Climate Change: Post up your Phd. dissertation, coward

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Climate Change: Post up your Phd. dissertation, coward

«‹›410 »

tsa: Feb 3, 2014

imagine making a post that bad ; )

Siljmonster posted:

Nah I love coming to threads to point out how stupid people are

luckily in this thread it's quite easy

# ? Aug 1, 2018 16:20

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 03:39

Flowers For Algeria: Dec 3, 2005; I humbly offer my services as forum inquisitor. There is absolutely no way I would abuse this power in any way.

Hey y�all, NOAA has released today its annual State of the Climate report!

The executive summary is great, page after page of record-breaking statistics condensed for your pleasure.

Check it out here. Chapter 2 has all the good stuff about hurricanes.

# ? Aug 1, 2018 17:40

VideoGameVet: May 14, 2005; It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion. It is by the juice of Java that pedaling acquires speed, the teeth acquire stains, stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion.

Long read but worth it: Losing Earth: The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html

This narrative by Nathaniel Rich is a work of history, addressing the 10-year period from 1979 to 1989: the decisive decade when humankind first came to a broad understanding of the causes and dangers of climate change. Complementing the text is a series of aerial photographs and videos, all shot over the past year by George Steinmetz. With support from the Pulitzer Center, this two-part article is based on 18 months of reporting and well over a hundred interviews. It tracks the efforts of a small group of American scientists, activists and politicians to raise the alarm and stave off catastrophe. It will come as a revelation to many readers � an agonizing revelation � to understand how thoroughly they grasped the problem and how close they came to solving it.

Nice Conclusion:

Could it have been any other way? In the late 1970s, a small group of philosophers, economists and political scientists began to debate, largely among themselves, whether a human solution to this human problem was even possible. They did not trouble themselves about the details of warming, taking the worst-case scenario as a given. They asked instead whether humankind, when presented with this particular existential crisis, was willing to prevent it. We worry about the future. But how much, exactly?
The answer, as any economist could tell you, is very little. Economics, the science of assigning value to human behavior, prices the future at a discount; the farther out you project, the cheaper the consequences. This makes the climate problem the perfect economic disaster. The Yale economist William D. Nordhaus, a member of Jimmy Carter�s Council of Economic Advisers, argued in the 1970s that the most appropriate remedy was a global carbon tax. But that required an international agreement, which Nordhaus didn�t think was likely. Michael Glantz, a political scientist who was at the National Center for Atmospheric Research at the time, argued in 1979 that democratic societies are constitutionally incapable of dealing with the climate problem. The competition for resources means that no single crisis can ever command the public interest for long, yet climate change requires sustained, disciplined efforts over decades. And the German physicist-philosopher Klaus Meyer-Abich argued that any global agreement would inevitably favor the most minimal action. Adaptation, Meyer-Abich concluded, �seems to be the most rational political option.� It is the option that we have pursued, consciously or not, ever since.

These theories share a common principle: that human beings, whether in global organizations, democracies, industries, political parties or as individuals, are incapable of sacrificing present convenience to forestall a penalty imposed on future generations. When I asked John Sununu about his part in this history � whether he considered himself personally responsible for killing the best chance at an effective global-warming treaty � his response echoed Meyer-Abich. �It couldn�t have happened,� he told me, �because, frankly, the leaders in the world at that time were at a stage where they were all looking how to seem like they were supporting the policy without having to make hard commitments that would cost their nations serious resources.� He added, �Frankly, that�s about where we are today.�

If human beings really were able to take the long view � to consider seriously the fate of civilization decades or centuries after our deaths � we would be forced to grapple with the transience of all we know and love in the great sweep of time. So we have trained ourselves, whether culturally or evolutionarily, to obsess over the present, worry about the medium term and cast the long term out of our minds, as we might spit out a poison.

# ? Aug 1, 2018 21:48

hobbesmaster: Jan 28, 2008

Between that and President Donald Trump I'm pretty sure we're in the alternative future caused by a gently caress up by a time traveler.

# ? Aug 1, 2018 21:51

How are u: May 19, 2005; by Azathoth

We're just playing our part in proving that Climate Change is an integral component of The Great Filter.

Maybe the next civilization will get it right in a couple of tens of millions of years.

# ? Aug 1, 2018 21:54

Conspiratiorist: Nov 12, 2015; 17th Separate Kryvyi Rih Tank Brigade named after Konstantin Pestushko
Look to my coming on the first light of the ~~fifth~~ ~~sixth~~ some day

What's "getting it right", though?

# ? Aug 1, 2018 22:11

DrHammond: Nov 8, 2011

How are u posted:

We're just playing our part in proving that Climate Change is an integral component of The Great Filter.

Maybe the next civilization will get it right in a couple of tens of millions of years.

Go Octopi bros go!

# ? Aug 1, 2018 23:05

ATP_Power: Jun 12, 2010; This is what fascinates me most in existence: the peculiar necessity of imagining what is, in fact, real.

VideoGameVet posted:

Long read but worth it: Losing Earth: The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html

This narrative by Nathaniel Rich is a work of history, addressing the 10-year period from 1979 to 1989: the decisive decade when humankind first came to a broad understanding of the causes and dangers of climate change. Complementing the text is a series of aerial photographs and videos, all shot over the past year by George Steinmetz. With support from the Pulitzer Center, this two-part article is based on 18 months of reporting and well over a hundred interviews. It tracks the efforts of a small group of American scientists, activists and politicians to raise the alarm and stave off catastrophe. It will come as a revelation to many readers � an agonizing revelation � to understand how thoroughly they grasped the problem and how close they came to solving it.

Nice Conclusion:

Could it have been any other way? In the late 1970s, a small group of philosophers, economists and political scientists began to debate, largely among themselves, whether a human solution to this human problem was even possible. They did not trouble themselves about the details of warming, taking the worst-case scenario as a given. They asked instead whether humankind, when presented with this particular existential crisis, was willing to prevent it. We worry about the future. But how much, exactly?
The answer, as any economist could tell you, is very little. Economics, the science of assigning value to human behavior, prices the future at a discount; the farther out you project, the cheaper the consequences. This makes the climate problem the perfect economic disaster. The Yale economist William D. Nordhaus, a member of Jimmy Carter�s Council of Economic Advisers, argued in the 1970s that the most appropriate remedy was a global carbon tax. But that required an international agreement, which Nordhaus didn�t think was likely. Michael Glantz, a political scientist who was at the National Center for Atmospheric Research at the time, argued in 1979 that democratic societies are constitutionally incapable of dealing with the climate problem. The competition for resources means that no single crisis can ever command the public interest for long, yet climate change requires sustained, disciplined efforts over decades. And the German physicist-philosopher Klaus Meyer-Abich argued that any global agreement would inevitably favor the most minimal action. Adaptation, Meyer-Abich concluded, �seems to be the most rational political option.� It is the option that we have pursued, consciously or not, ever since.

These theories share a common principle: that human beings, whether in global organizations, democracies, industries, political parties or as individuals, are incapable of sacrificing present convenience to forestall a penalty imposed on future generations. When I asked John Sununu about his part in this history � whether he considered himself personally responsible for killing the best chance at an effective global-warming treaty � his response echoed Meyer-Abich. �It couldn�t have happened,� he told me, �because, frankly, the leaders in the world at that time were at a stage where they were all looking how to seem like they were supporting the policy without having to make hard commitments that would cost their nations serious resources.� He added, �Frankly, that�s about where we are today.�

If human beings really were able to take the long view � to consider seriously the fate of civilization decades or centuries after our deaths � we would be forced to grapple with the transience of all we know and love in the great sweep of time. So we have trained ourselves, whether culturally or evolutionarily, to obsess over the present, worry about the medium term and cast the long term out of our minds, as we might spit out a poison.

I don't know how many folks in this thread have read any Peter Watts, but he did an essay about writing "hard" sci-fi, optimism and dystopia. When I'm reading about climate change (that story especially), this passage always comes to my mind :

quote:

I'm not claiming that I don't tell my stories against a dystopian backdrop. Take the Rifters
trilogy, for example. The desperate rearguard against ongoing environmental collapse, the
neurochemically-enslaved bureaucrats deciding which part of the world they'll incinerate today
to hold back the latest plague, the exploitation of abuse victims to run power plants on the deepocean
floor � none of this is the stuff of Hallmark Theatre. But in a very real sense, these are
not my inventions; they are essential features of any plausible vision of the future. The thing that
distinguishes science fiction, after all � what sets it apart from magic realism and horror and the
rest of speculative horde� is that is fiction based on science. It has to be at least semiplausible in
its extrapolations from here to there.

Where can we go, from here? Where can we go, starting with seven billion hominins who can't
control their appetites, who wipe out thirty species a day with the weight of their bootprints, who
are too busy rejecting evolution and building killer drones to notice that the icecaps are melting?
How do you write a plausible near-future in which we somehow stopped the flooding and the
water wars, in which we didn't wipe out entire ecosystems and turn millions into environmental
refugees?

You can't. That ship � that massive, lumbering, world-sized ship � has already sailed, and it
turns so very slowly. The only way you can head off those consequences by 2050 is by telling a
tale in which we got serious about climate change back in the nineteen-seventies � and then
you're not talking science fiction any more, you're talking fantasy.

So if my writing tends toward the dystopic it's not because I'm in love with dystopias; it's
because reality has forced dystopia upon me. A ravaged environment is no longer optional when
writing about the near future. All I can do now is imagine how my characters might react to the
hand they've been dealt. The fact that they resort to implanting false memories and neurological
shackles in their employees, that they may order the immolation of ten thousand innocent
refugees � that's not what makes dystopia. What makes dystopia is an inheritance in which
these awful actions are the best ones available, where every other alternative is even worse; a
world where people commit mass murder not because they are sadists or sociopaths, but because
they are trying to do the least harm. It is not a world my characters built. It is only the world we
left them.

ATP_Power fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Aug 2, 2018

# ? Aug 2, 2018 02:38

Potato Salad: Oct 23, 2014; nobody cares

guys what if science... isn't

I mean, I don't understand any of this poo poo but I'll tell people "I did my research and I don't think climate change is real," now why can't I go on TV and say n-

# ? Aug 2, 2018 03:11

Conspiratiorist: Nov 12, 2015; 17th Separate Kryvyi Rih Tank Brigade named after Konstantin Pestushko
Look to my coming on the first light of the ~~fifth~~ ~~sixth~~ some day

I loving love Peter Watts, and yeah his reasons are exactly why I've lost the appetite for most sci-fi, though the genre at large is slowly catching up as the realities of our situation begin to sink in.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 03:49

Nice piece of fish: Jan 29, 2008; Ultra Carp

Conspiratiorist posted:

I loving love Peter Watts, and yeah his reasons are exactly why I've lost the appetite for most sci-fi, though the genre at large is slowly catching up as the realities of our situation begin to sink in.

I never even heard of Peter Watts before someone recommended Blindsight to me and yeah. He is a very good author.

I find it morbidly amusing how much the doomsday economics thread keeps derailing(?) into climate change issues these days. Even this classic was linked: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/climate-change-earth-too-hot-for-humans.html

and I even found one of the true classics of the climate change debate

Crowsbeak posted:

Ah, once again why post? I mean if your energy use is apparently more then what the earth can use why are you on here? If this is your legit belief. Which I doubt as inherently Malthusians have little actual care for their fellow human beings. I mean it;s obvious you think so little of humanity.

If any kind of climate change mitigation is going to depend on human consensus, we are utterly utterly hosed. But we already knew this, we're all posting itt after all. Maybe I should consider getting myself a farm?

# ? Aug 2, 2018 09:12

OhYeah: Jan 20, 2007; 1. Currently the most prevalent form of decision-making in the western world

2. While you are correct in saying that the society owns

3. You have not for a second demonstrated here why

4. I love the way that you equate "state" with "bureaucracy". Is that how you really feel about the state

Flowers For Algeria posted:

Hey y�all, NOAA has released today its annual State of the Climate report!

The executive summary is great, page after page of record-breaking statistics condensed for your pleasure.

Check it out here. Chapter 2 has all the good stuff about hurricanes.

quote:

The total number of tropical cyclones were slightly above average overall.

As far as tropical storms or hurricanes are concerned, that was it.

Perry Mason Jar posted:

People have not rebutted you because you don't even understand what you're reading in the first place. The intensity of hurricanes has increased, the frequency of hurricanes has not and probably will not. You don't seem to grasp that basic point.

Again, these are predictions based on a number of models. I'm talking about hurricane trends which can be detected right now based on the last 100+ years of observations. There is no upward trend hurricane intensity.

Perry Mason Jar posted:

I don't know how you can sit around saying climate change is vague unsubstantiated crap while the global north is literally cooking. Wildfires have always happened - now they're happening with more frequency, more intensity, and in places they hadn't previously. Droughts have always happened - now they're happening with more frequency, more intensity, and in places they hadn't previously.

Interesting you should mention wildfires: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6345/1356

Global levels are down, but whether it's good or not is actually debatable because humans have upset the natural cycle of ecosystems where forest fires play an important role.

Key sentence:

quote:

Fire models were unable to reproduce the pattern and magnitude of observed declines, suggesting that they may overestimate fire emissions in future projections.

If you are thinking that this doesn't apply to Europe, particularly the Southern region, then I have to say that forest fire numbers are down there as well (peak between 1995 and 2004 and down ever since). If you are talking about the are affected there has been a very noticeable downward trend since the mid-80s.

Source: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/forest-fire-danger-2/assessment

# ? Aug 2, 2018 09:19

SlightlyMad: Jun 7, 2015; Gary’s Answer

Some recent scientific results to add to the big picture:

1. Warming temperatures cause bacteria in soils to release even more greenhouse gases globally. The word "massive" is used to describe it.
2. Plastics release greenhouse gases when they degrade. Plastic production is growing.
3. Wetlands and permafrost warming cause a feedback loop of more greenhouse gases released. Emissions need to be reduced more than thought.

In a nutshell, it seems to me that current climate change models have been too optimistic since they have not included all the sources of methane and other gases.

Personally, I vote according to what I see happening. I don't expect much success from mankind in general when it comes to solving big problems though. Screeching monkeys flinging poo poo at each other would be pretty much on par when it comes to dealing with reality. Oh well, I will live my life as I can and aspire to Stoicism. We all die some day.

Links:

1. As temperatures rise, Earth's soil is 'breathing' more heavily:
https://phys.org/news/2018-08-temperatures-earth-soil-heavily.html

2. Degrading plastics revealed as source of greenhouse gases:
https://phys.org/news/2018-08-degrading-plastics-revealed-source-greenhouse.html

3. Study reveals what natural greenhouse emissions from wetlands and permafrosts mean for Paris Agreement targets:
https://phys.org/news/2018-07-reveals-natural-greenhouse-emissions-wetlands.html

# ? Aug 2, 2018 09:56

Nice piece of fish: Jan 29, 2008; Ultra Carp

SlightlyMad posted:

Some recent scientific results to add to the big picture:

1. Warming temperatures cause bacteria in soils to release even more greenhouse gases globally. The word "massive" is used to describe it.
2. Plastics release greenhouse gases when they degrade. Plastic production is growing.
3. Wetlands and permafrost warming cause a feedback loop of more greenhouse gases released. Emissions need to be reduced more than thought.

In a nutshell, it seems to me that current climate change models have been too optimistic since they have not included all the sources of methane and other gases.

Personally, I vote according to what I see happening. I don't expect much success from mankind in general when it comes to solving big problems though. Screeching monkeys flinging poo poo at each other would be pretty much on par when it comes to dealing with reality. Oh well, I will live my life as I can and aspire to Stoicism. We all die some day.

Links:

1. As temperatures rise, Earth's soil is 'breathing' more heavily:
https://phys.org/news/2018-08-temperatures-earth-soil-heavily.html

2. Degrading plastics revealed as source of greenhouse gases:
https://phys.org/news/2018-08-degrading-plastics-revealed-source-greenhouse.html

3. Study reveals what natural greenhouse emissions from wetlands and permafrosts mean for Paris Agreement targets:
https://phys.org/news/2018-07-reveals-natural-greenhouse-emissions-wetlands.html

Oh word? There are previously undiscovered but kindasorta predicted feedback mechanisms that naturally exacerbate emissions when warming happens? Well poo poo.

As I think has been talked about a lot previously itt, this really is the true danger of climate change and probably the thing we all should be most afraid of. We really do not know poo poo about what will happen as the world warms, but there's every indication that there are strong feedback mechanisms and they are going to increase if not multiply the damage we're doing from just our own emissions. The problem - surprise surprise - is a lot loving bigger than just our own emissions.

The most frustrating thing for me (and the thing making me want to start a sustainable farm somewhere and give up my career in law) is that it is still, STILL loving impossible to talk to people about this problem. You either get the predictable "eh not my problem, you're exaggerating, we'll be fine here where we live, you're such a panic starter" or even the "oh well how serious can it be, you don't live as some sort of climate ascetic, you have a car and everything so who are you to talk" or people just go quiet if you start talking about even a fraction of the more depressing stuff from this thread. I mean if you can't even reach people to make them vote for the greenest alternatives and there's a whole cohort of baby boomer fucks who will never absolutely ever agree with you and vote with you whatever you say, I really feel like I might as well start planning for a slow collapse just in case things spiral downwards more quickly than we are expecting. It's not like we know fuckall about how the future is going to go and how fast except in the most general terms. It would probably make me breathe a bit easier, until we hit 1000 ppm at least.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 10:10

Gortarius: Jun 6, 2013; idiot

Years ago when that one volcano spewed a bunch of gunk into the air and all of Europe had flight restrictions for a while, was there any recorded changes in anything climate related?

Or during like Earth Hour or whatever?

I know those don't amount to a hill of beans, I'm more just curious about these things.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 10:49

navyjack: Jul 15, 2006

Gortarius posted:

Years ago when that one volcano spewed a bunch of gunk into the air and all of Europe had flight restrictions for a while, was there any recorded changes in anything climate related?

Or during like Earth Hour or whatever?

I know those don't amount to a hill of beans, I'm more just curious about these things.

There was a measurable effect from when almost all flights worldwide after 9/11

# ? Aug 2, 2018 13:06

friendbot2000: May 1, 2011

Not specifically climate change related, but kudzu does kill a significant amount of plant life that sequesters carbon so I would say it is tangentially related.

There is a group called Eco Goats that is clearing invasive plant species from land using herds of goats and they are tackling the kudzu problem in the south. I kind of want them to come further north to Alexandria, VA because our parks are being choked by the stuff...

Back in 2011 there was a kid who invented a device/process of killing Kudzu using helium injected into the root system/soil
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7MFZ1tEtdU

I personally like the goat one better, but some invasive species are hardy and come back if you don't obliterate the root system. Cool stuff being done though in Enviroscience.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 13:23

Gortarius: Jun 6, 2013; idiot

navyjack posted:

There was a measurable effect from when almost all flights worldwide after 9/11

Elaboration please.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 13:52

StabbinHobo: Oct 18, 2002; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

Nice piece of fish posted:

The most frustrating thing for me (and the thing making me want to start a sustainable farm somewhere and give up my career in law) is that it is still, STILL loving impossible to talk to people about this problem. You either get the predictable "eh not my problem, you're exaggerating, we'll be fine here where we live, you're such a panic starter" or even the "oh well how serious can it be, you don't live as some sort of climate ascetic, you have a car and everything so who are you to talk"

you can play the "truth is in the middle" cool-centrist-guy all you want, but if you have a car you're not one to talk.

I know this is an extremely difficult thing for americans to swallow. doesn't change it.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 14:27

Nice piece of fish: Jan 29, 2008; Ultra Carp

StabbinHobo posted:

you can play the "truth is in the middle" cool-centrist-guy all you want, but if you have a car you're not one to talk.

I know this is an extremely difficult thing for americans to swallow. doesn't change it.

I'm not american and you're disingenuous.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 14:29

Conspiratiorist: Nov 12, 2015; 17th Separate Kryvyi Rih Tank Brigade named after Konstantin Pestushko
Look to my coming on the first light of the ~~fifth~~ ~~sixth~~ some day

Gortarius posted:

Elaboration please.

There was a halt on all civilian flights in and to the US after the WTC attack, which resulted in remarkably clear skies due to the lack of contrails. However, what net effect in temperature this had if any, is arguable given the brief window and uncontrolled nature of the 'experiment'.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 14:30

A Buttery Pastry: Sep 4, 2011; Delicious and Informative!

Gortarius posted:

Elaboration please.

Contrails evaporated with no flights, leaving less cloud cover to reflect the sun or infrared radiation from the ground. IIRC, this increased the daily variation in temperatures by 0.5C during the period.

StabbinHobo posted:

you can play the "truth is in the middle" cool-centrist-guy all you want, but if you have a car you're not one to talk.

I know this is an extremely difficult thing for americans to swallow. doesn't change it.

A Norwegian lawyer might have an electric car.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 14:33

Owlofcreamcheese: May 22, 2005; Can't post for 9 years!; Buglord

StabbinHobo posted:

you can play the "truth is in the middle" cool-centrist-guy all you want, but if you have a car you're not one to talk.

I know this is an extremely difficult thing for americans to swallow. doesn't change it.

What the heck lifestyle do you even live? Like 90% of your posts seem to be you being smug you are the one true climate lover because you live right. Have you even done anything exceptional or are you just an unmarried vegetarian that lives in a clean city or something and try to claim that as your own personal achivements?

# ? Aug 2, 2018 14:40

Flowers For Algeria: Dec 3, 2005; I humbly offer my services as forum inquisitor. There is absolutely no way I would abuse this power in any way.

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

are you just an unmarried vegetarian that lives in a clean city or something and try to claim that as your own personal achivements?

Don�t doxx me

# ? Aug 2, 2018 14:44

Car Hater: May 7, 2007; wolf. bike.
Wolf. Bike.
Wolf! Bike!
WolfBike!
WolfBike!
ARROOOOOO!

StabbinHobo posted:

you can play the "truth is in the middle" cool-centrist-guy all you want, but if you have a car you're not one to talk.

I know this is an extremely difficult thing for americans to swallow. doesn't change it.

I went to school for cars in the most car-centric state and now work for the great Satan itself to service my debt, does that invalidate my demands on my legislators to ban cars, planes, and international trade or strengthen my arguments?

# ? Aug 2, 2018 14:49

Wakko: Jun 9, 2002; Faboo!

Interesting study working to date 4C a little more precisely:

Climate Change of 4�C Global Warming above Pre-industrial Levels

quote:

Using a set of numerical experiments from 39 CMIP5 climate models, we project the emergence time for 4◦C global warming with respect to pre-industrial levels and associated climate changes under the RCP8.5 greenhouse gas concentration scenario. Results show that, according to the 39 models, the median year in which 4◦C global warming will occur is 2084. Based on the median results of models that project a 4◦C global warming by 2100, land areas will generally exhibit stronger warming than the oceans annually and seasonally, and the strongest enhancement occurs in the Arctic, with the exception of the summer season.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 16:25

sitchensis: Mar 4, 2009

Oh. Goody.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 16:44

Conspiratiorist: Nov 12, 2015; 17th Separate Kryvyi Rih Tank Brigade named after Konstantin Pestushko
Look to my coming on the first light of the ~~fifth~~ ~~sixth~~ some day

It's okay, most if not all of us will be dead by then.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 18:13

Trainee PornStar: Jul 20, 2006; I'm just an inbetweener

1969 UK kid chiming in here.... assuming I make it my 70's which will be around 2040.

How much do you think things will have changed? I'm leaning towards massively but don't know the specifics of how much & in what ways.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 18:59

hobbesmaster: Jan 28, 2008

Trainee PornStar posted:

1969 UK kid chiming in here.... assuming I make it my 70's which will be around 2040.

How much do you think things will have changed? I'm leaning towards massively but don't know the specifics of how much & in what ways.

Basically all those Brexit predictions but planetwide

# ? Aug 2, 2018 19:03

Conspiratiorist: Nov 12, 2015; 17th Separate Kryvyi Rih Tank Brigade named after Konstantin Pestushko
Look to my coming on the first light of the ~~fifth~~ ~~sixth~~ some day

Trainee PornStar posted:

1969 UK kid chiming in here.... assuming I make it my 70's which will be around 2040.

How much do you think things will have changed? I'm leaning towards massively but don't know the specifics of how much & in what ways.

Nobody can know. We can expect some events to occur, but we don't know how society will react to them, which is the biggest factor in determining how your life will be personally affected. Humans in developed nations have lives fairly insulated from the subtleties of the natural world, and even when they intersect is in a limited fashion, so outside of personal/regional catastrophes (the industry you work in experiences a dramatic downturn and you get laid off, or your community gets devastated by a natural disaster) the effects we experience are social and macroeconomic.

IE it's highly likely we'll see, or will be well on our way to seeing, an end to multi-year ice in the Arctic, but aside from a more unstable polar vortex causing off-season cold spells (as much as 'seasons' remain a recognizable concept) that in itself won't change your life much, even if it cascades into events that complicate the mid-term prognosis.

OTOH we'll see greater migration into Europe from the Middle East as the situation there worsens politically and economically, with climate change as a contributing factor due to its negative effects in the region, and how Europe reacts to that will play a part in the political landscape.

Will Iran and Israel+Saudi Arabia+UAE duke it out? Will Pakistan and India, with Chinese involvement? Will nuclear weapons be used in either of these? For the past few years we've been seeing the breakdown of international norms and rules that characterize the run-up to wars, and the socioeconomic costs of climate change can only increase tensions in these situations.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 19:19

Gortarius: Jun 6, 2013; idiot

What is more likely to first leave the Middle-east desolate: being perpetually bombed into the stone age or climate change?

Also from what I understand Afghanistan is some sort of a drug growing paradise, is this coming to an end or benefiting from climate change?

# ? Aug 2, 2018 20:01

Perry Mason Jar: Feb 24, 2006; "Della? Take a lid"

Gortarius posted:

What is more likely to first leave the Middle-east desolate: being perpetually bombed into the stone age or climate change?

Also from what I understand Afghanistan is some sort of a drug growing paradise, is this coming to an end or benefiting from climate change?

�U.S. military action has resulted in the desertification of 90% of Iraqi territory, crippling the country's agricultural industry and forcing it to import more than 80% of its food.�

https://www.ecowatch.com/military-largest-polluter-2408760609.html

# ? Aug 2, 2018 21:29

StabbinHobo: Oct 18, 2002; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

Nice piece of fish posted:

I'm not american and you're disingenuous.

ok then, but no i'm not.

A Buttery Pastry posted:

Contrails evaporated with no flights, leaving less cloud cover to reflect the sun or infrared radiation from the ground. IIRC, this increased the daily variation in temperatures by 0.5C during the period.

A Norwegian lawyer might have an electric car.

the total rounding error of rich people in rich countries driving electric vehicles powered by carbon-free electricity is nothing but a cute side story. especially in norway, a literal petrostate.

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

What the heck lifestyle do you even live? Like 90% of your posts seem to be you being smug you are the one true climate lover because you live right. Have you even done anything exceptional or are you just an unmarried vegetarian that lives in a clean city or something and try to claim that as your own personal achivements?

its really not complicated, i live in an apartment building and use walking/biking/rail/bus/lyft/zipcar to get around. roughly 40% of the people in my mid-sized american city do the same (not own a car that is, like 90% of us live in apts). this is a completely normal american lifestyle that you need to freak out in fear of because if you admitted its "fine" you'd have to own the massive carbon footprint gap between it and yours. so you have to dial up the caricature of how awful it would be in your head, and you have to wail and nash about how you'd have to move (near black people!), but meanwhile there's easily tens of millions of us just living our lives fine thank you.

Also, I have never done anything remotely as "exceptional" as fly to all the continents to pet cats.

StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 22:50 on Aug 2, 2018

# ? Aug 2, 2018 22:44

StabbinHobo: Oct 18, 2002; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

in fact, tell you what, forget the list, just do this one thing to start:

- live in an apartment building

thats it. we're done here folks.

# ? Aug 2, 2018 23:12

VideoGameVet: May 14, 2005; It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion. It is by the juice of Java that pedaling acquires speed, the teeth acquire stains, stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion.

StabbinHobo posted:

in fact, tell you what, forget the list, just do this one thing to start:

- live in an apartment building

thats it. we're done here folks.

How does that rank with going Vegan?

# ? Aug 3, 2018 01:04

StabbinHobo: Oct 18, 2002; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

VideoGameVet posted:

How does that rank with going Vegan?

3 - 5 times more important (if you assume knock-on effects in transpo and hvac)

edit: here are some fun infographics for context

you can pretty clearly see that if you can go from a "two car family where both cars drive 10+ miles a day" to a "one car family where it mostly sits in a nearby parking lot for trips", that alone is like the single biggest thing you can do.

and the other bigger numbers, electricity and natural gas, will correlate with the smaller square footage of your apartment as they're mostly about running boilers and compressors. lastly the consumer-goods/furniture/etc you get will be less because you don't have attics and basements and garages to fill up with hoarded crap.

StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 03:59 on Aug 3, 2018

# ? Aug 3, 2018 01:25

Shibawanko: Feb 13, 2013

Galaxy brain: never turn on the heater and wear a coat indoors.

# ? Aug 3, 2018 03:18

Nocturtle: Mar 17, 2007

Perry Mason Jar posted:

�U.S. military action has resulted in the desertification of 90% of Iraqi territory, crippling the country's agricultural industry and forcing it to import more than 80% of its food.�

https://www.ecowatch.com/military-largest-polluter-2408760609.html

That 90% figure is shocking but the link doesn't really substantiate it. I'm having difficulty finding the primary source which seems to be a report by the Iraqi Agriculture Ministry. Googling around suggests a range of factors including climate change, drought, land use and upstream dams etc. This article provided a nice summary, although I don't know anything about IRIN:

IRIN posted:

Death knell for agriculture?
According to the Agriculture Ministry, salinity is affecting at least 40 percent of agricultural land, mainly in central and southern Iraq, while 40-50 percent of what was agricultural land in the 1970s has been affected by desertification.

According to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), desertification is the degradation of land in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas. It is caused primarily by human activities and climatic variations. Desertification does not refer to the expansion of existing deserts. It occurs because dryland ecosystems, which cover over one third of the world's land area, are extremely vulnerable to over-exploitation and inappropriate land use. Poverty, political instability, deforestation, overgrazing and bad irrigation practices can all undermine the productivity of the land.

Fadel Ali al-Faragi, head of the desertification control division in the Agriculture Ministry, said - in a presentation available on the UNCCD website - that 92.5 percent of Iraq was subject to desertification. "Our concern is big and unprecedented," al-Qaisi said.

I'm not an expert but it seems at least contentious to attribute Iraq's environmental problems entirely to US military action, although it's certainly a component. Frankly the possibility that climate change induced drought is making Iraq inhospitable on decade timescales is even scarier. In principle we can at least control the US military.

edit: the broader point that article makes about the US military being a colossal polluter is completely correct

# ? Aug 3, 2018 03:52

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 03:39

Gunshow Poophole: Sep 14, 2008; OMBUDSMAN
POSTERS LOCAL 42069; Clapping Larry

Shibawanko posted:

Galaxy brain: never turn on the heater and wear a coat indoors.

Literally what lost jimmy carter the presidency (that and a certain hero of the Republican Party negotiating with terrorists)

Gunshow Poophole fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Aug 3, 2018

# ? Aug 3, 2018 03:59

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Climate Change: Post up your Phd. dissertation, coward

«‹›410 »