You know, I could have sworn I heard about this (or something very similar) a few months back. I remember getting an email for a petition to slow it down or somehow manage to stop it entirely.
Climatologist says arctic carbon release means "We're Fucked"
- Thread starter Zak757
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In fact, this is quite often the equivalent of the Gaza Defense which Critical Miss has just spoofed.Vault101 said:
Believe it or not, folks, we can treat minorities like people and still fix the environment and deal with crime and make great advances in science and whatever else.
At the risk of being equally pedantic, the death of the dinosaurs was due to the change in environment. At the same time, the death of several of the dominant species afforded new slots to be filled by animals which then adapted to fit them. Extinction events are part of evolution and so technically the things that cause them are heavily associated with the process.
By the same measure, sharks have evolved very little because there's been little need to adapt and no real role to fill.
(And yeah, I know that there aren't literally slots or quotas in nature)
It is pretty willfully ignorant, yes. Especially since you're downplaying events that did happen (acid rain, ozone depletion) and conflating them with things that were fringe science at best (and with Nostradamus, not even that). You might as well try and insist that "science" predicted the end of the world because of the Mayan Calendar.Batou667 said:
And you're free to cleave to these beliefs as much as you want, but people are going to call you on it.
Seems like my previous post rustled a few jimmies. Perhaps I should clarify.
No, I don't deny climate change. There's a robust body of evidence supporting it, and I can heartily recommend Potholer54's excellent YouTube playlist on the subject for anybody who needs convincing or just wants to brush up on their science. I'm also generally pro-environmental because, hey, I like wildlife and clean oceans and renewable energy as much as the next guy.
What I take with a pinch of salt is the notion that climate change is primarily human-caused, can be stopped or reversed by human actions, and represents a cataclysm that we just so happen to be witnessing unfold before our eyes, and especially dubious is the way we're being encouraged to fight against it. "Your mission, Planeteers, is to save Mother Nature! Who's with me? Friendship solves everything! Don't forget to floss your teeth!"
Unless of course anybody has some convincing evidence that we're fucked? Because so far all that's been presented has been an XKCD comic and a facaetious Donald Trump tweet.
No, I don't deny climate change. There's a robust body of evidence supporting it, and I can heartily recommend Potholer54's excellent YouTube playlist on the subject for anybody who needs convincing or just wants to brush up on their science. I'm also generally pro-environmental because, hey, I like wildlife and clean oceans and renewable energy as much as the next guy.
What I take with a pinch of salt is the notion that climate change is primarily human-caused, can be stopped or reversed by human actions, and represents a cataclysm that we just so happen to be witnessing unfold before our eyes, and especially dubious is the way we're being encouraged to fight against it. "Your mission, Planeteers, is to save Mother Nature! Who's with me? Friendship solves everything! Don't forget to floss your teeth!"
Unless of course anybody has some convincing evidence that we're fucked? Because so far all that's been presented has been an XKCD comic and a facaetious Donald Trump tweet.
Donald Trump? Donald fucking Trump, of all people, has something to say about this? Is it possible he can be worried about something besides himself?Batou667 said:
Besides that, humanity isn't the cause of climate change, but we are RAPIDLY accelerating the. If we had switched to clean alternatives to fossil fuels when available and started working on geoengineering projects to slow climate change, these problems wouldn't necessarily go away, but they would show up hundreds of years later down the line. And at that point, a little bad weather is going to be a minor inconveniance to humanity rather than a serious problem. At this stage of advancement though, we can't really combat against a temperature increase like this, and millions or maybe billions will suffer as a result of it. Not just the climate change itself, but all the human interaction that follows.
So . . . one of the positive feedback loops we've been warned about has already started. I hear this and send a little probe down into my brain and I can't find a bit of surprise. The fact is, we were fucked a long time ago. Political institutions and the public have both proven themselves unwilling to address climate change, despite all evidence. This will not change until it is far, far too late. Normalcy bias is just too powerful an effect on the human psyche. It's no longer about stopping it. At this point, it can only be about being ready for it.
If it was a case of a alien invasion or a new killer disease you'd be right, but in this case he could've been doing something a little more productive than telling us "we're fucked."Sleekit said:
The last two points I'm with you on. The issue with climate change, and why people don't feel as though it is a thing, is that it is difficult to physically see. Something not easily observed is much harder to convince people to do anything about. Moreover, while I'm all for renewable energy (I'm finishing a degree in it, after all), the way it is currently being implemented is IMO probably not going to prove entirely useful. I honestly think you might be better off (certainly in the UK) having fewer turbines (for example) put up and having them primarily run rural communities and pouring more of that money into research which will hopefully up people's confidence that this technology can work. One of the big issues at the moment is we're having big wind farms put up with turbines that are not the newest and best partly because companies don't want to risk money on tech they don't even know will work while still striving to make their green energy production targets. I think it would be better to loosen the restrictions on how much green energy they need to produce and instead promote them to use newer technology on a much smaller scale. Government would likely not end up paying out much, if any, more than they do at the moment.Batou667 said:
Oh, and another thing to work on? Maybe constructing things that will, for example, allow us to set up our own offshore wind turbines. It's all very well saying that offshore wind will make us a more self-reliant nation until we need the massive rigs that Russian companies own to set the damn things up!
... I think I was losing my point a little. Oh yes, I think climate change is at least significantly caused by us. I don't think it coincidence that the spike in CO2 that aligns with the rising temperature also appears to effectively mirror the rise in global energy consumption. Although it does kind of make me mad whenever people go off and blame China for most of it, when it's far more complex than that. It's very difficult to say just how much of that is really everyone else's carbon footprint that has been imprinted on China due to companies other countries using them for cheaper production. Not to mention that they're starting to become a big player in the renewable energy sector of late, too.
... Damn, off on a tangent again, I'd better stop there!
Hardly. You do realise that these people are scientists, right? The issue of how to solve these sorts of issues is not even primarily a scientific one, it's down to governments, businesses and legislature. What the hell do most scientists know about any of this? It's amazing how plenty of people are sceptical on climate physics, then expect the physicists to hold them by the hand to help fix the problems.canadamus_prime said:
Is it not the scientist to discover possible solutions for the politicians to think about acting on (or more than likely, ignore). I know if I were a politician and some dipshit scientist came up to me and said "Ok so these pockets of methane could possibly kill the planet unless we do something." my fist response would be "Ok so what am I supposed to do about it?"zhoominator said:
While Im not the biggest believer in a greater power I do believe in a unifying force and I just have to believe that it would give some mercy to third world peoples EVENTUALLY!
Scientists have been telling us what to do about it for years. "Stop putting billions of tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere every year."canadamus_prime said:
In other words - tax the fuck out of carbon emitting stuff, invest lots of money in renewable, clean energy sources, and just generally reduce humanity's reliance on technology from the 19th Century. But the politicians of course won't listen.
To be fair though, this is only partially their fault. Many are trying to do their best within the system, but the system is broken so they have to continually appease a) people with money and b) the public in order to keep their jobs. The people with money don't see much profit margin in not-killing-the-world, and the public are fickle and ignorant about what it all means and it's hard to convince them that nicer summers than they experienced as a kid is leading to the destruction of the human race. As far as they're concerned it's just better beach weather.
So yeah, politicians are often dicks about this stuff but they also have little choice. The real potential heroes in all of this are, if you can believe it, the businessmen. Once you get people like Elon Musk showing the world that there is big money to be made in solar panels and electric cars, you can bet the other big players will follow suit.
He did though, he basically said that the sensible solution is to reduce the amount of CO2 we're pumping into the atmosphere. Unfortunately, that's not the answer politicans want to hear.canadamus_prime said: