We only have 12 years before temperatures will rise to an unlivable temperature.

Question

Urgent changes needed to cut risk of extreme heat, drought, floods and poverty, says IPCC.

Answer 1

This claim is misleading, but built upon true and confirmed data. I researched this claim and went to The Guardian article where it originated to find more about the severity and truthfulness of this claim, as well as a Washington Post article to back up my research. In The Guardian Post I found extensive amounts of evidence arguing that we need to stop our temperature from exceeding 2c. This argument was led by scientist discs and listed numerous direct consequences if we cannot control our production, including “Extreme heat waves will be experienced by 14% of the world's population at least once every five years at 1.5C. But that figure rises to more than a third of the planet if temperatures rise to 2C.” While this is incredibly dangerous, it does not support the claim that the world will be an unlivable temperature. In the Washington Post article, I searched to see if they had any input on “unlivable temperatures” but only found “Risks of extreme heat and weather events just rise and rise as temperatures do, meaning these would be worse worldwide the more it warms.” From reading these articles it is clear how detrimental it would be if we exceed 2 degrees celsius, however they prove the claim to be misleading as neither of these trusted sources state the world would rise to unlivable standards. While the consequences could be an eventual unlivable world, this claim is false for its exaggeration. This is harmful because misinformation about climate change damages the repudiation and worth of real scientist’s important insight on this issues that is already someone disregarded. Furthermore, it's unnecessary as the truth of climate change is already so scary on it's own and shouldn't need to be misleading to get people's attention.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/08/world-has-only-years-get-climate-change-under-control-un-scientists-say/

Answer 2

Although climate change is happening, and temperatures are rising, the outside temperature will not be "unlivable" in 12 years. There will be adverse affects, and issues caused by such temperatures, but it's not like you'd just instantly die because it's so hot. According to an article by PBS, publish in 2022, they say the next 18 years will see negative human health and hunger effects, and that some parts will be uninhabitable, but it doesn't say the temperatures will just kill us all.

https://whyy.org/articles/un-ipcc-climate-change-report-uninhabitable-planet-code-red/

Furthermore, using a 6-year-old article and not adjusting the time in the claim is misleading and makes the claim flat-out incorrect.

Comments

Hey! This is a great fact check. Noting how the age of the article makes it less relevant is super important and shows that you looked in depth with your research. I also liked how you brought in a secondary, more reliable source that gave specifics to what we will see in the future, but didn't support the false claim. You did a good job explaining how unrealistic the claim is that we would all die of the heat instantly, but I would add onto your explanation how different parts of the earth are impacted differently, so some people in more affected areas will likely die from heat exhaustion.

Answer 3

This claim is that humanity only has 12 years before global temperatures will rise to a point where the Earth can no longer support human life. This claim comes from an article published on October 8th, 2018. Based on the content of the article provided, this headline is thoroughly misleading. The main claim in the article linked is that if global temperatures were to rise above an average of 1.5 degrees celsius per year, drought, floods, and extreme heat could contribute to worsening quality of life. 

An article published by the New York TImes, by Gernot Wagner and Constantine Samaras

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/19/opinion/climate-change-12-years.html

This article summarizes the point that the concept of 12 years was simultaneously a real timeline, but also somewhat misleading. The IPCC report which the original claim referenced essentially outlines how if climate change continued at the same trajectory, after 12 years the world would have to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2030. There are underlying timelines at play, making it difficult to mark 12 years as some definite range which the world had to make a change by.

This article published by the Scientific American, by Kate Marvel

https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/hot-planet/thinking-about-climate-on-a-dark-dismal-morning/

Refutes the claim and argues that it is mostly nonsense. The New York Times article above, quotes Marvel briefly, while making a similar point. A longer quote from her article helps summarize the primary claim she makes. “Most of the coral reefs are going to die, and many of the glaciers will melt. Climate change is here, leaving grubby human fingerprints on parched, burned, flooded and melted landscapes. But we don’t have to settle for dystopia.” She claims that climate change and its effects are indisputable, but they have not pushed the planet to a point of no return or imminent doom. 

An article published on BBC, by Matt McGrath

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48964736

McGrath did not argue in this article that the world will end in 18 months if plans to cut global emissions were not enacted. What he did argue is that the 18 months following the IPCC report marked the most important time to take action before climate change reached an irreversible point.

In general, this claim is false, the idea of irreversible climate change is not false. There is not immediate risk that the planet will become unlivable in the immediate future if climate change restrictions are not cut.