|
Started writing a reply to that, but then saw poster name and relented. If there's no compromise for urgent and broad action, those huge chinese and indian populations will soon be 'skyrocketing downwards' themselves.
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 23:28 |
|
|
Radbot posted:"Skyrocketing downward", that's a new one. If you look at everything upside down it makes perfect sense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
So let's say the talks fail, What sort of great natural disasters and ecological changes can we expect in the next 10 years? The next 20?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
Freezer posted:If there's no compromise for urgent and broad action, those huge chinese and indian populations will soon be 'skyrocketing downwards' themselves. This is a Malthusian fantasy. A bit demented too, if I am being honest. How do you propose this is going to happen? They're not going to starve: food production is growing faster than the population, and food production will continue to increase rapidly as advanced agricultural techniques are utilized in the developing world. Meanwhile, the rate of population growth is slowing down. Posted graphs to this effect in this thread before, and recently in the new thread. They're not going to drown. They're not going to die in hurricanes. They're not going to be killed off by heat waves. There will be heat waves and hurricanes and droughts and floods, and of course fatalities, but also much higher standards of living that equips people to better deal with natural disasters (be they exacerbated or not). Remember that populations that live in poverty are shrinking, not growing! There's not going to be wars over water: we already have desalination technology that can create unlimited drinkable water (technology that will inevitably become far less expensive over time). Incidentally, we have a problem here in the southwest US of the Colorado river not providing enough water to the various states. I don't think we're going to start invading one another! One of the great fallacies in the arguments for alarmism is that the world will remain status quo. That we won't invent new energy solutions, we won't ever figure out how to sequester carbon, we won't technologically adapt, and the poor world will remain too poor to deal with changes. The world will have done nothing but wait. These downtrodden masses in China & India will all sit around twiddling their thumbs while they die off due to evil western carbon. Contrary to that fallacy, there are two stone cold guarantees here. The first is that climate change, even if it gets very bad, will be very slow moving. The scale is one of decades and centuries, not days or months. And the second guarantee is that the world is going to be unimaginably more advanced and wealthier. People are going to be far more equipped to deal with maladies coming their way. The world population living in extreme poverty will shrink to near nothing over the coming decades. Dying to non-natural causes is going to become rarer and rarer as the world modernizes. Can you imagine people in your hometown succumbing and dying due to climate change in 2015? That level of wealth is going to become commonplace across the world. For alarmism, there are arguments to be made about the impact on worldwide animal species and things like ocean acidification. Those are legitimate, potentially irreversible problems. The whole "scare people by insinuating tons of people are going to die" argument is a twisted one. It is simply not going to happen. Malthusian forecasts have never even come close to happening. Humans are a resilient, resourceful, super intelligent species.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
Climate change may be "slow moving" ,but I would actually say the consequences are not slow moving ,because as you can see even small affects of climate change such as the Syrian drought have led to world wide consequences.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 07:16
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:So let's say the talks fail, Bigger and stronger hurricanes, longer and more severe droughts, more insane snowstorms, and so on. The difference probably won't be noticeable between now and 2025, but around 2040 or so poo poo is going to get... interesting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 07:43
|
|
|
How long until everyone dies?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 08:34
|
|
|
Silver Nitrate posted:How long until everyone dies? Two more climate change threads
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Radbot posted:"Skyrocketing downward", that's a new one. Plummeting? Groundrocketing?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Climate change may be "slow moving" ,but I would actually say the consequences are not slow moving ,because as you can see even small affects of climate change such as the Syrian drought have led to world wide consequences. What does a drought in Syria have to do with climate change? Droughts have been occurring before humans arrived. As the IPCC makes clear, we have detected no significant changes in droughts or flooding. It is hypothesized that changes in temperature MAY increase droughts or flooding, but we have yet to observe any changes. This paper from Nature last year looks at worldwide drought conditions over the past 30 years and finds no upward trend in droughts of ANY severity (D4 being the most severe):  http://www.nature.com/articles/sdata20141
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Arkane posted:What does a drought in Syria have to do with climate change? Droughts have been occurring before humans arrived.  As usual, this graph does not say what you think it does, and you are again misinterpreting the IPCC results. I'm gonna guess you cited that graph from another site, not from nature, because when I went and looked for it, guess where I found it? http://www.c3headlines.com/2014/05/extreme-drought-new-research-confirms-human-co2-not-causing-a-global-drought-increase.html Hmmmmm. Haven't you cited these dumb-asses before? 
CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Dec 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
All things considered, I think we got a wonderful deal out of Paris.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
It was 70 degrees in Pittsburgh today  Though I suppose you have to account for El Nino
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 06:08
|
|
|
It rained yesterday here in Wisconsin. Even my most conservative friends are starting to say there's something to this whole global warming thing. And of course, I just smile and nod because I'd rather have them on the right side for the wrong reason than to confuse their position by explaining that the fact that it is hot today is not necessarily linked with the overall average temperature of the world.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
Silver Nitrate posted:How long until everyone dies? For everyone alive today? Like 100 years or so.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:All things considered, I think we got a wonderful deal out of Paris. As an accelerationist, I agree.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Well great there is literally no punishment if a country said to piss off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 23:28 |
|
|
This thread is old as hell and there's a new one covering the same ground: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3750508
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 09:15
|
|
