|
Tenacious J posted:Has this been discussed? https://medium.com/@samyoureyes/the-busy-workers-handbook-to-the-apocalypse-7790666afde7 I just found it this week and have been stuck with it. they are not any presumption of the apocalypse within our lifetimes relies on predictions that are impossible to know, generally predicated on massive non-human emissions that are impossible to predict the odds of eg the clathrate gun going bang being nonzero are obviously unacceptable, I don't especially like a one in two thousand chance or what have you of the end of the world, but it's very different from being confident the world will end by 2050, because it's impossible to be confident of that things getting slowly and steadily worse is very boring and the world living longer than i expect to is very upsetting
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 06:22 |
|
|
# ? Jun 7, 2024 07:50 |
This appears to be a pseudonymous medium post that includes headings like "Why Don’t Scientists Agree?", a section which justifies the author's "insights" based on citing Noam Chomsky to justify the belief that all the scientists who disagree with them are brainwashed by propaganda. The article is brain poison; in the world of information available to you about everything, you should not have even considered it. You should identify how you came across it and stop using whatever source led you to it. I'm guessing twitter? Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 07:07 on Jul 26, 2023 |
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 07:05 |
|
I got bad vibes from it the moment they decided to round temperatures to 2 significant figures for no apparent reason. Also somewhere in the middle they quote something that says a 33% chance of something bad, briefly mention that 33% is unacceptably high, and then go on to continue acting like it's 100%.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 07:13 |
|
I enjoyed how at the end they spent a long time arguing against credentialism, far more then they needed to do so you understand it's fine that the author has none but it doesn't matter ok! The stuff about metals was interesting, I might read further into that. I wasn't sure what the authors point is, they take data and extrapolate the absolute worse possible outcomes, provide zero solutions and to what aim? To stir people into communist revolt? The effect is more likely just have people increase their selfish attitudes and speed up global warming, they have already said it's inevitable regardless. Then you take a look at their mastodon and see they are a self proclaimed 'doomer' and it all makes sense.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 08:08 |
|
They explicitly argue that a revolution is impossible, so yeah, it's all just doomerism. Nothing we do matters so might as well do nothing.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 08:10 |
|
Here's an article from 15 years ago that I've been thinking a lot about : James Lovelock: 'Enjoy life while you can: in 20 years global warming will hit the fan' For those of you who don't know, Lovelock was an extremely accomplished independent scientist who was elected to the British Royal Society in 1974 for his contributions to numerous fields, including Earth sciences. For environmentalists, he's best known for proposing the Gaia hypothesis, which postulates that the Earth functions as a self-regulating system. He invented the electron capture detector and used it to become the first to detect the presence of CFCs in the atmosphere. Notably, he was one of those rare (?) breed of pro-nuclear, anti-renewable environmentalists. I won't bold anything because the whole thing is worth a read. It's not very long. quote:The climate science maverick believes catastrophe is inevitable, carbon offsetting is a joke and ethical living a scam. So what would he do? The article of course gets a few things wrong. The Gaia hypothesis, for example, does not in fact "form the basis of almost all climate science". But I thought that, with everything in the news today, the things he said and predicted in this interview 15 years ago have been largely accurate: it really does look like the various systems that form the climate are starting to break down.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 16:12 |
|
I'm sure it's fine.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 17:53 |
|
Trainee PornStar posted:How much of the current warming stuff is due to c02 & how much is due to methane? A lot of emissions are reported in terms of CO2e or equivalent of CO2 emisisons (typically measured in metric tons). Each other gas will have a Global Warming Potential, which is a measurement of the impact of that gas over a given time period (usually GWPs will be calculated with a 20 year or 100 year timeframe), so for example the GWP for Methane used by EPA's 40 CFR Part 98 has a GWP100 of 25. So over 100 years, 1 ton of methane emitted to the atmosphere has the same effect as 25 tons of CO2 emitted to the atmosphere. If you look at Methane's GWP20 from the IPCC AR6, the GWP for biogenic methane is 80.8, so over 20 years one ton of methane from a biogenic source would have the same impact as 80.8 tons of CO2. So theoretically as methane ages in the atmosphere, yes it won't impact the greenhouse effect as, but that doesn't help much when we're still pumping tons of carbon into the atmosphere, or ever CFCs and HFCs which have much higher GWPs and typically last in the atmosphere for much longer.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 18:05 |
|
I love waking up to new depressing climate change news every single day! https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/25/gulf-stream-could-collapse-as-early-as-2025-study-suggests Honestly surprised to see beef and single use plastics still being discussed like it will make any difference at this point. The green movement failed miserably and it's time to start preparing for the worst.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 18:43 |
|
Koburn posted:I love waking up to new depressing climate change news every single day! Lots of media outlets have been reporting on this particular study, and they always use 2025 in the headline, because stating it more accurately, i.e. "could collapse in the next 70 years" wouldn't get as many clicks. Not that I have a problem with that kind of reporting, because IMHO absolute panic should be the general attitude towards climate right now, rather than the mild concern that the general populace has started adopting.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 18:50 |
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Lots of media outlets have been reporting on this particular study, and they always use 2025 in the headline, because stating it more accurately, i.e. "could collapse in the next 70 years" wouldn't get as many clicks. Nah, breathless over the top rubbish reporting is a big reason why a lot of people turn off from this sort of thing.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 22:39 |
|
Electric Wrigglies posted:Nah, breathless over the top rubbish reporting is a big reason why a lot of people turn off from this sort of thing. I mean, they can turn off from the reporting for a while maybe, but they really have no choice but to pay attention when stuff starts to happen to them and their loved ones. And at that point they'll have a come-to-Jesus moment along the lines of "hmm maybe the reporting that I previously dismissed as 'breathless over the top rubbish' was true and I should have paid attention". Anecdotally, this is exactly what I've been seeing: friends who used to not follow the news now are, because it turns out that the skies turning blood red is not a normal thing.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 22:59 |
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I mean, they can turn off from the reporting for a while maybe, but they really have no choice but to pay attention when stuff starts to happen to them and their loved ones. And at that point they'll have a come-to-Jesus moment along the lines of "hmm maybe the reporting that I previously dismissed as 'breathless over the top rubbish' was true and I should have paid attention". So you are saying that when the gulf stream doesn't fall over in 2025 (or 2030), it is still responsible reporting because.....? The same people were all doom and gloom, fire and brimstone, tieing themselves to trucks and conducting "raise the profile" attacks on nuclear facilities about the civilian nuclear industry, the only technology available since the 70's or so that could have made a real dent in carbon generation. Turns out going all out on fabricated hyperbole passed off as fact for META reasons is actually dumb.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 23:11 |
|
Electric Wrigglies posted:So you are saying that when the gulf stream doesn't fall over in 2025 (or 2030), it is still responsible reporting because.....? The same people were all doom and gloom, fire and brimstone, tieing themselves to trucks and conducting "raise the profile" attacks on nuclear facilities about the civilian nuclear industry, the only technology available since the 70's or so that could have made a real dent in carbon generation. Turns out going all out on fabricated hyperbole passed off as fact for META reasons is actually dumb. We're decades behind when it comes to stopping climate change. We haven't even begun the process of reversing it. Therefore, anything that gets people to act, and to pressure their representatives to act, is responsible reporting so long as it is based on science and facts. And AMOC collapse being possible by 2025 is based on science and facts, even if the year that appears in the headline constitutes the worst possible scenario within the given range of 2025 to 2095. What is actually dumb is the idea that 2025 will roll around and people will go "hey, remember that one Guardian article that said AMOC could collapse by 2025? Well, AMOC is still doing okay. What the gently caress? We have been tricked into making the world better! We should roll back our new climate policies immediately!" The other aspect worth recognizing here is that the current findings are that AMOC will collapse between 2025 and 2095. Judging by how much "such and such is happening much faster than scientists anticipated" and "scientists alarmed by how quickly such and such is happening" we've been seeing recently, I think we can reasonably expect that 2025-2095 range will shrink further as time goes on. In other words, there's a real good chance that what is hyperbole today in terms of media reporting will be a reasonable if not outright conservative estimate in the near future.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2023 23:58 |
|
I personally think anybody who sees this "working" or even lasting much longer* should be on extreme red alert. Of course I admit to not seeing the avenues by which power as we understand it realistically tackles the problems we face. *like, thinking beyond individual human life experience narrative. "It might not end while I'm still enjoying things" is a common and real attitude amongst your "betters". That thinking is validated by the lack of actual solutions from our systems, leaders and citizens.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 04:18 |
|
Koburn posted:I love waking up to new depressing climate change news every single day! The article is garbage and a sensational headline, https://twitter.com/GlobalEcoGuy/status/1683956621465079809?s=20
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 04:34 |
|
Tenacious J posted:Has this been discussed? https://medium.com/@samyoureyes/the-busy-workers-handbook-to-the-apocalypse-7790666afde7 I just found it this week and have been stuck with it. His conclusions are incredibly stupid and completely debunked by ClimateTippingPoints.Info
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 04:35 |
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:The article is garbage and a sensational headline, drat, this "GlobalEcoGuy" sure nitpicks a lot, even though in the end he admits that in terms of whether AMOC will collapse or not, he has no loving clue: https://twitter.com/GlobalEcoGuy/status/1683956642591678464 Will AMOC collapse? Maybe, maybe not. Wow! Deep insight.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 06:03 |
I can't read that thread without an account but it's totally valid to let people know that there is no evidence for a claim that is being made. He can't confidently say it won't happen, but that's just the normal response you'll get from a scientist when you ask a question about their field without enough evidence supporting a conclusion. It's important to know that we just don't know. It's not a firm refutation because apparently there is no firm evidence either way.
|
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 08:40 |
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:, there's a real good chance that what is hyperbole today in terms of media reporting will be a reasonable if not outright conservative estimate in the near future. Nah, this is as dumb as the guys that deny climate change on "there's a real good chance that what is hyperbole " after all, they are every bit as right as you are.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 08:58 |
|
Slow News Day posted:drat, this "GlobalEcoGuy" sure nitpicks a lot, even though in the end he admits that in terms of whether AMOC will collapse or not, he has no loving clue: https://twitter.com/GlobalEcoGuy/status/1684379516607639554?s=20 https://twitter.com/AJWVictoriaBC/status/1684340627952263168?s=20 drat, he seems pretty smart to me! Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 10:25 on Jul 27, 2023 |
# ? Jul 27, 2023 10:19 |
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Here's an article from 15 years ago that I've been thinking a lot about : He sounds just like every competent engineer I know. People don’t listen to engineers is the problem.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 10:45 |
|
Electric Wrigglies posted:Nah, this is as dumb as the guys that deny climate change on "there's a real good chance that what is hyperbole " after all, they are every bit as right as you are. The trends are on my side. Things are happening faster and faster, and much sooner than scientists anticipated. You do you, though.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 15:23 |
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:https://twitter.com/GlobalEcoGuy/status/1684379516607639554?s=20 What about these guys? Also climate scientists: https://twitter.com/Lacertko/status/1683884456027860993 https://twitter.com/rahmstorf/status/1684519055221219328 Even the famously anti-doomer guy signal-boosted it: https://twitter.com/MichaelEMann/status/1683983534313340929 Like, if you're reading an article about possible AMOC collapse and it cites the Gulf Stream, and your first reaction is "Hah! The Gulf Stream and AMOC are different things!" then you're... probably missing the point in a huge way.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 15:47 |
|
Well the first guy said by 2025, the news ones posted are saying by 2050. Which is it?
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 16:20 |
|
You can look at the paper yourself and find out, you know. Here's the line that is apparently driving both of those interpretations: "The mean of the bootstrapped estimates of the tipping time is 〈tc〉 = 2050, and the 95% confidence interval is 2025–2095." Here's the paper.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 17:10 |
|
Society collapses and 99% of non-wealthy humans are starving and without clean water in 2050: “Ha! Those losers said this would happen 2025! Look how wrong they were!”
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 17:50 |
|
https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/saguaro-cacti-collapsing-arizona-extreme-heat-scientist-says-2023-07-25/ Saguaro cacti collapsing in Arizona extreme heat, scientist says PHOENIX, July 25 (Reuters) - Arizona's saguaro cacti, a symbol of the U.S. West, are leaning, losing arms and in some cases falling over during the state's record streak of extreme heat, a scientist said on Tuesday. Summer monsoon rains the cacti rely on have failed to arrive, testing the desert giants' ability to survive in the wild as well as in cities after temperatures above 110 degrees Fahrenheit (43 Celsius) for 25 days in Phoenix, said Tania Hernandez. "These plants are adapted to this heat, but at some point the heat needs to cool down and the water needs to come," said Hernandez, a research scientist at Phoenix's 140-acre (57-hectare) Desert Botanical Garden, which has over 2/3 of all cactus species, including saguaros which can grow to over 40 feet (12 meters). Plant physiologists at the Phoenix garden are studying how much heat cacti can take. Until recently many thought the plants were perfectly adapted to high temperatures and drought. Arizona's heat wave is testing those assumptions. Cacti need to cool down at night or through rain and mist. If that does not happen they sustain internal damage. Plants now suffering from prolonged, excessive heat may take months or years to die, Hernandez said. Cacti in Phoenix are being studied as the city is a heat island, mimicking higher temperatures plants in the wild are expected to face with future climate change, Hernandez said.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 20:23 |
|
jeeves posted:Society collapses and 99% of non-wealthy humans are starving and without clean water in 2050: “Ha! Those losers said this would happen 2025! Look how wrong they were!” But enough about this thread in general…
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 22:32 |
|
LionArcher posted:But enough about this thread in general… Shouldn't generalize from just two or three posters IMO. There's dozens of us!
|
# ? Jul 27, 2023 22:37 |
|
the Phoenix botanical garden is loving cool, incidentally all desert plants plus a butterfly house
|
# ? Jul 28, 2023 00:13 |
|
Slow News Day posted:What about these guys? Also climate scientists: This an entirely different claim. What was original posted was just plain old bad incorrect sensational clickbait. It's almost as if you aren't even reading what are you posting. The author has a deeper explanation as well, https://twitter.com/GlobalEcoGuy/status/1684669483326091264?s=20 https://twitter.com/GlobalEcoGuy/status/1684669490401857536?s=20 https://twitter.com/EleanorFrajka/status/1683917521735368704?s=20 Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Jul 28, 2023 |
# ? Jul 28, 2023 04:32 |
|
It's interesting to note that if the gulf stream shuts down (which is not the AMOC, but a smaller part of it as I understand) some studies have said the result will not be that europe becomes colder. All the time that is, some have said it might become hotter in summers and colder in winters (like alaska or siberian cold for us in the north) and lots more extreme weather all around.
|
# ? Jul 28, 2023 05:19 |
|
jeeves posted:Society collapses and 99% of non-wealthy humans are starving and without clean water in 2050: “Ha! Those losers said this would happen 2025! Look how wrong they were!” Its important to know! I can't get a bunker built in only 2 years.
|
# ? Jul 28, 2023 08:19 |
|
Mega Comrade posted:Its important to know! I can't get a bunker built in only 2 years. Buy an old missle silo. Hell you can even get an entire base! (Gotta let the Air Force have access to keep cleaning up contaminated groundwater/soil).
|
# ? Jul 28, 2023 14:17 |
|
drat it feels good to be a gangser (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
# ? Jul 29, 2023 00:00 |
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:
Dr. Johnathan Foley's salary from this particular non profit is apparently public information. This is useful how?
|
# ? Jul 29, 2023 00:21 |
|
It's standard cretinous behavior; to imply that the guy's saying what he's saying because he's being paid well to do so, without actually having to come out and say that because, of course, there's absolutely no evidence to support such an accusation if it's made outright. If you can't attack the message, attack the messenger.
|
# ? Jul 29, 2023 03:05 |
I had to perform a separate set of 990 searches, but for reference that's his 2019 income from Project Drawdown, not any listed income from the California Academy of Sciences. Nothing else stands out other than they've got some conflict of interest procedure disclosure language that's probably not needed referring to activities in 2011, and one of their entity descriptions has typos because it was lazily copy-pasted, probably from their site.
|
|
# ? Jul 29, 2023 04:06 |
|
|
# ? Jun 7, 2024 07:50 |
|
biznatchio posted:It's standard cretinous behavior; to imply that the guy's saying what he's saying because he's being paid well to do so, without actually having to come out and say that because, of course, there's absolutely no evidence to support such an accusation if it's made outright. Yeah. I totally get that. $300K will give you a very comfortable life, it's well beyond middle class but it's not a crazy amount of money. These days it takes something like $650K to break into the top 1% of earners. When you get your annual physical the doctor who listens to your heart rate is probably making more. A nurse who works a lot of overtime and picks up shifts on major holidays would approach that. He's an executive director for a nonprofit. He could take his skill set and connections and make 10 times as much doing the same work at a Fortune 500 community. It's not like he is taking a vow of poverty by doing what he's doing, but his salary is entirely unremarkable.
|
# ? Jul 29, 2023 04:16 |