it has been determined using experiments on models that natural internal variability can cause short-term temperature trends lasting at most 16 years.
Nope. An accurate estimate can’t be done over short timescales, partly because (if my understanding…
David Piepgrass

Fun fact, natural internal variability happens on every time scale :)

One of the ways you can check yourself visually, is to do a graph like this:,1,4,48,92%5D

Literally, you create a plot of every single possible combination of start dates and end dates, and you can discern patterns, exceptions to patterns, and lack of patterns pretty clearly. For fun, go to that link and look at “trend+significance” to see some interesting “gray areas”.

I say “assumed” since solar output and volcanic activity are not predictable

Let’s add a few other things that aren’t predictable:

  1. earthquakes
  2. PDO/AMO
  3. hurricanes
  4. tornadoes
  5. droughts
  6. floods
  7. economies
  8. technology
  9. biology

Now, if someone is trying to tell me that on a regular basis, on every timescale imaginable, their predictions may be offset by natural causes, why should I predicate my life on their predictions?

solar energy dropped in price faster than anyone expected, and it’s now cheaper than coal in equatorial climates.

I’m going to call shennanigans, but I’m happy to be shown I’m wrong. Most estimates of LCOE (levelized cost of energy) on solar energy I’ve seen show unsubsidized levels that are much less favorable. Add in subsidies, and make wild guesses about CO2 emissions pricing, and you can make the numbers dance, but I’ve yet to see anything there that would make me very optimistic.

And then, even if I did get optimistic, we get to the intermittent and unreliable nature of solar energy, and the high cost both in rare metals and other toxics for battery technology that still needs a long way to go.

I think another 25% increase will happen in a shorter, not longer time, since emissions have been rising exponentially

I would have thought so too, except for the fact that natural sinks have unexpectedly increased their rate of CO2 abosorption.

I’ll take a closer look at the other article, and see if there’s anything particular there that might be worth diving deeper into — I think the most fertile ground at this point is going to be around the falsifiability question. Honestly, most of the in the weeds stuff can go one way or another, and that’s typical of any field that has a history of such varied predictions that at any point in time, you can find something where the other person was wrong or right about something.

The only escape to that for me has been the scientific method — and to your great credit, you’ve been engaging that issue directly, which I thank you for.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Jere Krischel’s story.