|
If you can find the old thread, look at some of the science posts from the early parts of it. It's hilarious how optimistic people were only like 5 or 6 years ago.
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 23:15 |
|
|
ChairMaster posted:I'm not American, and I know perfectly well that NZ has immigration policy, which is like the main reason I went back to school to get a degree that can get me a job that can get me a work visa toward eventual permanent residence and citizenship. It's not a short term plan, but it's also perfectly possible to move to another country if you do your research and put in the time and effort, especially if you're white and you speak the same language they speak. Fair enough. I just see a lot of Americans throwing it around as some option that's always there if they feel like it. Possibly due to the constant right-wing American cadence of how Mexicans should just "immigrate legally," as though everyone always has that option on the table for any given country.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:08
|
|
|
Rap Record Hoarder posted:Go for it but make sure your kid knows how to fend for themselves (live off the land, basic medicine, etc) and use guns. I'm not joking. It sounds like a bad joke about baby boomer preppers but honestly if poo poo goes sideways then they'll need it. I don't think that's true at all. There are a number of existing technologies that are able to remove more carbon than they produce, the issue is cost.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
even in the last 10 pages people were optimistic about the paris accords as "not enough to prevent 2C but its a step"... imagine being able to go back and tell that person "donald trump was elected and backed out of them"
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:29
|
|
|
Now we can finally put to bed the notion that eating beef, flying, and having kids will make poo poo bad; this was decided before I was born.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:34
|
|
|
Banana Man posted:Now we can finally put to bed the notion that eating beef, flying, and having kids will make poo poo bad; this was decided before I was born. Yes, this is basically the form of argument that denialism will take in the final stages. Of course, it fails to understand the actual scale of the problem. A +6C world is actually worse than a +4C one and a +2-3C world is still possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:37
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Yes, this is basically the form of argument that denialism will take in the final stages. *raises hand* what if i lust for the worst of all possible worlds
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:38
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:40
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Yes, this is basically the form of argument that denialism will take in the final stages. Haha, "final stages". quote:Last month, deep in a 500-page environmental impact statement, the Trump administration made a startling assumption: On its current course, the planet will warm a disastrous seven degrees by the end of this century.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:43
|
|
|
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-09/environment-minister-says-calls-to-end-coal-drawing-long-bow/10354604quote:The [environment] Minister, who used to work in the mining sector, suggested the 91 scientists behind the IPCC report had got it wrong. https://twitter.com/SkyNewsAust/status/1049106248308645889 https://twitter.com/Clarke_Melissa/status/1049408007631597568 https://twitter.com/p_hannam/status/1049411731414339584 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:49
|
|
|
Yeah that way of thinking is basically just a switch anyway for most people; going from “climate change is fake” to “there’s no way to avoid it” is exactly the same amount of energy required from said person. I don’t think I’ve contributed to the thread much other than 1 or 2 interesting articles and left it mostly to shitposting in frustration, so thanks y’all for the articles and interesting bits and papers and whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 04:56
|
|
|
Banana Man posted:Yeah that way of thinking is basically just a switch anyway for most people; going from “climate change is fake” to “there’s no way to avoid it” is exactly the same amount of energy required from said person. Which is why the second one is so popular in this thread. The world turning off like a lightswitch in 15 years is more 'fun' and cinematic than some future where during your retirement food costs 37% more and that is within your personal budget to afford but limits your quality of life while harming poorer people significantly stuff that is just sad and dour and doesn't ever happen like a cool action movie where you get to do sick bike flips in a rock quarry that is the setting of some post apocalyptic movie.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:09
|
|
|
Well I suppose if capitalism is all we've got... how do we go about convincing the rich that if we all die out, they'll lose massive amounts of money, so it's more cost effective to keep the planet cool? Obviously we won't convince the US government to invest until at least 2020, but in the meantime we could maybe get Elon Musk types on board? I kind of hate him, but he's got the kind of money you can throw at a problem like this and potentially get inertia and results.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:10
|
|
|
Saxophone posted:Well I suppose if capitalism is all we've got... how do we go about convincing the rich that if we all die out, they'll lose massive amounts of money, so it's more cost effective to keep the planet cool? Tesla makes millions selling credits to other companies that let them pollute more than they otherwise would, so idk if Musk is the best place to look.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Tesla makes millions selling credits to other companies that let them pollute more than they otherwise would, so idk if Musk is the best place to look. Touche. I was thinking more along the lines of SpaceX kinda deal, but for warming, but... blah. Surely we should be able to talk billionaire tech-bros into investing in saving the world so they'll get all the credit down the line? Maybe? ... I'm at anger and bargaining now, aren't I? Oy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
Yeah I’m thinking that it’s best to not involve the rich in this process (unless we are eating them) any attempt at normal action is going to be seen as a threat and the facists will (even more so) put the boots to minorities that are scrambling for cover. Not to say this is a nothing matters situation but talking nice to them is the wrong move imo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
The level of action required to avert catastrophe is literally unprecedented in human history. It's ten times the Marshal Plan, applied all over the world. It would put an immediate stop to economic growth in the way we currently expect and appreciate it. Construction of an entirely new power generation infrastructure in every developing nation, complete replacement of most power generation with clean sources, nuclear solar and wind wherever each is applicable. The end of profit as a large scale driving notion. The end of capitalism. It's politically impossible, and recruiting some dipshit billionaires is not good enough.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:28
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:
It's a better start than screaming into the void until the sea swallows us or the sun roasts us I should think. Literally any little bit is better than nothing. I'd rather go out fighting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:34
|
|
|
Do whatever you want dude, the flip side of being powerless to do anything substantive to make the world better is that you can't really make things any worse. Trying to get child-minded billionaires to be decent human beings isn't going to be rewarding in any way, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:37
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:Do whatever you want dude, the flip side of being powerless to do anything substantive to make the world better is that you can't really make things any worse. Just because you might not be able to make things that much better doesn't mean you can't make it much worse. Reality isn't symmetrical like that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:40
|
|
|
If you're thinking in terms of binary outcomes like "it's too late" vs "it's not too late" you should probably step back and consider that the planet doesn't care about your stupid anthropomorphic narratives. We can have a pliocene, miocene, or eocene-like climate and we can have anywhere in between or worse. Shut the gently caress up and get busy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:42
|
|
|
Fair, but what pressure can be applied where to get action taken? If we get non-morons into government in November and more yet in 2020 we could get the Paris Climate Agreement back in play with enough pressure and someone charismatic enough behind it. From there you can at least hopefully stymie the horrifically bad stuff and just deal with the bad stuff until you can apply more pressure and hope technology would be keeping up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:44
|
|
|
emperor naked four new posts in cursed thread reading them makes sad
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:54
|
|
|
Saxophone posted:Fair, but what pressure can be applied where to get action taken? If we get non-morons into government in November and more yet in 2020 we could get the Paris Climate Agreement back in play with enough pressure and someone charismatic enough behind it. From there you can at least hopefully stymie the horrifically bad stuff and just deal with the bad stuff until you can apply more pressure and hope technology would be keeping up. Vote in national elections. Vote in local elections. Live a more ascetic lifestyle. Show up at town halls and push for better policies. Educate yourself in Earth science and environmental engineering. Take good care of yourself physically and mentally. Learn skills that will make your community more resilient. Be compassionate. Convince others to do the same. More people doing these things creates a feedback loop that improves the outcomes for all of us.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:54
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Just because you might not be able to make things that much better doesn't mean you can't make it much worse. Reality isn't symmetrical like that. Do you... think that forums poster Saxophone has the ability to make climate change significantly worse? I don't. Same goes for everyone else here, we just don't have that kind of power. Notorious R.I.M. posted:If you're thinking in terms of binary outcomes like "it's too late" vs "it's not too late" you should probably step back and consider that the planet doesn't care about your stupid anthropomorphic narratives. We can have a pliocene, miocene, or eocene-like climate and we can have anywhere in between or worse. Shut the gently caress up and get busy. The ecology of the world at large is not really my concern, the political effects of what's to come are bad enough that I'm not particularly concerned with the difference between any of the various outcomes that are realistic at this time. Saxophone posted:Fair, but what pressure can be applied where to get action taken? If we get non-morons into government in November and more yet in 2020 we could get the Paris Climate Agreement back in play with enough pressure and someone charismatic enough behind it. From there you can at least hopefully stymie the horrifically bad stuff and just deal with the bad stuff until you can apply more pressure and hope technology would be keeping up. The best your country has to offer are not even close to willing to consider that the problems we face might not be compatible with unlimited growth and profit. There is not a single Democratic politician who has anything substantive to say regarding climate change and I doubt there ever will be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:59
|
|
|
Saxophone posted:Fair, but what pressure can be applied where to get action taken? If we get non-morons into government in November and more yet in 2020 we could get the Paris Climate Agreement back in play with enough pressure and someone charismatic enough behind it. From there you can at least hopefully stymie the horrifically bad stuff and just deal with the bad stuff until you can apply more pressure and hope technology would be keeping up. there is a lot of hope in here, if you think voting for democrats who have historically been pretty mediocre on climate change will change the things then you should do the voting thing and maybe all the canvassing and other things that go with it. I'm skeptical of democrats. Climate change is violence on a massive scale, perpetrated by a comparatively small number of elites who refuse to admit or acknowledge that they need to do something because, oh no their profits or their GDP or whatever the gently caress is far too important to them. Instead of doing anything at all they're too busy building their pyramids so that after the end comes future archaeologists can exhume their corpses and talk about how our pharaohs built monuments to protect them even in death at the expense of billions of their slaves. With that in mind I think you could justify pretty much any action you can think of or look to history for examples of what kinds of action individuals or dedicated groups could take to do things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 05:59
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:A +6C world is actually worse than a +4C one and a +2-3C world is still possible. this is the horror that is motivating me to post and really think about this. what is 4 degrees Celsius to the average person? welp, gotta tighten up the purse strings... set the a/c to 24C/75F instead of 20C/68F. oh these scientists can't deal with a little extra heat? heh, i've driven without a/c before. eggheads afraid of a little heat.  there is an issue with messaging here. the numerical difference just doesn't impact the imagination or convey anything meaningful. here's a stupid, silly, funny, hypothetical scenario with aliens that i hope illustrates what i'm getting at. keep in mind i recognize this is hyper-simplistic, i'm not gonna write 50 pages: so let's say we somehow miraculously communicate with some cool aliens. nearly destroying our planet through the industrial age due to pollution, we ask if the aliens had similar issues in development. amazingly, their story is so, so similar to ours. but instead using the number 100 as the boiling point for water, the aliens used 1,000. their space-scientists said 'hey... we're burning space-oil and it's making our not-earth planet get warmer, and it's going to get warmer by 50 degrees if we don't tackle this. so the aliens had an order of magnitude difference relating things they could count (i.e. 1 space-apple, 2 space-apples, many space-apples) and the numbering system they used to measure temperature. since integers were much easier to understand to the alien space-apple farmers whose votes mattered most, they recognized a loss of 50 apples as something massive. they also exercised tighter control over their air conditioning systems because the values of 1 degree meant more to them conceptually than the earthling's 0.1 degree; all beings in the universe are averse to non-integers. so the aliens skipped world war 3 and jumped right into developing an end to scarcity for their civilization. and it was all thanks to the number 1,000. /end silly-aliens-story i'm not advocating that we change the Celsius scale. what i'm suggesting is that 1/2/3/4 degrees is meaningless to the average person. so if you want to come up with methods of convincing John Q. Public, just screaming 4 to 6 DEGREES OF DOOM isn't going to do any good. i don't have a solution to this perception problem. but knowing is half the battle. G.ee I. Knoe  Edit: in case it's not obvious, it's horrifying to me because even half a degree of warming could have a profound impact. and that because everyone is all black/white in their thinking even attempts to stop a bad situation from getting worse are just met with fatalism. im depressed lol fucked around with this message at 06:06 on Oct 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:02
|
|
|
Yeah I think even using numbers isn't going to work. You basically have to gather a religiosity about stewardship for gxd's creation/gxxx.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:06
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:Do you... think that forums poster Saxophone has the ability to make climate change significantly worse? I don't. Same goes for everyone else here, we just don't have that kind of power. I mean, yeah. Not picking on them or anything, just that's exactly why global solutions are required. It only takes releasing 8L of Freon to equal an entire lifetime of American emissions, or 5 Chinese lifetimes. A single forest fire caused by negligence or arson can release thousands of lives worth of sequestered carbon. A single industrial accident (or intentional act) can lead to the emissions equivalent of a million of people or more. (those are napkin math figures) im depressed lol posted:this is the horror that is motivating me to post and really think about this. Honestly, there's a strong argument to be made that Americans would be more understanding of the impacts of climate change if we used C˚.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:12
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:The ecology of the world at large is not really my concern, the political effects of what's to come are bad enough that I'm not particularly concerned with the difference between any of the various outcomes that are realistic at this time. Ahh I guess that's why you made dumb rear end claims upthread like ocean acidification leading to "phytoplankton extinction." It just turns out that you have no idea what you're talking about and would rather repeatedly make poo poo up to ensure to yourself that it's too late for... something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:15
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:Ahh I guess that's why you made dumb rear end claims upthread like ocean acidification leading to "phytoplankton extinction." It just turns out that you have no idea what you're talking about and would rather repeatedly make poo poo up to ensure to yourself that it's too late for... something. Uh... are you talking about that thing I specifically said probably wasn't going to happen? Or do you believe that ocean acidification has no effect on phytoplankton? I'm a little confused by this post.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:21
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:Uh... are you talking about that thing I specifically said probably wasn't going to happen? Or do you believe that ocean acidification has no effect on phytoplankton? I'm a little confused by this post. Different phytoplankton can adapt to a range of pH levels. There's no consensus on what different concentration pathways would do to global phytoplankton communities and some of the absolute worst outcomes we know about support thriving phytoplankton communities. You repeatedly drop specious claims in this thread to advocate for your own selfish resignation. Divining specific outcomes out of noise is you using confirmation bias to justify your actions. Take it to /r/collapse you charlatan.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:29
|
|
|
Any good break downs on that? I've seen it pushed along two lines: #1 - [Allegedly] They'll dissolve and die then we're hosed. #2 - [Allegedly] Convective currents'll be hosed everywhere which disrupts circulation something something about nutrients and life cycles. Populations will decrease to the point where we're hosed. In terms of looking into it, I got as far as reading that there's oxygen-producing phytoplankton which don't have calcium carbonate shells and wondering why I'd never heard anything about that from the, "they'll all dissolve," people so I just stopped there and don't pay attention to this anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:33
|
|
|
Yea that thing you posted is specifically why I said I don't think it's likely that we'll suffocate on the atmosphere because all the phytoplankton died. I said that like 4 times before you decided I was saying that humanity is definitely going extinct. If I'm so far off base, you probably wouldn't need to make stuff up to yell at me with, you could pick something I actually said and not pretend I said the opposite. It wouldn't be hard, theoretically. Anyways the new IPCC report confirms pretty strongly what I've been saying for years regarding the science of the matter, the only thing you can really disagree with me on at this point is the politics of it. If you really believe that we are politically prepared for the scenario described by that report then uh... that's ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:33
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:Yea that thing you posted is specifically why I said I don't think it's likely that we'll suffocate on the atmosphere because all the phytoplankton died. I said that like 4 times before you decided I was saying that humanity is definitely going extinct. If I'm so far off base, you probably wouldn't need to make stuff up to yell at me with, you could pick something I actually said and not pretend I said the opposite. It wouldn't be hard, theoretically. I mean, if you think the IPCC report supports your contentions, why don't you quote from the report where it does? Since you've already read it. (As you'd have to already have read it to know it supports you.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:35
|
|
|
its easy you just need to contextualize the numbers 1 - 8C is "the number of 9mm bullets you think your kid can survive" look it up, you'd be surprised how high it is!
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:39
|
|
|
The reason reason regulars post in this thread is to assert their place on its dominance hierarchy when it becomes the biggest megathread in 2030.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:If you really believe that we are politically prepared for the scenario described by that report then uh... that's ridiculous. Ahh so that's why they got rid of all the different RCPs and SSPs and just left us with two pathways, "prepared" and "unprepared"
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:49
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I mean, if you think the IPCC report supports your contentions, why don't you quote from the report where it does? Since you've already read it. (As you'd have to already have read it to know it supports you.) quote:Limiting warming to 1.5°C would require transformative systemic change, integrated with sustainable quote:Although multiple communities around the world are demonstrating the possibility of implementation quote:Under emissions in line with current pledges under the Paris Agreement (known as NationallyDetermined RE the world being completely and utterly unprepared and unwilling to make an effort in any meaningful way, which has been my main contention for a long time. Notorious R.I.M. posted:Ahh so that's why they got rid of all the different RCPs and SSPs and just left us with two pathways, "prepared" and "unprepared" Scientists don't know anything about politics, dude. Those pathways are fine regarding the science and ecology of the matter, but it's silly to think that our society will remain peaceful and stable in the midst of most of them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 06:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 23:15 |
|
|
Accretionist posted:Any good break downs on that? 2 is the weird one. We have some limited paleoclimate evidence that a reduction in deep overturning circulation results in a stratified water column that is productive and oxic at the surface and sulfidic and anoxic (euxinic) at depth. There's tons of problems running with this assumption though, like during periods where we suspect euxinia persisted (the Permian) we had a lot more shallow water shelves. But beyond that ocean chemistry has changed a lot since then. Diatoms didn't even exist until at least the end-Permian extinction for example, so we can't just assume that a repeat of end-Permian ocean conditions yields the same outcome. Regarding 1, we can test tons of different species to see how they react and adapt, but we can't extrapolate these conclusions to how the food web at large will react. Like many other facets of climate change, the frightening part is the size of the uncertainty in the response, not any specific outcome.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 07:00
|
|