> The issue is that a couple of degrees is likely to be reached this mid-century
A couple of degrees from the "pre-industrial" baseline, which is as of something like 1750, not now. From now to mid-century is only a couple of tenths of a degree. In other words, we have already adapted to most of the "couple of degrees" of change.
> things might continue to get worse from there.
"Continue to get worse" implies that things are already getting worse and have been over the past few centuries while the "couple of degrees" of temperature rise was taking place. That's not the case.
> the article explores the less likely scenarios
Which all fail to take human adaptation into account. That has always been the problem with alarmist predictions like this.
Comments
> The issue is that a couple of degrees is likely to be reached this mid-century
A couple of degrees from the "pre-industrial" baseline, which is as of something like 1750, not now. From now to mid-century is only a couple of tenths of a degree. In other words, we have already adapted to most of the "couple of degrees" of change.
> things might continue to get worse from there.
"Continue to get worse" implies that things are already getting worse and have been over the past few centuries while the "couple of degrees" of temperature rise was taking place. That's not the case.
> the article explores the less likely scenarios
Which all fail to take human adaptation into account. That has always been the problem with alarmist predictions like this.