Arctic sea ice retreat, increases in heavy rainfall and flooding, permafrost melt, loss of glaciers and snowpack with attendant changes in water supply, increased intensity of hurricanes, etc.
OMG
climate change that takes place due to increases in carbon dioxide concentration is largely irreversible for 1,000 years after emissions stop.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/01/28/0812721106.full.pdf+html
How’s Australia’s water supply doing? Last I heard it was “worse than we thought”.
What a monkey doodoo.:-)
What? No mention of extreme weather events? I had that line about extreme weather events pounded into me four years ago, as an after effect of the October surprise. In fact, today marks the 4th anniversary of the October surprise storm. Punch october surprise storm buffalo ny in on Google and check out all the images that come out. For once, Wikipedia even gets it pretty close. Around 5 pm on 12 October 2006, the rain/wet snow mix had changed over to wet snow and the grass started to turn white. Here in Lancaster, fifteen hours later, around 8 am on 13 October 2006, we had 24 inches of snow on the ground, as well as tons of tree limbs (most of the leaves were still on the trees). In the region, 400,000 residences were without power, some for as much as a week. Officially the snow melted by the 15th; however, we still had a foot of snow on the ground and it took a couple more days to complete the melt. Then there were all those tree limbs on the ground; they wrecked havoc on life in the area even through Halloween — some trick or treating plans were shelved because of all the tree refuse that remained. It may have been an extreme weather event, but spare me all that stupid talk about climate disruption or whatever this season’s fashionable phrase is in place.
Simply amazing that PNAS publishes papers with ABSOLUTELY NO observational data, only modeling results.
No justification for the “irreversible warming” claim, no discussion of alternative interpretations of CO2 residence time in the atmosphere. Well, jeez, no wonder the models all point to “inevitable chaos”.
Also missing (apparently) from all model runs: no biosphere, no precipitation (as a forcing on T), no ocean heat cycles, no solar influence, to name a few.
When you reduce the input variables to the one that you are twiddling, it’s pretty easy to project the result. Doesn’t make it science, tho. Not by a long shot.
Geologic evidence of much higher CO2 in the past begs the question: How did earth ever recover from such “irreversible” conditions?
Hello, Solomon??? Anybody home?
Obviously it took longer than 1,000 years, silly. As soon as the millenium passes the tipping point is reached and the lower atmospheric amplifications implodes all of the CO2 into harmless carbon and oxygen. So obvious, everyone knows that.
Wow, Kewl. But the hardest part is figuring out if I want to die from drought or flood. With both occuring at the same time, how to choose?
What am I saying? We all died a decade ago from starvation. Problem solved.