Here in the UK we currently have a heatwave. Europe seems to also be having a heatwave (Portugal just had forest fires). And I read today about Arizona in the US, where flights were grounded because the temperature (up to 48 degrees C) was higher than the operating temperature of the aircraft.
Are all of these things due to climate change? And will this stuff keep happening?
Other urls found in this thread:
climatecentral.org
ucsusa.org
metoffice.gov.uk
charts.animateddata.co.uk
twitter.com
It's just another year like all of them. People just suck at remembering what the last year was like.
No it's not, they're saying on British news that we're having the hottest June heatwave for decades.
I'm actually a bit of a climate change sceptic. Well I don't deny it's happening, I've just always taken the view that we should wait and see what happens before destroying entire industries like coal and oil, especially when other countries are still profiting from those industries.
But this heatwave is making me think "hm, maybe global warming is a bit shit".
Hottest heatwave for decades? A decade is in no way relevant amount of time when it comes to measuring climate so it's completely irrelevant. Outlier years will happen. There will be colder summers coming too but they don't fit the agenda so we don't talk about it.
Not destroying the very thing we are trying to protect by fucking over the industries that enable our standard of living is a good thing I agree.
>A decade is in no way relevant amount of time when it comes to measuring climate so it's completely irrelevant.
How is it irrelevant?
>Outlier years will happen.
They happen more frequently if you increase the temperature. That's the point.
>There will be colder summers coming too but they don't fit the agenda so we don't talk about it.
There will be fewer cold summers.
>Not destroying the very thing we are trying to protect by fucking over the industries that enable our standard of living is a good thing I agree.
Oh no! Climate change mitigation will destroy us! Who's the alarmist exactly?
>flights grounded
>48c
>higher than operating temperature
How retarded are you?
So you think this heatwave ISN'T due to global warming? Do you still think global warming is happening though?
>Oh no! Climate change mitigation will destroy us! Who's the alarmist exactly?
OP here - I guess you have a point there. I dunno, I guess it's about gradually weaning off coal/oil and making sure there's renewable energy being developed to replace it, both in providing energy AND in terms of providing jobs.
Which bit about that is incorrect you fucking retard? That's exactly what they said on the news - some of the smaller planes have max. operating temperatures lower than 48 C.
>What is Confirmation Bias?
How many places in the world are having an unusually mild bit of weather right now? Mildest summer here in several years. Local weather is not climate, and cherry picking places where it is warmer than usual to "prove" climate change, or cherry picking places where it is cooler than normal to disprove it, are both equally without value.
Showing a pattern of more frequent record breaking weather is not cherrypicking.
And in my country this year has been the coldest of the past 100 years. Guess the climate is cooling now huh? Stop global ice age
June solstice is coming. The sun will be at 23.5N lat in a few more days. Then it will head back toward the equator, arriving for Sept Equinox, then off to Capricorn at 23.5S lat in time for Dec solstice. Then back to the equator for March equinox, repeat
...
this
>It's just another year like all of them.
Yeah, this.
Ignore the fact that warmest ever months have been getting more and more common.
...
>tfw you think climate change is a natural thing and our gasses are probably inconsequential which basically makes me hitler
Friendly reminder that Batman V Superman was a good movie. Solid 7/10, would be higher if not for the greenscreen nightmare Doomsday fight.
>Wahh, people object when I say stupid shit!
>tfw you think the earth is flat and gravity is probably inconsequential which basically makes me hitler
Oh honey, you see science doesn't care about what you think or how you feel about a subject, all that matters is the empirical evidence that has been studied for nearly a century in regards to climate change, longer if you look at paleoclimatology. See sweetie, your emotions don't matter in a scientific argument, all that matters are the facts honey. Now go on, run back to that echo chamber / safe space that is /pol/ where you can have arguments from emotion about climate change because you just feel it's not right and those damn libcucks, or libruls or leftists or whatever other buzzwords you guys throw around are just up to no good.
By the way darling, it doesn't make you "Hitler," it just makes you another dumb brainlet to be ridiculed.
Lmao i don't care. I won't be alive to see the serious consequences and the areas currently being fucked by it are areas that need population removal regardless.
>one person doesn't believe
>spawns ad hom shitposts and asspain about /pol/
Want to guess why people don't listen to you blithering retards?
On a related topic, what do you guys think of Climate Engineering?
Moral/ideological issues aside, is it even feasible?
I think the difference people don't really talk about isn't whether it exists, it's if governments should do anything about it. Just let consumers decide what they want, the market will follow
Capitalism will not solve climate change
How do you know it won't? Give me evidence it won't.
Capitalism is inherently opposed to environmentalism (which at this point ought to just be called Humanism)
The measures necessary for slowing this process down really depends on everyone to stop using carbon. These "reductions" won't do shit in the long run.
climatecentral.org
The Paris Agreement still doesn't address cars, the "largest source of pollution in the US" (the second biggest polluter on the planet).
ucsusa.org
It also doesn't address entire processes like fracking, like selling bottled water, like producing nearly as much plastic junk as we do.
There's still going to be waste, and even if you pay money just to plant trees-- where do you think that energy comes from? Where do you think any of this energy comes from?
The big bad truth is that our lifestyles and the survivability of our planet are mutually exclusives. We need to make massive sacrifices and shifts in the ways we live. Capitalism--the consumerism, the unregulated privatization and collection of (what ought to be) public resources will never let you do that.
I don't know what the answer is, but to even think the market is going to save us from what it caused in the first place is insanity.
I see you lack creativity. Someone could easily invent a process or discover and energy source that is just as powerful and cheap as gas, oil, fracking. In fact, shortage of those supplies will literally force companies to develop cost efficient, powerful fuels to meet demand. Because money. But sure, let's just subsidize shit products and hope people adopt them.
I think you also just don't understand capitalism. I bet you think electric powered cars don't exist due to some century old myth
I see you believe in some magic hand. We could all get together and stop promoting objectively wasteful and unnecessary lifestyles (do you know harmful, for example, eating meat every night is? or smoking cigarettes?). But sure, let's trust the companies and the ignorant public, they always know what to do.
Electric cars don't even solve the problem, by the way.
It sounds like you're the person not understanding capitalism. Your "counter-argument" consists of "if we let the market create more efficient commodities, everything will be fixed" / "let's just wait for cold-fusion". Not to mention how you're ignoring how makor industry has consistently acted against environmentalism purely because it doesn't sell and, in fact, is opposed to consumption.
Ah, I see. You're now claiming to be smarter than everyone else, and want to make decisions for them. It comes out. I don't want you to decide for me. I'll decide my own fate. You're probably European. I know this is foreign to you. Nothing, and I mean nothing, has created more wealth, prosperity, and advancement of society than the free exchange of people's goods and services specific to their own interests.
And you're right, environmental commodities don't sell BECAUSE PEOPLE DONT WANT THEM.
Consider this.
Oil is now running out. It is becoming too costly for people to drive their cars. Will the companies keep trying to produce gas burning cars?
No, they will be forced to come up with a new power source, which could be renewable, might not be. If you can't understand this simple concept then I'm afraid your world view clouds your judgement.
Markets have solved every problem we've had so far, and will continue to do so.
> I don't want you to decide for me. I'll decide my own fate.
Well I hope you enjoy the choice between 20 different types of detergent. What would us Americans do without such an essential freedom of choice.
>And you're right, environmental commodities don't sell BECAUSE PEOPLE DONT WANT THEM.
Ah, I see. You're ignoring the good of mankind, the sustainability of our planet, and the wellbeing of our grandchildern because it doesn't sell. You're literally valuing economic good over the good of humanity. Believe it or not, the two aren't the same.
>Oil is now running out. It is becoming too costly for people to drive their cars. Will the companies keep trying to produce gas burning cars?
And they've helped ruin the environment and ruined the way America is designed. Gee, I sure wish we didn't fucking push for everyone to get cars or wastefully produce millions of models a year because "freedom of choice".
>Markets have solved every problem we've had so far, and will continue to do so.
They've also caused a good deal of the major problems we're facing today. So I'm not going to be singing their praises.
If you're so brainwashed as to think that a person's fate and freedom is solely defined by their economic choices and what kind of car they choose to drive, or what kind of fast-food they're going to get, not only do you have a cynical and shallow view of life, you're also part of the problem.
Not to mention, by the way, most of these "choices" you're making aren't free. Americans are attacked with ads that are designed to target and bring out your most animal and unthinking self, they're raised to buy certain kind of products, they have limitations based on their income or, for most people, luck. That's hardly liberty or self-determination by anyone's standards.
Nothing out of the ordinary, really :
metoffice.gov.uk
These are the mean tempature for the day, meaning it's including night temperature, hence why you don't see much above 25°C.
As far back as 1948, you see temperature in June fluctuating between 10°C and 23°C.
I don't know exactly the conditions they are measuring it but they had 12,7°C and 20,7°C last year.
A second source give me this :
charts.animateddata.co.uk
We can see the temperature follow more or less the same pattern all along the year and this since the beginning of the century.
Now, there might be discripenties between the two sources if we look a bit deeper but they both say the same thing in the end :
That the average monthly temperature are in line with the previous 100 years of data.
What might be different is the rain :
In western continental europe, there's currently a serious case of drought, which make the heat much worse than it should be.
You've gone full Bernie and are a tyrant. I want nothing to do with you and your power grab to try and control my life. Kill yourself
Thanks for not giving a shit about the environment or humanity's future. Can't wait for your small town to suffer water shortages.
I sit on some of the largest areas of fresh water on the Earth. You'll be coming to me faggot.
>Not to mention how you're ignoring how makor industry has consistently acted against environmentalism purely because it doesn't sell and, in fact, is opposed to consumption.
Not the user you were answering but still :
Major energy industries don't oppose ecologists just because "it doesn't sell".
They oppose ecologists because going their way would mean having to make huge investment to change a production process that is already working.
If you have the choice between continuing exactly as before with a sure chance of profit for your work OR change radically your way of working and have lesser chances of profit, you won't do it.
You might do it if the potential chances for profit would be higher than your old ways... or if what allowed the old ways is disappearing.
Rather than whinning about "muh fragile ecosystem", ecologists would have better success if they worked on finding clean energy technologies that are actually more economically efficient than the existing ones.
That wouldn't stop oil drilling dead in its tracks but it would reduce private investment into new drilling operations, since money could be invested better in said new ways of producing energy.
I'm glad you understand
>If you have the choice between continuing exactly as before with a sure chance of profit for your work OR change radically your way of working and have lesser chances of profit, you won't do it.
It doesn't sell v it doesn't profit-- the point is the same.
Again, the capitalist system requires businesses to care more about their own profits than the greater good--namely the habitability of this planet. It's not so much that heads of coporations are evil and they're holding back progress, I don't mean to make it sound that way, it's that the capitalism itself promotes this, requires this: efficiency, profitability, wealth > human costs.
My point is that it'd be dumb to think that this system could ever save us from impending ecological catastrophe. Our lifestyles and the manner we do business in is inherently opposed to it.
>Rather than whinning about "muh fragile ecosystem", ecologists would have better success if they worked on finding clean energy technologies that are actually more economically efficient than the existing ones.
>implying they aren't trying to do this
Again though, this drives my point home even further.
What if we can't find good clean energy that works as efficiently as oil does?
Why aren't we willing to make that sacrifice for the sake of humanity?
Why? Because people are greedy. Even you're greedy. Tell me, despite all you've said, what phone do you have? Computer? Car? Are you ready to give up all those things? Are you saying you're not greedy? If so, you're the only person to be that way.
The world runs on greed, and won't until there is an unlimited supply of energy. Until then, greed runs the world.
>Americans are attacked with ads
>attacked
Damn... I bet you feel that your brain is being "invaded" each time someone is making a argument, then.
What about the Great Song War that is raging all the time, conquering and then occupying the minds of millions of oppressed americans ?
Really, we should put some kind of restrictions of the freedom of expression because that's a real threat to everyone's safespace !!
Reality is that, yes, there's a lot of information out there, some design to influence you.
And while it's a bit more than in Plato's time, it's not a single overwhelming voice with a single opinion so the "brainwashing" doesn't benefit a single all-powerful organization here.
Up to each one to like or dislike all they are listing and then think about it, filtering what they think is rubbish and what is worthy before making up their mind.
And sure, along the way, some people WILL be fed lies and buy them whole. But that's no different than before, when you had NO WAY to check the facts because access to information was VERY difficult to come by.
>What if we can't find good clean energy that works as efficiently as oil does?
>Why aren't we willing to make that sacrifice for the sake of humanity?
But we are looking into good clean energies.
Nuclear fusion is one potential way but there are others.
But fact is that private companies are looking it these alternate energies because they know that fossil fuel will eventually run dry.
They don't invest all their ressources in researching alternative because that's not their primary mission.
Their primary mission is to provide energy today to everyone, at a price that is
- high enough to cover cost and make profits for the stockholders
- low enough to be affordable by the largest demographic possible, so as to maximize sales and therefor allow for a production size where economies of scale can happen, allowing to drive production cost down and therefor profits up.
Doing so require most of their ressources, both financial, material and human.
But they are nevertheless researching alternative.
Hence why we still have oil : if these companies hadn't researched new ways of drilling to reach deeper wells, we would have lacked oil by 1930
The day someone make a reactor that can provide energy out of water at a price per kw/h lower than oil, there will be no more drilling.
And since new (and deeper) drillings are costing more and more, there will be a point where even wind power might become competitive.
But before that, as user said : It's all about greed, aka economical efficiency, aka the best use of one's time.
So I am right, you do have a cynical and shallow view of life. You've also given up your argument. Environmentalism necessarily opposes greed.
I don't think people are naturally that greedy, not to the extent I'm talking about. I think it's about the system they're in. I don't think people would be as greedy as they are if they weren't constantly given incentives to do so, or were basically forced to be by their society.
Oh please, if you don't think there's some serious ideology being pushed through consumer products then you're pretty blind. No, it's not a rigid agenda to support the war or jews or whatever other, but after having grown up being bombarded by advertising images and consumerist culture, it's a part of me in a probably deeper way than I'd ever want to admit.
It's not even about "The facts" or arguments or anything, it's about being raised to think that, basically, the only things that matter is how the market serves me.
Holy shit you're worse than I thought. I especially enjoy how you think it's society that makes people greedy, and not an inherent biological nature.
I'm also curious. Where do you get the right to tell me what I want?
>But we are looking into good clean energies.
No, I know. It was supposed to be a hypothesis to underline my main point.
>They don't invest all their resources in researching alternative because that's not their primary mission.
I also understand all of these reasons, I'm not arguing against these reasons' logic.
This whole argument is about capitalism being necessarily opposed to environmentalism, not about capitalism making sense or not.
I don't biology tells us to knowingly destroy our environment for the sake of momentary, unsustainable pleasures. It doesn't even make sense evolutionarily. I think it requires serious and concentrated seduction through social institutions.
I don't know what you want, user.
But why shouldn't I (well, not me specifically-- but you know) be able to tell you what you want, or prohibit you from what you want, if I have evidence that it's, quite literally, contributing to our destruction? Or is petty? Or isn't actually what you want?
Or, more importantly; Where did you get that idea of what you wanted? Can we even say it's what (You) want? Or rather is it something that you've been programmed to want through societal codes and programming?
And, before you start calling me crazy, this is Rousseau, this is Kant.
Hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha haha
Enjoy the L nigga, night
Night dude.
Don't free market too hard before bed, causes nightmares y'know.
nope
>what do you guys think of Climate Engineering?
Some of the ideas are neat, but almost all of them either rely on speculative tech or would be as significant as pissing in that Pacific. The only practical geoengineering option is sulphur aerosol injection, and that brings it's own list of unknown and nasty side effects. Actually fixing the underlying problem is widely agreed to be our best option.