Maggie's Farm

That's funny. Regarding the very first chart they show, they say, "When it comes to precipitation, it hasn’t caused anything", but the chart shows an increase over time.

Climate science doesn't predict a dramatic rise in global precipitation, because precipitation is constrained by Earth’s energy balance. There will be some increase as shown in the chart. What climate science does predict is changes in regional distribution of precipitation, as well as (general) increases of precipitation in wet areas or seasons and decreases of precipitation in dry areas or seasons.

OneGuy: We had a Little Ice Age. It was a natural, cyclical event that ended about 1850.

The cyclical nature of global mean temperatures over that last 800,000 years or so is largely due to Milankovitch cycles. Milankovitch cycles cause changes in the incoming solar radiation in mid-to-high latitudes. This is amplified by natural feedbacks, primarily atmospheric water vapor and albedo. (Other influences include changes in solar activity and volcanism.)

OneGuy: We had a Little Ice Age. It was a natural, cyclical event that ended about 1850.

Saying the Little Ice Age ended is not a mechanism. The primary mechanism was the Milankovitch cycles, which cause changes in the incoming solar radiation in mid-to-high latitudes.

OneGuy: Surprisingly not a lot

Historically, it only takes a few degrees change to have a large impact on climate.

OneGuy: and in fact not enough yet to bring us back too the "normal" temp.

Normal is relative. What matters to humans is stability. Human civilization developed over a period of relative climate stability. The current rate of rapid global warming is anomalous for human civilization.

Ulithi: Before we claim something to be "anomalous" don't we first need to define or determine what is standard?

Anomalous refers to the rate and magnitude of change in the Earth's global mean temperature since the development of human civilization. See Osman et al., Globally resolved surface temperatures since the Last Glacial Maximum, Nature 2021: “When compared with recent temperature changes, our reanalysis indicates that both the rate and magnitude of modern warming are unusual relative to the changes of the past 24 thousand years.”

Uthili: What is then the standard/optimal rate of global warming/cooling for a beneficial effect on human civilization ?

Humans do best in relative stability. Some climate change is natural, but the current warming is anomalous in rate and degree. Humans are highly-populated and dependent on areas that will be subject to rapid climate change. So, someone might says, “Well, move then.” But consider the social strains already entailed with current levels of migration.

Humans can and will adapt. However, the sooner humans address the problem, the lower the economic disruption and the less damage to humanity’s natural inheritance. Also, keep in mind that the reason humans are so capable of adaptation, is that they can project and avoid the worst consequences, including the threat from anthropogenic global warming.

Ulithi: Unusual is not a synonym for catastrophic.

The difference in Earth's mean surface temperature between a glacial period and an inter-glacial period is about 6°C, so a difference of 3°C would be significant, especially considering the artificial rapidity of warming, and that Earth is already in an interglacial period.

Ulithi: One might possibly take Osman et al with less than a pound of salt if climatology could be somewhat more like the hard sciences instead of a cult's relative.

Handwaving is not an effective scientific argument.

Z: Humans can and will adapt.

Ulithi: and yet human civ. seems to have marched onward if not always upward.

Then we are in agreement. That doesn't address "However, the sooner humans address the problem..."

Uthili: Until there emerges greater consensus and viable data re "the problem"

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS): “there is now a high degree of agreement among climate scientists that human-caused climate change is real.”

National Academies of Science of Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States: “It is unequivocal that the climate is changing, and it is very likely that this is predominantly caused by the increasing human interference with the atmosphere.”

NASA: “There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.”

Uthili: it might be wise to hold off enthusiasm for addressing the "problem" via solar geoengineering, stratospheric aerosol injection of sulfur dioxide, space sunshades, etc. .

None of that is our position. Energy infrastructure has to be replaced 2-3 times per century, so replacing older infrastructure as it ages out with new technology will keep costs reasonable, and will allow economies to continue to grow and innovate during the transition. Economic growth is essential for the transition, as well as for allowing more of the world’s peoples to enjoy the fruits of modernity.