The biggest risk is some kind of feedback loop that spirals. This is why climate change is an urgent crisis, even if the probability is low, it's a true existential risk that we can't take.
Well I don't think many climate scientists are claiming that a hothouse earth runaway reaction is likely.
Also the temperature and CO2 concentration on earth has been way higher than it is now, so if its possible for earth to turn into venus, we're probably not very close to that tipping point.
"Our analysis indicates that methane emissions from fossil fuels are unlikely to be the dominant driver of the post-2006 increase" source: https://research.noaa.gov/2021/06/17/new-analysis-shows-microbial-sources-fueling-rise-of-atmospheric-methane/
They are obsessed by quarterly profits. They are also addicted to numbers. It comes to a point where numbers don’t equate to money anymore. It’s points in a ball game.
Not that I’m simping for billionaires here (lol), but I think we’re ALL lazy gluttons that want to live like kings and queens and have every product, every tool, every device, and every toy, at our disposal. Co-ops could be a thing, but they so aren’t.
Some of us are worse than others for sure. And some of us are much more to blame than others. But for myself to use billionaires as a scapegoat doesn’t help me become a better person that consumes less.
I’ve seen some people that don’t appear all that wealthy, buying all kinds of cheap junk at the dollar store. All that cheap junk comes from places with very little regard for our environment, is packaged in a lot of needless plastic, and is shipped halfway across the world using bunker fuel. Yeah billionaires are hurting us, but dumbass consumers are enabling them.
Billionaires aren't lazy. They are hyperactive hoarders of money and power. (Hoarder being a psychiatric diagnosis, money being just a token of power). Amongst other things they hoarded ownership of all massmedia, including social networks and their algorithmic feed, and are using that power to manipulate masses of dumbasses into blidfolded consumerism. Because that is how they came to power and they cannot think of any other way how to keep and increase their power. Money through consumerism must flow.
Not according to the legal system in Canada as they recently prosecuted activist stating that they broke the law as there is not immediate risk. They choose the side of environmental collapse. Really shows you how deep the issue goes.
I was trying to rephrase the article's title to better reflect the problem of global warming. I mean, it isn't the temperature on our bodies as much as the atmosphere's total energy content, heatwise **and** otherwise.
Yes!! These are the words I’ve been looking for. I have noticed in the summers since 2019/2020 that the forecasts/temperatures seemed all wrong, and everything felt warmer though it like wasn’t meant to be a warm day and when it was meant to be a fairly mild day (idk 24 degrees Celsius) the sun was hot. Like a searing hot. Having spent a lot of time outside, I knew it was very different as well as my body feeling very different.
The article is part of a series called Curious Kids. The question is from a 12-year-old. The article answers the question in simple terms children might understand. It’s actually pretty great for including children in on the conversation of an issue that will define their adult lives.
Oh hell yes. In the US alone no state and cities are running bid budget surpluses where they can absorbs costs of rebuilding. The US government debt is increasing by 3 trillion dollars a year right now.
A google search tells me that above 108 can cause death. 109 can cause brain damage and 111 is likely to kill you but people have survived 115. 7. I would not do anything like work at temps above 100 degrees. I'd just go inside and chill until the temperature dropped down to something reasonable but I know there are people who don't have that option.
The photo of the truck driving around spraying mist in Delhi answers the questions. All of them.
1. Title question? Yes.
2. Are we too myopic to stop burning fossil fuels as a way to mitigate our discomfort? Also yes.
The biggest risk is some kind of feedback loop that spirals. This is why climate change is an urgent crisis, even if the probability is low, it's a true existential risk that we can't take.
Given that non-anthropogenic methane is increasing at an alarming rate I think, sadly, the probability might be high.
We should all look over to Venus and realize what runaway greenhouse looks like.... Ita wouldn't surprise me if earth shares a similar fate.
Feedback loops won't runaway like with Venus, but would instead probably slow down with diminishing effect. Would still mean mass extinction though.
What's your basis for saying that?
Well I don't think many climate scientists are claiming that a hothouse earth runaway reaction is likely. Also the temperature and CO2 concentration on earth has been way higher than it is now, so if its possible for earth to turn into venus, we're probably not very close to that tipping point.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo1892.epdf?sharing_token=wTrI-Jqvbyk7C6OzASRwpNRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0OXfszQG7G1UXR-Uwrx7qp2-Kc9KzeYCoYk5lwS9d3VuasoHWezFLe_IT0wFCitdxKFCB99Nq_7KLPbKNiFQvkFKyn9u0UbXQ4v9dUd8IXSMrojOTCTTZCnnUwgFwBJjXF19OH9Y95O_u9aE3NI_0iihX7QGVUF9qHcwVuo6B3aU1NVLwOotaR6A0ZlbY9fms4%3D&tracking_referrer=www.scientificamerican.com https://www.space.com/planets-earth-venus-greenhouse-gases-climate-change
It probably won't be CO2 tho. Once the earth kills us off, the algae will take back over and change it back over to oxygen again.
I thought they recently figured out that the methane increase is tied to leaks during extraction.
"Our analysis indicates that methane emissions from fossil fuels are unlikely to be the dominant driver of the post-2006 increase" source: https://research.noaa.gov/2021/06/17/new-analysis-shows-microbial-sources-fueling-rise-of-atmospheric-methane/
billionaires are willing to take that risk. Because if they can’t have their billions, what’s the point of having an earth that’s habitable?
They are also building bunkers for themselves so...
Yeah, they know what’s coming.
They are obsessed by quarterly profits. They are also addicted to numbers. It comes to a point where numbers don’t equate to money anymore. It’s points in a ball game.
Not that I’m simping for billionaires here (lol), but I think we’re ALL lazy gluttons that want to live like kings and queens and have every product, every tool, every device, and every toy, at our disposal. Co-ops could be a thing, but they so aren’t. Some of us are worse than others for sure. And some of us are much more to blame than others. But for myself to use billionaires as a scapegoat doesn’t help me become a better person that consumes less. I’ve seen some people that don’t appear all that wealthy, buying all kinds of cheap junk at the dollar store. All that cheap junk comes from places with very little regard for our environment, is packaged in a lot of needless plastic, and is shipped halfway across the world using bunker fuel. Yeah billionaires are hurting us, but dumbass consumers are enabling them.
Billionaires aren't lazy. They are hyperactive hoarders of money and power. (Hoarder being a psychiatric diagnosis, money being just a token of power). Amongst other things they hoarded ownership of all massmedia, including social networks and their algorithmic feed, and are using that power to manipulate masses of dumbasses into blidfolded consumerism. Because that is how they came to power and they cannot think of any other way how to keep and increase their power. Money through consumerism must flow.
This person ☝️ understands it perfectly.
That makes absolutely no sense.
Not according to the legal system in Canada as they recently prosecuted activist stating that they broke the law as there is not immediate risk. They choose the side of environmental collapse. Really shows you how deep the issue goes.
Is it hot enough yet for destruction of human infrastructure with droughts and hurricanes to be faster than we can rebuild it?
Getting there
I was trying to rephrase the article's title to better reflect the problem of global warming. I mean, it isn't the temperature on our bodies as much as the atmosphere's total energy content, heatwise **and** otherwise.
Yes!! These are the words I’ve been looking for. I have noticed in the summers since 2019/2020 that the forecasts/temperatures seemed all wrong, and everything felt warmer though it like wasn’t meant to be a warm day and when it was meant to be a fairly mild day (idk 24 degrees Celsius) the sun was hot. Like a searing hot. Having spent a lot of time outside, I knew it was very different as well as my body feeling very different.
By “otherwise” I think of air movements resulting in changes in pressure and humidity, that we perceive as hurricanes and droughts.
I think it is the result of losing O- Zone.
Oh, was that a question from you?
Which question are you referring to.
In the title
No. I just think the title leads to think it’s only about temperature we feel but that’s only one problem.
The article is part of a series called Curious Kids. The question is from a 12-year-old. The article answers the question in simple terms children might understand. It’s actually pretty great for including children in on the conversation of an issue that will define their adult lives.
Even some Redditors might understand
Oh hell yes. In the US alone no state and cities are running bid budget surpluses where they can absorbs costs of rebuilding. The US government debt is increasing by 3 trillion dollars a year right now.
And yet there they go pushing to be #1 in O&G production, emissions and climate-caused infrastructure destruction.
Hey a guy needs to buy a third house and take care of the mistress…..
Survivability (of 'the fittest') has always been -- is now -- and will *increasingly* be about **adaptability** at-scale. Full stop.
Why does your body get a fever?
Because many bacteria and viruses cannot survive 120 degrees F.
I don't think humans can survive fever above 108
It’s pretty deadly even around 104-105.
A google search tells me that above 108 can cause death. 109 can cause brain damage and 111 is likely to kill you but people have survived 115. 7. I would not do anything like work at temps above 100 degrees. I'd just go inside and chill until the temperature dropped down to something reasonable but I know there are people who don't have that option.
The photo of the truck driving around spraying mist in Delhi answers the questions. All of them. 1. Title question? Yes. 2. Are we too myopic to stop burning fossil fuels as a way to mitigate our discomfort? Also yes.