And then there is this astonishing bit of "science"
Are these people looking at the same planet that we are?
"Virtually Certain"? Really Who is paying these people?
Words fail me.
How I read the article was that while keeping warming to a max of 1.5 is virtually certain to keep some ice it is also virtually certain that warming will be greater than 1.5.
So more about a missed opportunity than an opportunity still available. So expect a little boat to sail over the north pole in the next 5 years ?
I suppose that one could read it that way, if one was very
generous except that they are playing fast and lose with data. This is disturbing from people who claim to be mathematicians.
First, we are watching an impeding ice free summer at most 5 years out and we are "only" at ~ 1 deg. C. Add to that the 20 to 40 year delay in temperature rise due to ocean thermal mass.
Note that the claim that the 1.5 limit was not attainable was not part of their paper.
They are regarding 2012 as anomalous and widely deviant from the 1979-2000 average, when the record shows a steady, albeit noisy, progression downwards in a time series where virtually every year after 2000 was below the 1981-2010 average and much of it was more than 2 std dev. Further, they make no mention of the loss in volume.
Regardless of whether the 1.5 degree cap is attainable (it isn't), it is amazing that they state:
'summer ice cover is "virtually certain" to survive' ,
when readily available data strongly suggests that arctic summer sea ice is virtually certain to vanish within 5 years except for perhaps wind driven littoral piles in the CAA, and all at a temperature below what they specify.
I can't read the original paper (paywall) but there are several references to the same, so it doesn't seem to be misinterpreted.
The original posting website appears to be supported by the agricultural industry, but I don't see any obvious signs of denialism, so for now, I chalk it up to some very sloppy math and lazy assumptions. Having such bad science like this "out in the wild" is very disheartening. I also sense that something else is at play here, but it is not obvious.