I think for that Nature study on warming, it was calculating the reduction in productivity assuming it would grow at a certain rate, rather than a reduction from existing levels.
"Notably, innovation has contributed positively to average yield trends in many regions, which will probably continue into the future in some form. Our projected yield impacts should therefore be interpreted as deviations from a future trend in average yields that is driven by other factors, including innovation."
"Forecasters believe that there’s a 67% chance (range: 55% to 75%) that Iran (not just one of its proxies) strikes a US base in the Middle East by the end of August."
Is this forecast for successful strikes or attempted strikes?
I think for that Nature study on warming, it was calculating the reduction in productivity assuming it would grow at a certain rate, rather than a reduction from existing levels.
"Notably, innovation has contributed positively to average yield trends in many regions, which will probably continue into the future in some form. Our projected yield impacts should therefore be interpreted as deviations from a future trend in average yields that is driven by other factors, including innovation."
Thanks!
"Forecasters believe that there’s a 67% chance (range: 55% to 75%) that Iran (not just one of its proxies) strikes a US base in the Middle East by the end of August."
Is this forecast for successful strikes or attempted strikes?
Resolves positively either way :) https://www.axios.com/2025/06/23/iran-retaliation-trump-israel-war
Wait no, the attack was intercepted, lol https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-weighs-retaliation-against-us-strikes-nuclear-sites-2025-06-23/