Comment by BurningFrog
7 months ago
Well, look at this section:
> Climate tipping points — the "points of no return" past which key components of Earth's climate will begin to irreversibly break down — could be triggered by much lower temperatures than scientists previously thought, with some tipping points potentially already reached. There are also many more potential tipping points than scientists previously identified, according to a new study.
I count to 3 maybes only there:
1. tipping points "could be triggered by much lower temperatures" 2. "some tipping points potentially already reached" 3. "according to a new study"
Number 1 and 2 says that this may possibly happen, not that it will!
Number 3 is the worst. Many - probably most - new studies with unexpected results turn out to be wrong, as the Replication Crisis has painfully taught us. They also get the most press, because "new study confirms what we thought" stories don't go viral.
> it's the ones that do all they can to downplay the consequences who make the money
That's absolutely not true in science or publishing. The most sensational results get the most attention and grants and ad dollars.
[flagged]
[flagged]
I'm not agreeing nor disagreeing with the original text - but it contains NO maybes.
BurningFrog hasn't correctly read it and is arguing against a strawmanned version of it (it may be incorrect for other reasons).
The original: https://www.space.com/climate-tipping-points-closer-than-rea...
states (correctly or not):
In English as a first language that's an assertion that
* Climate tipping points [...] could be triggered by much lower temperatures than scientists previously thought
implying that they are real and will hapen at some threshold but there is now evidence or a model that suggets the thresholds may be lower than once thought.
The incorrect interpretation by BurningFrog above was that
> that this [ Climate tipping points ] may possibly happen, not that it will!
whereas the text (again, correct or not) was definite that Climate tipping points are real and will happen when thresholds are crossed.
The only "maybe" was a suspicion that these thresholds could be even lower than thought and a Rubicon may have been crossed already - but there was zero uncertainity expressed wrt existence and potential to be crossed.
3 replies →