psyches are created in part by our culture and history. Our current world is not setup for cooperation and we’ve allowed selfishness to thrive. The prosocial beliefs and behaviors necessary to change things are possible for humans to adopt, but it starts at the root. Maybe there’s something to the idea of a Capitalocene rather than an Anthropocene. I don’t think this is an innate problem of the human psyche, but of the psyche of the very Europeans whose worldviews spread around the world starting around the 16th century.
In principle it is a good thing we have this reflex. Because starting to panic or being depressed does not help.
We evolved to concentrate on the present, getting enough food for the next winter, having enough wood to heat, finding a partner and so on.
The most depressive thing to me is, that there are many things we can do quickly. We can build green energy fast, there is no physical limit in that. The technology is ready to cut down emissions by maybe 80% today.
We could build millions of wind turbines, solar cells, battery storage etc. in the next 5 years and shut of most of fossil fuel. Only after that we would neet technology that is not yet developed.
But why are we not doing it? Because of economical reasons. Nobody is willing to out down the mony to do this in the paste required. Many people would need to change their job from fossil to green energy really fast.
Fossil assets like fossil plants would lose most of their value.
We just do little to late right now and future generations are going to hate us for that.
The obscene wealth of algorithm-customized distractions does not help either. 🎪
That's because way back when we invented human society, we slowly stopped seeing ourselves as connected and started seeing individuals as powerful and independent. A proper perspective would be considerably more altruistic and ironically we would've been better equipped to handle current changes if we'd all had pre-social mindsets that view the family (in this case meaning the extended families of humanity and life on earth) as more important than its individual children.
Because it doesn't really matter how powerless an individual is, you see; in groups, we have power, so if every individual serves the group, the group becomes nigh-invincible. That's how both disease and multicellular life, teams and hive minds alike find success. Humans technically serve their group, but we spend way more time on ourselves and don't bother acting in ways that would benefit everybody if everybody acted that way. There's no money in it.
@@langohr9613ify I actually believe that capitalism is able to adapt relatively quickly. Like Sabine said just make carbon emission more expensive and energy providers will flock to renewable and nuclear energy to make money. There just need to be political will, which comes from the people, to make this choice which will affect them via the form of higher prices on almost everything.
For years, climatologists told us there was a tipping point. Now we’ve reached it and many people want to think we can still avoid the worst consequences. It doesn’t sound very nice to say it is too late
The thing that I like most about this brilliant, humorous lady is that when she doesn't know something, she says so. That is a real scientist. Respect and thanks!
That is what scientists do. That is what they have to be pretty good at in order to Identity new research topics. If you have the feeling this isnt been done often enough i would probably change or at least check my source because typically this is a week spot of journalist, not the scientist.
Science lives off "don't know"'s. The whole point of a scientist it to ecxel in turning don't knows into knows. (The exact reverse of religion BTW, that exploit don't knows).
Journalist's tend to excel in misinterpreting science, trying to dumb it down for their readers, and screwing everything up in the process. Climate change is a great example of this, the term "global warming" is so soft and fluffy that it just hasn't got the real message over to the public. Messaging IS important, as any politician will agree.
Weird. What I noticed was hackneyed superficial banter.
Hi Sabine, I was really surprised by the dramatic forecast you gave at the end. I have seen in my life several major themes that would or should have ended or disrupted civilization. Overpopulation, global warming, thermonuclear war, ozone depletion and rising sea levels are but a few. Your forecast sounded so much like that type of talk. It has made me lose some confidence in you as a scientific commentator. I have a mathematics and physics background and have always enjoyed listening to your commentary on the physics fields. I have always felt you are an expert on physics matters. When you see that you get the most dislikes on your videos regarding climate change, I suspect the answer could be that you do not come across as such an expert on this topic. I disliked this video and did so because I felt it was the case. It is a sad outcome and something you should look into. It is likely I am not the only one who has formed this view. Anyhoo, I wish you a great day and will remain subscribed. Kindest regards, Tony
Sure?
“Unvaccinated are a danger to themselves and others. Of course, they should not have the same rights and freedoms as vaccinated people. Anyone who intentionally puts others in danger has to live with the consequences.”
Sabine 🤡 Hossenfelder - 2021
Sabine, I've always enjoyed your no bullshit presentations and I respect this one. I live in a rural area in a temperate zone on a piece of property that has been in my family for almost 70 years. I have seen the landscape change from as long as a person can remember. I have seen the first frost which used to occur in September move to late November and the ice on the nearby pond go from thin, but lasting for the month of January to becoming a rare and short lived event. I have seen the vegetation and the animal life change, mostly the insect life. I have seen the yellow pines wiped out by infestations of pine beetles and have observed that the white pines that used to thrive in this area are now barely hanging on and mostly dying. Fir and spruce used to grow here but they are all gone and the ones that I have planted in the last few years never last long. I will be trying to plant long leaf pines soon just to see what they do, the northern edge of their range used to be a couple hundred miles to the south but I suspect they will do better now if they aren't wiped out by some new infestation of insects. Every spring brings a new species of insect. We've gone from having one species of tick that was just a nuisance in the summer to having seven species of ticks, some of which are active all year round. I could go on by I'll spare you and your viewers. Just saying, if I had never seen a news article on climate change, I would be wondering what the hell has been going on and would be asking the scientists about it. I'm not optimistic, but I am observant. Thanks for scaring the hell out of me. I'm 66 years old and my health is not great so I might not see the worst of the coming effects but my children and grand children will. Thanks for scaring the hell out of me.
We are in a pretty similar situation. My wife and I moved to southern NH 40+ years ago and have witnessed the changes that have occurred over that timeframe. Living in a rural area makes you acutely aware of how finely adjusted flora and fauna is to the micro- climate of the area.
I have a farm in New Zealand, ive been scared for a couple of years now. Winter, if we have one is 2 months later than it used to be and the sun is hotter than ever. I suspect we will have trouble growing traditional crops within a short time and that we will be too slow to change. The world wont miss us but i worry for my daughters lives.
I remember watching ice sailboat races on the rivers in New Jersey as a kid. The rivers don't freeze at all anymore
@@farmboypresents9977 - you are right to be worried. The younger generations are in for a world of hurt.😞
Climate change scares me not because I completely understand it, but because I understand PEOPLE.
It's inconvenient, and it's not economically friendly. These two factors practically guarantee that individuals and corporations will not properly address this new challenge.
Ironically, it may take complete societal collapse to save humanity.
Perhaps the insurance industry's 5:47 response to the increased risk caused by climate change will wake people up. Inability to get, or to afford, home insurance will cause real pain.
The worst thing for the future is that we successfully implement a solution. If we dodge harmful climate change, then 'proving the negative' to deniers becomes the key to having the trust necessary to effect the change needed to prevent the next calamity. And since you understand people, you understand this would be impossible.
Plus, it is hard to say which influence man-made geoengineering has on the climate if all measures that are being taken in that direction are kept top secret. This also makes the whole science around it somewhat malleable. We need complete disclosure on worldwide geoengineering activities.
What might safe humans ins the spread of continents, especially the Antarctica. We still live in a glacial period therefore and this will continue for centuries at least. Enough time for humans to adapt and live on in higher latitudes (likely in smaller numbers)
Yes.
Nature will regulate itself by erradicating the species, that created the problem at first.
Unfortunately, this "regulation" will end many species' life aswell as collateral damage created by humanity.
Maybe Sabine, you will read this, my experience. I started college in 79, in environmental studies. Global warming was a topic even then, and it is still with us but only a little has changed. I made some mathematical models for acid rain when I changed to Engineering. Regan and Bush, (ever heard of them) ruined any dreams for environment lovers. I worked in industry and saw complete avoidance of global warming. Disheartened, at 42, (in 2002) I retired to Florida USA. I moved to the South West coast where there were no hurricanes. In 2004 we had Charly and every year since then we are either hit or just miss a hurricane. This year, 2024, we have had 3 hurricanes so far. Two were quite destructive! I wish I could post pictures of the flooded houses and sailboats in the grass. We are selling and moving 1000 miles North. In. the us, we have half the population that support a man who says that climate change is a hoax perpetuated by China. Most of the other half are not sure because of loss in faith of institutions. It matters not what number best models or predicts global warming/climate change. Those who can effect change will not do it because they refuse to give up anything to save our planet or species. It is as simple as that. In the us, corporations rule, and they see no profit in even acknowledging climate change. Of course climate change is affecting all of us. Leaning toward nihilism, I see our end as inevitable anyway. (war, microorganisms, etc) But, yes I would like to spend my pension too! Love your videos!
I'm 60 and have seen changes, one is the lack of flying insects, over 40 years ago, I'd return from a summer ride on my motorbike and would barely be able to see through the insect smeared visor, these days four or five insects over the whole visor.
You're probably thinking of the 1979 greenfly explosion. Like all these events, just one of those things that happens occasionally. Nothing to worry about. There is no man-made climate change.
Couldn’t be the huge increase in telecom masts & the 1000s 3:42 & 1000s of low orbiting telecom satellites.
There’s a rumour that insects, birds etc may be sensitive to emf environments
Even us!
& there has been a huge increase in the incidence of a once rare brain cancer glioblastoma as well as an increase in heart & brain conditions among young & middle age adults
& an explosion in dementia in older adults
Must be climate change!
Which explains the dramatic collapse in amphibian populations, in particular frogs and toads. I’m in my 60s too and have observed that the world of my youth and the world we live in now aren’t the same — and I don’t like it. I blame humans. We’re the cause of climate change and I have little faith in our willingness to address the crises that lies ahead. God help us…
I've been a truck driver for about 35 years and I've noticed the same. Vehicles used to be caked in bugs. There's a highway that goes through Toronto and 30 years ago I'd have to constantly clean my windscreen. Now, no matter where I drive there are hardly any insects. I emailed a Monarch researcher in Michigan mentioning that on my drives, on average, I would count between 70 to 90 Monarchs hitting my truck every day not counting the possible near hits or the ones I didn't see. During peak migration I've counted 120 to 140. She wasn't impressed which blew my mind. I don't hear bird song anymore, and this is the first year I haven't had any mice getting into my house. Things are bad
I'm also 60 and noticed this too. It's one of the scariest examples of baseline shift. Young people see this as normal and don't know how different and rich our world used to be.
I live in the Phoenix area, dotted with the Sonoran Saguaro cactus - which have a lifespan of up to 200 years. We had record breaking heat last summer, with over 30 consecutive days with highs of 110+, and the nighttime air was too hot for them, they lost a ton of moisture during their air exchange period when they open their pores after sundown. I went on a hike last sunday and the McDowell Sonoran preserve was littered with the bones of fallen giants, Saguaros decades+ old that has died over the summer. I've never seen anything like it.
That's heartbreaking.
Why do all the elites buy sea front property if the ice caps are melting 😂😂 think about it
@mostlycloudy1738 they arnt thinking about 20 years from now. They are thinking "I want to live on the beach"
@@mostlycloudy1738 "Why do all the elites buy sea front property if the ice caps are melting 😂😂 think about it" There's nothing the think about--sea level rise is a terrible thing we have done to future generations--our emissions in the past and now have ripple effects for up to 150 years, but the serious effects won't happen for awhile for most places. Right now, sea level rise is only ~4.6 mm/yr, so there's no reason for elites to not buy beachfront property that sits 10 feet above the waves.
@@mostlycloudy1738 Using crying emojis in a smug way has to be a sing of very low IQ.
It has been my observation that there are a lot of people that vote to save the planet but almost none that will do anything if it involves actual change in their lifestyle. Thus, if the models are actually correct, then the situation can only be resolved with calamity.
Unfortunately I'm afraid that might be corredt
No one is willing to accept real sacrifices to benefit strangers.
This is true, but never forget that, for true change, an honest effort by government and industry is essential.
They create markets and mass consent on a regular basis. They must do that in regard to the climate crisis...or we are in for a lot of trouble...
2023 had most Carbon reductions . carbon dioxide blocks heat both ways. The molecule is to dense to hold much energy
Our modern society,as an overreaction to the socially conscious movements, is so individualized only personal trouble seems to motivate (and then, only individual action for the most part)
In 1958, scientists in an observatory on Maui detected a pattern of temperature increase of the earth. In 1987 I studied at University and our professor said we‘ll all be driving small cars like the European models. But Americans chose to drive large trucks or SUVs. Americans chose to wait in drive thru coffee shops and not follow speed limits. Gasoline consumption increase and market price increases. Oil is a finite commodity.
Human stupidity is not finite...
American stupidity*
all cars are bastards. The problem isn't how big the car is, it's how cities are built so that everyone MUST drive.
@zorgate True, big auto and big oil have been busy in planning law so that modern cities depend on cars. That's why the lobby hates 15min cities that make walking the travel mode...
1. There is no physical mechanism by which a gas can absorb energy without at the same instant creating an equal and opposite emission spectrum and in the open atmosphere of our planet there is in any case nowhere for energy to hide, other than in ice or water. Carbon dioxide can not absorb and preserve energy. At no stage is cooling prevented and even if it was, that would not increase the originally achieved maximum temperature. A blanket can at best maintain your body temperature, it can not add heat and give you a fever; it does not make you warmer, it just keeps you warmer.
2. Quite the opposite. The earth would be warmer if there was to be no water vapor in the atmosphere and by some margin (but only during the hours of sunshine of course). Observational evidence can be seen on a daily basis when comparing maximum temperatures in deserts that have coastal fringes (e.g. Sahara, Namib and Atacama), where it will be seen that there is a direct link between humidity and maximum as well as minimum daily temperatures. Absence of water vapor allows more of the sun's radiation to reach the ground and thus create a warmer earth locally when compared to an atmosphere that holds greater water vapor and is at the same latitude. Conversely, the absence of water vapor will allow greater cooling at night whilst high humidity areas benefit from greater preservation of warmth, a sort-of “greenhouse effect” in reverse.
3. That statement only holds true in high humidity areas and then only during the hours of darkness. The presence of water vapor creates a cooler daytime atmosphere and a less cold (not warmer) atmosphere at night. At no stage is heat added nor created by the presence of water vapor or any other substance. In any case, earth is already enveloped in the perfect “blanket”: the vacuum of space - void of matter and having no temperature of itself, we could not ask for a better insulation. As per #1 above, a blanket can at best maintain your body temperature, it can not give you a fever and neither can a thermos make its contents warmer.
4. If ever there was equilibrium between temperatures on earth and solar irradiance, the weather as we know it would cease to be. As is, solar radiation often varies more from mile to mile along any longitude or latitude than anyone could ever imagine and all climate related “averages” are purely mathematical entities that bear no relation to the actual situation at almost any point on our planet other than perhaps the coldest areas of the poles during their respective long periods of winter darkness when there is not enough energy entering the local climate system to create the greater variations witnessed in more temperate climate zones. Just looking at the maximum and minimum temperature of a particular place in a moderate climate zone and deriving an “average daily temperature” from such observations bears no resemblance to the ever-changing temperatures throughout the day. In between the observed maximum and minimum temperature of the day, it could have hailed or snowed or rained or have been overcast in several episodes. The struggle to reach equilibrium is what makes the weather so unpredictable and equilibrium can never be reached.
5. A brand new Law of Physics here, where parts within a system can behave contrary to the 2nd Law but the whole obeys. Only in “climate science” can such chicanery be accepted as academic judgment. Thermal energy cannot flow into itself, only into something that has less energy than itself. That's a law of nature, not a law of “systems”.
6. A photon will not be able to raise the temperature of the object it is hitting if that object is at an equal or higher energy level. In IPCC graphics, that photon warms the earth and the process starts again - quite impossible (see IPCC graphic below). As per #5 above: Thermal energy cannot flow into itself, only into something that has less energy than itself. That's a law of nature, not a law of “systems”.
7. Thermal insulation in the setting of our open atmosphere does not make the system one degree warmer than it would be without that insulation (the widely accepted “insulation” being the “greenhouse gases”, not the air itself (nitrogen, oxygen)). For a given energy input, a resultant maximum temperature is achieved and regardless of the amount or type of insulation, that maximum temperature can not be increased. As per #1 above, a blanket can at best maintain your body temperature, it can not give you a fever and a thermos does not make the contents warmer, it merely slows down the rate of cooling.
8. An “infrared greenhouse effect” (whatever next?) would need “greenhouse gases” to hang on to received radiation and only water has that ability which is best seen during the hours of darkness, not whilst the sun is adding energy, when in fact water and water vapor keep soaking up energy and prevent the atmosphere from warming up as much as it would without water and water vapor (quite the opposite to what is being proposed).
9. A 77 degree average surface temperature due to the purely radiative impact of the greenhouse effect? Radiant units do NOT combine in reality - 101 W/m2 directed at a blackbody that's radiating 100 W/m2 raises its energy to 101 W/m2, not 201 - but in the much heralded Kiehl-Trenberth budget they DO combine. Let's look at the numbers, then.
According to the accepted Kiehl-Trenberth radiation budget (see below), the earth's surface averages 168 W/m2 for solar absorption. K-T has the surface lose much of that energy by convection and evapotranspiration, though, so that 324 W/m2 of back-radiated power brings the surface up to 390 W/m2, corresponding to 15°. But in this case we'll reduce convective and evapotranspirative heat loss to zero, which leaves us with the original 168 W/m2. Now, within these parameters, how much extra back-radiation is required to bring the surface up to 77°? SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY FOUR W/m2, for a total of EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY TWO W/m2, which corresponds to 77°. (Bonus question: If the greenhouse effect generates enough radiative power to raise the earth's temperature to 77°, but most of this heat is dissipated, then why is there no sign of this excess energy being blasted away from the earth? Satellites only see the earth emitting 240 W/m2.) The average solar irradiance for a blackbody earth - one that absorbs every photon the sun can provide - is 342 W/m2, corresponding to an average temperature of 5.5°. Yet here illustrious academia estimates conjure 852 W/m2 out of nothing
10. “Radiative equilibrium” is an arbitrary construct to BEGIN with. You just subtract a planet's reflectance from the available irradiance and divide by 4. That's IT. There ARE no other steps. Since Earth reflects about 30% of sunlight, then, 1368 W/m2 × 0.7 = 957.6 W/m2. Dividing by 4 gives you 239.4 W/m2, so that becomes earth's equilibrium figure and this corresponds to a temperature of 255Kelvin. Now, is the earth's average SURFACE temperature 255K? No, it's warmer. So you say that “somewhere up there” is where earth's radiative equilibrium is to be found, somewhere in the troposphere. It's all so silly. But once you convince yourself that the earth's temperature is NOT principally determined by the surface, you can convince yourself that it IS determined by the atmosphere and that “greenhouse gases” RAISE the “equilibrium point” higher and higher. And as you see, you can even go as far as asserting that the surface absorbs no sunlight. The Settled Science Unsettled In spectroscopy, an absorption spectrum does not mean that energy is actually absorbed; it means that an equal and opposite emission spectrum is created, indicating that intercepted energy is dissipated, scattered, re-radiated at different frequencies. By looking only at the absorption spectrum gives the wrong impression, as so clearly illustrated by the overall emission spectrum of earth as seen by the satellites. Radiation input from our sun equals emitted radiation from the earth back into space, in expected accordance with the basic and well-proven laws of physics. No energy is lost nor created, whereas the widely and incorrectly accepted “greenhouse” mechanism has it that carbon dioxide somehow re-radiates the same amount of infrared energy towards space as well as back to earth, thus apparently doubling the energy quantity - quite an impossibility yet described in great detail by the greatest institutions on earth - see below for the latest list. The UN's IPCC graph reproduced yet again below is the classic and accepted view of the mechanism by which the earth gains heat, but this mechanism can not exist; if it did, our energy problems would have been solved long ago by the engineering community: “Surface gains more heat and infrared radiation is emitted again” - if only that were true!
O'Sullivan, John; Schreuder, Hans; Johnson, Claes; Ball, Tim; Anderson, Charles; Siddons, Alan; Olson, Joseph A.; Hertzberg, Martin. Slaying the Sky Dragon - Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory .
I’m currently studying sustainable design Engineering. Everyone told me it’s not worth it, but listening to this video now I feel like I made the right decision.
it definItly is, keep it up!
You are doing a service, while things like going vegetarian/saving energy are good, this is a step toward large-scale change.
Within a capitalist society sustainability does not work eventually. Most people speaking of it just use it for marketing purposes. The idea is nice, but idealists are the people who end up getting abused by our society.
"Sustainable design engineering" done by humans will never be sustainable. You are marginally decreasing destruction, because your bosses will NOT PAY for actual sustainable development.
@@scepticalchymist ye you right so lets just keep rollin the way we used to till the great downfall of humanity
"The problem is that we can't agree to implement the solutions we have." Loud standing ovation here.
Yep. And it's so. Fucking. Aggravating.
@@keiganblaise9878 what is aggravating? You have no idea how complex these things are! No idea whatsoever! What's actually aggravating is the shallow interpretations of people who think they understand such complex scientific domains and the extend of consequences of the offered solutions.
Video Tittle: Let them slave us with carbon taxes ASAP!!!!
@@C_R_O_M________what exactly is you alternative? Keep debating until there is 100% proof and evidence for exactly how some process is happening? Which by the way has pretty much never been reached in science, and is not the purpose of science.
So, what's you suggestion, just go on as usual not changing anything based on the understanding we now have, because it is too "complex"?
This woman is part of the problem. A smart person whoknows numbers is given a large set of fake numbers and is also given a reason for the fake numbers. Not knowing the area at all she is duped into thinking there is a problem.
Even many smart people dont know how to think for themselves.
Thats not the "hot models" i was hyped for 😢
I needed a good laugh after watching this video. Thanks.
@@user-ki4ek9wn1l Yes b/c you clearly, a stranger online, know far better than a scientist how the world and systems work. And you know better than me, even though I studed economics at the doctoral level. But what do I know?
@@user-ki4ek9wn1l She obviously knows more about the topic than you. Here in Germany we are more aware about the problem. Island states or low lands like the Netherlands also... Just the ducking super powers think they can decide how ever they want... thanks for messing it up for everyone else.
@@opheliawild You're right, but your arguments are invalid. Being a scientist doesn't make her an expert in all scientific fields, and it turns out she did trigger a response from an actual climate scientist.
As for the economic doctorate level... well... only people who have studied economics think economy is a serious field of study :D !
if ppl dont know about the climate scam by now, they deserve to be robbed in taxes @@user-ki4ek9wn1l
A couple of years ago I tried to fix a Open Source Model that had pretty unreliable Predictions, I gave up once I noticed that the model could not work with the actual data that I feed into it because for that model to work i needed certain parameters like CO2 levels in the atmosphere and so on and I quickly started to notice a big discrepancy between what we told is going on and what is really going on.
I incorporated a Database and a tool that should check for discrepancy’s from the model generated data to the actual real time data point and make some sense out of this. Turns out the model couldn’t run correctly because the data I provided was so far off from what’s really going on that I needed moths of data mining to figure that out. And most governments still don’t want to hear that the data they provided is completely useless because it’s so wrong.
Hear! Hear!!!
I'm from central South Africa and over the course of the last 10 years we haven't been able to trust expected weather patterns. We're used to wet summers in the 30-35 (Celsius) range and it's been going into drought temperatures (40-45) with little to no rain for a long period and a sudden flood-causing burst every season. Our national average temp has also increased twice as fast as the global temperatures since the early 90's so the impact of this is a very tangible non-debatable issue here, especially in the agricultural sector.
Yes, it would hit your region faster and harder than certain other parts of the world. I live in Cleveland Ohio (USA) and our change is milder. This does allow for more people in my region to remain ignorant and blind to the science.
@@JosephKleppel Some parts of the US are very affected. Just think of the year-long drought and all the wildfires in California.
Maybe this is caused by the increased solar activity of the sun. We are near the end of an 11-year solar cycle. But nobody wants to say this as there's no money in it.
I'm from the Northern part of South Africa (pretoria)
I can honestly say that our weather patterns have not changed noticeably in the past 30 years (which is how far back I can remember)
45 year old from Johannesburg, can definitely say I’ve experienced a change in weather patterns over the years (anecdotal yes, but I count for at least one observer)
My anxiety is actually reduced by seeing people taking this seriously. Even though I've completely abandoned all hope, it's nice to not feel gaslighted about the problem :)
Sort comments by new.
Learn how to cook tofu, chia seeds in lemonade, bread, rice beans, low sodium plant-based and you will lower your carbon footprint.
Chia seeds are organic, have a complete protein and are 35% fiber for maintaining adequate moisture in the colon.
Weakling. Climate isn't spiraling out of control. Your mental health and rationality are.
If you desire information on climate history, please look at Tony Heller's work.
I hear you! It's madness hearing denial of facts in common conversations, especially about something as essential as our climate. Farmers have been worried for decades.
@@jaredkaye3669Thanks!
I'm Australian, spent the first half of my life growing fruit, 4th generation to do so. We started seeing measurable change in 1980s. Increased hail, higher temps burning fruit and higher minimum temperatures affecting fruit budding. The harvesting season has moved to earlier in year by about 3 weeks. Bush fire season can be up to 8 months or more now. Australia has always had extremes but now the extremes are extreme. As modelling and now reality shows we are one of the most affected countries with climate change. Already more sensitive crops are having to either move south or higher in altitude. This of course has limitations, especially altitude. Already a very dry continent with over use of irrigation growing the wrong crops the future doesn't fill me with delight. And that's not mentioning the affects on our ocean fisheries or our wonderful unique wildlife.
Also Australian, and have noticed the same. It is heart-breaking, and still we continue down the same stupid path.
Tomatoes here in Nz have become notoriously hard to grow because our UV levels atm are through the roof
😂😂 you don't "notice" climate change, it happens over time scales more vast than a humans life time or 2. What you are seeing is called the weather. Yes it can and does fluctuate. Its not global warming.
Weren't water rights in Australia also tradable like stocks?
The forecast depletion of 50% of the Globe's aquifers, by 2050, will force starvation and mass population migrations, decades before average temperatures are forecast to make the cultivation of the existing crops impossible, if there were only the goundwater. Places like Saudi have already banned the use of groundwater for agriculture, as for now they can sell oil to import food, and burn oil to desalinate water. Though Australia, China, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Iran, Turkey, Mexico, Spain, USA, ..., aren't is the same position, and have 4bn bodies dependent on pumping ground water.
I liked this video because I live in Las Vegas Nevada and on July third last summer in the middle of a heat wave that saw the all time record high jump by seven degrees my electric car's battery controller decided it could no longer charge the battery I found it cheaper to drastically down grade my vehicle than repair my car. This cost thousands. Also this qualifies as by far the hardest summer of my entire life as far as surviving the heat, and I've been here for decades.
I've noticed that whenever something troubling emerges, it always seems to the tip of a way bigger iceberg than we realized.
I agree, I think; (you've omitted a word or two, between "always" and "bigger".)
Thank you!
Because people keep burying their heads in the sand until it cannot be ignored.
The entire religion of global warming or climate change is based upon one fundamental misapprehension which, if you remove it, causes the entire theory or religion to collapse, and the fundamental misapprehension is that there either is or can be, any such thing as a Global temperature.
It is impossible to talk about a single temperature for something as complicated as the climate of Earth.
A temperature can be defined only for a homogeneous system. Furthermore, the climate is not governed by a single temperature. Rather, differences of temperatures drive the processes and create the storms, sea currents, thunder, etc. which make up the climate.
Planet Earth doesn’t have ‘a temperature’, one figure that says it all. There are oceans, landmasses, ice, the atmosphere, day and night, and seasons. Also, the temperature of Earth never gets to equilibrium: just as it’s starting to warm up on the sunny-side, the sun gets ‘turned off’; and just as it’s starting to cool down on the night-side, the sun gets ‘turned on’. The ‘temperature of Earth’ is therefore as much of a contrived statistic as the GDP of a country. (If the Earth was in equilibrium, that is, if it absorbed and re-emitted the Sun’s radiation perfectly, as a ‘blackbody’, then its rotation would be irrelevant, and the temperature would be a constant 6 ⁰C. Mocking up the effects of Earth’s albedo brings the ‘blackbody’ temperature down to -18 ⁰C, and including greenhouse warming brings it back up to around 15 ⁰C.)
‘The climate’ is difficult to define: is it a trend over one decade, century, or millennium? For what sized region is it defined ? Weather is very variable – how can we go from weather to climate? Furthermore, climate change on human timescales is a very small effect, and the empirical data needed for climate models have large ‘error’ bars.
If you cannot define what is changing, you cannot say it is changing; It is essential to understand that no man apprehend or experience the entire plant –the whole-thing all-at-once. You cannot even sense apprehend experience yourself - he-whole-thing, all-at-once, so how could you possibly experience something as gigantic as the planet on which you live, other than piecemeal and seriatim - little bit after little bit.
If you remove the fallacy that there either is or can be, any such thing as a “Global Temperature” , the entire edifice of climate change and/or global warming, collapses, because it is contingent on the idea that there can be , or is, a “ Global Temperature, which is a thermodynamic and mathematical
impossibility. While it is possible to treat temperature statistically locally, it is meaningless to talk about a global temperature for Earth. The Globe consists of a huge number of components which one cannot just add up and average. That would correspond to calculating the average phone number in the phone book. That is meaningless. Or talking about economics, it does make sense to compare the currency exchange rate of two countries, whereas there is no point in talking about an average 'global exchange rate'.
If temperature decreases at one point and it increases at another, the average will remain the same as before, but it will give rise to an entirely different thermodynamics and thus a different climate. If, for example, it is 10 degrees at one point and 40 degrees at another, the average is 25 degrees. But if instead there is 25 degrees both places, the average is still 25 degrees. These two cases would give rise to two entirely different types of climate, because in the former case one would have pressure differences and strong winds, while in the latter there would be no wind.
Or maybe you're hysterical. It's perfectly possible.
in the beginning it's only a tip of an iceberg, but we wait and let it grow. The problem is, that it is very hard to understand exponential growth and what it means in the later game. that won't change until we evolve.
I live in Brazil. And in these models, there is still no room for unexpected effects that we don't yet know about. For example, for some time we did not know about the possibility of savannaization of the Amazon forest, nor about the aerial rivers that flow over the forest. And we still don't know if this phenomenon stops, what will happen to the climate on a global scale. We have many variables. And they all seem to point to the worst.
The amazon really is a huge part of the global ecosystem… it can't be allowed to die!!
@@acmhfmggru if u can't see the amazon dying you're willfully ignorant.
This is what scares me about climate change.. we have models, but unexpected things can crop up and obliterate assumptions we've made for decades. If the climate sensitivty assumption has been wrong all this time, then it's almost certainly too late to mitigate these effects in any meaningful way... apart from it might just be possible to keep at least part of the planet habitable. A crazy thought really
@@user-sw2eg9lg2tthe permafrost started melting in 2013, that was game over, we cannot refreeze it and it contains 1300 GT of carbon (more than double the amount we put into the atmosphere) and a shit of of methane too. So even if we stop CO2 output, today, cc is a self serving process now regardless of our actions.we are done, the question is just how fast.
@@meneedmorebrain Not sure that's the scientific consensus.. the fact is slower change allows more time for adaptation which means less disriuption to people's lives. More time also means better technology and science to know how to use ressources more effectively... imagine we had 50 years to fix this, could fusion would be a much more viable solution to depend on (still unwise, bet a lot less unwise than it'd be to depend on it as the situation is). The climate is never static, so surely the rate of change is on a scale of severity.. saying it's already over gives everyone permission to do nothing.
I really like this video, no sugarcoating. Being 64 years old I’ve been camping since I was a kid the last few years I’ve been using tarps not for rain but for creating shade over my tent and nearby to get away from the Sun bring the summer hottest time.
The lakes and rivers I swim in have also warmed up. There’s a big possibility they will be forest fires in the areas where I go camping sooner or later.
Maybe the heat just feels worse because youre old now? Have you considered that? I use to think the same thing but then I looked around and noticed the kids, like I use to be, are not bothered by the heat.
@@DissenterNet we're now recording historical record highs almost on a daily basis. must be because we're all older...
hey dude, its just the sun doing its job!
sun doing its job
@@DissenterNet I’m in college and greatly disappointed by the lack of snow days as I age. Because there’s no snow, most of our snow days are from icy road conditions that melt by the end of the day.
It seems to me that the dinosaurs acted in a careless and selfish manner. HOW could they have forgot to create a backup for their data!! This is an outrage. Thanks a lot T REX!!
50 years ago, hitting 100° was a big deal where I live. It rarely happened. Last summer we hit 100° for 30 days straight. We suffered drought and farmers lost crops. It's been really hot for about a decade now.
It’s crazy
Where I live, in SE PA, USA, it feels like the opposite. This is anecdotal, but I’d say summers tend to be cooler and wetter than they used to. But winters are way warmer. Snow is becoming rare.
@chmd22 NJ here. Snow is far from rare. We haven't been slammed in a few years, mid-90s and late 2000's were the last time I remember blizzards that dropped several feet of snow. In the mid 2010's we had those "polar vortexes" those winters were brutally cold. The last few winters have been relatively mild.
It's a natural occurrence. Ever hear of the dust bowl? Nature does stuff. The sun, the earth, the sky... Everything is in flux. It always has been.
A few years ago in July or so, it snowed in both hemispheres. When it snows in summer in North America--that's climate change.
The recorded temperature history is too short a time to be considered entirely useful in climate determinations such as what is "natural" variability?
CO-2 is plant food, so what do they do? Biofuels--cut down and burn forests. When normally green trees would absorb and thereby sink carbon from the atmosphere, idiots are paid to destroy forests--that makes no sense. Who paid them?
Where I am a few years ago they had the coldest day on record in over a century, but that lasted only a day or so, and then the temperature went back up high again.
Naysayers. They always seem to be wrong.
What is to say that Dr. Helmut Fluhrer's precipitation-influencing ionic atmospheric layer devices have not been deployed and used to promote globalism? In 2010 his company was known as Metro Systems and his company made artificial rainstorms in Abu Dhabi UAE for about 50 of 60 days when normally there is no precipitation at all.
Now his company is named Weathertec. Born in Germany, and living in Switzerland, Fluhrer's critics are naysayers who base their criticisms on absolutely nothing. That's like saying that there is no causal link between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer--also known as tobacco science.
Thick rainstorm clouds in the daytime cast very dark shadows that block the sun's rays from reaching the surface and heating it. What if clouds at nighttime were eliminated to let surface-level heat disperse into outer space. What is the capacity of outer space to dissipate such radiation? Thereby, any daytime accumulated heat can be cast into outer space by clearing the skies at night.
The ionic polarization of the atmosphere can be altered by throwing a polarity switch on such atmospheric layer ionization machines.
Wikipedia used to have a citation of Metro Systems weather modification experiments of 2010. The article had the information excized. Who would have that be done? Hmmm?
reference: business journal artificial rainstorms abu dhabi uae
In this case, climate change can be compelled by the constant operation of such equipment to whatever purpose is desired--heating or cooling. Energy saving or energy-wasting on heating or cooling.
The people with huge amounts of money pay hired goons to enforce their will on the rest of us. Some guy invents a 100 mpg v-8 carburetor in the 1920s. What happens? Lead is added to gas as an anti-knock agent that just happens to clog such carburetor designs--coincidence--I think NOT! Some video on YouTube explains that the addition of lead to gas ended up killing a lot of people with this additive. Lead and other heavy metals are known causes of brain damage.
Experiments were done with WW1 battleship hull painters to get rid of their lead poisoning. Those who had heart conditions said that the treatment made their heart condition disappear. Later that treatment was banned so that heart surgeons would not lose any business. Fake studies were done to pooh-pooh the entire finding. Science is for sale--a corrupt business you could find anywhere in our corrupted world where love of money motivates the masses to do immoral things that damage themselves and their loved ones. Seems that the rich want to get richer and lord over the rest of us. Some schemes should be invented, not Marxism, that counteracts the evils of Marxism such as central banking and control of financial systems by constantly changing monetary policies and encouraging people not to work by giving more people handouts whenever they vote for them.
How to undo corruption? Advanced lie detection systems, truth serums, and a list of pointed questions to unearth corruption and its network of influencers and financial supporters. Punish the guilty rather than the innocent.
"No I'm not asking you to like this video, I don't even like it myself" sent a chill up my spine
Abusing climate fear for 3 videos in a short period of times to generate clicks sent a chill up mine.
@@Hentai-Semite You don't fear climate change at all. Don't be disingenuous.
@@Hentai-Semite one person here spoke truth...and it wasn't you.
Chill that.
@@Hentai-Semite Keep looking for fair ways of comunicating unfair problems while the ones that don't care at all keep the bussiness as usual
You scare too easily...
What worries me most is that the Keeling curve doesn't show any change from its exponential growth the last 10 years. Only in 1991-1992 there was a tiny, tiny dip, arguably due to Mount Pinatubo eruption, or collapse of the Sovjet Union. So, CO2 reductions have not been registered...
Dec 3rd 1972
50 top scientists met at Brown University to write an open letter to Nixon to save us from the coming ice age by melting the arctic by covering it with soot.
Jan 5th 1978 NYT
International team of spspecialist finds no end in sight of 30 year cooling trend in noerthern hemisphere.
The same year a world Meteorologist meeting was held in Geneva to counter global cooling
China.
@@beskydyk And then wait for India and else
@@beskydyk China has increased his carbon emissions but also because most countries are externalising its production, which means that we're mostly buying things that were made there (and so polluted there). It's unfair to say that Europe is a "clean" region when that comes at the price of polluting in the other side of the globe.
I live in a small European country and every village and town got funds from EU to plant trees in the streets. The older population loved to plant walnuts in front of houses which grew huge over the years and were a great sunblock but were cut down in the last 20-ish years or so for the new drainage system, cables or whatever else.
The new trees are being planted like acer platanoides, liquidambar styraciflua, tilia cordata, fraxinus excelsior etc. My country has an aging population and old people are stubborn, not open minded and often dont want the trees that dont give fruits in front of their houses. They "water" the trees with used cooking oil, diesel or whatever else to destroy the trees. I own a tree nursery and it saddens me to see that people dont see whats happening around us.
For me, I'm tired of this topic not because I don't believe in it, but because knowing more about it actively makes my life more depressing and worse, while I can't really change my life in a way that solves this problem.
The climate has to change. It’s not a static thing. It can’t be static.
@@stormchaser9753 Look up dunning-kruger effect. Please try not to ignore facts.
@@stormchaser9753 What climate scientist have you seen saying that climate is static?
I’m tired of it specifically because I trust it, but because no matter how much more I learn about it, how much irrefutable evidence I see, I still know there are so plenty of potato brains in the world who prefer to live in denial, let propagandists tell them everything’s fine, and hinder efforts to do something about it.
I empathize with you, but I disagree that there's nothing you can do. You're right that you can't change your lifestyle to solve it because you're just one person. But what one person can do is stay engaged politically. Like it or not, politics is intrinsic to how we live our lives. It's literally us having a say in how things should be done.
Write to your reps, attend meetings, donate, sign petitions (or even make new ones), etc. There are plenty of ways to stay engaged and you're probably going to find one or two that work for you if you give it a try. (Forgive me if you already are - on the internet, context is hard)
I just wanted to say, thank you so much for the warning for people with anxiety. Most creators would use that part of the video to really suck people in, and instead you encourage to stop watching. I have severe panic attacks about existential topics, and often I don't have the sense to stop consuming things that I know will stoke that in me. Having you advise to leave the video was so helpful.
My son taught me to embrace insufficient action. Look into it. It may seem like a waste but it really can help.
I agree, it was a strange kind of relief to just hear someone say it all. @@debrabarnhardt1103
That's what the left do, induce fear to more easily control the people.
13:16
Hearing you curse is such a weird surprise. I felt that frustration
All else aside, it kind of turns me on when she swears. 😍
It's very hard to feel anyone is serious when we aren't switching to nuclear power. Especially if China and India don't switch first. We share 1 atmosphere.
@@jr7853nuclear power isn't a panacea. It isn't going to cleanse the environment of micro plastics andnforever chemicals, it isn't going to reverse the greenhouse gas feedback loop, it isn't going to regrow the forests, it isn't going to restock global fisheries. Nuclear power is a piece of the puzzle, and only a piece that's meant to replace the fuel that our civilization runs on not ensure it's sustainability, even though it is less of a carbon footprint I believe it would only keep the status quo, i.e. capitalism.
@@jr7853 : Who is "anyone" in that scenario? The public doesn't decide these things. The people who want nuclear have to get investors and they tend to be big money losers. China invests more in nuclear and renewables than any other country. India is still a distant 3rd to the US in carbon emissions.
you know what? too late: "experts" have been telling us the end of the world is near for at least 50 years. I don't blame anyone for not believing "scientists"
Famous last words: "Humans won't go extinct because there are too many of them" There used to be 10 billion carrier pigeons, now only a few specimens in museums
Ty for science truth. Texas weather patterns are changing from my 50 years of observing. Even dad a chem engineer, saw it in the 1970s. Keep teaching for our future children, a few are listening. Truth is never dishonorable, TY.
Were supposed to have a foot of snow and 10 degree temps up here in Minnesota but its getting up to the 50s for over week straight.
It’s so noticeable in the middle as well. In Ky we went from regular several inches of snow all winter even a decade ago, remember when 21• was noteworthy. Now it’s rain and 20sto 50s all winter with a few dry arctic blasts at near zero. My oldest kids played in the snow regularly and their younger brother barely remembers. The plants have been so confused earlier and earlier.
My husband wants to move south for the weather and I’m saying the south is coming to us!
Scotland is seeing temps over 19C. Should be under 10C.
When I moved to the UK, over 35years ago, it was normal to get 30cm of snow (that's in Yorkshire). Now, it is surprising if we get 2, 3 cm.
yeah, 50 years in millions, and YOU "know" climate is changing and the world will end in fire or ice or whatever is the panic hype of the moment.
I retired in 1993 to Washington near Puget Sound, 47.1854° N. As a lay person attentive to the natural world (climate) I had encountered in my life up to then, I figured Washington State would have the weather of San Francisco in 50 years. Robins leave the area for the winter. It heralds spring when they return. I saw my first Robin on 25 January 2024. In 1993 it was March before I saw any. There are buds on the bush in the yard. I have been studying my yard and things are changing.
I'm in victoria BC just north and i was shocked to see the Robin's so early as well.
DR RICHARD LINDZEN? YOUTUBE I LOOK FOR AT LEAST 2 OPINIONS DR LINDZEN HAS BEEN IN CLIMATE OVER 40 YRS AND STATES WHAT THIS IS IS POLITICS
I am in Oregon, here for 20 years. Oregon weather is very close to what northern CA used to be in the seventies, and northern CA appears to be drying and warming. And yes, the robins are here all year long now.
Lindzen gets money from the coal industry. You have to know who you are getting your information from these days. @@PeachesCourage
Oh darn. There's more life in your yard. How terrible, the world might end that you saw a sparrow in January.
As a layman, I appreciate your videos Doctor Hossenfelder, and the time and effort you and your team put into breaking down the most complex of topics into easily digestible bite-sized pieces. Thank you Doctor!
I think the best way for us layman to talk about climate change, it to be informed, but not use it as a tool, because we can't explain it as well as communicators.
instead, we should talk about climate change as a humanitarian crisis, its not whether or not, or who did it, but why aren't we helping people who are in need, especially when it'll damage us as well
I wonder if it has occurred to Sabine that companies and other vested interests might be using bots to mass downvote her climate videos? They only need to convince her that it’s an unpopular topic, if they hope to stop her from making them. At least that’s what they will be gambling on, if they hope to influence her at all? So, it won’t matter to them that others can’t see the numbers as you can.
I’m more afraid of gravity change. Since the widespread availability of backyard trampolines started in the late 60s the earth’s rotation has slowly been knocked out of kilter. It is now becoming critical, countless billions are being spent of so called ‘climate change” yet this more pressing pending disaster is largely ignored. I can solve this problem once and for all using strategically placed counter weights on springs at strategic gravity hotspots ( namely my backyard) and I can do all this for a cool 2.5 billion dollars. Don’t wait for the world to end with us all either shooting off into space of being crushed into the ground. Send your tax deductible donation to the “Harvest the gullible fools Institute”. We are also hiring the services of Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny to solve Climate Change. Santa is going to fly his slay around during his off season and the Easter Bunny will accompany him sprinkling the clouds with left over chocolate which has been finely powdered. This will stain the clouds brown and block the sun ending the dreaded warming that we are assured will one day cause sea levels to rise somehow. This can be done for the bargain price of 1.25 ! So what are you waiting for Send your tax deductible donation to the “Harvest the gullible fools Institute” NOW or they may be no tomorrow !
@@acasccseea4434 it isn’t a crisis when the historical average temperature is higher than the current. 150 years of data on a 4.5 billion year old planet isn’t enough data. Ice core samples say the average temp is higher in virtually all times. We are in a cold age right now and coming out of it.
@@UnlinkedCashews You're missing the point. Nobody is saying the climate is different to historical times, they are saying the climate is becoming different to what we need today for our survival. When you say the climate was this warm billions of years ago, remember that there weren't any humans alive back then either which is what everyone's concern is. If you don't consider the potential loss of your food supply as a crisis, perhaps you'll at least be concerned about having millions of refugees suddenly invading your country looking for food and a place to live.
To me sensitivity factor mostly sounds like a fudge to play around with outcomes in chaotic systems models. In reality there's a vast amount of interactions, buffering, feedback etc
Never stop talking about it, and don't apologise, Sabine. It's one of the most important subjects of modern times.
No it isn't
"Never stop talking about it, and don't apologise"
Show some FAITH! Believe!
@@paddleed6176 Just curious. How old are you and where do you live? I'm 54. Cochabamba, Bolivia.
Suggestiin: look up #JHAT, Just Have A Think.
@@thomasmaughan4798 Or, you know, do what Sabine does and show some evidence. That thing the Abrahamic religions never do for the supernatural.
These guys will deny any evidence shown to them but they'll wholeheartedly believe in supernatural beings without any evidence 😂
"Now, I'm not asking you to like this video, I don't really like it myself" got me to like the video
Too bad real climate scientists have been dunking on her since she put this laughable video up.
I liked that comment too.
@@nobodyimportant7804whom? link them
@@nobodyimportant7804 the only video I could find from a professed climate scientist responding directly to this video was by "ClimateAdam." He disagreed with a chunk of what this woman says, but also implicated that man-made global warming is a very real thing, and addressing it in the long run is important.
I am coming to love her more and more.
"Those poor people who dont conveniently die right away." Sabine you are a rockstar
Her sardonic comment is the official policy the the American Republican Party it its MAGA Christians.
A rabid eugenicist. A predator trapped in a gilded cage plotting the death of everything moving freely. Evil itself is what I take from the presentation.
What people miss about the climate migration crisis is that nation states do not simply lay down and die. Northern nations are regressing politically, turning more to ethnonationalism, halting immigration, and turning their borders into armed fortresses. The plan the first world is converging to is to raise the drawbridge and shoot anyone who shows up at the gates. While this technique can keep out a loose flood of disorganized migrants, it fails when actual nation states are involved. Border patrols aren't going to stop armies.
And the real scary thing about this is we're talking massive heavily armed nation states with nothing to lose. What will the leaders of India do if they're told that in ten years, 95% of their population will be dead due to lethal heatwaves? If history teaches us anything, it's that those leaders will start demanding a place for their people to migrate to. They won't just want us to let immigrants in, they will want us to hand over some of the increasingly habitable high latitude territories as land for entire nations to relocate to.
And these governments really will have nothing to lose. We have been spoiled in the post-1945 world in that nuclear weapons, for all their terror, have meant that the big nation states don't fight total wars against each other anymore. There's literally no reason to; anything you would hope to gain from attacking another nuclear power would be more than cancelled out by the apocalyptic destruction a nuclear conflict would unleash.
But if your nation is already facing annihilation, if doing nothing will result in the certain doom of your people, what do you have to lose? If the Indian subcontinent becomes completely uninhabitable, the people living there, in the most populace nation on Earth, literally have nothing to lose by throwing their entire society into a total war effort to capture more habitable lands. Even if that conflict results in a nuclear war, it's still a rational strategy for them to pursue. If you're facing a changing climate that will kill 95% of your people, a nuclear war, even one that kills 75% of your people, is a good move. Vast regions of the globe being rendered uninhabitable is one of the few scenarios where a nuclear exchange may actually be a sane choice to a sufficiently desperate country.
And the reason I mention nukes is to break through Western chauvinism and beliefs about the absolute military superiority of Western countries. Even if you believe that the northern countries, by din of their vastly superior military acumen, will somehow resist an entire Indian subcontinent thrown into a total war economy, nukes put the lie to that idea. We're engineering a situation where even nuclear war is a rational option for nations of sufficient desperation. And most people are in complete denial about it, thinking that the worst that will happen through climate change is a few coastal vacation homes get flooded.
I wish it was funny.
nice synchronicity, five seconds before I called her a “rockstar” too! 😎
On a positive note, growing oranges and palm trees in Minnesota when Florida is underwater will increase tourism. Also "Nuclear" is spelled with an L.
The thing that worries me is that every IPCC report includes a phrase to the effect of "things are accelerating faster than previously supposed". If we keep adjusting the model to accommodate "faster than supposed" growth, and the next year comes out even more faster than supposed, I dunno, seems like a problem.
This is only true if you look at recent years. There was an entire decade(2005-2015) where the global average temperature didn’t move much at all and the predictions were much worse than reality. They’re quick to say that THAT was an outlier decade, but when we have a massive unusual global heatwave of a summer in 2023, which is the definition of an outlier, they will say that’s indicative of an accelerating temperature change. It’s not. There’s not enough data yet so it, by definition, is an outlier & just a weirdly hot year, which more aligns with the solar cycle than anything else.
They fake the data. They are constantly "adjusting" past temperatures based on a number of excuses to make them cooler. They claim stuff like temperature gauges weren't accurate enough etc, and then adjust the data to the numbers that meet their agenda.
Then their models are constantly wrong. And as the saying goes, if the predictions are wrong, it's because the hypothesis was incorrect. That's how real science works.
They also assume that heat exchange with the interior of the Earth can't change on the order of a human life span while there is no measurement to support that since most of the Earth's surface is covered in water and we know more about Mars than we do about the Ocean floor.
The model isn't causing the warming. Even if we adjust model to accommodate faster warming (not really how it works), there's no causal loop that that then makes Earth warm even faster. Just means we keep under estimating it.
@@mirfjc Oh, thank goodness this poster was around to inform us that observational data doesn't cause the observational data that is observed when taking observational data.
As someone who comes from the Equator zone and whose whole family lives there, I keep thinking about this all the time...
Well, you're actually lucky, because equatorial regions tend to remain the most stable. Non-equatorial tropical areas, as well as subtropical and temperate areas, will see the by far most destructive changes.
And the cool regions that have very short growing periods will explode with growth.... Making billions of acres of almost unusable farmland now usable for much longer, increasing world food production significantly.
@davi37005 stop you panicking over nonsense
As an American expat who has lived in a developing SE Asian nation for close to a decade, I hear you loud and clear. I'm fortunate that I have air conditioning, something many of my friends do without. I used to teach in schools with a few working fans. It was exhausting and humbling. When my 8th grade students looked wilted and too hot to learn anything, I knew I had to take frequent breaks and sit at the teacher's desk with the "teacher cooler" (a small desk fan) to keep from passing out.
I wish I could do more with what remaining time I have on Earth. FWIW, I no longer have a car or boat, like I had in America. I do have a 175cc motorbike, and I don't mind buying at most 3 liters of petrol a week at all! I'm quite sure I have dropped my transportation carbon output by a magnitude at least.
@@ebx100:
The thing is, in the equatorial tropics, with a true Köppen Af climate at least (like in e.g. the largest Indonesian islands and Malaysia), there's always the option of simply moving up to a higher altitude. Flooding could still be a problem, but you'd still have good and stable temperatures year round, and most likely persistent enough rainfall to be able to grow food all year.
If there's one thing I think people have gotten wrong about climate change, it's the idea that the tropics will suffer the most; I think when the famines set in worldwide, people will realize that the tropics remains one of the most stable zones to live in. It's no wonder we and all the other great apes evolved there for tens of millions of years.
I'm Colombian and in the particular area where i live, it hasn't rain in like 2 months and counting. Water is running out, Heat is reaching peak highs, i know it because i work construction and the sun it's unbearable compared to previous years. Mind you the place i live has abundant water, but two to three months without a single drop of water dries anything including crops plus the wildfire crisis. Farmers are concerned, everyone is.😢
i live in south brazil... the cut down of amazon forest changed the rains here too... now the rains that should go to colombia and other western latam countries go to here... and a lot of floods are happening
@@fete0 It's really problematic how drastic it can be, most people here don't even own a car or heavy industry. Somehow we get affected 😔.
It's called HAARP.
climate is variable and there are 10 20 50 100 200 1000 years cycle
There is no increase in droughts, storms, fires or extreme weather damages. The biosphere is greening, habitable lands expanding.
I am writing this the beginning of November of 2024. We here in the Phoenix Metro Area had the most extraordinarily hot summer where all previous records were broken across the board - 113 days in a row over 100 degrees Fahrenheit with many days well over 110 degrees Fahrenheit. In Phoenix itself in July, we had many days where the low temperature never got below 93 degrees Fahrenheit. These numbers were originally predicted for later in the 21st Century. Very alarming.
Sabine, Never apologise for making hard truth videos, you are an inspiration to all of youtube
Yes, never apologize for all the stone age people driving suv's that caused the earth's glaciers to recede , twice. Yes, its a hard truth that climate change didnt exist until humans came along. I mean just ask a dinosaur. Oh, wait..climate change a million years before man killed them before man created climate change.
When she starts making them, let us know.
Here isnt a shred of truth in this entire video.
Thats because neither of you know how to evaluate "truth" of reality. All you're doing is announcing your scientific illiteracy
@@wolfgangdali1036 unlike you basically anouncing nothing 🤣🤣🤣
I live in Northern Europe and love my local forest. Last summer which was unusually long, dry and hot I've found out that one of my favourite spots in the forest that also had some very rare plants was being quickly destroyed by bark beetles. It was like a warzone! Huge old spruce trees were dying quickly, falling and the sound of the beetles chewing on the bark was eerie. I literally cried in shock. They were always there but never in such quanitites and destroying the forest so quickly! It came to my mind that sooner or later our forest may be completely gone if this continues. I don't know what I'm gonna do if it happens. The forest has been my best friend, therapist and also a provider of nutrient-rich food. It will be so stressful to see it dying that i may have to move elsewhere. I believe, the bark beetles propagated due to the favourable conditions, like the extremely dry, hot and long summer. I really hope it will not be like this every year, but looks like science doesn't support it.
Tonga volcano 2022. Why aren't climate scientists talking more about that event that lofted huge amounts of IR-absorbing water vapor into the normally dry stratosphere where it is especially well-placed to absorb IR and affect the climate?
I just returned from Iceland. Had a great time hiking over glaciers that will be gone in 10 years. Real tragedy.
But is it a win or loss for life ? Forest lost, beetles won. Sometimes it feels that climate examples are very human egoistic, but phrased as an issue of life itself. Or more specificly, we are worried for our life to be exactly as it is now and not different,, like old people want the life to be as when they were young. Should we be looking forward to changes, rather than grasping at the past ?
@@dmitripogosian5084 To me, a selfish anthropocentric nordic woman who loves forest, it is my own personal tragedy and it matters to me the most. Of course, mentally I can empathize with the creatures who will gain something with the loss of the forest (but I'm pretty sure those who lose will be in much greater numbers), and I respect the dynamics of nature and its power over us. But emotionally I cannot accept it and will fight until I lose.
@@ChaviChoffChop That is understandable and valid position. But perhaps when we are talking about policies for the whole human population, it makes sense to point out that we often mean preservation of life very literally as it is now. For instance, it is probably far less important than in 100 years Manhattan will be underwater than some other things, and actually it is easier to relocate Manhattan than to change climate. So are we trying to protect not exactly the most relevant things ?
Great video! The "problem is that people can't agree to implement known solutions" is why I'm utterly hopeless. I'm sitting in Berlin, watching the government celebrating LNG contracts with Norway after shutting down working, amortized nuclear power plants. And Germans are supposed to be the rational ones. We are lost.
Leftist and greens are terrorists.
Rubbish, you can't expect a sudden change excluding fossil fuels. But things are changing, look at the reduction of coal usage in developed countries. Look at the shift to electric vehicles. By 2050 demand for fossil fuels will be dead.
It's finally completed: https://youtu.be/ErftVFXSRso
Germans never were rational. Germans are extremists. So, if you have a rational German, he is extremely rational. If you have a german fool, he is extremely foolish. And so on. What is not done wholheartedly is not done at all. Any known German in the last 400 yrs.
"Germany, you were the chosen one. It was said you would destroy climate change, not contribute to it!"
A jedi somewher
We’re not going to prevent this from happening. I have no faith in humanity. This is the future that’s coming. Plan accordingly.
13:13 its mind blowing how few people know about Ocean Acidification causing a repeat of the Permian Mass Extinction pattern of destroying the phytoplankton that makes 70% of the oxygen we breathe!
how many know about glaciations mechanics? including Gobi desert, I bet not even you
So you believe in things you've never yourself verified because you feel it's right? Congratulations it's a religion
There are natural buffers that prevent extreme drops in PH.
The Coral Reefs are only growing.
Nonsense. Additional CO2 is absorbed by plankton just as excess CO2 is breathed in to make chlorophyl by land-bases plants.
I don't watch for the humor. I watch for the educational content. From what I can tell, the worst-case scenarios tend to be more accurate to date. And since no one wants to be seen as an alarmist, those predictions get rolled back to something more palatable. Politics in science communication. Keep it up, Sabine.
Exactly, the only thing we've learned is that we've practically exceeded every worse case scenario in the previous global warming models so far. I don't know why they'd decide to now die on the climate sensitivity hill for why global warming couldn't be happening even faster still.
I feel like a nutcase when I talk about it to friends. Don't want to sound like an alarmist, but we kinda...need to do something about this.
Don't smoke please. You are contributing for the worst-case scenario.
@Hei, I have read comments by scientists to the effect that they sometimes downplay the risk so as not to be seen as lunatic alarmists and also in fear that people will decide it´s hopeless and give up all efforts. In my opinion things are going to get very bad, that is inevitable at this stage, but we can still prevent them from getting truly horrible.
Been seeing alarmists for over 30 years man. Those paper straws are truly saving us all
@robfut9954 - 2024-01-27
They aren’t disliking it because the topic. They’re doing it because politics have made climate change red team versus blue team and sides have been chosen. And the extreme ends are where the two teams live on every topic.
@jimmyquigley7561 - 2024-01-27
Mostly in the USA where a large part of the people seem to have gone mad or stupid.
@OlmanWillo - 2024-01-27
@@jimmyquigley7561I wouldn't say most. But the politics of my country have gone completely mad. You can't even speak solutions without it being called devisive
@natevanderw - 2024-01-27
Also Sabine politics and views and climate change have been trash in the past years
@impishboss - 2024-01-27
I’m more so surprised that those types of people watch this video in the first place
@johannuys7914 - 2024-01-27
@@OlmanWillo You are definitely not unique, that's for sure. But you are very visible regarding partisan politics. Quite bizarre.