Concise and understandable.

major war over the past two years or so was the straw that broke the camel's back?

I know that war increases the burning of carbon.

(snip)

War and climate change are vastly interconnected and, hence, should not be dealt with independently should governments and organisations want to create lasting change. It is evident that the climate impact of war results in massive carbon emissions both in the short and long term. Furthermore, any potential climate progress that could have been made by the countries involved will have been majorly set back, as the focus shifts to survival amid the ongoing war. This makes the effect of climate change even more severe, which in turn impacts regions that are already grappling with the repercussions of climate change, contributing to rising unrest and leading to more conflicts. This vicious cycle perpetuates itself, and the consequences will grow more and more severe unless we act on a global scale to combat the cycle of destruction.

(snip)

https://carbonliteracy.com/the-climate-impact-of-war/#:~:text=War%20and%20climate%20change%20are,the%20short%20and%20long%20term.


Thanks for the thread hatrack.

I think someone's calculation slipped a decimal point.

.

7 SDs is essentially "zero chance."