Posted on 04/09/2020 9:53:24 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Paris (AFP) - Global warming will cause "catastrophic" biodiversity loss across the world if greenhouse gas emissions aren't curbed, with some ecosystems liable to collapse as soon as 2030, according to new research into where and when die-offs may occur.
Earth has never in human history warmed so quickly or uniformly as currently, but a variety of factors affect temperatures in individual regions, with significant seasonal and geographic variation.
Scientists predict that at the current level of manmade carbon emissions, Earth is on course to heat up to four degrees Celsius by 2100.
Instead of looking at global trends, researchers in Britain, the United States and South Africa looked at more than 150 years of climate data and cross-referenced that with the spread of more than 30,000 species of birds, mammals, reptiles and fish.
They then divided the globe into 100 square kilometre (39 square mile) segments, and modelled the temperature trends and effects this would have on wildlife in a given area.
Alex Pigot, from University College London's Centre for Biodiversity and Environment, said that the models showed that animal populations were liable to collapse once they cross a temperature "horizon" -- being exposed to heat they're not evolved to handle.
The models change dramatically according to each emissions pathway.
For example, at 4C of warming 15 percent of all animals could see extreme heat that could cause "irreversible damage" to regional ecosystems.
But at 2C of warming -- the cap aimed for in the Paris climate agreement -- that figure dropped to two percent, according to the models.
(Excerpt) Read more at france24.com ...
and more farmland just below the arctic circle. A new world breadbasket
Here’s a clue. Cold? Move south. Hit move to the coast or north. Tried and true method used by humans for 10s of thousands of years.
This piece nothing more than ‘crystal ball reading’ masquerading as ‘news’...
4 degrees warmer on average would be very nice where I live. Longer growing season and less severe winters sound good to me. I think Dr. Singer (God rest his soul) pointed out that most climates have a natural temperature fluctuation of 10 degrees so their long-term projections of 100 years from now are not even 50% of the usual fluctuations!
Furthermore, the history of mankind shows we have flourished during periods of warm weather. We should all want it to be a few degrees warmer even assuming they are correct (and they are not)!
Where was this idiot during the 'peak oil' freak out? Or the 'dead polar bears' BS, or the 'killer bees' crap... or or or... who gives a damn what bored liberal 'elites' come up with to scare everyone?
They're always wrong. And we're sick of them.
Oh, please! Just more of the same B S warmed-over. What a crock!
These anti-science, “warmer” nitwits just can’t stop. I guess being dishonest is a way for them to keep stealing money from productive people.
I think I’ll go outside this afternoon and burn a few old tractor tires doused in kerosene...just for spite.
Exactly, humans are a tropical species and warmer is good.
Cold kills.
Yep, the ones who can cook and clean house....
Isn’t it just as likely that new species will come into existence as a result of climate change? Isn’t that exactly how Darwin’s theory of evolution is supposed to work?
Perhaps they are anti-science? ;)
Let’s be generous and say 100 million years of weather data from a modern Earth and from that man has been around 10,000 years, or 0.01 % of time. If a person only has 1/10,00th of a data set there is no accurate way to extrapolate anything.
They then divided the globe into 100 square kilometre (39 square mile) segments, and modelled the temperature trends and effects this would have on wildlife in a given area.
So a basic assumption of this model is that the wildlife would remain in the original habitat even if they decided that the temperature was too hot. Even birdbrains know enough to migrate!
Of course, the modelers are working from the assumption that TODAY is the ideal distribution of wildlife. This is eerily related to the assumption of climate models that the temperatures TODAY are those which are ideal.
Now you have started a severe agony of the evolutionists whose second religion is Gorebull Warming.:)
Check my tagline!
Those “scientists” are so full of $hit their eyes are brown!
How does global warming connect to species extinction? Clearly either somebody has no idea HOW global warming (or cooling) comes about, or furthermore, has no idea about the adaptability of virtually ALL species to what at most would be only a very small change in overall ambient temperature, either higher or lower.
Scare tactics. (Oh, the poor polar bears! They will have to swim for HUNDREDS of miles to find a place to crawl out of the water!) Now I ask, have you ever been one-on-one, face to face with a polar bear? They are a pretty formidable creature, and almost as ill-tempered as a grizzly bear, not soft and cuddly at all.
A definite sign the coronavirus is petering out is the return of climate fearmongering.
If these models they use to do their predictions were actually any good, they could be initialized to the conditions of 1920, and a 100-year “forecast” be run which would match the actual historical climate records of the last century.
If they could do this, they would have, and be shouting the results from the rooftops.
They haven’t, because they can’t, because their models are all crap.
Post double pic. Include Fauci
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.