4 ms·

The planet itself will be absolutely fine. It's been through a heck of a lot worse. Humans (and other animals) are the ones who are going to have to adapt, hard

The planet itself will be absolutely fine. It's been through a heck of a lot worse. Humans (and other animals) are the ones who are going to have to adapt, hard. As a small example, a rise in sea levels would make unlivable countless coastal cities and destroy an immense amount of infrastructure. Humans will -survive- it, but say good bye to our cushy 21st century lifestyle.

cpr 8y ago
So maybe we'll learn the lesson that shorelines aren't constant, and stop building right on the water? The ocean levels have been up and down hundreds or thousands of feet in the past. Or we won't learn, and the rise will be slow enough that no one's going to drown. (Other than very low-lying islands, which were precarious to begin with, and which don't usually house complex civilizations.)
- jhanschoo 8y ago
  > maybe we'll learn the lesson that shorelines aren't constant, and stop building right on the water? Coastal cities will never /not/ be a thing. The ocean and river mouths contain very many important resources for societies to ignore. --- > rise will be slow enough that no one's going to drown. It depends on the solution: the cheapest usually is to build seawalls, and this obviously puts the city at greater risk of flooding. --- The comment you're replying to states rising sea levels as an example. There are, of course, known consequences that you don't address. To name two, it is a very direct consequence that 1) the weather will get more violent, with the additional amount of energy it contains, leading to a more frequent occurrence of natural disasters. Next, a change in climate will cause a massive redistribution and likely destruction of land suitable for agriculture, as well as lower overall quality for agricultural land, thereby 2) threatening worldwide food security.
TheBeardKing 8y ago
The difference here is the accleration of climate change, estimated to be 10-50x faster than previous transitions from cooler periods[1]. One study finds that this accelerated warming could lead the extiction of 1 in 6 species[2]. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/feb/24/earth-is-warming-is-50x-faster-than-when-it-comes-out-of-an-ice-age https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97... [2] http://science.sciencemag.org/content/348/6234/571 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/348/6234/571
- moreira 8y ago
  Yeah, but I think the parent posters' concern is that the outcome is "unclear", and I was just pointing out that no matter what happens, the planet will be fine, humans will survive, and our infrastructure is what'll be impacted (and consequently, our lifestyle). None of that is "unclear", I think. It all follows from "temperatures rise" (which the parent concedes as a given). Ice melts. Waters rise. Life changes.

cpr 8y ago

So maybe we'll learn the lesson that shorelines aren't constant, and stop building right on the water? The ocean levels have been up and down hundreds or thousands of feet in the past. Or we won't learn, and the rise will be slow enough that no one's going to drown. (Other than very low-lying islands, which were precarious to begin with, and which don't usually house complex civilizations.)

jhanschoo 8y ago
> maybe we'll learn the lesson that shorelines aren't constant, and stop building right on the water? Coastal cities will never /not/ be a thing. The ocean and river mouths contain very many important resources for societies to ignore. --- > rise will be slow enough that no one's going to drown. It depends on the solution: the cheapest usually is to build seawalls, and this obviously puts the city at greater risk of flooding. --- The comment you're replying to states rising sea levels as an example. There are, of course, known consequences that you don't address. To name two, it is a very direct consequence that 1) the weather will get more violent, with the additional amount of energy it contains, leading to a more frequent occurrence of natural disasters. Next, a change in climate will cause a massive redistribution and likely destruction of land suitable for agriculture, as well as lower overall quality for agricultural land, thereby 2) threatening worldwide food security.

TheBeardKing 8y ago

The difference here is the accleration of climate change, estimated to be 10-50x faster than previous transitions from cooler periods[1]. One study finds that this accelerated warming could lead the extiction of 1 in 6 species[2]. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/feb/24/earth-is-warming-is-50x-faster-than-when-it-comes-out-of-an-ice-age https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97... [2] http://science.sciencemag.org/content/348/6234/571 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/348/6234/571

moreira 8y ago
Yeah, but I think the parent posters' concern is that the outcome is "unclear", and I was just pointing out that no matter what happens, the planet will be fine, humans will survive, and our infrastructure is what'll be impacted (and consequently, our lifestyle). None of that is "unclear", I think. It all follows from "temperatures rise" (which the parent concedes as a given). Ice melts. Waters rise. Life changes.