...............


there is so much out there about this - I don't really need to provide a lot of sources - a quick google search will find you thousands of links

of course there are the climate change deniers

and there are those who say what little we can do won't be nearly enough



just one link:



from the article:




"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. "




https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/




couldn't resist one more link - story about Siberia, one of the coldest places on earth where there is human habitation - they now face 100 degree days and multiple wildfires caused by them





https://eos.org/articles/siberian-he...20they%20found.



.

meh, I don't think 1 or 2 degree rise in global temperatures is going to be a big deal. first of all, according to NASA temperature data, warming has been concentrated in northern regions, which actually stand to benefit from the warming as permafrost thaws and land becomes arable and the regions more habitable. this is because water vapor is a much more potent greenhouse gas than co2 so a lot of hotter and more humid areas are already maxed out on global warming, whereas the colder, more arid regions not so much. anyway, regions in Canada experience swings in temperature of 60+ degrees centigrade on an annual basis, so why exactly is a 1 or 2-degree increase supposed to be deadly? there is no way of determining what the optimal level of climate should be, but the Earth is presently in an ice age so a few degrees increase is probably not going to be the end of the world and may ultimately be beneficial.

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooool

WAAF

This.

Greenland will go back to being green.

the Polar ice caps are melting and causing rising seas

.





https://thehill.com/changing-america...eys-soon-to-be


from the article linked below:


"Polar ice caps are melting as global warming causes climate change. We lose Arctic sea ice at a rate of almost 13% per decade, and over the past 30 years, the oldest and thickest ice in the Arctic has declined by a stunning 95%. ... Sea ice loss has far-reaching effects around the world."



https://www.worldwildlife.org/pages/...pacts-everyone



.

Planets screwed to many people. Unless climate change is a world problem were screwed. When you have an accord that lets China and India do nothing the planets screwed.

The question is the timeline and science will never get that right

Too bad former President Obama recently spent several million dollars on an oceanfront home . I guess as President he wasn't privy to SCIENCE.

I am interested in seeing the survey that was filled out. 97% of scientists agreed that "Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities."

Scientists aren't exactly known for their nuance.

Did a search for climate change end game and found this delightful little graph:



So, revert society back to the 1850s and we might not all die. No sweat.

Hope you California boys can swim.

My understanding is that left unchecked climate change will cause over 100 million deaths planet-wide once the higher temps settle in.

This will be a result of flooding especially in poorer countries (like India) and islands. It will also be a result of a lack of water.

It probably will be the cause of wars as well.

Unfortunately as a result of abortion (and other medical advances like the ability to tell couples very early on the sex of the fetus) both India and China will have tens of millions more men than women in the coming years.

This will lead to war as well as water and food shortages resulting from bad years (drought, flooding, etc.).

Because we are fairly isolated from this in the US we will probably lose a smaller % of our population to climate change than the rest of the world, except for maybe Europe.

The ultimate shame of it is that with about 4% of the world's population we created over 20% of the environmental problems that have caused and will continue to cause global warming. It would be nice of us to proactively do something about it to help prevent and/or mitigate the oncoming death toll.

Why do anything about Climate Change? Who cares if poor people die? Survival of the fittest, right? Don't you idiots believe in Evolution? The quicker the old and the sick and the ignorant and the poor die, the faster humankind will evolve into The Master Race. Cannot be +EV to mess with Evolution, right?

sweet, more beachfront property!

....................

.



.


https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/f...tics-wildfires


.

Turns out that on top of being a troll, an instigator, and a contrarian you are also a decent human being.

Pay more attention to yourself.

gee, maybe that is because Federal policy around that time changed to "stop putting the fires out".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor..._United_States


Three events between 1978 and 1988 precipitated a major fire use policy review in 1989: the Ouzel fire in Rocky Mountain National Park, the Yellowstone fires of 1988 in and around Yellowstone National Park, and the Canyon Creek fire in the Bob Marshall Wilderness on the Lewis and Clark National Forest. In all three cases, monitored fires burned until they threatened developed areas. While none of the Yellowstone fires of 1988 were caused by controlled burns, later investigations proved the fire use policy was appropriate, though needing strengthening and improvement.[13]

The Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior convened a fire policy review team to evaluate the National Park Service and Forest Service wilderness fire policies. The team reaffirmed the fundamental importance of fire’s natural role but recommended that fire management plans be strengthened by establishing clear decision criteria and accountability, and that interagency cooperation be improved. Wildland fire use programs restarted slowly after the 1989 review. Eventually the Forest Service and National Park Service programs began to grow as the number of fires and area burned increased.[1]

Have been laughing at the stupidity of this post all day.

Thanks again.

The earth storing enough extra energy to raise aggregate global temperatures by 2C is a massive deal, this does not mean all areas just get 2C warmer, it means there is that much extra energy in the climate system, meaning climate changes massively in response to this extra energy, and where ever the climate systems dumps this energy at any given time is going to experience much bigger swings in temperature than 2C and of course all sorts of extreme weather events. You even note how warming is not evenly distributed, but cant follow through with the logical extension of that fact. You do realise it needs a **** ton of energy to raise the entire aggregate global temperature by 2C?

Bolded is one of the biggest fails of intuitive deductive reasoning I have ever seen. You do realise water vapor and carbon can exist in the atmosphere at the same time? So adding more carbon just means a bigger cumulative effect and of course adding is the key word.

Thank you! I graciously accept all accolades!

Want to bet? $500?

There is a maximum effect of global warming, because only up to 100% of the heat reflected off the earth can be re-reflected back to the planet. So hot and temperate areas have already maxed out on global warming because water vapour is a green house gas that is substantially more effective than co2.

You really haven't read much on this subject have you?

Bet on what exactly?

Just read this link it will explain everything to you?

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/c...t-the-co2.html

You'd just welch anyway.

That link doesn't dispute any of my claims, and is not on point. You aren't very good at this thinking business.

.

You seem to think I am making a claim that water vapour, not co2, is the driving force behind global warming. I am not.