Date: December 31, 2020
In science a precise and transparent language is paramount. Climatology is far from it. Many of the used terms in climatology are extremely superficial, if not meaningless, which is a major reason for the hysteria in the current climate change debate. And science is using them recklessly.
The result is obvious, when the claim is made: The world may already have crossed a series of climate tipping points, which mean an ‘existential threat to civilization’.(The Guardian, Nov.2019). Many climate scientists have warned that CO2 has pushed Earth dangerously close to a no-return threshold, beyond which lies an unlivable hothouse world. (See: Phy.Org Nov 2019). This belongs in the department: Scare monger machine.
The term ‘tipping point’ has its origin in physics and chemistry, meaning: that if an object becomes unbalanced, even a slight force can cause it to topple. Note that this explanation refers to “one object”.
Currently, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Chang (IPCC) says:
___ IPCC, Glossary – 4/06/2018.Tipping point: A level of change in system properties beyond which a system reorganizes, often abruptly, and does not return to the initial state even if the drivers of the change are abated. For the climate system, it refers to a critical threshold when global or regional climate changes from one stable state to another stable state.
___Wikipedia cites the IPCC in this way: The IPCC AR5 defines a tipping point as an irreversible change in the climate system.
The problem starts with referring to “a climate system”. The IPCC (2018) defines it as a“highly complex system consisting of five major components: the atmosphere, the hydrosphere, the cryosphere, the lithosphere and the biosphere and the interactions between them”, which has two principal flows:
It actually means nothing else as the interaction of nature, which explains nothing. All that this boils down to is ‘the interactions of the natural system’. What is the point of a term if it explains nothing? (See Letter to Nature, 1992)
Worst is the use of the word ‘climate’, which according IPCC is the statistic of average weather over a period of time ranging from months to thousands or millions of years, culminating in the fact that IPCC does not explains in the Glossary, what it regards as ‘weather’. (Discussion HERE)
The corresponding Glossary of the American Meteorological Society (AMS) is neither very helpful, merely saying that: The “present weather” table consists of 100 possible conditions, (More HERE ), thereby paving the way to a meaning that cannot be verified. There is no ‘object’, like in physics, which can become unbalanced, as mentioned above. But scientists speak about it, as if they understand the complexity of the unexplained.