c'est fascinant de ne pas demander des comptes à ceux qui défendent la démocratie ? 😳

en fait non, il n'y a pas de délit d'antisémitisme. C'est juste une circonstance aggravante d'autres délits constitués comme l'incitation à la haine raciale. Si on est un peu malin, on peut etre antisémite sans se faire poursuivre devant les tribunaux.

so why is the global ACE not increasing, and actually rather decreasing since the 90's ?

climatlas.com/tropical/

It's certainly frightening to be living in the same temperature as people who lived 100 miles further south 50 years ago.

"billions of people will die" seems to me a rather secure prediction since everybody will eventually die.

you must choose : do you prefer to save mankind or polar bears ? 🤗

vu que le mot doit signifier "passage" et ne ressemble à rien de connu, j'aurais aussi parié sur Budapest sans vérifier 😂

j'abuse parfois un peu du second degré c'est vrai 🤗

fais des copies d'écran, il m'a bloqué 🤗

Bah oui un petit déluge Al Aqsa pour fêter l’anniversaire du Bataclan, ça leur ferait les pieds à tous ces kouffars ! 👍

Sorry but I don’t particularly believe in loose assertions from public media or non scientific institutions. I’m a scientist and i need scientific arguments. IPCC is doing a good job but please show me where these estimates are justified in their reports.

Ok fine but if it’s really good science, then you should able to indicate me a chapter of IPCC report where the right damage function is described instead of an AFP PR .

and do you claim that "warnings by NGFS" are scientifically much more solid than decades of work of a Nobel Prize ?

that would be a surprising position in my opinion.

ahem.. would you describe the black curve as a "lower economic growth" ? it rather looks like "collapse of civilization" for me !

could you please be more specific on what happened since 2021, that drastically changed the estimate of the costs of climate change ? I confess not being aware of really new facts.

BTW, do you have factual arguments to call it a "consensus" and not the position of a part of the community (may be a minority) ?

I think the term of "consensus" should be itself validated by a scientific procedure, as every claim is not a "consensus".

I agree that it's what matters. But if this is an "emerging consensus" (although Nordhaus got the Nobel Prize only 7 years ago ??) , it should be present in IPCC report shouldn't it ? or does IPCC fail to represent the scientific consensus ?