How Sure Are Climate Scientists, Really?

One major challenge to understanding what is true and not true regarding climate change is that both sides of the argument can and I believe are used as a tool to bend people to the will of those who would use that power for an agenda. The question isn’t whither climate is changing, it is whether what comes with it will be a world where a new equilibrium can be found between human civilization and our planet earth itself. What can we put back together, restore, live without, hold on to and stride on to our future? We as a species are still very far away from being able to live as one human race capable of making decisions globally.

They're all sure we're fucked and why. What they're not sure about is how quickly it will happen, but most now think much more quickly than they did before.

July 2022 was way warmer than July 2024 where I live yet the CO2 has increased by over 70 Billion Metric Tons.

Climate change is a scam.

Oops warming led co2 rise. Second opps plants need co2. And we need plants.

"Our future is uncertain." True. Well, we have about a century to move to higher land, help those at sea level in Oceania, make more electric cars, etc, blah blah blah. Or...we can keep whining about it. Why not have city planners just start projects inland at higher elevations? Why WAIT till sea levels rise? Why can't we just be proactive? Why debate whether or not it's human caused? Let's just make normal changes going forward. Cuz I tell you what, we're about to release A BUNCH of carbon into the air during World War 3. lol

For many, I think it's considered unfair to pass legislation that ruins their CURRENT livelihoods to just say, yeah we gotta kill all your cows cuz of temperatures in 80 years. Sorry, mate. Or telling people they have to pay extra money because they don't have enough grass in their yard. Carbon Tax credit stuff is political hogwash. Come up with a better way. Stop trying to charge people for carbon bs.

For years we were recycling, then with all the plastic one-time-use waste from medical stuff during covid, we just made things worse. In the States I get a worthless paper straw from Starbucks that falls apart in a few minutes because plastic is evil. But all over Asia - where I've been traveling for a few months - they don't have to bother with all that silliness. It just feels like virtue signaling in the west. It's just making someone rich - whoever makes horrible paper straws for example in the US is making a mint. lol

Whether people believe the 'consensus', or not. Gradual changes won't hurt as many people, while drastic policy shifts that only serve to enrich politicians, hurt many many more.

It is obvious that the climate is warming. The fossil fuel industries are accumulating vast wealth at our world’s expense. We need to find a new source of energy, like splitting water. Water has nearly wise weight/weight as gasoline. Water is the perfect fuel as the combustion reaction creates water.

Let's agree on one thing: Just the amount of data models claiming to be correct should make you suspicious. From there and onwards there is only presentation, lobbying, and activism that collectively makes the winning arguement. You cannot avoid it as there are too many lucrative government funded opportunities in going green/clean.

One thing all scientists can agree on: the animations and soundtrack in this video are gorgeous.

We’re all doomed, DOOOOOMED!!!!!!

Meteorologists can't predict the weather accurately for tomorrow much less next year or the next 1000 years. Plants use carbon dioxide as food and expel oxygen. global warming/Climate change was made up by al gore to try and keep him relevant, which he isn't. There is a structure 10,000 years old 69 feet under water in the Baltic. Politicians cant fix a problem, no matter how much money we give them. If you want a problem that we as a species can fix (and ironically caused), worry about the piles of trash floating around in the worlds oceans.

Most beautiful climate change video I have ever seen

Warmer is way better than colder. I'm praying they don't do something crazy that plunges us into a new ice age which would kill billions

I agree with a lot of the video but there's a some problems that aren't presented. 1) political and economical interest to reopen the science debate 2) science like everything is becoming more expensive and specialized. So telling people just do science can be really naive

100% would be the wager

AWC AY25. Sem 3!!

Your temperature diagram ignored the Bronze Age II warm period, the Iron Age cold period, the Ancient/Classical Era warm age, the early Medieval cold period, the Medieval Optimim (aka Medieval Warm Period) that featured dairy and dry land farming in Greenland, the Little Ice Age, and the current warm period as we have emerged from the LIA.

Instead, you showed a nearly flat line, which is a blatant lie. No, you aren't lying. Your trusted sources are liars.

Computer climate models are allegedly tested by taking early modern data and using the model to reproduce late modern data. But most of the models used by IPCC made projections for the thirty years following 1992. How well did those predictions match the real world of the last 30 years?

They failed miserably. They predicted sea temperature rises that didn't happen. The predicted sea level rise acceleration that didn't happen. They predicted sea ice and glacier retreats that didn't happen. They predicted major storm count increases that didn't happen.

I'm not the one denying long term, irregular climate swings known from history. I'm not the one denying the inaccuracy of predictions from supposedly reliable models.

There is also an observable fluctuation called the North Atlantic Oscillation that exerts temperature influences over a 60-80 year cycle. Warming from the 1890s thru the 1930s was followed by cooling from the 1940s thru the 1970s. Now we have some warming from the 1980s thru the present.

Using the pattern of the NAO, we are more likely to see modest cooling rather than warming in coming decades.

Agreed. What was once “News” is now thousands of channels, in a deregulated world where vast monopolies represent two sides of an ideological culture war. Liberal media pushes awareness into fear. They often present climate studies as flashy headlines but rarely provide the caveats or limitations.

This makes conservative folks angry and suspicious. In Turn, they drill deep for any studies that challenge the data,not so as additional evidence, but as proof of a liberal conspiracy to destroy the American way of life

Uncertainty plus media overdosing has combined yet again to hold Americans in bewilderment.

And with stakes up, I’m sure universities don’t coddle and protect these cheaters who are destroying one of the last credible institutions in our country

Convoluted explanation of Nothing ... Truth be told. C02 levels don't have geometric effect.
ALL you can do is wait and Watch :-)

Nicely done, and positive as much as possible. Climate science domain is much of a political playground than science unfortunately. It is not as bad as being labeled a transphobic with a slightest criticization of trans movements for instance but I believe it is bad as it can be in a scientific domain in terms of severity. The uncertainty is the thing here as you suggest, and whatever the future offers us, fatalism especially in form of doom saying will get in the way of critical thinking which is happening for quite some time.

Love this video so much.
Where is the follow up video on scrutinizing efforts to solve climate change? Did you end up releasing that elsewhere? Would be very curious to see that!

Bottom line is these scientists wannabe God are just bunch of good for nothing mothers. Uckers.😅😅😅😅

I would buy into global warming if they so called scientists haven't been caught doctoring the data multiple times. There isn't a CONSENSUS, there is a majority (maybe) but NOT a consensus. Anyone who disagrees are socially and economically punished for their views (scientists). This in my opinion is anti-science. If you would let the scientists debate the issue, you may actually gain more support. So, until then, you are going to have to keep pumping out propaganda like this and hope to convince people that think you folks are exaggerating the issue.

It's not sciense the one givin confusing information, is the lack of capability os Communicators to understand and democraticise information. Journalist are getting TOO STUPID to translate complicated Scientific information into News and Press. That, and a lot of Economic Lobby Interested in affecting the Objetivity of Mass Media. This video is too forced to dismantle Global Warming, that do not analice both POSSIBILITIES, there is a notorius BIAS. But well it's a 3 years old Vídeo!!! Hope the burning while flooding Greece has make you reflex.

Plants + CO2 = More plants = less CO2

😂😂😂😂 lies.
Ozone layer and CFC. We got rid of them. Apparently ozone layer is fixed, but we still heating up.

😂😂😂😂 Stop blaming humans and pushing for green energy that cost less resources to run.
Keep fossil fuels 🙏🙏🙏

Wow. Just push ideas and false graphs onto people. Then tell it's 'hard' science. Ohh geez boi

Do the artificial satellites and metal junks found in satellites orbit that grow more and more contributed more heat to Earth's atmosphere?

Equitorial and polar inhabitants have different aims on governing territories . Polar inhabitants find ways to thermalize Thier regions for more mobilities that affected equitorial regions

This video is great, but goes completely off course with the last part when rises in sea level are shown for different coastal, urban centers.
Yes, the sea level is eventually going to rise due to the melting of the ice sheets, but it happens so slowly that we will be able to adapt to it over time.

maybe where ´göng tv häl... but ´they liV€ anywäyce vFV

peak

Extremely well done video

Some things that should make everyone feel better:
-CO2 affects temperature on a logarithmic scale.
-Plant life begins to die at 150ppm of atmospheric CO2.
-This video only went back 20,000 years.
-CO2 is plant food, not a pollutant.

Plot earth’s obliquely and eccentricity going back a million years each time the peaks coincided we had glaciation. These factors control the majority of earth’s temperature swings.
Plot co2 and temperature going back 400000 years. The temperature changes we see now are too small to see and co2 becomes decoupled from temperature. Correlation is not causation.
Temperature causes co2 rise not the other way around. With an increase in temperature decomposition increases, fires increase and the oceans can hold less CO2.

I feel like maybe we need an inquisition. These guys remind me of economics, a pseudoscience. The best of them know how to model a detail of the climate well.
But the people who are going about the global models: It should be clear that they are duping policy makers claiming their global models are of any use, when they do NOT include ice sheet dynamics, just as the most glaring example.
It's outright insanity to drop something complicated but essential, and focus on the simpler stuff because they can get that accurately.

Fear mongering with margin of error as evidence.. just stop or become educated on geological timescales

Since this video was created, we exceeded 1.5°C
and not a single action took from the leaders for
Climate Change.

And the worst is we know that Climate Change
is accelerating. Probably because Oceans could
not any more to take (to sink) the same amount
of CO2 than the previous years, they are saturated.

So, looks like the 2°C will be here around 2038.
Buckle up, stock up on plenty of toilet paper,
let's go for a total collapse of civilization...

Seeing that temperature line on the graph go shooting up in the 20th century makes me wonder why in the 60's. 70s, 80, scientists were predicting another ice age? Shame you didn't explain this...

Thank you so much for this video! I’ve used it as a home schooling resource! I’m immensely grateful!

The carbon atom in gas is black. Does black absorbs heat?

They never take into consideration about world population increase and the same thing goes for animals. Each person gives off 98 degrees of heat. If you put lots of people in a closed room the temp will rise to that of a person. With today's world population ever increasing, so will yje tempreture if the temperature of the earth . That's the real reason for climate chabge.

Come back sir!

Hey, what's going on with the Miami sea level rise map? Having lived in Miami Beach for a long time, I can tell you confidently that 9 meters of water would inundate every inch of the barrier islands.

Consider 2 recent expert consensus controversies that have been largely debunked: the saturated fat hypothesis and the COVID response. The "experts" lined up on one side and tried to suppress the other. The COVID "experts" ruthlessly suppressed (cancelled) dissenting views. Indeed, disturbing evidence of vaccine damage is still suppressed, in some cases by loss of livelihood if it is exposed. I saw echoes of the vicious manner in which climate alarmists attacked dissenting voices and drove them out of the debate. They now control the narrative, the assumptions, the research dollars, and refuse to consider alternative assumptions and approaches to understanding climate dynamics. Are they right? We cannot know since alternative hypothesis and research funds are not permitted. The "science" is "settled".

There's a well know effect called heat islands that describes how cities create local temperature increases. This seems to get regularly ignored when sampling temperature data for stats like you gave at the end of your temperature graph. Ive seen attempts to do this in an individual country, ie in Australia, he removed all temperature sensors within a certain range of large cities and found a near flat temperature change over ~40 years of available data (iirc 90% of the sensors were in cities in Australia which is well over 90% empty, playing into the heat island effective). Now I'm well aware this is just one country but when you compare that near flat temperature to the 1.44'C reported by the government since 1910 (larger period of time im aware). My point is in reported data the heat Island effect seems to regularly be deliberately ignored in global warming estimates. Most temperature sensors are near people and though these heat islands are geographicly small disproportionate numbers of reading fall within these heat islands with little attempts to compensate as saying its actually 0.1 not 1.44 would put a massive damper on the project

Critical thinking is losing the war to media hype