Support NeoGAF

[Pandy]

Sure.

So, mature discussion?

Well said. Emphasizing the very serious effects of human induced climate change is important but we do a disservice to exaggerate all this because all that does is turn people away from supporting much needed change.

We aren't talking about human extinction. We're talking about the end of the current era of human civilisation. It will be an extinction level event, but humans will indeed be hard to get rid of completely due to being highly adaptable and sufficiently widespread. There are many thousands of species that will go before we do.

Don't expect to be able to log onto GAF to bitch about it though.

 

[maniac-kun]

Arctic Sea Ice not looking good:

https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/

 

[Tuck]

I'm going to play devils advocate here and yes I acknowledge that plenty of research has been done on this topic with multiple people dedicating their entire lives to it. But hasn't there been plenty of articles proving that this is a natural occurrence as well? There have been time periods throughout history where the world has been extremely hot. I just want to know the arguments from all sides, not just the gloom and doom side.

Yes, there have been incidents of this occurring in history, but rarely in the span of 100 years.

Plus there's the fact that this all has coincided with the start of the industrial revolution, which is a bit too convenient to be a coincidence, no?

 

[Kaako]

Well played, humans. Edging a tad bit closer to our own inevitable extinction.

 

[Oriel]

We're talking about the end of the current era of human civilisation.

Outta here.

 

[Pandy]

Outta here.

Credit where it's due, at least you have a plan. I always wondered what Hugo Drax's GAF-name was.

 

[Divvy]

Outta here.

Instead of dismissive comments, why not explain why you find that so hard to believe

 

[Necromanti]

That's assuming you believe the government knows how to spend my money better than I do.

So what are you doing about it?

 

[Shredderi]

If true then I can't believe my bad luck in being born to an era where the end of the world comes. I mean, all those thousands of human dominated years and it would happen on my watch? What are the fucking odds. Should've been born in the sixties I guess.

 

[Nafai1123]

That's assuming you believe the government knows how to spend my money better than I do. My current govt appear to be barely able to walk and chew gum at the same time so you'll forgive me if I don't believe everything they spew.
There is nothing wrong with keeping the environment clean and safe but not when it means putting the human race back thousands of years to do it

Lol, thousands of years huh?

 

[teruterubozu]

If true then I can't believe my bad luck in being born to an era where the end of the world comes. I mean, all those thousands of human dominated years and it would happen on my watch? What are the fucking odds. Should've been born in the sixties I guess.

Why the sixties? You'd only be in your 40s-50s and still have plenty of time to witness world destruction.

 

[zeemumu]

I wonder just how fucked we have to be for governments to actually take it seriously?

Beyond the turnaround point.

 

[Aki-at]

That's assuming you believe the government knows how to spend my money better than I do. My current govt appear to be barely able to walk and chew gum at the same time so you'll forgive me if I don't believe everything they spew.
There is nothing wrong with keeping the environment clean and safe but not when it means putting the human race back thousands of years to do it

But without a plan of action set by the government what do you hope to accomplish by yourself? Only the governments of the world can react to a solution to this crisis by working together, individual action isn't the way we'll get ourselves out of this problem. If your government is run by climate change deniers I could understand the cynicism.

Furthermore we are not going to throw our development back thousands of years, that's an extreme overreaction.

 

[RedSwirl]

So what actually happens?

I think a reason climate change discussion hasn't been all that palatable to the general public is because there haven't been specifics on how their lives in particular (or their childrens' lives) could change as a result. It's a bit tough to find an actual "timeline" of how the world could change.

I mean, we're seeing a few things today with warmer temperatures, barely controllable wildfires, the California drought, and flooding in Bangladesh. Is it just more of that? I read an article on The Post I believe suggesting that sometime in the middle of this century California will probably go through another "super drought" that will last decades. What else is there?

 

[Shredderi]

Why the sixties? You'd only be in your 40s-50s and still have plenty of time to witness world destruction.

At least I could've had some fun in my younger years and then witness hell and burn in it. Now I'm just feeling like I'm entering my prime and supposedly shit is hitting the fan :'D

 

[Sleight of Jam]

Tbh we deserve it if money rules all decision to improve. RIP humanity, nothing of value will be lost.

 

[B!TCH]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX-YfuVQmX8

This is fine.

 

[ColdPizza]

That has nothing to do with climate change.

Ozone depletion isn't related to climate change?

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/assessments/ozone/1998/faq9.html

 

[Epsilon-delta]

I wanted to make a quick check of the source in the OP so I looked into the "IEA says 3.5 degrees by 2035" claim. It looks to be unsupported. The primary source clearly appears to be the Christian Science Monitor, seeing how most sources either quote it verbatim or link back to it, but try as I might, there's just no indication of there being an actual IEA release to that effect.

Quite the contrary: actual IEA releases seem to predict a much more modest 3.5 degrees by 2200 under current committments scenario.

https://www.iea.org/publications/fr...2015SpecialReportonEnergyandClimateChange.pdf

During the search, I also found indications that the source is plagiarising Mother Jones with that terrifying list of theirs that the 3.5 degrees by 2035 claim is on.

http://www.motherjones.com/environm...nvironment-apocalypse-human-extinction?page=2

Big caveat: I'm not saying there's nothing to worry about - there absolute is. But whenever you see these claims that climate change is proceeding much faster than expected or that we'll reach some temperature decades or centuries earlier than previously thought; be skeptical. Climate scientists are really good at what they do. Their models are pretty much on point, that's not the problem. The problem is the incredibly slow response on a global scale. But even a business as usual scenario is completely unlikely to create a sudden climate apocalypse; rather, it's the slow march towards it by the end of the century that should scare us, because that's when our children and grandchildren will live through it.

At the beginning of page 37:

If stronger action were not forthcoming after 2030, the emissions path in the INDC Scenario is estimated to be consistent with a 50% probability of an average long-term global temperature increase of around 2.6 °C in 2100 and 3.5 °C in the longer term (after 2200).

There are also a lot of assumptions in the report, specifically with China expected to introduce a national carbon scheme by 2020 and this little gem:

Some other countries such as China had not submitted their INDCs but had otherwise clarified their intended post-2020 actions on climate change. These INDCs and stated policy intentions (together with previous policy declarations by countries which have yet to disclose their latest intentions) provide a basis upon which to conduct an initial assessment of their impact on future energy and emissions trends.

 

[DonMigs85]

Higher-ups in the fossil fuel industry are basically real-life Captain Planet villains, it's so sad

 

[Fallout-NL]

I still can't believe we got GW Bush over this guy. I know many don't like him but I believed then as I still believe now that Al Gore would have been one of the best Presidents this country would have ever had.

Yeah, it's a crying shame. Though I admit, I was sceptical when I first saw 'An Inconvenient Truth' (something that shames me now). Who knows, we might look back at that election a couple of decades from now as the moment where it all went wrong.

 

[phyrlord]

I think climate change is a big deal, but I have a feeling this article is exaggerating the situation a bit

You say that, but as someon who lives in onatrio CANADA. We have been hitting 'feels like' 45C more then once through the summer in the last 2 years. if that gets any worse. I'll get a little concerned.

 

[Mesoian]

I wonder just how fucked we have to be for governments to actually take it seriously?

Considering the state of Chinese smog, we'd all have to be burning alive Dante's Inferno style for anyone to even begin to start caring.

 

[ohlawd]

we fucked the world up for the kids and the rest of the animals

enjoy your present!

 

[Lime]

Yeah, it's a crying shame. Though I admit, I was sceptical when I first saw 'An Inconvenient Truth' (something that shames me now). Who knows, we might look back at that election a couple of decades from now as the moment where it all went wrong.

As an older person, we have known since the 70's and 80's that anthropologic climate change was real, yet no one has acted and lots of push back constantly. It has taken 21 international meetings to even reach some sort of target, which is still insufficient and does not take into account air and water transportation.

We have known this for 40 years and we are here now without much movement and little to no reduction in pollution.

 

[PK Gaming]

With this and Trump potentially becoming president...

Not a good look for humanity

 

[Nivash]

At the beginning of page 37:

There are also a lot of assumptions in the report, specifically with China expected to introduce a national carbon scheme by 2020 and this little gem:

I actually did find that passage after making my post and traced it back to at least as far as the 2011 report. I tried to check the 2010 report to see if that's where the CSMonitor got their numbers, but it wouldn't open on my iPad for some reason. Still, it's a far cry from actually reaching 3.5 degrees by 2035 as implied by the CSMonitor article, right?

The 2015 release is based on the voluntary commitments made before the Copenhagen convention and is the most recent I found. It's a decent estimate, as far as things go. I'd argue that it's more realistic than business as usual.

 

[Smokey]

Well that was thoroughly depressing.

My exact thoughts.

I guess it's pretty much inevitable.

 

[MutFox]

Greed will kill us, thank a capitalist world.

 

[Jetman]

The article talks about how change is possible and how it's only a question of political will to change our energy consumption to something less damaging.

Then how do you handle the other major progenitors like China and India?

 

[Ogodei]

Serious question:
If the fossil fuel industry "disappears" as they say... How does the world work?
Or are we spelling the death of our current lives?

No fossil fuels mean many of the conveniences we take for granted (like plastics for cell phones and computers) disappear too...

No easy way to get across town without gasoline in the car... I guess we're walking to work?

I'm not being a climate change denier, I'm simply asking how everyone expects the population at large to react with government enforced eradication of how they've lived their lives for the entirety of my lifetime...

Yeah, this is where the language of the article starts to feel reminiscent of the "peak oil" fringe, or the people who'd say "our grandkids will ask us what flying on a plane or plastic was like."

Frankly if it takes the destruction of civilization to save civilization, how are we any better off? I definitely believe we need to cut down on carbon emissions faster than we have been, but anything as radical as a total halt to hydrocarbon fuel and use would be counterproductive. It's not like wood-burning stoves are any better for the environment, and that's what a lot of the world would move back to if you took oil off the table.

 

[blu]

Dumb fucking species couldn't even wait out the inevitable finite burnout of our own star before taking a scorched Earth policy to the entire goddamn planet.

/cranks up air conditioner

(would be the common response of our species)

We, as a species, have near-zero abilities to deal with cataclysmic problems. So far we have exclusively relied on our good luck and/or self-restoring balances to fix things for us. We have bright, genius individuals, but the average mass has the intelligence of a mildly-mutated primate. Our species will surely serve as a great negative example to somebody else one day.

 

[ishibear]

Well this is depressing.

 

[Epsilon-delta]

I actually did find that passage after making my post and traced it back to at least as far as the 2011 report. I tried to check the 2010 report to see if that's where the CSMonitor got their numbers, but it wouldn't open on my iPad for some reason. Still, it's a far cry from actually reaching 3.5 degrees by 2035 as implied by the CSMonitor article, right?

The 2015 release is based on the voluntary commitments made before the Copenhagen convention and is the most recent I found. It's a decent estimate, as far as things go. I'd argue that it's more realistic than business as usual.

You're right because a 3.5 degree increase by 2035 would be catastrophic, resulting in runaway climate change.

I agree that the voluntary commitments are a decent estimate. China needs to step up to the plate but then again I can say the same for US and India.

Like you noted earlier, it is hard to be in this field walking a fine line between informing the public and possibly distrusting us if our predictions fail. I know one thing for certain, most of us agree that preventing a 2 degree increase is a lost cause.

As for the report, even a 2.6 degree increase by 2100 would have devastating effects on the world. I would be long gone by then but I can't help but feel sorry for future generations.

 

[Username1198]

Yet gay marriage is a bigger political talking point

Maybe that's there solution for gay marriage; eradicate everyone, that way no more gay marriage.

Fuuuuuuck I like the earth too, my second fav planet

 

[Insane Metal]

Beyond the turnaround point.

That has already happened. I think we will have serious commitment with this issue once developed nations really start getting crazy because of lack of fresh water and food, for example. Until something really unprecedented happen I think nothing will change, unfortunately.

 

[Sparse]

There was this article about the gloom many climate scientists feel.

It had a great Norse proverb shared by the scientist though:



Getting yourself into a restless, uncomfortable tizzy won't help you or anyone else. So try to work through it if you can.

Just wanted to say thanks for the proverb.

 

[MegaManTrigger]

Oven level temperatures?! Good grief! This doom porn is why so many are hostile towards climate advocacy. Can we please have a mature discussion? Yes climate change is real and yes it should be taken seriously. But no, humans aren't going to go extinct and no, Earth isn't going to turn into Venus.

You do realize I said after hundreds/thousands of years? But nope, keep being hyperfocused on one aspect of the comment.

 

[univariate]

This is why I am considering not having children.

Same here. 2035 is right around the coroner.

 

[Epsilon-delta]

/cranks up air conditioner

(would be the common response of our species)

We, as a species, have near-zero abilities to deal with cataclysmic problems. So far we have exclusively relied on our good luck and/or self-restoring balances to fix things for us. We have bright, genius individuals, but the average mass has the intelligence of a mildly-mutated primate. Our species will surely serve as a great negative example to somebody else one day.

I would add that people who have our best intentions are usually not the ones in power.

I'm all for a technocratic government.

 

[Kill3r7]

Then how do you handle the other major progenitors like China and India?

You don't. Hard to convince developing nations and their leaders/businessmen to curtail their growth and development in the name of global salvation.

 

[Insane Metal]

Same here. 2035 is right around the coroner.

Well, that escalated quickly.

 

[Ac30]

Ozone depletion isn't related to climate change?

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/assessments/ozone/1998/faq9.html

I'm confused, it seems from the article that the effects are rather limited, and the closing of the hole is a good thing.

 

[BigBoss]

Everything is fine guys, the ground is supposed to move like jello:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06Xc3LtZRWo

 

[Fallout-NL]

As an older person, we have known since the 70's and 80's that anthropologic climate change was real, yet no one has acted and lots of push back constantly. It has taken 21 international meetings to even reach some sort of target, which is still insufficient and does not take into account air and water transportation.

We have known this for 40 years and we are here now without much movement and little to no reduction in pollution.

Yes, I worded that poorly. I meant one (of many) possible moment(s), albeit a key one, where it could have been turned around.

 

[hydragonwarrior]

If some horror scenarios come true, maybe. The thing about ecological systems is, they might work fine (well, fine enough to support billions of humans & other animals) even when they are on the brink of total destruction. But then, once it goes past some limit, it all comes crashing down hard. We are screwed if(when) plankton in oceans start dying off en masse and some key areas of food production dry up.

Plankton dying off would starve the oceans, and the mass death would acidify the oceans quickly too. More the reason why I despise how conservative politics have undermined our climate change efforts.

 

[tirant]

I wonder just how fucked we have to be for governments to actually take it seriously?

It's citizens who have the power to move and replace governments, and we don't care shit. That's why they are not doing anything.

 

[pr0cs]

So what are you doing about it?

Paying my stupid bullshit carbon taxes like everyone else where I live even though people are consuming and demanding the same style of living as they have before just that they're now taxed out the ass to do so.
Anyone who believes that the government knows how to reduce our dependence on hydrocarbons without taking things away from people are naive

 

[Ac30]

Paying my stupid bullshit carbon taxes like everyone else where I live even though people are consuming and demanding the same style of living as they have before just that they're now taxed out the ass to do so.
Anyone who believes that the government knows how to reduce our dependence on hydrocarbons without taking things away from people are naive

So, you expect private citizens to take matters into their own hands? The same ones who vote in people like Inohofe and deny climate change?

Erm, okay.

 

[IndoAssassin]

Crazy how it went from our grandchildren going to the possibility of us going extinct.

Well scientists can dream as loud as they want, unfortunately it is too late for us to do anything.

Already have a hard time convincing politicians of a 50 year timeline how you gonna push them to a one year lol.


The last time the oceans became acidic, 99% of all life on Earth died off.