With evidence mounting on the failure to limit global warming to 1.5C, do you think global carbon emissions will be low enough by 2050 to at least avoid the most catastrophic climate change doomsday scenarios forecast by the turn of the century?
I am somewhat hopeful most developed countries will get there but I wonder if developing countries will have the ability and inclination to buy into it as well.
Yes, that’s what I meant.
About Venus, it’s interesting to remember that not long ago, before the Oxygen Catastrophe some 3 Gigayears before Greta (BG), the atmosphere was basically Nitrogen and CO2 - and there was life. Their habitats were devastated and almost all existing life went mass extinct because those climate change deniers cyanobacteria went on with their irresponsible use of Earth resources, and filled the atmosphere with toxic, reactive O2. But life went on.
I believe we’d be down to a sustainable level of polluting population way before reaching pre-Oxygen Catastrophe levels of CO2 - and we were no Venus even then.
But back in those good ol’days the Sun apparently had only 70% of today’s shininess, so maybe I’m wrong.
In any case, we as a whole are as clueless and reckless as those pesky cyanobacteria. We’re just another catastrophic natural disaster in Earth’s history.
But if we start spiraling down to Venus warm, we can quickly fill the skies with Sun blocking soot. No, wait, that’s what that other AI did. hmmm…
(to be clear: I’m no climate change denier, I just think we’re too stupid and attached to our way of living to change, until we’re at the edge of the abyss. And “we” includes me: I don’t do EVERYTHING possible to reduce my footprint, but it’s calculated at 1.8, whereas the world average is 4.7, so yeah, I’ll still have beef. If the rest of the world proved itself worthy and was around 2.0, I’d do more. I’m past school days when I did all the group work alone and the lazy ones got good grades for doing nothing)