1.5C Threshold Breached

Page 2 of 3 [ 44 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

kokopelli
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,217
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind

16 Jan 2025, 6:04 am

funeralxempire wrote:

It seems we've got some of these frogs on here too.

Idiotic strawman argument.

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,128
Location: Right over your left shoulder

16 Jan 2025, 7:41 am

kokopelli wrote:

Idiotic strawman argument.

It would be unfair to put words in your mouth.

_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
If you feel useless, just remember the USA took four presidents, thousands of lives, trillions of dollars and 20 years to replace the Taliban with the Taliban.

Double Retired
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2020
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,767
Location: U.S.A. (Mid-Atlantic)

23 May 2025, 2:53 pm

"Trump pushes UK to embrace drilling, dump windmills"

Quote:

President Trump on Friday criticized the United Kingdom’s energy policy, pushing the British government to do away with “costly and unsightly” windmills and drill for more oil in the North Sea.

“Our negotiated deal with the United Kingdom is working out well for all. I strongly recommend to them, however, that in order to get their Energy Costs down, they stop with the costly and unsightly windmills, and incentivize modernized drilling in the North Sea, where large amounts of oil lay waiting to be taken,” Trump said on Truth Social.

“A century of drilling left, with Aberdeen as the hub. The old fashioned tax system disincentivizes drilling, rather than the opposite. U.K.’s Energy Costs would go WAY DOWN, and fast!” the president said.

_________________
When diagnosed I bought champagne!
I finally knew why people were strange.

kokopelli
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,217
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind

23 May 2025, 4:50 pm

MrsPeel wrote:

kokopelli wrote:

You do realize, don't you, that this is a cool period in the history of the Earth. Prior to the beginning of our current ice age, they were a fair bit higher than they are now.

OMG no! You are talking nonsense!

I mean, OK, if you are looking at the entire history of the earth and geological periods of hundreds of millions of years, then it is true the earth has cooled over time. But trends over hundreds of millions of years is not the relevant period to be looking at with respect to impact on our current civilisation!

In terms of climate fluctuations since the birth of humanity, let's say over the last 200,000 years, the current level is not a cool period, it is an interglacial, which is a warm period.

And this interglacial is not quite as warm as the previous interglacial and some before that. Also, we are cooler than during the Holocene Climatic Optimum.

Also, human beings are generally thought to have emerged about 2.6 million years ago, not 200,000 years ago.

Quote:

So yes, I agree that sea levels may have been a few metres higher at some point during the last interglacial, which was between 130,000 and 115,000 years ago.

Sea level was supposedly more than two meters higher something like 5,000 or 7,000 years ago.

Quote:

So between 115,000 years ago and the present, sea levels fell over 100 metres and rose again. So if we are looking at the history of humanity, sea levels are higher now than they have ever been since our ancestors walked out of Africa.

Not at all. They were higher just a few thousand years ago.

Those higher temperatures during the Holocene Climatic Optimum likely made it possible for civilization to emerge. They enabled our ancestors to settle down in communities and begin farming. They enabled the accidental development of hexaploid wheat which enabled mankind to spread around the Earth much easier than it would have been without it.

One problem you have to face is that temperature does not lag CO2. It's the other way around. CO2 is estimated to lag temperature by 200 to 800 years.

cyberdora
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2025
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,896
Location: Australia

23 May 2025, 8:28 pm

kokopelli wrote:

By the way, the Earth was warmer a few thousand years ago during the Holocene Climactic Optimum. What was the results of that? Rather than death, it brought about the beginning of civilization. It is because of that warming that we are where we are today.

The sky is not falling.

Geochemical and ecosystem collapse might not work out in the long run, only issue here is time its going to take and the level of impact.

kokopelli
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,217
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind

23 May 2025, 8:36 pm

cyberdora wrote:

kokopelli wrote:

Geochemical and ecosystem collapse might not work out in the long run, only issue here is time its going to take and the level of impact.

Speculation based on nothing more than an irrational fear of change.

Some estimates put the previous interglacial period as being 5 C warmer than now.

Some things that are indisputable (at least by any rational person) is that a warmer period is far more productive. Plants grow better and warmer air can carry more water. Not only that, CO2 is beneficial for growing plants. Any modern, commercial green house owner can tell you about that.

cyberdora
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2025
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,896
Location: Australia

23 May 2025, 8:42 pm

the problem with predictive modelling is the geochemical and ecosystem balance is very delicate and we don't really know where along the continuum the earth is between robust resilience to fragile collapse.

I'm not so confident what the impact is going to be and the level of adjustment human beings will have to make. Using past events as a indicator might not be as reassuring as it first appears as the earth has experienced serious climatic events in the past resulting in mass extinctions and human bottlenecks.

kokopelli
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,217
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind

23 May 2025, 8:53 pm

cyberdora wrote:

It might be delicate in your imagination, but that does not mean that it is at all delicate. If collapse were that easy, it would happen time after time after time and we would not be here.

As for mass extinctions, do you mean by asteroid strikes? Or maybe Snowball Earth? Remember that in Snowball Earth, the problem was cold, not warmth. As for asteroid strikes, those were not the result of climate change.

cyberdora
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2025
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,896
Location: Australia

23 May 2025, 9:00 pm

kokopelli wrote:

It might be delicate in your imagination, but that does not mean that it is at all delicate. If collapse were that easy, it would happen time after time after time and we would not be here.

Are you a climate expert? 99% of climate scientists around the world predict some level of negative consequence from global warming. You sound like me talking about aliens :lol:

cyberdora
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2025
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,896
Location: Australia

23 May 2025, 9:03 pm

kokopelli wrote:

As for mass extinctions, do you mean by asteroid strikes? Or maybe Snowball Earth? Remember that in Snowball Earth, the problem was cold, not warmth. As for asteroid strikes, those were not the result of climate change.

Are you serious?
https://sustainability.stanford.edu/new ... nction.%22

kokopelli
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,217
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind

23 May 2025, 9:05 pm

cyberdora wrote:

kokopelli wrote:

It might be delicate in your imagination, but that does not mean that it is at all delicate. If collapse were that easy, it would happen time after time after time and we would not be here.

Are you a climate expert? 99% of climate scientists around the world predict some level of negative consequence from global warming. You sound like me talking about aliens :lol:

A great many so-called "climate scientists" are anything but climate scientists. I'm no expert on the subject and do not claim to be an expert on the subject.

Unlike you, I don't seek out simple solutions to complex problems. I recognize that the problems are far more complex than the general public clamoring for simple solutions.

cyberdora
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2025
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,896
Location: Australia

23 May 2025, 9:11 pm

kokopelli wrote:

Unlike you, I don't seek out simple solutions to complex problems. I recognize that the problems are far more complex than the general public clamoring for simple solutions.

You are simplifying potential outcomes from complex problems based largely on hope

cyberdora
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2025
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,896
Location: Australia

23 May 2025, 9:12 pm

kokopelli wrote:

A great many so-called "climate scientists" are anything but climate scientists. I'm no expert on the subject and do not claim to be an expert on the subject.

Strange? you are stickler for the scientific method except when it comes to climate science?

kokopelli
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,217
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind

23 May 2025, 9:13 pm

cyberdora wrote:

kokopelli wrote:

Are you serious?
https://sustainability.stanford.edu/new ... nction.%22

So include massive volcanic lava flows releasing incredible amounts of CO2 (vastly more than man can release) as a potential problem.

kokopelli
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,217
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind

23 May 2025, 9:16 pm

cyberdora wrote:

kokopelli wrote:

Unlike you, I don't seek out simple solutions to complex problems. I recognize that the problems are far more complex than the general public clamoring for simple solutions.

You are simplifying potential outcomes from complex problems based largely on hope

That's a lie.

Initially, I was caught up in the global warming fervor like so many others. But then I started asking questions such as whether or not the Earth has ever been so warm. Imagine my surprise to find out that it was quite a bit warmer just a few thousand years ago. And it didn't kill of man-kind. Rather, it was an enormous boon to the human race.

My position is based on historical evidence, not on hope.

cyberdora
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2025
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,896
Location: Australia

23 May 2025, 9:18 pm

kokopelli wrote:

So include massive volcanic lava flows releasing incredible amounts of CO2 (vastly more than man can release) as a potential problem.

I mean I could pick hundreds of examples, do you want me to list them.
Climate change killed off civilisations in the Sahara (it used to be green) and the Indus Valley in what is India and Pakistan. Its also thought to be responsible for demise of many native cultures in south and north America.

Page 2 of 3 [ 44 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Jump to:

1.5C Threshold Breached Post Reply New Topic

1.5C Threshold Breached