The News Thread

[Dak]

I figured it embellished, but the point about soil quality stands regardless of what happens. I care about what happens after I die because I care about my kids' lives.

 

[CiG]

Sure, I care about my child too, but from everything I have read about climate change, it won't even greatly impact my great great great great great great grandchildren.

 

[Dak]

Sure, I care about my child too, but from everything I have read about climate change, it won't even greatly impact my great great great great great great grandchildren.

Well I care but I don't think my caring matters because I'm not sold on anthropogenic driven climate change yet. If the earth is indeed warming a few degree for whatever reason, I'd just advise my kids to live further north and not near the ocean.

 

[CiG]

Makes me wonder if central Australia will ever be inhabited by people.

 

[rms]

I'm still far, far more worried about cooling than warming, and I'm worried about warming because it could cause cooling due to melting enough ice to set it free into the ocean to slow down the oceanic conveyor belts of warm air, causing a new glacial period (the norm for the earth). This is the most problematic longterm outcome imo.

I don't think this is how it works my man. And the author talked about how there's more carbon in the ice than what humans have already done.

And oceans would stay warm since surface temps would be increasing.

But I didn't think about unleashing ancient diseases so that's cool to think about

 

[Einherjar86]

Yep, the permafrost is melting. There's some shit down there that we haven't been exposed to for a looooooong time. Cool is one word for it, I guess. Frightening is another.

Sure, I care about my child too, but from everything I have read about climate change, it won't even greatly impact my great great great great great great grandchildren.

Well, if we're being honest it's already affecting us, just not "greatly impacting." But I think it's fair to say all of our great grandchildren will be significantly impacted by it, even indirectly (e.g. "It would have been cool to live in a coastal city, too bad they're underwater").

 

[CiG]

Well, if we're being honest it's already affecting us, just not "greatly impacting."

I chose my words very specifically because I do understand that.

But I think it's fair to say all of our great grandchildren will be significantly impacted by it, even indirectly (e.g. "It would have been cool to live in a coastal city, too bad they're underwater").

Is it really so that coastal cities all around the world will be underwater in 50 years?

 

[Einherjar86]

I'm assuming my great grandchildren will go on to live for 70-80 years after they're born. Although depending on climate change, that might be optimistic.

And maybe not every coastal city, but it doesn't look good for coastal cities in the U.S.

 

[CiG]

Interesting, I thought predictions of great impact were in the hundreds of years, if not thousands.

 

[Einherjar86]

Interesting, I thought predictions of great impact were in the hundreds of years, if not thousands.

Scientists are now looking at significant sea-level increases by 2100. But there's no telling what the actual levels will be because these are fluctuating systems and the simulations can only predict based on past data. The numbers for California, for example, range from 2 feet to 10 feet--but it's likely to be much lower than ten feet.

And yet another report, prepared for the state of California and released this month by a team of climate researchers, has now also presented the possibility of extreme sea level scenarios by 2100 — albeit ones that have either a low or an unknown probability of occurring.

That document looked specifically at California coastlines, and found that for San Francisco, for instance, the ‘‘likely’’ range for sea level rise in the year 2100 under a high global warming scenario would be 1.6 to 3.4 feet. But it also said there was a 1-in-20 chance of 4.4 feet, a 1-in-200 chance of 6.9 feet, and even a chance, whose probability could not be estimated, of 10 feet.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/sc...el-increase/3Wq26jlUzMxHgvj6ImmGvL/story.html

More important to consider here, though, is that even an increase of 1.5 to 2 feet can have significant impact on a global scale. When I say "significant impact," I don't mean that people will necessarily be living in immediate danger, but that climate change will lead to changes in lifestyle that might be dramatically different from ours today. For example, even if cities don't see major flooding, rising sea levels could disrupt coastal habitats involved in fish reproduction, which could in turn have an impact on fisheries and the availability of fish worldwide.

 

[Baroque]

Climate change is real. Historical evidence supports that fact.

Predictions and simulations of the future are definitely what should be questioned here. Every year you add onto a simulation increases its margin of error significantly. If we're talking a 100 year prediction it's almost certain that prediction is wrong. Different simulations produce different results and it's impossible to account for all variables.

I believe climate change will continue into the future but any statistical prediction of what exactly the change will be in decades from now is little more than a ballpark guess. It could very well be more or less we don't know.

"A chance whose probability can't be estimated out to ten feet" means the probability was arbitrarily close to zero out to several decimal places by their methods (the probability of it happening was smaller than 1- the level of confidence they're allowing themselves, probably less than .01%)

 

[CiG]

I don't know that many, if any people question whether climate change is real. The fundamental point of contention is whether it is man-made and whether it can be reversed or redirected by man.

Scientists are now looking at significant sea-level increases by 2100. But there's no telling what the actual levels will be because these are fluctuating systems and the simulations can only predict based on past data. The numbers for California, for example, range from 2 feet to 10 feet--but it's likely to be much lower than ten feet.



https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/sc...el-increase/3Wq26jlUzMxHgvj6ImmGvL/story.html

More important to consider here, though, is that even an increase of 1.5 to 2 feet can have significant impact on a global scale. When I say "significant impact," I don't mean that people will necessarily be living in immediate danger, but that climate change will lead to changes in lifestyle that might be dramatically different from ours today. For example, even if cities don't see major flooding, rising sea levels could disrupt coastal habitats involved in fish reproduction, which could in turn have an impact on fisheries and the availability of fish worldwide.

Climate change is real. Historical evidence supports that fact.

Predictions and simulations of the future are definitely what should be questioned here. Every year you add onto a simulation increases its margin of error significantly. If we're talking a 100 year prediction it's almost certain that prediction is wrong. Different simulations produce different results and it's impossible to account for all variables.

I believe climate change will continue into the future but any statistical prediction of what exactly the change will be in decades from now is little more than a ballpark guess. It could very well be more or less we don't know.

Very interesting.

 

[rms]

whether it can be reversed or redirected by man.

that's the best part. those who say look at the science! about global warming seem to stop when the evidence suggests it's just too late

 

[Dak]

Because the policy prescriptions never change no matter the reason, the evidence, etc. Even when 100 million die.

 

[CiG]

Dinesh raises some fair points here about developing countries and the plan to battle climate change by already developed countries clashing.

(Skip to 4:30 to pass over his moral points.)

 

[no country for old wainds]

there are far greater threats to human civilisation as we know it than climate change

i.e. https://www.kidrockforsenate.com/

 

[Einherjar86]

He's an American badass.

 

[Dak]

Rock/Rock 2020. Trump has no shot.

 

[CiG]

The trajectory of America, this is probably going to happen.

 

[CiG]

http://www.newindianexpress.com/wor...ne-iceberg-breaks-off-antarctica-1627707.html