>>8380952

>giant CO2 scrubbers

They are called forests

Plants need water, what do you think happens when things get hotter?

Probably because the change isn't uniform and some areas will get too hot and some will get too cold. I'm sure global warming will open up some new areas to farming, but the problem is what happens to the areas being currently farmed.

So why are they using the word "permanent" as if natural order won't correct it?

more clouds and more rain?

So basically we need to cut back significantly, but we're not yet fucked. Good to know

Forests are pretty crappy CO2 scrubbers. Think about what happens to the carbon in the plant when it dies or gets eaten: the sugar is digested by heterotrophs and turned back into CO2. Something like a coral would be better because it can fix carbon into its exoskeleton.

California disagrees.

newscientist.com/article/dn11655-climate-myths-higher-co2-levels-will-boost-plant-growth-and-food-production/
Also plants are generally in serious crisis right now. Bees dying, predators, disease, drought lack of space to form healthy communities due to urban sprawl, etc...
Not to mention that most of the CO2 that plants absorb get returned into the atmosphere shortly after they die unless preserved in some way, like peat bogs or being buried.

Tipping points and positive feedback loops make that very unlikely. Once we reach 450 ppm we're very likely headed towards becoming Venus. You wouldn't say Venus has a chance of becoming habitable by natural causes would you?

California never had much rain in the first place. That's like wondering why Lake Mead is running dry when it's the primary source of water for a giant city in the middle of a desert