Are you guys using the same definition of “overshooting the target”?
You seem to refer to it as “shooting over the 1.5C goal”, while the other commenter above might interpret it as “overshooting the reduction needed to get to the target”, so more like “having too little CO2”.
The headline is confusingly worded and allows both interpretations.
Every step we take past 1.5°C means increased risk of losing major ecosystems and habitable areas.
Paris called for limiting the long-term average temperature increase to 2°C which remains attainable.
Are you guys using the same definition of “overshooting the target”?
You seem to refer to it as “shooting over the 1.5C goal”, while the other commenter above might interpret it as “overshooting the reduction needed to get to the target”, so more like “having too little CO2”.
The headline is confusingly worded and allows both interpretations.
The article makes it clear that they’re talking about going past 1.5°C
And my comment makes it clear, that I’m talking about the headline.
Are you actually surprised people react based on a headline?