|
I feel like if you want to discuss peer-reviewed literature you should probably just post on the Arctic Sea Ice Forum
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 06:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:13 |
|
|
BattleMoose posted:One paper I read freaked me out so much I had to just stop, and take a nap. I am not sure what you are expecting but there is some seriously depressing stuff in the peer reviewed literature. Please link the article that made you panic and pass out (That sounds awesome)
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 06:42
|
|
|
You want to really do something? Go into real estate. Go into business and beat the guy who pollutes. Go into investment capital management and encourage people to think of more than a 5 year legacy. Seize the means of destruction. Vote for local elections and convince your lovely town to go renewable in honor of god's creation. Vote for county commissioners who recognize that wind power jobs are better than coal jobs, and solar farms have less long term degradation potential than oil and gas wells. Vote for state legislators who want tourism dollars for your pretty mountains and grasslands more than they want bribes from shale developers. Vote for school board members that understand that children born today will need more comprehensive political capital than any prior generation in history. In other words, take and reshape society in any way you can. Otherwise you're just moping about as you blame all the "idiots" from whom you are indistinguishable save for your astute and well informed dread. Also: Accretionist posted:Please link the article that made you panic and pass out
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 07:16
|
|
|
Minge Binge posted:lol. voting? vote for who? clinton or trump? Trudeau, Harper or Muclair? Even if you get someone like Corbyn winning, there's decades worth of institutions willing to stymie any political progress. Out of all things voting has to be the most useless. This is dumb as hell.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:Just kidding about killing your family. I see people saying individual actions don't matter and only political action matters, then I see people saying voting doesn't matter because it's too late. I'm pretty certain people will continue to convince themselves that they are helpless because actually doing anything is hard. It seems like posts like this--nothing matters, so why do anything?--are some weird attempt to find absolution. I can't fault anybody if their life is too crazy to fit one more existential worry into it, but if you know the problem exists, it's on you to at least try to contribute to it as little as possible.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 07:28
|
|
|
I genuinely don't understand people who have read even a fraction of the links and studies posted in this thread and can pretend like anything we do matters with regards to climate change at all. Does anyone seriously believe that there is any meaningful difference at all between RCP 8.5 and 6.0? Or that there is any chance at all of humanity in general even being able to steer this doomed-rear end ship into a 6.0? Do they think its 1980? What is going on? It's absolute nonsense to pretend like anything anyone in this thread does matters at all with regards to climate change. If you need hope, pretend like someone's gonna find a technological solution to atmospheric carbon in the next 10 years or so, because that's the only thing that's gonna make a real difference. Where did this nonsensical "living green" movement even come from? Was it just naivete of the 90s, before anyone (other than oil companies) knew or understood how huge this problem is?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 07:42
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:I genuinely don't understand people who have read even a fraction of the links and studies posted in this thread and can pretend like anything we do matters with regards to climate change at all. Does anyone seriously believe that there is any meaningful difference at all between RCP 8.5 and 6.0? Or that there is any chance at all of humanity in general even being able to steer this doomed-rear end ship into a 6.0? Do they think its 1980? What is going on? It's absolute nonsense to pretend like anything anyone in this thread does matters at all with regards to climate change. No offense but this kind of whiny white people bullshit is just loving laughable. People a hundred years ago died from having their toes stepped on by horses. Children died of mysterious and incurable diseases as often as they did not. Today, people suffer worse than the worst future reality privileged people like us can imagine. Acting like our potential future suffering is somehow just too hard to deal with is pathetic. If we really can't continue to live our lives and believe that we can make the world a more sane and sustainable place, then we not only deserve the worst climate change can give us, we deserve to be euthanized like the simpering consumer cattle we are. I mean for gently caress's sake of course people can make a difference. Every goddamn thing makes a difference. That is the brutal lesson of modernity and capitalism: there is no such thing as an "externality." You sitting there trying to convince everyone how pointless it all is has an effect, just like donating your beer money to the Natural Resource Defense Council can help make oil leases more expensive. Unless you have been so thoroughly domesticated and leashed to your office chair that you can't turn up at a city council meeting every once in a while, you can make a surprisingly big difference. The system at play is not some perfect, deterministic machine, and can be changed in any number of ways. We may not want to do all of the uncomfortable work involved in changing the world, but that only matters so long as we think of ourselves as insipid customers waiting for the world to give us a product we find appealing.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 07:51
|
|
|
quote:Where did this nonsensical "living green" movement even come from? Was it just naivete of the 90s, before anyone (other than oil companies) knew or understood how huge this problem is? It was the commercialization and de-politicization of a movement that was still in its infancy. It also probably didn't hurt that its base largely consisted of remnants of the anti-nuclear movement, syndicalists and conspiracy theorists who all pushed their own baggage into it. Also, you're wrong. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 08:10 on May 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 07:51
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:Does anyone seriously believe that there is any meaningful difference at all between RCP 8.5 and 6.0? People living under 8.5 would think so. Edit: I think if the thread title were along the lines of --
Accretionist fucked around with this message at 07:56 on May 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 07:53
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:I genuinely don't understand people who have read even a fraction of the links and studies posted in this thread and can pretend like anything we do matters with regards to climate change at all. Does anyone seriously believe that there is any meaningful difference at all between RCP 8.5 and 6.0? Or that there is any chance at all of humanity in general even being able to steer this doomed-rear end ship into a 6.0? Do they think its 1980? What is going on? It's absolute nonsense to pretend like anything anyone in this thread does matters at all with regards to climate change. Everything matters. The smallest positive action is still a positive action, just as an American penny is still technically money. By itself, it's more symbolic than anything else, but the utility comes from accumulation. If you simply shut down and assume that we're absolutely out of luck and the next few decades will mean the end of civilization, then you're effectively a denier and you've removed yourself from the conversation. I get annoyed by people who are attempting to sell me despair as if it's realism. I was a teenager in the '90s. That poo poo was my pop culture, and I'm not going back. Instead, it's more useful to talk about adaptation and reaction, which is already occurring, albeit slowly. We're seeing a lot of moves to get younger people into the political structure, or to at least unseat the worst of the deniers; Lamar Smith himself has a young Democratic challenger gunning for him specifically because of his views on the climate change issue. Most of the developed world are switching to renewables at a brisk pace, there's a lot of interesting research going on into CO2 capture and utilization, you can 3D-print solar panels now, the Ocean Cleanup project goes live later this year, and there's always room for a good pair of hands or a decent sense of design at any of a dozen farms, projects, think tanks, or research teams. The climate change discussion to me is an attempt to figure out the shape of the future, as climate change is, at least potentially, the single most transformative force in human history. It might destroy us, but there's at least an equal chance that we'll end up adapting. It's going to be messy, violent, and bloody, but every bit of work we do now has the chance to make it a little less so. Because everything matters.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:06
|
|
|
Minge Binge posted:lol. voting? vote for who? clinton or trump? Trudeau, Harper or Muclair? Even if you get someone like Corbyn winning, there's decades worth of institutions willing to stymie any political progress. Out of all things voting has to be the most useless. If you have the mindset of "we are hosed and I can only afford to care about me and mine" I'd think you would still be voting at the very least to ensure the passage of policies that will help you accumulate as much as possible and get into a self-sufficient position before it all goes south. That wouldn't even necessarily need to be on a national level, local politics seem like they would be even more important with that viewpoint. If you're not even doing that, then it's not really any kind of "survival" mindset; just suicidal apathy. edit: What i'm trying to say is: drat, dude, don't you realize even preppers are less pathetic than this?? FourLeaf fucked around with this message at 08:15 on May 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:09
|
|
|
Fasdar posted:Acting like our potential future suffering is somehow just too hard to deal with is pathetic. If we really can't continue to live our lives and believe that we can make the world a more sane and sustainable place, then we not only deserve the worst climate change can give us, we deserve to be euthanized like the simpering consumer cattle we are. Aside from all the irrelevant nonsense about people's attitudes towards progress or whatever, exactly what do you think "the work" is that I'm apparently balking at? Reducing personal emissions is totally worthless and will have zero impact, and any political work will take literally decades to get anywhere near the amount of action required to change a drat thing worth changing. The only "work" that people can do to make a difference in time for it to matter to anyone in any real way is to execute everyone in power and overthrow capitalism and install a world government that gives a poo poo about fixing the planet. That's loving nonsense, and it's literally our only way out.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:10
|
|
|
What's your threshold for worthwhile outcomes?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:12
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:Please link the article that made you panic and pass out It was actually a combination of two papers. Griffin, D., and K. J. Anchukaitis, 2014: How unusual is the 2012–2014 california drought? Geophysical Research Letters, 41 (24), 9017–9023 quote:These observations from the paleoclimate record suggest that high temperatures have combined with the low but not yet exceptional precipitation deficits to create the worst short-term drought of the last millennium for the state of California. Stine, Scott. "Extreme and persistent drought in California and Patagonia during mediaeval time." Nature 369.6481 (1994): 546-549. quote:Ring counts on the longest-lived of the G1 and G2 stumps indicate that the first of California's medieval droughts lasted for more than 220 years before the generalized termination date of AD 1112 (thus, from before AD892 to around AD 112), whereas the second persisted for at least 141 years before AD 1350 (thus, from before AD1209 to around AD1350). quote:The medieval period in California was thus marked not only be severe and prolonged drought, but by abrupt and extreme hydroclimatic shifts- from inordinate dryness, to inordinate wetness, and back to dryness.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:15
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:I genuinely don't understand people who have read even a fraction of the links and studies posted in this thread and can pretend like anything we do matters with regards to climate change at all. Does anyone seriously believe that there is any meaningful difference at all between RCP 8.5 and 6.0? Or that there is any chance at all of humanity in general even being able to steer this doomed-rear end ship into a 6.0? Do they think its 1980? What is going on? It's absolute nonsense to pretend like anything anyone in this thread does matters at all with regards to climate change. Sure okay let's say we hit some tipping point where we break the quaternary glaciation cycle. What happens next? Do you know the death toll? Is it everyone? I'm guessing you don't know because while we have useful models (thanks CMIP5) we can't magically peer into the future and see what's going to happen. You can't look at CO2 ppm and act like this is new territory; levels were as high 2000ppm as recently as the Eocene. Aside from some mass extinctions on the sea floor, nothing too exciting really happened (see: Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum). We're also not hitting record territories in temperature, though we are about to leave anything we've seen since the Pleistocene. Things may end up getting really bad, but until the outcomes all point to a guaranteed human extinction event what you do matters. So there is a difference to be made and you can't try to absolve yourself of any responsibility. Also yes there is a difference between RCP 8.5 and RCP 6.0. But climatology research is also moving so quickly that arguing from the IPCC report is becoming rapidly more irrelevant by day.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:15
|
|
|
BattleMoose posted:It was actually a combination of two papers. Here is a fun followup to that which was recently published: http://www.pnas.org/content/110/14/5336.abstract tl;dr: Slowing jet stream increases vorticity from the coriolis effect which leads to a higher number of "nodes" at the poles, see for the south pole: https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=mean_sea_level_pressure/orthographic=-109.90,-89.21,441 The resonance pattern that can occur from this causes the west coast to either get stuck into periods of extreme dryness or periods of extreme wetness. Similar stratifications across the globe and this effect can account for many recent floods and wildfires. The source causes of this effect are all tied directly back to AGW
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:18
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:Also yes there is a difference between RCP 8.5 and RCP 6.0. But climatology research is also moving so quickly that arguing from the IPCC report is becoming rapidly more irrelevant by day. There was an interesting article stating exactly that last month. Would be interested to know what people think: http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2017/04/10/how-the-ipcc-becomes-a-climate-change-denial-tool/ quote:The most recent IPCC report was published nominally in 2014. It was restricted to existing peer reviewed literature, thus not including the pre-embargoed material (though there was an effort by many scientists to get stuff out in time to be employed in that process). The report took time to produce. The physical science basis part of the report, on which the rest is based, actually dates to 2013 nominally, though it includes some 2014 material.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:23
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:Aside from all the irrelevant nonsense about people's attitudes towards progress or whatever, exactly what do you think "the work" is that I'm apparently balking at? Reducing personal emissions is totally worthless and will have zero impact, and any political work will take literally decades to get anywhere near the amount of action required to change a drat thing worth changing. If you agree there's a problem, there's an attached logical imperative to not actively make the problem worse. If you apply the same reasoning to other issues, you just end up looking like an rear end in a top hat. After all, you could be the most open-minded guy in the world, but you can't end racism by yourself, so why not go spray-paint invective on your neighbor's house? It's a drop in the bucket! Political work, depending on scope, can be faster than you think. The key is to not get caught up at the macro level. Being on the city council or school board can let you make a significant impact in your community, for example. You don't have to regard anything shy of a state senator's seat as a failure condition, and in fact, this is part of why the Republicans have made such ferocious gains. A strong progressive interest in local/state-level government would be an excellent corrective to the denialist movement, and would at least get the conversation going in a more positive direction. Of course, if you don't want to do any work on the matter, that's perfectly all right. It is a lot easier to just sit around and play video games until, ten or twenty or fifty years from now, a climate refugee boils you for soup.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:25
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:I've actually met self-proclaimed fascists online who got really offended whenever you implied nationalism = racism. Basically trying to claim if non-whites conform to the dominant culture and are loyal they'll accept them, so they're "not racist". Making the distinction seemed worthwhile to emphasize the alt-right people (in the previous post) really do love their ethnic separatism. They want to go back to some faux-1950s nostalgia world where they won't have to interact with non-whites ever; even if you tried to assimilate they don't want you.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:29
|
|
|
Wanderer posted:Instead, it's more useful to talk about adaptation and reaction, which is already occurring, albeit slowly. We're seeing a lot of moves to get younger people into the political structure, or to at least unseat the worst of the deniers; Lamar Smith himself has a young Democratic challenger gunning for him specifically because of his views on the climate change issue. Most of the developed world are switching to renewables at a brisk pace, there's a lot of interesting research going on into CO2 capture and utilization, you can 3D-print solar panels now, the Ocean Cleanup project goes live later this year, and there's always room for a good pair of hands or a decent sense of design at any of a dozen farms, projects, think tanks, or research teams. Hoping for a technological miracle to save us is something I've been telling people who still need hope for the future to do for like this entire thread. If that CO2 capture doesn't turn out to be good enough (It almost certainly will not) then none of that other stuff is important. Wanderer posted:The climate change discussion to me is an attempt to figure out the shape of the future, as climate change is, at least potentially, the single most transformative force in human history. It might destroy us, but there's at least an equal chance that we'll end up adapting. It's going to be messy, violent, and bloody, but every bit of work we do now has the chance to make it a little less so. Because everything matters. I don't care about the shape of the future when it's shaped an awful lot like a planet where my country gets annexed and I'm subject to the effects of the Great American Internal Refugee Crisis. I don't think I've ever said that humanity isn't going to survive, but it's equally ridiculous to think that global human civilization is going to look anything like it does now, when every developing country is torn apart by starvation and war (nuclear war, in the case of India and Pakistan) and disease and every developed nation has long since become infested by fascism and xenophobia when subjected to the horrors of a refugee crisis the likes of which has never been seen in the history of humanity. Notorious R.I.M. posted:You can't look at CO2 ppm and act like this is new territory; levels were as high 2000ppm as recently as the Eocene. Aside from some mass extinctions on the sea floor, nothing too exciting really happened (see: Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum). We're also not hitting record territories in temperature, though we are about to leave anything we've seen since the Pleistocene. Are you kidding me? There weren't 7 billion humans on the planet during the Eocene and Pleistocene. My concern isn't for the existence of human beings in the future, it's for the continuity of global civilization and world peace, such as it is. Wanderer posted:Political work, depending on scope, can be faster than you think. The key is to not get caught up at the macro level. Being on the city council or school board can let you make a significant impact in your community, for example. You don't have to regard anything shy of a state senator's seat as a failure condition, and in fact, this is part of why the Republicans have made such ferocious gains. A strong progressive interest in local/state-level government would be an excellent corrective to the denialist movement, and would at least get the conversation going in a more positive direction. The problem is much bigger than climate deniers, the problem is the entirety of modern first world life is based around loving over the planet with reckless abandon. The problem isn't "how do we get Americans to eat less meat and drive less car", it's "how do we create a world in which nobody want's to burn fuel anymore and we can convince all the moneyed and most powerful people in the world to give up their riches and power for the good of the planet?". Once again, a miraculous technological breakthrough could save us, sure, but it's pretty silly to count on it actually happening. Wanderer posted:Of course, if you don't want to do any work on the matter, that's perfectly all right. It is a lot easier to just sit around and play video games until, ten or twenty or fifty years from now, a climate refugee boils you for soup. I've never said that we should just sit around and play video games, climate change research is a big part of what got me to go back to school to earn a degree that'll let me move away from this doomed continent and place my bet on a place that's less populated and less likely to be invaded or destroyed in the future.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:36
|
|
|
I agree that the best personal course of action is getting rich.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:40
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:My concern isn't for the existence of human beings in the future, it's for the continuity of global civilization and world peace, such as it is. Time to give up on the latter and realize that the former is still very much a sliding scale of outcomes.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 08:41
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:If you have the mindset of "we are hosed and I can only afford to care about me and mine" I'd think you would still be voting at the very least to ensure the passage of policies that will help you accumulate as much as possible and get into a self-sufficient position before it all goes south. That wouldn't even necessarily need to be on a national level, local politics seem like they would be even more important with that viewpoint. All my candidates have no interest in the politics required to do anything about climate change. Why the gently caress would I vote and endorse a system that got us into this mess.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 12:51
|
|
|
Minge Binge posted:All my candidates have no interest in the politics required to do anything about climate change. Why the gently caress would I vote and endorse a system that got us into this mess. Because not voting is endorsing status quo. How are you this stupid? You have literally three categories of options: 1) Political Action: Get involved in local politics. Vote to drag the Overton window as far to the left as possible 2) No Action: Endorse that status quo by not taking any action. 3) Rebellion: Buy a gun, join a militia. I don't know. Participate in ecoterrorism or something. This option is included solely because it would be intellectually dishonest on my part to say that political action is the only thing you can do, and goddamn you seem detatched and dumb enough to get into a "You're presenting a false dichotomy!" defense if I don't include this thing that you will never, ever lift a finger to see thorough to conclusion. Edit: that's wrong, maybe you own or will at some point buy a gun. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 13:47 on May 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 13:44
|
|
|
The US can't even deliver functioning infrastructure to wide swaths of America *today*. People who insist that "the LABOR ARISTOCRACY in AMERIKKKA will be just fine" are loving privileged idiots.Wanderer posted:You're trying to justify your own paralysis. If you're sad that nothing is being done, then do something. Even if you never manage to make an impact on mainstream culture, you can still do a great deal to affect your family, your community, and your city. Run for local office, look into starting a green business, plant a tree, clean up litter, cut trash out of your life as much as you can, dig a compost heap, think about a career change, whatever. drat, this poo poo is so tiring. I far prefer the "I'd rather die on my feet" line of thinking to this inane make-believe that a personal compost heap is going to do poo poo, even if everyone on the planet started participating yesterday. Every single time I see dreck like this, I also see someone that can't comprehend the scale of the problem we're dealing with. Burt Buckle posted:Stop eating meat, take the bus, open the window, kill your family. Folks like you always stop at the mealy-mouthed "ugh, why don't you JUST DO ~*SOMETHING*~" because when you delve into specifics it's very easy to tear apart the idiocy. Please, tell us what sort of political action you feel is both necessary and possible at this point. You're an inch away from the gun nuts that think their AR is going to keep the UN soldiers at bay. Fasdar posted:You want to really do something? Go into real estate. Go into business and beat the guy who pollutes. Go into investment capital management and encourage people to think of more than a 5 year legacy. Seize the means of destruction. Just go "beat" them, easy! You'd kinda think there was something inherently profitable at externalizing the environmental costs of your investment and development, which is why we see those things paired so often. But apparently you can just "beat" them by "encouraging people to think"! (Again, zero specifics, because, well, you know). The ignorance of thinking that voting for a Democratic Dog Catcher at the local level is going to do poo poo at this point is willful self-delusion. Familiarize yourself with the timescale and magnitude of this problem. You using a toothpick to dig out from an avalanche *will not work* and *does not matter*. call to action fucked around with this message at 14:30 on May 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
I have a physical disability that has so far meant that I have never driven a car in my life, did I fix the problem guys, did we win?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
Minge Binge posted:All my candidates have no interest in the politics required to do anything about climate change. Why the gently caress would I vote and endorse a system that got us into this mess. I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I'm not trying to persuade you to vote for candidates that think they can stop climate change. I'm asking why aren't you voting for candidates to change local laws to make it easier for you to establish some kind of large community garden (my town did this in a local park, each participant got their own section of beds), or, on the the most selfish level, make it easier for you to buy a gun, some kind of efficiently-sized property with room to grow some food and maybe even a few useful animals. God knows there are plenty of politicians that want to reduce such regulations. I'm being dead serious here. Assuming you live in a first-world country and are at least middle class, things will get worse for you (so it will help to be as self-sufficient as possible during potential housing crises and economic crashes) but probably not so bad you need to worry about roving warlords coming to steal your stuff. You're not doing it to endorse the system or save the world, you're using the system to help yourself. I ask because it's strange to see people so sure that disaster is coming (which I don't think is wrong), yet are also refusing to take any kind of meaningful political action to prepare for it because that would "endorse the system"?? It makes me think either you don't actually believe disaster is coming and you're just being edgy, or you're so suicidally depressed that you're convinced human extinction is imminent, which is almost certainly not true.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 15:16
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
edit; post was pointless and antagonistic
Burt Buckle fucked around with this message at 16:12 on May 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
This thread has been dripping with human exceptionalism lately geez.Notorious R.I.M. posted:I feel like if you want to discuss peer-reviewed literature you should probably just post on the Arctic Sea Ice Forum There's a few good posters there but way too many people trying to make predictions by just extrapolating or reading tea leaves than modeling anything.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
Nearly 94% of Shell shareholders reject emissions reduction target in line with Paris climate agreement "We can't help, it might cost MONEY!" 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:edit; post was pointless and antagonistic Please do make a climate action thread. I'd particularly like a good breakdown of greenhouse emissions by source and national origin somewhere in the OP.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:this thread has degenerated into endless "Wow, this is really hosed up, huh?" "Yup, here's a new hosed up thing" which is not really discussion, so only shitposting is left. Martian posted:Nearly 94% of Shell shareholders reject emissions reduction target in line with Paris climate agreement Yup, here's a new hosed up thing: New sea level estimates show strong, recent acceleration quote:Overall, this produces a trend of 1.3mm of sea level rise a year since 1902. If carried into the future, this would leave us with a very manageable rate of change. But it's not being carried into the future. Instead, since 1993, the data suggests ocean levels have risen at a rate of 3.1mm a year. That's similar to the value obtained by satellite readings, an important validation. In addition, the authors say it's a good match for the sea level budget set by water additions and warming. The rate of change in ocean levels is also highest in the two time periods where temperatures rose the most (The 1920s to '40s and 1970s to present).
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
Nice, this thread is good when it's liveposting the Fall of Rome
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
It's almost over, boys. Enjoy the forum while you can.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:edit; post was pointless and antagonistic That was supposed to be this thread lol. Things were better when we still had Arkane and other legit denialists posting. Without a common enemy it's inevitable that we'll tear ourselves apart.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
call to action posted:
While you may be right about the advantage of externalizing environmental costs, your dismissal of strategies that demonize pollution and associate social costs with negative environmental or hell, animal welfare, impacts is a bit short sighted. Unless the "organic, cage free" eggs haven't been selling at double the normal price point and are just there via magic, and electric cars aren't selling faster than demand can keep up with. The goddamned Iowa board of tourism is running ads right now touting their 39% wind power. Also, I would like to be clear about what the "something" I'm talking about doing, as you seem to be focused on stopping climate change and averting all related negative impacts associated with it. I agree with you when you say that such a thing is impossible. In fact, I'm in the camp that thinks the social knock on effects of what we're already seeing will probably create a lot of social chaos that outstrips even the immense ecological and environmental impacts we'll see. That is exactly why, however, I think doing things like getting involved with local politics and forging a meaningful and effective culture of sustainability is so important. It is the equivalent of a socio-political bug out bag. No, it probably isn't going to stop the bloodshed - figurative or literal, as the case may be - but it may position you better to seize what opportunities arise in the madness. You seem to be arguing, on the other hand, for simply waiting for the end as if you're not even playing the game anymore. But ask yourself this: when wheat prices spike, and water supplies suddenly fall short of demand, do you want the usual band of fat white dudes and real estate agents who normally fill local government to be making all the decisions, or do you want someone with a modicum of human decency and intellect?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
I guess my one request if you are going to be a climate nihilist is to learn your poo poo. If you're going to rant about certain death, you better not miss a beat when a climate change denier asks why there was significant global cooling through parts of the 20th century.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:I guess my one request if you are going to be a climate nihilist is to learn your poo poo. If you're going to rant about certain death, you better not miss a beat when a climate change denier asks why there was significant global cooling through parts of the 20th century. Just in my lifetime Mount Pinatubo springs to mind.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:13 |
|
|
FourLeaf posted:I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I'm not trying to persuade you to vote for candidates that think they can stop climate change. I'm asking why aren't you voting for candidates to change local laws to make it easier for you to establish some kind of large community garden (my town did this in a local park, each participant got their own section of beds), or, on the the most selfish level, make it easier for you to buy a gun, some kind of efficiently-sized property with room to grow some food and maybe even a few useful animals. God knows there are plenty of politicians that want to reduce such regulations. I'm being dead serious here. Assuming you live in a first-world country and are at least middle class, things will get worse for you (so it will help to be as self-sufficient as possible during potential housing crises and economic crashes) but probably not so bad you need to worry about roving warlords coming to steal your stuff. You're not doing it to endorse the system or save the world, you're using the system to help yourself. These are things I do. Working to build stronger and sustainable communities pretty much consumes all of my free time. Mostly it's just volunteer work, but I'll support local candidates through political activism. But this won't do anything about climate change. It will only create more resilience. So you are right. On the other hand. In order to have any sort of appreciable impact on global warming it would require a complete restructuring of our society. Anything else is only delaying the inevitable, into a world with more people, with a more fragile globalized economy, with more habitats destroyed, more chemicals polluting the soil, more plastics in the oceans, more fascists, more weapons, more uncertainty. Our capitalistic society is toxic and needs to be destroyed. Voting for the lesser evil is putting it on life support. As long as it exists, the infection won't stop spreading.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2017 22:07
|
|