Wait. It’s Geldof and it’s “Sir Bob” (do they give these titles to anybody who applies nowadays? Because I want one). Judging by the way the man looks, I’d say the world ended for him ten years ago and he just hasn’t noticed yet.
Anyway, Science says we have 34 years left. Science couldn’t be reached for comment (rumor is He’s building a survival cabin in the Kazakhstan outback), but his representative Camilo Mora at the University of Hawaii volunteered to speak to us via the journal Nature in his paper “The projected timing of climate departure from recent variability.”
Mora and his colleagues say by 2047 climates will be “unprecedented”, a word that I swear I’ve heard a lot recently. Where? Never mind. What’s clear is that the “emergence of unprecedented climates could also induce responses in human societies.” Responses! Why, those could be anything. Anything bad, of course. Good things are impossible in changed climates.
AP picked up on this hot story (who doesn’t love bad, over-used puns?). AP avoided “unprecedented” but said we’ll experience “hotter environments the likes of which [we’ve] never seen before.”
Some unknown but credentialed person was asked about Mora’s paper and was ready with a response: “This paper is both innovative and sobering.” Sobering? Dude. If Mora is right the last thing we want to be is sober. If the temperatures keep soaring the way they’ve done over the past seventeen years, I’m going to start hanging out with Geldorf and at least go out with a withered smile on my face.
Well, maybe the temperatures haven’t been soaring, maybe they’ve been holding steady or even decreasing. But that’s a mere observation and observation can’t trump theory. How did Mora derive his result?
[He] and colleagues ran simulations from 39 different computer models and looked at hundreds of thousands of species, maps and data points to ask when places will have “an environment like we had never seen before.”
That many computer models simply cannot be wrong. Sure, one or two could be off. But 39? That would be unprecedented. I used to complain about the asinine use of statistics in papers like this—they have straight-line correlations and wee p-values!—but I’ve learned my lesson. There’s too many authors with opinions different than mine; therefore, they must be right, and I must be wrong.
I mean, anybody who can speak of Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) in equations as precise as “historical climate variability” = 1.2773â€‰lnâ€‰* “historical time bins”â€‰+â€‰2063.2 should be heeded. I mean, 2063.2—point 2! That kind of confidence can’t be ignored.
So we’re in for it. Women and minorities will be hardest hit. Corals and mangroves will be hardest hit, too. Turns out Mora’s a biodiversity fiend. Biodiversity is like regular diversity but about plants and animals nobody has heard of.
But Mora’s also a diversity-diversity maven. Turns out deadly climates will attack “low-income countries” first, which is “an obvious disparity”. Disparities are verboten where diversity is cherished. Solution? Enlarge governments so they can extract a “bigger commitment from developed countries”. Bet you didn’t see that coming.
Not every scientist agrees with Mora. Some think it’s worse than we thought. Like Michael “Hockey Puck” Mann, affectionately known to many as the “gentleman of climatology”. In the AP article he said Mora “may actually be presenting an overly rosy scenario”. Mann was last seen by the Lincoln tunnel with a squeegee and spray bottle of some brown substance trying to raise money for climate change “awareness.”
All those who are aware the climate has changed, raise their hands.
I am left with a grin and a tonic after reading this. Pity about the world ending so soon though.
If you ever find yourself feeling blue, ask a climatologist to tell you how accurate his models are. Always brings a smile.
Have you followed your own advice? That is, have you ever asked a climatologist to tell you how accurate his models are.
I now see the secret of your success, Briggs. Straight Men!
It’s too bad that you kicked out George III otherwise you’d be a Knight of the Garter by now. But then again we don’t have them in Canada either, I don’t know why. Now waiting for straight man response.
I will tell you what this means.
Blue Cheese and Bacon burgers every night since we are all going to burn up in a few years time anyway; screw the Cholesterol!
Wonder if Sir Bob will stop flying first class to slow the warming down in the mean time…
The climate is going to depart from variability! It’s going to shift beyond historical analogs! ??? I am familiar with an analog computer because I had a course on computer design, but I have no idea what a historical analog is when refering to climate. I am sure not going to pay to find out what he means.
The End of the World ended last year 2012. Don’t we remember? Lol xx
The irisg buffoon has 34 years of singing ‘I don’t like Mondays’. God save us.
As pointed out elsewhere there’s a pun available for Manoa. It may be apt if this is an example of what can be expected from the its U. of Hawaii branch however repeating it would leave a bad taste in my mouth. So I won’t.
Manure in Manoa out, or is it Manoa in Manure out?
Either way its a case of MIMO.
My hand is raised. Both in fact!
According to my calculations (and I double checked them on my pocket calculator because I am not a mathematical giant), in October of 2047 I will be 100 years old. Heck, I guess I can live with that. Cheers to ya!
Whoa, I am getting confused.
It used to be global warming;
then it became climate change;
then it became extreme climate;
now, it has become CLIMATE DEPARTURE!
Oh no, the Gods of Rhetoric (Al GoR) are coming for us! Run … hide!
“Bob Geldorf (and who the hell is he?)” Is this the same Bob Geldof who created the “Live Aid” charity concert at Wembley Stadium back in the ’80s and penned the hit songs “I Don’t Like Mondays” and “Don’t They Know It’s Christmas”? I don’t know if these credentials make him a viable scientist or prescient, but I thought I’d complete his bio to muddy the waters of this discussion a bit. ‘Fame’ (however irrelevant to the topic and/or nearing expiration) equals ‘informed source’ in our current culture, doesn’t it? So, we’d better join the other lemmings . . . Tom.
Oh my God! I had heard Don’t They Know It’s Christmas before. I had to look up I Don’t Like Mondays. “I’d like to shoooo—oo-oo-oo-ot the. Whole. Day. Down.”
I am now going to out to light a fire and add more carbon dioxide to the air to hasten our end so that not even accidentally will I hear these songs again.
Knighthoods have gone the way of Nobel Peace prizes, political, no discernible, consistent or credible criteria for their award.
Geldorf is Irish so not being British he may not actually use the title ‘Sir’, but anyway he is affectionately know in the UK as Sir Gob.
RE: “Science says we have 34 years left”
VERY INTERESTING, “34” years & not some other number. Consider:
In 1982 the musician “Prince” wrote “1999” — about partying like it was 1999 given the end of the world was 2000.
1999 – 1982 = 17 years ’til the end.
17 is also the cicada cycle!
Sir Bob G “coincidentally” [I thinks not] predicts doom 17 years hence, though, with “hence” commencing from ‘right now’ (the usual starting point, which is always selected with no regard to past predictions, as required).
Clearly 17 is a mystical number with profound properties.
Also, the more educated & observant …and politically astute… tend to hedge their bets by putting in a fudge factor. A factor of two is commonly used*:
17 * 2 = 34 years ’til the end.
And, viola, 34 years is when the next predicted climate Armageddon is predicted to strike!!
There’s more, should any of you doubt the profundity of this:
It’s been observed that most contemporary cell phone calendars end in 2047…that’s 34 years hence! 34 is the first integral factor (i.e. going from 1x’s to 2x’x) of 17!! What do cell phone developers know that the Mayans didn’t?!?!?!?!!!
(RE Cell Phone calendars see: http://www.chacha.com/question/why-do-people-think-the-world-will-end-in-2047 OR
See? THIS IS HOW PREDICTIONS ARE PROPERLY MADE. No need for statistics at all. And, insofar as the particular climate Armageddon predictions go, I’d wager the above technique is, statistically, just as “good” as any other popular contemporary prognostication.
* While two is common, so is three and other factors apply to different disciplines; for example, starship repair estimates are best made with a factor of four, even though no safety factor is necessarily required, as this exchange illustrates:
Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge: Look, Mr. Scott, I’d love to explain everything to you, but the Captain wants this spectrographic analysis done by 1300 hours.
[La Forge goes back to work; Scotty follows slowly]
Scotty: Do you mind a little advice? Starfleet captains are like children. They want everything right now and they want it their way. But the secret is to give them only what they need, not what they want.
Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge: Yeah, well, I told the Captain I’d have this analysis done in an hour.
Scotty: How long will it really take?
Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge: An hour!
Scotty: Oh, you didn’t tell him how long it would “really” take, did ya?
Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge: Well, of course I did.
Scotty: Oh, laddie. You’ve got a lot to learn if you want people to think of you as a miracle worker.
CONCLUSION/PREDICTION [about predictions]: Somewhere along the way, probably both before & after 2047, gloom & doom predictions will incorporate the number “17” or its integral multiples for future dates for Armageddon or similar.
OMG – the Significance:
On Dr. Roy Spencer’s climate blog (http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/10/the-danger-of-hanging-your-hat-on-no-future-warming/ ) he depicts two Time magazine headlines:
1. How to Survive the Coming Ice Age (from 1977)
2. Be Worried; Be Very Worried (showing a polar bear on an almost ice cube) (from 2006)
2006 – 1977 = 29
29/17 = 1.70…etc.
Amazing–there’s the “17” figure popping up again (though with a period in the middle).