Global warming is here now. The oceans are acidifying. Polar bears are losing hunting grounds due to loss of ice from climate change.
"Ocean acidification describes the process by which our ocean has become more acidic — about 30 percent more — since the Industrial Revolution. About a quarter of the carbon dioxide (CO2) we pump out into the atmosphere every day through the burning of fossil fuels and other activities is absorbed by the seas"
I watched the video. I don't think climate change is an existential threat, in the sense all humans will be extinct in 12 years. That's an exaggeration.
“Scientists agree that climate change does pose a threat to humans and ecosystems,” the statement said, “but they do not envision that climate change will obliterate all people on the planet.” By Shannon Osaka and Kate Yoder on Mar 3, 2020
Still, denying climate change just because some of the predictions were inaccurate or a few people who believe in climate change are incorrect, doesn't disprove the overall theory.
Also, there is small chance that Earth could have a runaway greenhouse Venus scenario if large amounts of methane are released from glaciers.
"Stephen Hawking: Earth Could Turn Into Hothouse Planet Like Venus
By Tia Ghose July 05, 2017 "
This is a long shot, but in the end we can't know everything and it is at least a possibility even if it is a really small possibility.
"You might think the Antarctic methane would be secure under such a thick ice cap. But the Antarctic has been losing a lot of ice lately." national geographic
I'm much more worried how climate change is already effecting us. We can speculate all day long and when a certain prediction will come true and the likelihood of a worst case scenario. Yet, climate change already kills over 150,000 people a year.
"Climatic changes already are estimated to cause over 150,000 deaths annually." who
Do we really need to wait for the number to increase to 250,000 a year to act? The sooner we act the better.
Human beings are doing many things to the planet besides the supposed effects of CO2 emissions.
The only realistic long-term solution is population reduction to sustainable levels, say one or two billion, which could in principle be accomplished in about a century by birth control. The graph below shows the real hockey stick, Michael Mann and other such publicity hounds notwithstanding.
"While natural processes continue to introduce short term variability, the unremitting rise of CO2 from industrial activities has become the dominant factor in determining our planet’s climate now and in the years to come.
Basic rebuttal written by Michael Searcy
Update July 2015:"
The myth here is that any number of other factors here are the real culprit, volcanoes, aerosols, etc.
Now for you specific claim about human overpopulation. Humans more or less need industrial activity to survive and live a high quality of life, and yes a lot of co2 is produced from those activities.
Yet, we can have our cake and eat it too. Electric cars, LED lightbulbs, solar panels, carbon capture, and so forth can greatly decrease the level of Co2 generation. The fallacy here is jumping to conclusions. Co2 from industrial activity is the main cause of climate change, not jumping to conclusions that human overpopulation is the main driver.
"The method produces spheres that have good capacity for carbon capture, and it works effectively at a large scale.
Carbon spheres range in size from nanometers to micrometers. Over the past decade they have begun to play an important role in areas such as energy storage and conversion, catalysis, gas adsorption and storage, drug and enzyme delivery, and water treatment.
They are also at the heart of carbon capture technology, which locks up carbon rather than emitting it into the atmosphere, thereby helping to tackle climate change." December 28, 2020
Source:
Swansea University
This is fun, thank you for the conversation Thinkerbell.
I'm not sure where she got 12 years. Climate change is here now. We are in the middle of a sixth mass extinction.
"If we use the same approach to estimate today's extinctions per million species-years, we come up with a rate that is between ten and 10,000 times higher than the background rate.:
All humans are gullible.
Liberals are humans.
Therefore, liberals are gullible.
Sad, false stories about polar bears, made them believe in global warming.
I can’t remember, we only have 7 years or so, to live before global warming, cooks us all like a slice of toast.
Global warming is here now. The oceans are acidifying. Polar bears are losing hunting grounds due to loss of ice from climate change.
"Ocean acidification describes the process by which our ocean has become more acidic — about 30 percent more — since the Industrial Revolution. About a quarter of the carbon dioxide (CO2) we pump out into the atmosphere every day through the burning of fossil fuels and other activities is absorbed by the seas"
https://climate.nasa.gov/blog/182/the-acid-test/
C'mon, man! No need to panic!
We've got 12 years!
I watched the video. I don't think climate change is an existential threat, in the sense all humans will be extinct in 12 years. That's an exaggeration.
“Scientists agree that climate change does pose a threat to humans and ecosystems,” the statement said, “but they do not envision that climate change will obliterate all people on the planet.” By Shannon Osaka and Kate Yoder on Mar 3, 2020
Still, denying climate change just because some of the predictions were inaccurate or a few people who believe in climate change are incorrect, doesn't disprove the overall theory.
Also, there is small chance that Earth could have a runaway greenhouse Venus scenario if large amounts of methane are released from glaciers.
"Stephen Hawking: Earth Could Turn Into Hothouse Planet Like Venus
By Tia Ghose July 05, 2017 "
This is a long shot, but in the end we can't know everything and it is at least a possibility even if it is a really small possibility.
"You might think the Antarctic methane would be secure under such a thick ice cap. But the Antarctic has been losing a lot of ice lately." national geographic
I'm much more worried how climate change is already effecting us. We can speculate all day long and when a certain prediction will come true and the likelihood of a worst case scenario. Yet, climate change already kills over 150,000 people a year.
"Climatic changes already are estimated to cause over 150,000 deaths annually." who
Do we really need to wait for the number to increase to 250,000 a year to act? The sooner we act the better.
https://grist.org/climate/is-th...ists-weigh-in/
https://www.livescience.com/596...nto-venus.html
https://www.nationalgeographic....e-environment/
https://www.who.int/heli/risks/...matechange/en/
Human beings are doing many things to the planet besides the supposed effects of CO2 emissions.
The only realistic long-term solution is population reduction to sustainable levels, say one or two billion, which could in principle be accomplished in about a century by birth control. The graph below shows the real hockey stick, Michael Mann and other such publicity hounds notwithstanding.
Co2 is the main driver of climate change.
"While natural processes continue to introduce short term variability, the unremitting rise of CO2 from industrial activities has become the dominant factor in determining our planet’s climate now and in the years to come.
Basic rebuttal written by Michael Searcy
Update July 2015:"
The myth here is that any number of other factors here are the real culprit, volcanoes, aerosols, etc.
Now for you specific claim about human overpopulation. Humans more or less need industrial activity to survive and live a high quality of life, and yes a lot of co2 is produced from those activities.
Yet, we can have our cake and eat it too. Electric cars, LED lightbulbs, solar panels, carbon capture, and so forth can greatly decrease the level of Co2 generation. The fallacy here is jumping to conclusions. Co2 from industrial activity is the main cause of climate change, not jumping to conclusions that human overpopulation is the main driver.
"The method produces spheres that have good capacity for carbon capture, and it works effectively at a large scale.
Carbon spheres range in size from nanometers to micrometers. Over the past decade they have begun to play an important role in areas such as energy storage and conversion, catalysis, gas adsorption and storage, drug and enzyme delivery, and water treatment.
They are also at the heart of carbon capture technology, which locks up carbon rather than emitting it into the atmosphere, thereby helping to tackle climate change." December 28, 2020
Source:
Swansea University
This is fun, thank you for the conversation Thinkerbell.
https://skepticalscience.com/CO...of-climate.htm
https://www.sciencedaily.com/re...1228101803.htm
I'm not sure where she got 12 years. Climate change is here now. We are in the middle of a sixth mass extinction.
"If we use the same approach to estimate today's extinctions per million species-years, we come up with a rate that is between ten and 10,000 times higher than the background rate.:
https://www.sciencealert.com/he...ass-extinction
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature09678