Press Release - 8 Hours Ago - Things are Worse than Expected. Too Late?

[BirdinHand]

What happens the day after that day?

Go fishing

 

[Luckyone]

You wanted it sunny and warm, if you care go use your garden hose.

No sense in trying to cool the Earth if you want it sunny and warm.

An outside crematorium is also sunny and warn. You want to enjoy seeing your family burn?

 

[Atreus21]

What happens the day after that day?

Waterworld (1995) - IMDb

Waterworld: Directed by Kevin Reynolds. With Kevin Costner, Chaim Jeraffi, Rick Aviles, R.D. Call. In a future where the polar ice-caps have melted and Earth is almost entirely submerged, a mutated mariner fights starvation and outlaw "smokers," and reluctantly helps a woman and a young girl try...

www.imdb.com

 

[Exquisitor]

An outside crematorium is also sunny and warn. You want to enjoy seeing your family burn?

How are you going to use your garden hose this spring?

 

[Exquisitor]

An outside crematorium is also sunny and warn. You want to enjoy seeing your family burn?

Don't worry, my family lives in the Great Lakes region, and with me using my rainmaking method, it won't be a desert here for a long time.

I have to enjoy watching my family burn for other reasons, they're Republican.

 

[Simpletruther]

New Report shows that: Things are worse than expected and it may now be too late to fix them.


Here is the report that just came out today.

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/

It has 270 authors, 34,000+ citations and 62,000+ review comments.

Ignore it at your own (and your family) risk.

Again!!!!! Oh noos. Run for the hills lol

 

[Luckyone]

What is your preferred way to go?

 

[Fletch]

I disagree strongly with your words. There's a reason why older men like trump. They don't care plus they see themselves as strong. knowing actually that
they'll be dead soon..and they can't handle that in a logical way. They think kindness is weakness, never learning that that can be a fatal mistake.
Yes, there are people that "Set-up" that kind of scenario. (Appear weak...let the foe's guard down..then...destroy the idiot's fake Bravada..)

You sure pretend to know an awful lot about people you have never met and know nothing about.

 

[Fletch]

"I" am not saying nothing. The scientists are saying it. Ask them. All I am doing is giving you the news and info. Do with it what you want.

"I" am not going to live in fear like you are.

 

[Fletch]

Let's call it change then.

It's changing the planet from habitable to unhabitable.

On the way there is pain, suffering and death, along with starvation. Wait till you have a "heat dome". The one here last spring lasted 41 days of over 110 degrees. 800 dead. An entire town was reduced to ashes.

Still to come; water riots, food riots.

Have a watch of a film called Soylent Green with good old pistol pakin' Charleton Heston!

It is surprisingly accurate considering it was made in 1971

The planet is NOT on its way to becoming uninhabitable. Stop spreading fear and loathing

 

[Hypothetical]

the question is, how do we maintain the ability to stop would be dictators like putin and China if they are not going to also follow this plan to stop global climate change?

 

[redbeer]

New Report shows that: Things are worse than expected and it may now be too late to fix them.


Here is the report that just came out today.

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/

It has 270 authors, 34,000+ citations and 62,000+ review comments.

Ignore it at your own (and your family) risk.

Fearmongering.......precession, earth wobble, climate changes are a natural occurrence transpiring billions of years. The earth will not end in 10 years, 50 years, 500 years, nor a 1,000 years.....live your life in peace and run from the cult of "climate change" radicals.

 

[BirdinHand]

the question is, how do we maintain the ability to stop would be dictators like putin and China if they are not going to also follow this plan to stop global climate change?

And that’s the crux of it.

The US can all give up oil, drink from paper straws and recycle everything.

India and China will keep on keeping on…

 

[Luckyone]

"I" am not going to live in fear like you are.

I am not living in fear. I have no more than 15 years of life left (probably a lot less), meaning that global warming is not going to affect me.

I live in Miami and this is the expectation for the city to be covered in water:

How many years until Miami is underwater?

Parts of Miami are so flooded that Hugh Jackman can have a whole fight scene in an underwater concert hall. The kind of sea level rise that can permanently flood the entire ground floor of a concert hall is higher than the most extreme climate projections for Miami—at least by 2100.Oct 31, 2021

As such, I am in no rush to buy a yacht.

By the same token, I do care about my children and grandchildren as they are likely to face the problem square on. Given that I do care about others (not selfish like you), I do worry about them. I can certainly see you don't worry about your progeny for the future.

Hey, what can I say? You are a stereotypical Republican that only cares about himself. No surprise there!

 

[BirdinHand]

I am not living in fear. I have no more than 15 years of life left (probably a lot less), meaning that global warming is not going to affect me.

I live in Miami and this is the expectation for the city to be covered in water:

How many years until Miami is underwater?

Parts of Miami are so flooded that Hugh Jackman can have a whole fight scene in an underwater concert hall. The kind of sea level rise that can permanently flood the entire ground floor of a concert hall is higher than the most extreme climate projections for Miami—at least by 2100.Oct 31, 2021

As such, I am in no rush to buy a yacht.

By the same token, I do care about my children and grandchildren as they are likely to face the problem square on. Given that I do care about others (not selfish like you), I do worry about them. I can certainly see you don't worry about your progeny for the future.

Hey, what can I say? You are a stereotypical Republican that only cares about himself. No surprise there!

If you’re that worried - tell your family to move.

 

[Craig234]

I suspect it's too late. It's like seeing a guy high on drugs with a gun marching toward a crowd determined to shoot them, and saying, he's just walking, is it too late? In terms of the likelihood the guy just thinks better of it and decides not to do it, ya, it's likely too late. There's an analogy there to how determined we are to use large amounts of energy and not spend large sums to protect the climate. Our political will is lacking, just giving lip service mostly.

 

[Mithrae]

The planet is NOT on its way to becoming uninhabitable. Stop spreading fear and loathing

Correct; it's 'just' unbalancing the equilibrium which nature and, more precariously, human civilization have developed into over the past ~7000 years of intermittent cooling since the Holocene thermal maximum. If instead we interrupted that with a few thousand years' warming trend of two or three degrees, climate and ecological patterns would change - the Sahara might return to being a verdant savanna for example, while desertification would doubtless occur elsewhere - but overall there'd probably be no real problem in global terms. Civilizations have collapsed due to gradual climate change in the past, but nowadays in a globalized world we'd probably have the means to adapt more successfully. Even with the far more rapid warming we're causing, if we had a planet with robust ecosystems - or even the somewhat degraded ecosystems prior to the industrial revolution - it's possible that the problems would not be insurmountable; given concentrated international efforts over the decades we might be able to shift enough of our agriculture zones around so as to mitigate most of the impact on human civilization.

The big problems are that: A) what we're seeing is pretty much exactly the opposite of concentrated international efforts to acknowledge and address this crisis, instead governments all around the world are trying to milk every last cent out of fossil fuels while doing little if anything to even adapt to their consequences, let alone prevent it; and perhaps even more importantly B) global warming isn't our only crisis and ecosystems all around the planet are on the verge of collapse already, with documented species populations on average declining by over 60% in just the period from 1970-2016.

By a conservative estimate (B below, as opposed to the very conservative estimate of A) almost 1.5% of mammal species have gone extinct since 1900, over 2% since 1500, with similar numbers applying to all vertebrates; dozens of times higher than the expected natural background rate:

Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction, Ceballos et al 2015

Among those species that are not yet extinct, population numbers on average have plummeted by around 68% in less than fifty years from 1970 to 2016:

9 facts about wildlife extinction and how we can save species | World Economic Forum

www.weforum.org

There'll always be animals and even humans around, no doubt, but human civilization as we know it depends on earth systems and ecological systems which are looking very shaky, and still getting worse decade by decade despite everything we know about these crises.

 

[Fletch]

Correct; it's 'just' unbalancing the equilibrium which nature and, more precariously, human civilization have developed into over the past ~7000 years of intermittent cooling since the Holocene thermal maximum. If instead we interrupted that with a few thousand years' warming trend of two or three degrees, climate and ecological patterns would change - the Sahara might return to being a verdant savanna for example, while desertification would doubtless occur elsewhere - but overall there'd probably be no real problem in global terms. Civilizations have collapsed due to gradual climate change in the past, but nowadays in a globalized world we'd probably have the means to adapt more successfully. Even with the far more rapid warming we're causing, if we had a planet with robust ecosystems - or even the somewhat degraded ecosystems prior to the industrial revolution - it's possible that the problems would not be insurmountable; given concentrated international efforts over the decades we might be able to shift enough of our agriculture zones around so as to mitigate most of the impact on human civilization.

The big problems are that: A) what we're seeing is pretty much exactly the opposite of concentrated international efforts to acknowledge and address this crisis, instead governments all around the world are trying to milk every last cent out of fossil fuels while doing little if anything to even adapt to their consequences, let alone prevent it; and perhaps even more importantly B) global warming isn't our only crisis and ecosystems all around the planet are on the verge of collapse already, with documented species populations on average declining by over 60% in just the period from 1970-2016.

By a conservative estimate (B below, as opposed to the very conservative estimate of A) almost 1.5% of mammal species have gone extinct since 1900, over 2% since 1500, with similar numbers applying to all vertebrates; dozens of times higher than the expected natural background rate:

Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction, Ceballos et al 2015

Among those species that are not yet extinct, population numbers on average have plummeted by around 68% in less than fifty years from 1970 to 2016:

9 facts about wildlife extinction and how we can save species | World Economic Forum

www.weforum.org

Ill start caring when there is a risk that cows might go extinct

 

[Mithrae]

Ill start caring when there is a risk that cows might go extinct

You're very clever

 

[Jay59]

New Report shows that: Things are worse than expected and it may now be too late to fix them. Here is the report that just came out today.
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/

It has 270 authors, 34,000+ citations and 62,000+ review comments. Ignore it at your own (and your family) risk.

That was the perfect response to the OP. Why you attached it to a more reasonable post is unclear.

Science says that climate change is slow and there are no major problems in sight. Follow the science.

There are five major renewable energy sources​

• Solar energy from the sun.
• Geothermal energy from heat inside the earth.
• Wind energy.
• Biomass from plants.
• Hydropower from flowing water.

How these types of renewable energy work

• 1) Solar energy. Sunlight is one of our planet's most abundant and freely available energy resources. ...
• 2) Wind energy. Wind is a plentiful source of clean energy. ...
• 3) Hydro energy. ...
• 4) Tidal energy. ...
• 5) Geothermal energy. ...
• 6) Biomass Energy.

All of them work somewhat. None work often enough, well enough, or reliably enough to be major factors in the next decade.

That's even with things like this going on in Texas. It's still an unreliable fringe source.

 

[DONTbite]

Russia says it's going to arm a submarine with 6 nuclear 'doomsday' devices

Russia has repeatedly threatened the US and Europe with the weapon, which it said it could park off a coast and detonate at a time of its choosing.

www.businessinsider.com

Russian President Vladimir Putin initially announced the Poseidon in a March 1, 2018, speech, in which he said US defenses could not stop it. Of course, the US has no defenses against any full-scale Russian nuclear attack, but in the case of undersea defenses, the US appears not to have even explored this avenue.



In that speech, Putin confirmed the existence of the Poseidon, which has horrified experts since images of it first leaked in 2015.

The UN has said nuclear war is 'back within the realm of possibility.' Here are the places in the US most likely to be hit in a nuclear attack.

An Insider map shows the essential points Russia would have to attack to wipe out the US's nuclear forces, according to a nuclear weapons expert.

www.businessinsider.com

The US and other countries field nuclear-powered submarines capable of firing nuclear missiles, but the Poseidon represents a unique danger to life on earth. Most nuclear weapons seek to minimize radioactive fallout and simply destroy military targets. Russia took the opposite approach with the Poseidon.

The weapon is said to use a warhead, perhaps the strongest ever, designed to come into direct contact with water, marine animals, and the ocean floor, kicking up a radioactive tsunami that could spread deadly radiation over hundreds of thousands of miles of land and sea, and render them uninhabitable for decades.



In short, while most nuclear weapons can end a city, Russia's Poseidon could end a continent.



Russia has also repeatedly threatened the US and Europe with the weapon, which it said it could park off a coast and detonate at a time of its choosing. Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, previously told Business Insider that rather than a first- or second-strike weapon, he sees Russia's new torpedo as a "third-strike vengeance weapon" designed to shatter NATO.



While a nuclear exchange between the US and Russia would cause incredible death and destruction, and plunge much of the world into the dark ages, a stealthy submarine designed to launch six "doomsday" devices would be the most deadly weapon in human history and pose a direct threat to life on earth.



The inclusion of a mini-sub, which experts speculate could destroy vital undersea cables and is operated by a shadowy branch of Russia's military, suggests another clandestine purpose for this weapon.

 

[bluesmoke]

Come on, it'll be Riza, it'll be the Mecca of the galaxy and riviera of the stars, a total resort town.

For cockroaches, flies and mosquitoes.

 

[Hypothetical]

Correct; it's 'just' unbalancing the equilibrium which nature and, more precariously, human civilization have developed into over the past ~7000 years of intermittent cooling since the Holocene thermal maximum. If instead we interrupted that with a few thousand years' warming trend of two or three degrees, climate and ecological patterns would change - the Sahara might return to being a verdant savanna for example, while desertification would doubtless occur elsewhere - but overall there'd probably be no real problem in global terms. Civilizations have collapsed due to gradual climate change in the past, but nowadays in a globalized world we'd probably have the means to adapt more successfully. Even with the far more rapid warming we're causing, if we had a planet with robust ecosystems - or even the somewhat degraded ecosystems prior to the industrial revolution - it's possible that the problems would not be insurmountable; given concentrated international efforts over the decades we might be able to shift enough of our agriculture zones around so as to mitigate most of the impact on human civilization.

The big problems are that: A) what we're seeing is pretty much exactly the opposite of concentrated international efforts to acknowledge and address this crisis, instead governments all around the world are trying to milk every last cent out of fossil fuels while doing little if anything to even adapt to their consequences, let alone prevent it; and perhaps even more importantly B) global warming isn't our only crisis and ecosystems all around the planet are on the verge of collapse already, with documented species populations on average declining by over 60% in just the period from 1970-2016.

By a conservative estimate (B below, as opposed to the very conservative estimate of A) almost 1.5% of mammal species have gone extinct since 1900, over 2% since 1500, with similar numbers applying to all vertebrates; dozens of times higher than the expected natural background rate:

Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction, Ceballos et al 2015

Among those species that are not yet extinct, population numbers on average have plummeted by around 68% in less than fifty years from 1970 to 2016:

9 facts about wildlife extinction and how we can save species | World Economic Forum

www.weforum.org

There'll always be animals and even humans around, no doubt, but human civilization as we know it depends on earth systems and ecological systems which are looking very shaky, and still getting worse decade by decade despite everything we know about these crises.

what exactly do you guys expect approaching 8 billion humans on this planet and no real research into travelling beyond or more importantly, colonizing beyond... our planetary confines?

if I have any sympathy, its for the animals.

 

[Mithrae]

what exactly do you guys expect approaching 8 billion humans on this planet and no real research into travelling beyond or more importantly, colonizing beyond... our planetary confines?

if I have any sympathy, its for the animals.

This planet can comfortably supply ten billion people's needs; it will never satisfy even one billion people's greed. Population itself isn't a problem, it's consumption, which of course is heavily concentrated towards wealthier countries and people, actively and endlessly encouraged by the capitalist model. Extraplanetary expansion would and should be an excellent governmental or intergovernmental priority, but obviously would need to be funded through taxation. The private sector is showing an interest in the matter of late, but probably moreso because the billionaires will need somewhere to go after this planet has been pillaged and polluted and left a barren cesspool for the rest of us.

 

[Exquisitor]

For cockroaches, flies and mosquitoes.

Et'll love it.