Climate Change General - /ccg/

>European here, how severe will be the climate change effects in Europe?
Direct effects negligible, but indirectly you'll get a few million climate refugees due to direct effects closer to equatorial countries.

this

>climate change
>on a board about math and science

How can there be deserts next to the mediterranean sea?

Do you think this will lead to people coming into power who dont mind shooting refugees?

>Do you think this will lead to people coming into power who dont mind shooting refugees?
No, Europeans love refugees unconditionally.

>clathrate gun hypothesis
No he doesn't.
Just permafrost releasing CH4 and CO2
+ the warmed sea water releasing CO2.

btw, when CH4 breaks down you get more CO2

CH4 + 2 O2 --> CO2 + 2 H2O

The subtropics (latitude 23.5...40) will have terrible droughts, about 50-75% of the rain will be lost.

>no one knows exactly what will this world look like, here is our worst-case scenario.

only if you are a western European
t. greek

>How can there be deserts next to the mediterranean sea?

He was wrong about the SRM part, wasn't he?
7 Years have passed and we hear nothing about Solar Radiation Management, or Geoenigneering in general

the problem with srm is that it blocks visible light along with IR, that might affect crop sizes

If people who want to mass execute refugees come into power, chances are they'll also be fine with mass executing citizens. It'll be a dark time for all, but much worse for many.

>denialist can't into understand

>How can there be deserts next to the mediterranean sea?
What is North Africa?

>Capatalism

If anything it would have been the one to save it, had anyone actually cared. Capatalism incentivises efficiency at all levels.

>ITT Idiots that don't realize higher temps will be a net positive for humanity, causing more rain and more farmable land.

Only draw back is

Americans don't understand 2°C is almost 36°F.

3°C is basically 400°F

2°C is like 3°F

This graph proves we could have thousands of times more CO2 in the air than we do now and there will never be a catastrophic runaway greenhouse effect. Earth's maximum possible average temperature is 22 degrees which isn't enough to kill anything.
Even if it really is happening and it is our fault climate change is not the disaster alarmists say it is.

More like CO2 is not the disaster alarmists say it is.
>More CO2
>More trees and shit
>Less CO2
>the problem is pollution and smog or whatever, acidifying waters and stuff

I thought climate change was a real scientific fact and anyone who disputed it should be jailed ;)

That is wrong on so many levels. Did whoever made not understand basic climate?

0C is 32F
climate change is imperialist shenanigans

t. cock-sure idiot

>>More CO2
droughts
less trees and shit
more fires

youtube.com/watch?v=fpF48b6Lsbo&t=557s&index=19&list=PL82yk73N8eoX-Xobr_TfHsWPfAIyI7VAP

You're leaving out important context. Of the two studies that Monckton mashed together in order to create this graph, one doesn't speak about correlation between CO2 and temperature while the other does, specifically the paper "Geocarb III: A Revised Model of Atmospheric CO2 over Phanerozoic Time". The thing is, this paper says that there is a correlation between the CO2 and temperature. What Monckton failed to account for when he mashed the graphs together is the increasing of solar radiation from the sun, which was accounted for in the paper he cited yet did not read.

Is climate change a soft science like sociology?

No, actually climate science is basically physics, chemistry and biology plus computational models and programming

just pump sulfur dioxide onto the atmosphere nigger, detonate all active volcanoes

Pah, 252 million years ago CO2 levels and temperature levels were way higher than today and life carried on just fine, give or take a few dozen phyla.

252 million years ago there was no fragile human society that relied on a food industry that itself relied on stable climate conditions to be able to keep billions from starvation

1.5C is why the 1st world should disband and give all white women to africa? Wow.

you're missing the sarcasm. he's referring to the P-Tr extinction.

what's the relation between nuclear winter and climate change? what effect will nukes have when taking climate change into consideration?

Are you implying that any rise in temperature is dangerous even though the majority of the last 600 million had average global temperatures at 25°C?

>computational models and programming

The problem is not the rise in temperature but the rate of change in the temperature, it will probably affect agriculture and echo-system a hell lot.

I was addressing the claim that a rise in temperature automatically leads to an extinction level event like the one bordering the Permian and Triassic Eras despite the overall average global temperature, over a period of 600 million years, was approximately 10°C warmer than it is now and that there were other factors like volcanic ash causing a nuclear winter.

Only if they let them in.

Science fiction.

Skeptic.

It never has been. It's always been about the money.

It's pseduo science.

>Earth was warm in the past
Yeah but there was no industrial civilisation back then. Combine climate change with effects like deforestation, desertification, euthrophication, pollution etc. and you got a disaster in your hands.