Global Warming

No, are you a fucking dumbass? I acknowledge the problems of fossil fuels and maybe after a couple of hundred years this might be a problem, but we have way bigger fish to fry. The whole emissions issue can be resolved with only three, relatively cheap solutions.

>Subsidise Hydrogen vehicle prodyction
>Invest in extra nuke plants to produce the stuff
>Invest in delivery and supply infrastructure

Meanwhile bees and other insects are dying at an alarming rate, know what happens when they die off? No more agriculture.

Why don't you throw up a stink about this instead of virtue signalling?

>>Plastics and other pollution in oceans (Possibly the worst one)
Muh garbage island!

This is actually the least important one you fucking retard. You sound like a shill.

Exxon Mobil along with other energy companies. Doesn't mean they actually have a long term strategy for repairing the damage done. Food prices are going to go up exponentially as arable land disappears and mass migration of poor people into central areas creates violence and instablity.

Climate change kills insects too tho, idk if that hydrogen thing will work. The energy it takes to split water is a lot

that's not really their domain, they're just supposed cut down on the damage they do

All of those points are rather tied to indrustrialization.

Why doesn't USA put it's money into clean energy? China does, and the whole bussines get cheaper and thus more profitable by the year.

The government of course.

all of that is related to climate change, these are not discrete issues
>climate change is the most central environmental issue
try finding something not related to climate change (or I guess industrialization)

Nope it's the government.

if I recall correctly, it was with Obama, but Trump has been repealing that shit.

Do you guys reckon this'll affect us in our lifetime? Or is this a problem for future generations to deal with? I'm hoping the latter.

Is it really? I don't actually know, my school's enviro funding comes mostly from industry.

Yes it'll affect us. It'll probably become very noticeable in the 2030s, by the time a lot of us are starting to hit our 40s, and then we'll just witness it get worse and worse as we get old.

>guys we can't solve global warming because look over here at this other problem which is not nearly as damaging as global warming
Shill

slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2016/07/colony_collapse_disorder_is_no_longer_the_existential_threat_to_honeybees.html

it's affecting us right now! is it not affecting you?

Oh fuck. Is there any chance we'll be able to stop it? Brainlet here so excuse the retarded questions.

Well there's no noticeable effects of it

>less snow, bigger hurricanes, extinction rates, drought, desertification, breaking temperature records etc etc etc
ru4real

The government spends billions on climate research and is the biggest spender in basically all fields of research. I doubt all industry funding combined gets even close to $1 billion.

What can I do to prepare for this?

Best hope is that:

Presently, the Paris Agreement agrees to lower emissions for every country of the world, but it isn't enough to avoid under 2 degrees warming apparently, it would still go to about 3 degrees warming which is apparently a disaster.

So what has to happen is that as time goes by/decades, is that they see how bad global warming is getting and more and more people and the governments of the world accelerate/increase emission reductions, adding on more targets to the Paris Accord, thus we at least maybe only raise the earth's temperature by 2.5 degrees, still bad, but liveable. By then at least 90% of energy will be clean/renewable.

And then it'll take hundreds/thousands of years for the earth to slowly remove the emissions we added, unless we develop some technology to remove it before then.

That's my prediction what will happen if things go right.

You're both right but the only govt organization actively prepping in the US is the military. What does that mean for the average US citizen? You're fucked, the govt is gonna abandon you.

Well the hurricanes in the Caribbean are requent but not likely to get milder at this rate. Coral reefs dying in Australian coast due to sea water warming would fuck the whole ecosystem permanently, sea levels rising and already hot as hell places would probably get even hotter and thus force people to move somewhere else.

It's a slow prosecc but not a good direction at all.

it's not Armageddon, it's more like rising oil prices or something
>eventually it becomes intolerable

OP do you understand the concept of positive feedback? Basically warming triggers feedback which triggers warming in a cycle. These include:

>Water Vapour, as earth warms more water vapour is created through evaporation, 1 degree adds something like 7% vapour which traps more heat
>Permafrost melting in the arctic, the Permafrost contains HUGE amounts of carbon and methane (another powerful GHG) that warms the planet further. According to the national snow and ice data centre there is 1400 gigatonnes of carbon in the permafrost (the atmosphere has like 850 gigatonnes right now). Obviously this melt would take a while but it caused a minor extinction event 55 million years ago during the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum and will have a warming impact noticeable this century
>Loss of sea ice, and melting ice caps reduce the brightness of the planet. Albedo of the arctic in summer is 0.4-0.7 (40% to 70% solar radiation reflected). Open water is 0.1. Black carbon (soot) from increased forest fires ends up landing on the ice caps and sea ice which also reduces albedo. The tree line moves north which also reduces albedo (dark vegetation rather than frozen white tundra)
>It takes 80 times as much energy to heat 1kg of water by 1 degree than ice. so the melting ice reduces albedo and warms the oceans in the arctic.
>Methane hydrate buried beneath the siberian seafloor is a very big issue. individual hydrates have 50 gigatonnes of carbon. I read in the book 'A farewell to ice' by Peter Wadhams (a bit alarmist but very knowledgeable) that if one of these hydrates 'erupted' it would release 50 gigatonnes methane to the atmosphere in about 10 years, adding 0.6 degrees global warming over the next 20 (we've had about 1.1 degree since 1880)
>Microbes in soil release more Nitrous Oxide (another GHG) in warmer conditions
>More forest fires due to heat/drought=less CO2 taken in
>warmer oceans hold less carbon=more warming

Basically we better hope these take a long time

>What can I do to prepare for this?
Short term: Move north.
Long term: Buy land in high latitudes with an abundance of fresh water. Your progeny will become very wealthy, or at least survive for a while. Canada, Alaska, Scandinavia, far southern South America.
Long, long term: Greenland, Antarctica.

Not a mass extinction event. More like mass economic collapse event, althought just in some areas. Netherlands, fucked. Places far from the equator, fucked. This will lead to immigration trends cahnging and making other places the focus of development and innovation, but at a massive loss due to natural disasters and erratic weather.

There's no hope

We had to do a 180 degree flip 10 years ago, it's too late. The politicians are in charge, but they don't realize the importance of their positions and instead view it as a career choice and a way to make themselves feel important

We need Philosopher Kings but they will never exist. People with a longterm view, scientists. But they aren't in charge

Maybe scientists have a moral imperative to learn social manipulation a bit more and become politicians. Maybe that would help more than even research right now. The research we have isn't being applied, do we really need more research? No, we need widespread social change.

Just having no more that one child would help a lot.

>The research we have isn't being applied, do we really need more research? No, we need widespread social change.

I think governments and in general they need to appeal less so to global warming and rather to how fossil fuels and emissions increase pollution, which leads to diseases, etc; fucking up people's health, and then how oil will be gone one day and that we need to shift to renewables not because of global warming but because of that, and because it provides a better, cleaner safer work environment, higher wages, creates millions of new jobs for the economy and really just market market market how cool and futurist it is, look at this cool new technology, i want that! make it look cool.

I think that, would even appeal to some of the people sitting on the sidelines, and it would help more than what the approach to society is now.

>How fucked are we?

Don't worry user. It'll be a problem the next generation will have to live with.
>scientists find cure for aging and all diseases
>everyone becomes immortal
WE'RE SO FUCKED!!

Doesn't look too bad to me

t. Australian

We're already well underway with Earth's sixth mass extinction event. Indications are that it's going to be a doozy.

...

doing so over the long term would completely rek the economy so it isnt a viable option

WTF ever happened to the hole in the ozone layer? Damage was done in the 80's, we stopped using CFCs which were damaging it, but the hole is still there. Will it ever go away?

We really need to reduce our population fast if there's any chance of lowering greenhouse gases.

Or just stop eating red meat which produces tons of emissions.

Theres too much uranium everywhere fish are dying and mutating from exposure its fuckin' sad. Aint no place safe we're living in an extinction event right now and it's not really being broadcasted.

Sadly yes, for politicians, it's just endless preparation for the next elections. Then there's greed and money from lobbyists that are less than 1% of the whole population.

Increasing greenhouse gases will reduce our population fast.

Imo it's simply too late -- mankind (and many other organisms) just won't by around by the end of this millenium. I've pretty much closed the book on the issue and accepted it. All the shilling, lying, denial, and arm-waving just nail it down. Homo sapiens sapiens doesn't have enough sense to survive. So be it. I have other things to think about.

More likely to make them move to your country and shift your posting to /pol/ and /r9k/, if you already haven't.

We will survive, there is no doubt about that user

Do you have any idea how diverse we are. We are the most hardy organism on the entire planet. No other organism can live in so wide a variety of climates, from the desert to Antarctica to space. The only thing comparable is waterbears

We will be fine as an animal inhabiting the Earth. Whether our modern civilizations will continue as they are is the only thing up for debate

Do you have any understanding of what a major mass extinction is? All multicellular land organisms die... plants, animals, insects, all of it. Most multicellular ocean life dies, with the possible exception of a very few deep ocean dwelling creatures. The main thing that keeps life going is microbes, especially anaerobic cyanobacteria like the first life-forms. For all intents and purposes, evolution starts over almost from scratch. We're not talking about Neanderthalensis disappearing, or even dinosaurs.

Meh China has the vision to plan across the centuries, and given the ineptitudes of democracy they're most probably going to succeed in regaining their lead superpower status.

Just going tp suck having a population of drones ruling the world.

Rather that than the USA, from European point of view anyway. They're heavily investing in cleantech, unlike USA, though I don't know if individual states like California, which is a huge forerunner in clean technology, can go their own ways.

Clean Technology is not only good for the environment, it's also great business in the future. Why is USA so short-sighted?

Mass extinction events like that are wildly rare.

>This is actually the least important one you fucking retard.
I hope you don't enjoy seafood.

It's smaller now than it was.

>he fell for the global warming narrative
is it really hard to imagine that the earth itself has various and sometimes unpredictable climate shifts?
>inb4 found the drumpfkin
sure us humans have the ability to fuck up the atmosphere and increase greenhouse gas emissions, but the outcome is also dependent on what the climate decides to do next.

You're so fucking stupid

I wish everyone like you died this instant and we could rebuild the world in a rational way

It's a meme. The truth is that climate is impossible to predict with current technology. Look up IPCC predictions from the 90s about today, nothing is correct. It's always trivial to predict the past which is what new 'improved' models do.

Governments everywhere love this meme because it provides a moral rationalization for new taxes, which is the only reason it spread so much.

Not that fucked.

A lot of shit particularly in the ocean is probably fucked. Humans are already on the way out of the gravity well.

t. shill

You don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about.

>A lot of it is irreversible now
mind mentioning one ?

Looks like somebody alerted the shill patrol that there's a global warming thread somewhere. Eat popcorn and watch them lie, blow smoke, and make things up.

Coral reefs for one.

>t. climate 'scientist'

That's not how it works lol. Shit you can literally google "the worst extinction event" and you it's not even remotely close to that. Why do you just go on the internet to tell lies?

How much do you get paid to post this kind of retarded crap, Ace?

Yep, confirmed shill, complete with retarded bullshit graphics.

This is now a shill thread. Watch and laugh.

Oh look, you posted it again. Do we really have to go over why this is fraudulent yet again?

Food production is going to take a big hit - loss of food security is a proven path to war.

youtu.be/Mc_4Z1oiXhY?t=23m10s

Don't post bullshit to prove his point, or you actually a troll disguised as a proponent of climate change?

Once the warming goes over 2C, it becomes self-sustaining and would probably continue even if humans stopped existing.

youtu.be/Mc_4Z1oiXhY?t=17m45s

How to solve global warming and its long term consequences in 2 steps:

1) Nuke India
2) Nuke China

how to finish your dentist problems
shoot yourself if the mouth

>Ace
>Oh look, you posted it again
>you

Wow you might want to get that paranoia checked.
Also stop samefagging

Seriously, actually *read* old reports, instead of modern spin 'why they weren't really that wrong' like this:
"Mt Pinatubo erupted in 1991 (see FAQ 11.2 for discussion of how volcanoes impact the climate system), leading to a brief period of relative global mean cooling during the early 1990s. The IPCC First, Second and Third Assessment Reports (FAR, SAR and TAR) did not include the effects of volcanic eruptions and thus failed to include the cooling associated with the Pinatubo eruption."

Yeah no shit. The prediction was perfect if you ignore factors that and we didn't properly include because of how fucking complex Earth is
Think that's a one-off?
This one's from 2017:
chemistryworld.com/news/duller-sea-spray-may-mean-climate-models-need-a-rethink/3007692.article

Climate is NOT a fucking linear system, errors are NOT independent and they DON'T cancel each other, contrary to what brainlets loke you think. Everything interacts with everything. It's impossible to model with current technology.

Your post is (once again) one gigantic strawman that (once again) fails to rebuttal or counter a single point (hmmm. perhaps because you're incapable of doing so with any scientific evidence aside from anecdotal?)

Yep, it's totally bullshit to post something that is responding directly to the garbage graph that the above poster posted. Fucking moron. Keep posting it though, just like all the other images you've posted that have been debunked over and over again because you're too much of a brainlet to be skeptical of your own cognitive biases.

Oh, and then there's this. So much for your "muh samefag" narrative.

>fails to rebuttal or counter a single point

Your 'point' was that I'm some "Ace" and that "I" posted it again.
You also posted some gif about some other graph??? Wtf?

You're not convincing anyone, get a grip dude

The dinosaurs couldn't farm or build. IQ is a lot more useful than big teeth.

Look man. A giant meteor hit the Earth and that didn't call all life. Earth got cold AF and that didn't end all life.

I really doubt a few degrees is gonna kill off humans at their best.

>unless we develop some technology to remove it before then
This should be the focus. Fuck solar/wind. We should be working on Thorium and fusion. If we get either of those, energy will be so cheap we could afford to start running giant CO2 scrubbers.

Instead of making less emissions, we should be removing emissions.

unfortunately they lack critical thinking skills.

>Presently, the Paris Agreement agrees to lower emissions for every country of the world, but it isn't enough to avoid under 2 degrees warming apparently, it would still go to about 3 degrees warming which is apparently a disaster.
That's because it was all nakedly political posturing. It was bullshit. The countries that are the worst offenders are India and China, and they are not going to seriously cap their emissions because that would absolutely sabotage their efforts to modernize. The UK and the US already polluted the shit out of their surroundings by modernizing to the point where sustainable energy is possibly a thing (a theoretical thing, most energy still comes from carbon sources). To suggest that India and China kneecap themselves to maybe avert some warming is just being stupid. To do it in a very public referendum is politics.

You want to change the climate for reals, you need to made sustainable energy sources cost less. The only way to get these people on board is if a killowat-hour of solar costs less than a kilowatt-hour of oil (right now, it does not).

I love watching paid shills trying to make people with IQs over 89 believe their asinine rhetoric. It's just not going to work out for you on a science thread, guys. Better go back to political ads for semi-retarded people. You're wasting your time here. Seriously, no one is even going to pay attention to your nonsense.

This proves exactly nothing.

Have an article in Nature, as like ~all AGW believers you only accept arguments from authority:
"Overestimated global warming over the past 20 years"
nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n9/full/nclimate1972.html?WT.ec_id=NCLIMATE-201309

The AGW BS has 15 years more, tops. The discrepancies between reality and models are going to be wayyy too big by then. It's only sad that it's yet another bullshit after 'food science' with it's past horrific food pyramid that successfully appropriated 'science' brand. All it's achieving is making antivax and similar movements more successful. That's on you too.

So how do we help fix global warming when there are so many of these retards out there?

Ok, so you're at your desk with your computer, and you've had your team meeting where you went over all of todays talking points, and you have your memo there on the desk. One of your robots detects a global warming thread. So you get together with two or three other of your fellow shills and start boilerplating from your folder of "arguments." Or if it's just a comments thread you might go it alone. Either way, you get a salary plus a small bonus for each response.
Do you ever think about what a lousy job you have, about what a sleaze it makes you? A paid liar, a professional bullshitter. Does it ever bother you when you're trying to sleep at night? How do you live with yourself? Everybody here is aware of what you are and what you're doing. Why do you even try? Look what you are. I actually feel sorry for you.

So much projection in a single post, you should open a movie theater. I'm not that guy, I have no idea what he meant by "ace" or whatever the hell else he was talking about. By the way, the graph I posted you moron is the same graph that you posted above, it's an analysis about why it's inaccurate, which is why it was never published in any scientific journals except on Spencer / Christy's blogs, which are not peer reviewed.

>Whines about appeal to authority whilst appealing to authority in his own post.
Oh the ironing.

You guys never change, your arguments never evolve, you are so wrapped up in your biases that you refuse to be a true skeptic. It's unbelievable the level of delusion you have attained.

First off, you might want to read the actual paper you linked, it's not hard to find and I managed to find it with a single search:
stat.washington.edu/peter/statclim/fyfeetal.pdf

Nothing in this paper denies climate science, nothing in this paper claims that global warming is not occurring. Not only that, but the paper is five years outdated and not really relevant to the current discussion and the authors have written more papers on the topic since then (see below).

meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/Mann/articles/articles/FyfeEtAlNatureClimate16.pdf

You're also completely misrepresenting the argument of the paper itself. It's not arguing in favor of a stop to global warming, it's arguing that the rate of change is slower than it was in previous decades. That doesn't change that the trend is still going upwards overall.

Modern Civilization will definitely be screwed, though to what degree, I can hardly tell.
Coastlines, deserts, and such will be probably inhabitable.

Best Case Scenario: Humanity gets away with violent weather and decides to quit fucking up. Fusion can actually sustain it's energy process, and it's little more than an environmental bump on our road to the future or some shit.

The Worst: Positive feedback loop happens, we end up like Venus.

If the recent decades have shown us any sliver of hope, it's that governments eventually do react (if very, very, veeeery slowly) so that by the time Florida is underwater people are going to start looking for answers.

But it'd need to be a miracle indeed.

"16 of the 17 warmest years on record occurring since 2001"

nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-noaa-data-show-2016-warmest-year-on-record-globally

...

>Ok, so you're at your desk with your computer, and you've had your team meeting where you went over all of todays talking points

Actually I'm in bed, on a phone, going to sleep soon. Nobody would bother shilling on Veeky Forums anywhere except /pol/, sorry.

>By the way, the graph I posted you moron is the same graph that you posted above

Doubling down on BS, betting on no response? No, your gif is about "John Christy's" graph, which has one averaged line instead of individual models. That's apparently the readon it's 'fraudulent'. The graph I posted has individual models. The exact opposite.
It's from here:
drroyspencer.com/2014/02/95-of-climate-models-agree-the-observations-must-be-wrong/

>Nothing in this paper denies climate science [.. more bs..]

Nice strawman - you had to though, because how is the graph wrong when it agrees with the paper from Nature? :)
The paper shows that predictions were too low. That's it. Which is what the graph you so haplessly tried to debunk also showed.

Thanks for your responses I guess - couldn't hope for a better contrast.

>The dinosaurs couldn't farm or build. IQ is a lot more useful than big teeth.
Doesn't help with the air is on fire due to raining molten glass heating up the atmosphere, cooking near anything not underground or in the ocean in a matter of hours.

And these events aren't nearly as rare as people think - there are indeed so many possible ones that the fact that there's been so few of them is the closest we have to evidence of divine providence. On top of that, there's been several events we don't really consider mass extinction events that would reduce our own population by 90% or more, and every now and again, we invent a new potential apocalypse ourselves.

its worse, they do all of that only they do it for free