Well the ice melt in Greenland has to increase by orders of magnitude if its going to be a severe problem for the world in the century.
That depends on if 0.5m of sea level rise is a severe problem or not. The problem with many of the bashers is that they think scientists are claiming that "all" of Greenland is going to melt "soon" and sea levels will rise 7m. Not true. That was the implication your Cato chap was giving with all his chatter about "alarmism". Why didn't he bother to quote the sea level rise IPCC 2007 projects? Perhaps because it would ruin his story? Or perhaps because he thinks it might be a reasonable estimate, and he himself does not want to be viewed as "believing" AGP given is ideological affiliations?
So, if I may try this again, how much do you think sea levels will rise by 2100? Oh, I forgot, you will just say "I don't know and neither do you". Sorry, I agree with the IPCC, not with the Ostrich community.
well we understand demographics a lot better than we understand weather and climate.
You are conflating something here. We clearly understand current demographics much better than climate. We can't per se KNOW future demographics any better than future climate. 100% of everything we say about the future is based on modeling current understanding, and simulating that forward. Which is why I jumped on you for implying that somehow climate scientists did this horrible thing, and by omission you imply that other fields don't. BS.
Social Security spending is already very large
Uh? What does "large" have to do with anything? A lot of ice melts out of Greenland as well. I could call that "large". Surely you understand that the issue with SS is income vs. expense, just like in Greenland it is accumulation vs. depletion. SS is currently not a "large" problem because it is nearly in balance just like the current melt rate in Greenland is not a "large" problem because it is currently nearly in balance. The projections for both in the future (which yes, are both based on the best models and simulations their respective fields can muster, or in some case the "best" models which interested & ideological money can purchase ala the think tank model of "science") are the important questions. I will surely agree that SS is a quicker problem, unless things go worse than the IPCC projects, or better than SS worrywarts fear, either of which could happen. |
