Oct 6, 2022
As individuals, and as a society, our track record on assessing risk and responding to reduce risk appropriately is dismal.
There are numerous examples of this inadequacy, but one of the worst is our lack of understanding the grave risks from abrupt climate system change in time to enact plans to mitigate and save our societies and ourselves, and the plants and animals that we occupy this planet with.
Risk is generally determined by multiplying the probability or likelihood of something happening with the impact or consequences to us if that something actually happens.
Our risk assessment is horribly bad when the probability is very low and the impacts are very huge, so the product (risk) is significant, but mathematically the variance or uncertainty is extremely high. When the impacts are very severe and negative, we tend to ignore them and convince ourselves that they will never happen. This is a very dangerous path to proceed on, and eventually it comes along “unexpectedly” and caused us severe difficulties.
What could be more devastating than a loss of civilized society with massive mortality and morbidity in a small number of countries cascading into a loss of ordered society in more and more countries until it eventually cascades into all global societies?
Any scientific study that tries to better understand how we as individuals or the collective we (society) think about risks as we live through our life cycles is useful to help us get a better handle on how we can address risks logically and smartly rather than ignore them by sticking our heads into the sand.
Please donate at here, et to support my research and videos.
To support my preparation, travel, and attendance at the global climate conference COP27 please consider reading more details here. If you wish to specifically support my upcoming trip to the UNFCCC COP27 climate conference to present at daily news conferences, here is my GoFund Me page: Help Paul Go to COP27 – UN Climate Conference.
OOPS. Global Dimming is Worse than we thought // Oct 8, 2022
I am exchanging corny physics jokes with a good friend of mine. My last contribution was:
Q: I didn’t realize that Einstein was a real person.
A: I always thought that he was a theoretical physicist.
His last contributions were:
Q: Why does a burger have less energy than a steak?
A: Because it’s in its ground state.
Q: What’s the most terrifying word in nuclear physics?
Thus, I just had to use the word Oops to lead off my title to this video!!
I chat about a brand spanking new peer reviewed paper that determines the aerosol-cloud radiative effect (global dimming) is much larger than we thought; in fact over 40% worse.
If this finding pans out (remember, this is only one paper, and needs to be confirmed with many studies) then it means:
Climate models are too conservative
Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) is more sensitive than we thought
Warming will accelerate much more as we reduce aerosols from emissions
on the positive side, MCB (Marine Cloud Brightening) will be far more effective than we thought.
Please consider donating to support my work. I put a lot of time and effort into researching, studying and producing my videos so that you can learn how quickly our world is changing. Donating does not need a PayPal account, but simply a credit card. Please click here.