6 ms·

A 99% chance that this year will be the hottest on record. [0] I would say that now is time to panic, but the time to panic was twenty years ago. Perhaps the W

• guard-of-terra 10y ago
  On the other hand, where I live winter was pretty nice and May was just amazing. Have other things to panic about. "How do you have audacity not worrying about our problems", you're probably selfishly asking. Well, I've never seen much caring about my problems.
  • mathgeek 10y ago
    > where I live Important to remember that "Earth" is a valid answer for where you live, as well.
    • guard-of-terra 10y ago
      Do I worry about climate change on "Earth where I live"? Definitely. Does it enter the short-list of problems important for me? Definitely not. Do I think that sticking with pre-industrial climate is the only option? Frankly I don't. Stanislav Lem with his promised palm trees in Greenland is still vivid. Just saying that because my point of view got to be represented.
      • rvense 10y ago
        I think you'll find that science fiction authors are the only ones suggesting that the new climate will be better. Or at least that the period as we move towards a new equilibrium will be anything less than catastrophic.
        • guard-of-terra 10y ago
          "the only ones suggesting that the new climate will be better" Or maybe quite contrary, it's only people of certain coasts that think our current climate was optimal. Yes we share a common Earth, but we do have conflicting interests on it.
          • TeMPOraL 10y ago
            > Yes we share a common Earth, but we do have conflicting interests on it. True. But here I was thinking that we're above wanting to cut down the expense on heating for few million of our neighbours at the expense of fucking over the lives of several billion.
            • mathgeek 10y ago
              Honestly, I don't think that's far off from the mindsets of a sizable number in the developed world.
            • guard-of-terra 10y ago
              More than a hundred millions of people stuck in cold climate. And it's about quality of life, not just "expense on heating". And that's what they get for no effort. Do you seriously expect them to show effort for bringing their climate back to worse? Do you seriously think that any minority should be screwed over just because a larger set of people might benefit from this? For example, imagine they find a deposit of fertilizer on some tropical island. A lot of people could benefit from that fertilizer (and especially the few involved in this operation), should we just confiscate the island? After all, there's just a few thousands of inhabitants, who can be easily moved to a camp in some desert.
        • baddox 10y ago
          Wait, are you suggesting that the mainstream view is that catastrophic climate change is inevitable? I don't think that's accurate.
          • 10y ago
      • Oletros 10y ago
        I would like to see those palm trees growing in the darkness of Greenland
        • guard-of-terra 10y ago
          They had artificial suns in orbit to bathe those in sunlight.
      • nathan_f77 10y ago
        I would tend to agree with you. As of right now, I'm not personally involved in the fight against global warming. I'll try to do my part, but it's just like the efforts of one vegan trying to stop the slaughter of millions of animals. If it's going to happen, then it happens. I'll be reading the news all the way, but really the only thing I can do is to be prepared for the worst.
  • asQuirreL 10y ago
    I take it then, that your username is ironic?
  • ajnin 10y ago
    I hope you forgot the pronoun in your second sentence. Otherwise you have no place telling others what they should feel concerned about just because the weather was pretty nice in your backyard. Not to mention it is incredibly short-sighted to think the fate of the rest of the world will have no impact on your life.
    • guard-of-terra 10y ago
      Maybe that huge "rest of the world" figures out its problems on itself? Didn't see much interest towards my fate in the eyes of "rest of the world".
      • Rusky 10y ago
        Interest in dealing with the consequences of global warming is interest towards your fate. Regardless of where you live, you will be affected. The temperature in your backyard is irrelevant.
  • themartorana 10y ago
    These are still your problems. The economic fallout alone could personally affect you, or those nicer days could lead to hurricanes and tornados where there were none, and so on.
  • adwhit 10y ago
    You should panic for purely selfish reasons. There will be huge migrations caused by global warming, literally billions of people, and they're probably going to want to live where you are now. They may not get there, but at the very least, the measures required to keep them out (police state?) will probably affect you negatively.
• grangerg 10y ago
  At this point, there is a 100% chance that this is the coolest Spring/Summer in the last 15 years. It has broken 90F ~four times, and rained at least once a week in a place that normally rains once a month and is lucky to see a high be only 90F by the end of April. Climate change is pretty nice this year. If it wasn't obviously bad, I'd be cheering China and other "developing" countries on. The "West" has nothing on them.
• mesh 10y ago
  Why call out the west? A quick google search shows China as the top contributor to global warming, with Russia and India in the top 5. http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html#.V2V21OYrJE4 http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/sci... Seems to me this is a world wide issue, that calls for a world wide solution.
  • cryptoz 10y ago
    This is a world problem for sure. However, has the Chinese government or corporations spent billions on efforts to convince the population that climate change is a hoax? Anyone who runs a country that agrees it's a problem is doing better than a country (USA) where so many prominent people in power deny that the earth is changing because of us. That problem in particular seems unique to the west.
    • GunboatDiplomat 10y ago
      Uh... despite that, US carbon emissions have dropped over 500 million metric tons from their peak levels. I don't see any movement in that direction from China and India. Actions speak louder than words, after all.
      • themartorana 10y ago
        Is this mostly fuel efficiency in vehicles? I can't imagine solar is having that kind of impact yet, is it? (It would be great if it were.)
        • ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
          No, it mainly has to do with the use of Natural Gas instead of coal for electricity generation
      • danbruc 10y ago
        But the USA also has twice the carbon emission per capita of China and India's is almost ten times lower than that of the USA. Comparing carbon emissions but ignoring the differences in population is a bit misleading at the very least. You can really only start complaining about other countries when they pollute more than yourself.
• Brakenshire 10y ago
  > Perhaps the West will pass from 'apathy' directly to 'resignation' and skip 'panic' altogether. Anything to avoid actually doing anything.
• nathan_f77 10y ago
  Serious question: Is the worst case really a full-blown apocalypse? Or are people mostly safe if we live in a city at a high altitude? I understand that sea levels will rise, we'll lose some land, have to relocate some people, and weather events will become a lot more violent and energetic. But we're not looking at human extinction? I really have no influence over global warming, so the only thing I can do is prepare for the fallout.
  • niftich 10y ago
    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change believes: > a "runaway greenhouse effect" -- analogous to Venus -- appears to have virtually no chance of being induced by anthropogenic activities. [1] [1] http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session31/inf3.pdf http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session31/inf3.pdf
    • bjourne 10y ago
      But "virtually no chance" is not the same as "absolutely no chance". :/
      • niftich 10y ago
        They're being precise in their terminology. That line actually serves to frame the discussion in the linked paper: we won't befall the same fate as Venus, but they instead discuss other impacts that are more likely and require our consideration.