9 ms·

> while 2018 was the fourth hottest year on record in the past 140 years since the world began to keep a track on temperatures, NASA expects 2019 to be still ho

> while 2018 was the fourth hottest year on record in the past 140 years since the world began to keep a track on temperatures, NASA expects 2019 to be still hotter. In this context, here's an interesting map on what the world will look like 4 degrees warmer: https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/what-the-world-will-look-like-4degc-warmer https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/what-the-world-will-look-l... - apparently, much of the Indian subcontinent will be uninhabitable...

sadness2 7y ago
This is unreasonably rosy. Acidification of the ocean and ecological breakdown from overly rapid environmental change appears likely to cause a catastrophic failure of the food chain. Rapid change is necessary. The status quo is not OK.
- crankylinuxuser 7y ago
  Rosy or not, we need to plan when it happens. The only if we don't know is how bad it will exactly be. And don't forget, that a very valid answer is "food chain collapses, causing mass starvation and death".
  - WalterSear 7y ago
    It's happening. What's the plan? The rise of ISIS was driven by crop failure due to climate change. The temperature in India reached 123 degrees already this year.
    - briandear 7y ago
      The rise of ISIS was not due to climate change, it was a group that arose from AQI, which itself had it origins from Jordanian Jihadist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi who, in the 1990s ran jihadist paramilitary camps in Afghanistan. ISIS wasn’t driven by crop failure “due to climate change.” It was essentially a war due to Sunnis not liking Sh’ites — a conflict that has been ongoing for literally centuries. And, in this specific case was due to a power vacuum in the aftermath of the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. But the roots of that conflict are as old as the 1975 Algiers agreement between Iraq and Iran. Attributing ISIS to climate change is about the same as blaming social media for ISIS; arguably social media’s existence actually helped ISIS propagate more than any causes attributed to climate change. ISIS and it’s origins are exceptionally complicated as are most conflicts in that region. To trivialize it by claiming it was because of climate change is to reveal a profound misunderstanding of the history of that region. We can discuss climate change and it’s causes and effects, but it weakens credibility when almost everything gets blamed on it. It’s getting to the point where when one used to say this bad thing happened because “it’s God’s will,” but now people say, “climate change.” It’s taking on religion-levels of influence to where actual causation gets ignored in favor of attributing everything to CO2. Every storm, every war, every bad thing that happens has a least some people trying to use those events to justify their belief systems. Sometimes weather is just weather, war is just war. If we ended all CO2 emissions tomorrow, the Middle East would still be a cauldron, wars would still happen, crops would still fail from time to time, hurricanes would still destroy things, tornados would still happen. Climate is an important issue, but let’s not turn it into a religion.
      - WalterSear 7y ago
        https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/11/climate-change-drought-drove-isis-terrorist-recruiting-iraq/ https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/11/climate-change-d... https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/06/world/climate-change-terrorism-extremism-africa-middle-east-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/06/world/climate-change-terroris... > As described here, water and climatic conditions have played a direct role in the deterioration of Syria’s economic conditions. There is a long history of conflicts over water in these regions because of the natural water scarcity, the early development of irrigated agriculture, and complex religious and ethnic diversity. In recent years, there has been an increase in incidences of water-related violence around the world at the subnational level attributable to the role that water plays in development disputes and economic activities. https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/WCAS-D-13-00059.1 https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/WCAS-D-13-0005...
        jessaustin 7y ago
        It might be psychologically satisfying to blame Mother Nature for a particular problem that is the direct result of recent USA military and diplomatic policy, but it seems sort of silly. Millions of people who are still alive right now witnessed the intentional destruction of Iraq's government and civil society, the deliberate transfer of weapons and matériel to nascent anti-civil-society groups, and the intentional weakening of Syria's government and civil society through sanctions and military attacks. We don't have to learn about this; we saw it happen in real time. The Middle East hasn't had rain forests at any time in recorded history. This line of argument is so ridiculous that one is tempted to speculate you're trolling us to make real warming enthusiasts look worse...
- pseudosudoer 7y ago
  I've always wondered what I, as an individual, could do to help. I work full time, and I have a chronic illness which makes it difficult to physically contribute. I am a software engineer, so I do have technical skills to contribute if there were problems that needed technical solutions, but I simply don't know where to look.
  - 0xffff2 7y ago
    Nothing. We're far past the point of no return at this point. Minimizing the disastrous consequences of climate change requires a coordinated worldwide effort. In principle, the only thing you can do that might make a difference is get active politically. In practice, given the level of dysfunction exhibited in global politics right now, I'm extremely pessimistic that there's any hope of doing anything on that level either.
    - jogjayr 7y ago
      "It is not despair, for despair is only for those who see the end beyond all doubt. We do not. It is wisdom to recognize necessity, when all other courses have been weighed, though as folly it may appear to those who cling to false hope."
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - antisthenes 7y ago
      Seems like for the next 50 years, politics will be about passing the buck to the next guy in the office.
  - kaybe 7y ago
    We do have one problem that could do with a technical solution: If we managed to invent a carbon removal technique scalable and cheap enough to deploy on a massive scale, we'd still be able to prevent the worst. The problem is, currently there is no money in it, so the efforts are not the size they should be. We'd need a war economy on all fronts here.
  - 7y ago
NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Pessimistic outlook maybe, but on seeing that I tend to think it misses a sub-head. If that proportion of the population needs to relocate and that much is abandoned, something like: What the world will look like 4°C warmer For the 5% of humanity that survived World Wars 3, 4, 5, and 6. Maybe there'll be world government by then...
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  > Maybe there'll be world government by then... I really need convincing that a world government wouldn't be extremely inefficient. I believe this would be the most disappointing utopia ever tried with a guarantee for regular civil wars. I get that unity is required for dealing with global life threatening disasters waiting to happen, but it would just suck so badly if you think closer about it. Just my take to add to the pessimism.
  - hadlock 7y ago
    My observation is that humans' ability to effectively self-govern maxes out around 100 million, maybe even closer to 70 million. If you look at the world happiness report/index, the top 50 countries are all under 100 million (exceptions: US, Mexico) and not especially large landmass (exceptions: US, Australia). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report Growing up watching Star Trek I always thought the idea of some benevolent global government running in a post scarcity future was the goal we should all be shooting for but in retrospect it looks about as flawed as traditional communist command economies.
    - raxxorrax 7y ago
      Maybe the effect is countered by the relative autonomy of US states and perhaps money does indeed make happy: https://www.credit-suisse.com/corporate/en/articles/news-and-expertise/the-global-wealth-report-2016-201611.html https://www.credit-suisse.com/corporate/en/articles/news-and... But nevertheless I think that distributed and subsidiary governance is at least less less efficient. That said, I would instantly exchange my government for the united federation of planets.
mxcrossb 7y ago
On a side note, I always wondered if Americans would be more aggressive trying to prevent global warming if these projections were in Fahrenheit, not Celsius.
- 1024core 7y ago
  Nah, Americans (as in, the people in power) would only care if their homes were affected.
- numair 7y ago
  This may sound really simple and dumb, but I think you’re actually on to something. Americans read all of these stories about 1° warming and have NO idea what it means. In fact, since so much global policy-making involves American multinationals, maybe it should be a rule that all climate increases/decreases are written in the context of Fahrenheit, so Americans better understand what scientists are estimating, regardless of whether it is pro- or anti-climate-science.
  - 0xffff2 7y ago
    I don't think it would matter. One (or four) degree(s) is a similar change in either scale. I think the larger issue is the disconnect between global average temperature and local weather systems. I think people read "4 degrees warmer" and think that all of their weather forecasts are going to be 4 degrees higher than they used to be. It seems like a small change when viewed like that, but of course that's not what is going to happen at all.
    - skinnymuch 7y ago
      I’m concerned about climate change. I know about the flooding, glaciers and ice melting, coastal areas and islands filling up with water. I understand some of the natural ecosystem of the world would be messed up with some animals dying out as well. But I have no concept of how much of the latter will be done or how much it’ll effect things. However as I don’t know too much, why would 4 C increase result in a lot of South Asia being uninhabitable and making most of America into hostile land. The other link said most of it would be desert land. And that Siberia and north west Antarctica would be green inhabitable. Wouldn’t part’s of Siberia and any part of Antarctica still be crazy cold and awful places to be? I guess I’m a “dummy” because I also don’t get how global weather increase will mess and change things so much outside of what I acknowledged in my first paragraph. Though again I’m all for fixing up our behavior wrt environment and controlling climate change.
meruru 7y ago
The flooded areas are surprising. I always thought Japan would be the first place to go. Look at Brazil, why is it so flooded compared to everywhere else?
Mikeb85 7y ago
The earth was once 6 degrees warmer according to the geologic record. From what we know, it looked nothing like that map. Edit - here, for people who can't do their own homework: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/travel-through-deep-time-interactive-earth-180952886/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/travel-through... And: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record
- goerz 7y ago
  Source?
  - Mikeb85 7y ago
    Is this a joke? Dunno, grade school? Corroborated by a multitude of sources, some of which are on Wikipedia, and should be general knowledge. Did you not learn about this in grade school?
    - Retra 7y ago
      Is "taught in grade school" your standard of proof?
      - Mikeb85 7y ago
        Some things are common enough knowledge that asking for a source is disingenuous. Everyone should know the earth was once warmer and went through various cooling periods. It's like asking for a source to prove the sky is blue or that the earth is round... This community claims to be one of educated professionals, yet somehow there's comments questioning things that are literally common knowledge and if somehow they don't know, can't spend 2 seconds to google it? Instead write "Source?". It's intellectually lazy as hell.
        Retra 7y ago
        >Some things are common enough knowledge that asking for a source is disingenuous. Yes. But then we invented science and "common knowledge" was proven ignorant time and time again. >It's like asking for a source to prove the sky is blue or that the earth is round... Hardly. I can't look out my window and see what the temperature was thousands of years ago. >This community claims to be one of educated professionals You're claiming that, not 'the community.' What is intellectually lazy is not providing information that verifies your claims, and instead preferring to debate the social circumstances of an internet discussion. You're not obligated to provide a source. You don't have to do it. But don't think you're somehow more intellectually honest or hardworking because you refuse to. If 2 seconds of googling solves this problem, then you should have probably just done that rather than arguing about whether you should need to.
MrRadar 7y ago
What's going on around the Great Lakes on that map? It looks like most of Michigan has been swallowed by them, significantly more land loss than I would think a 2m rise in water levels would cause. https://i.imgur.com/tdX7vyr.png https://i.imgur.com/tdX7vyr.png
- arethuza 7y ago
  Aren't the Great Lakes somewhat higher than sea level? (At least until Niagara erodes all the up - which will be 50K years or so). Edit: Lake Michigan is at 176m - which is quite a bit higher than the level seas would reach if all ice melts (which I think is about 90m).
  - futureastronaut 7y ago
    Yes. The map is sensationalist trash. Not to say that global warming won't impact the lakes: The far more likely outcome is depletion, as water diversions considered unthinkable become politically feasible, both within and without the basin. A map like that might as well show the Colorado River shores expanding with sea rise, it would make as much sense (for non-Americans, the Colorado is so heavily diverted to southwestern farms and municipalities that its riverbed is dry, or a trickle, most of the year).
    - NittLion78 7y ago
      Of course it won't help the narrative when the Lakes right now are near record highs due to lower levels of evaporation and more rain in the autumn months of the past few years (according to Army Corps of Engineers' data that started records in 1918, anyway). These fluctuations aren't uncommon. Last time they were this high was the mid-80s. But you're right about the political ramifications of where the Great Lakes Compact line gets drawn. Waukesha, WI is one place that comes to mind where their own water supply became inadequate (mostly due to radium levels) and they requested to have access to Lake Michigan's water. My understanding is within a few years, they'll have the infrastructure in place and be able to legally draw from it. It doesn't take a deep imagination to think of what a few dozen new such situations will do to Michigan let alone the other Lakes.
agumonkey 7y ago
Man Russia has it sweet. Also Africa and Australia has a head start, they know how to live in deserts.. but maybe this one will be lunar void of life. Sarcasm aside I wonder: - Will humanity find wisdom and courage in doing what's simple and right (degrowth, relocalized, green first) - Will humanity will pile head on to fix the problem through gigantism (let's be mad: fusion powered geo engineering)

sadness2 7y ago

This is unreasonably rosy. Acidification of the ocean and ecological breakdown from overly rapid environmental change appears likely to cause a catastrophic failure of the food chain. Rapid change is necessary. The status quo is not OK.

crankylinuxuser 7y ago
Rosy or not, we need to plan when it happens. The only if we don't know is how bad it will exactly be. And don't forget, that a very valid answer is "food chain collapses, causing mass starvation and death".
- WalterSear 7y ago
  It's happening. What's the plan? The rise of ISIS was driven by crop failure due to climate change. The temperature in India reached 123 degrees already this year.
  - briandear 7y ago
    The rise of ISIS was not due to climate change, it was a group that arose from AQI, which itself had it origins from Jordanian Jihadist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi who, in the 1990s ran jihadist paramilitary camps in Afghanistan. ISIS wasn’t driven by crop failure “due to climate change.” It was essentially a war due to Sunnis not liking Sh’ites — a conflict that has been ongoing for literally centuries. And, in this specific case was due to a power vacuum in the aftermath of the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. But the roots of that conflict are as old as the 1975 Algiers agreement between Iraq and Iran. Attributing ISIS to climate change is about the same as blaming social media for ISIS; arguably social media’s existence actually helped ISIS propagate more than any causes attributed to climate change. ISIS and it’s origins are exceptionally complicated as are most conflicts in that region. To trivialize it by claiming it was because of climate change is to reveal a profound misunderstanding of the history of that region. We can discuss climate change and it’s causes and effects, but it weakens credibility when almost everything gets blamed on it. It’s getting to the point where when one used to say this bad thing happened because “it’s God’s will,” but now people say, “climate change.” It’s taking on religion-levels of influence to where actual causation gets ignored in favor of attributing everything to CO2. Every storm, every war, every bad thing that happens has a least some people trying to use those events to justify their belief systems. Sometimes weather is just weather, war is just war. If we ended all CO2 emissions tomorrow, the Middle East would still be a cauldron, wars would still happen, crops would still fail from time to time, hurricanes would still destroy things, tornados would still happen. Climate is an important issue, but let’s not turn it into a religion.
    - WalterSear 7y ago
      https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/11/climate-change-drought-drove-isis-terrorist-recruiting-iraq/ https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/11/climate-change-d... https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/06/world/climate-change-terrorism-extremism-africa-middle-east-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/06/world/climate-change-terroris... > As described here, water and climatic conditions have played a direct role in the deterioration of Syria’s economic conditions. There is a long history of conflicts over water in these regions because of the natural water scarcity, the early development of irrigated agriculture, and complex religious and ethnic diversity. In recent years, there has been an increase in incidences of water-related violence around the world at the subnational level attributable to the role that water plays in development disputes and economic activities. https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/WCAS-D-13-00059.1 https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/WCAS-D-13-0005...
      - jessaustin 7y ago
        It might be psychologically satisfying to blame Mother Nature for a particular problem that is the direct result of recent USA military and diplomatic policy, but it seems sort of silly. Millions of people who are still alive right now witnessed the intentional destruction of Iraq's government and civil society, the deliberate transfer of weapons and matériel to nascent anti-civil-society groups, and the intentional weakening of Syria's government and civil society through sanctions and military attacks. We don't have to learn about this; we saw it happen in real time. The Middle East hasn't had rain forests at any time in recorded history. This line of argument is so ridiculous that one is tempted to speculate you're trolling us to make real warming enthusiasts look worse...
pseudosudoer 7y ago
I've always wondered what I, as an individual, could do to help. I work full time, and I have a chronic illness which makes it difficult to physically contribute. I am a software engineer, so I do have technical skills to contribute if there were problems that needed technical solutions, but I simply don't know where to look.
- 0xffff2 7y ago
  Nothing. We're far past the point of no return at this point. Minimizing the disastrous consequences of climate change requires a coordinated worldwide effort. In principle, the only thing you can do that might make a difference is get active politically. In practice, given the level of dysfunction exhibited in global politics right now, I'm extremely pessimistic that there's any hope of doing anything on that level either.
  - jogjayr 7y ago
    "It is not despair, for despair is only for those who see the end beyond all doubt. We do not. It is wisdom to recognize necessity, when all other courses have been weighed, though as folly it may appear to those who cling to false hope."
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - antisthenes 7y ago
    Seems like for the next 50 years, politics will be about passing the buck to the next guy in the office.
- kaybe 7y ago
  We do have one problem that could do with a technical solution: If we managed to invent a carbon removal technique scalable and cheap enough to deploy on a massive scale, we'd still be able to prevent the worst. The problem is, currently there is no money in it, so the efforts are not the size they should be. We'd need a war economy on all fronts here.
- 7y ago

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

Pessimistic outlook maybe, but on seeing that I tend to think it misses a sub-head. If that proportion of the population needs to relocate and that much is abandoned, something like: What the world will look like 4°C warmer For the 5% of humanity that survived World Wars 3, 4, 5, and 6. Maybe there'll be world government by then...

raxxorrax 7y ago
> Maybe there'll be world government by then... I really need convincing that a world government wouldn't be extremely inefficient. I believe this would be the most disappointing utopia ever tried with a guarantee for regular civil wars. I get that unity is required for dealing with global life threatening disasters waiting to happen, but it would just suck so badly if you think closer about it. Just my take to add to the pessimism.
- hadlock 7y ago
  My observation is that humans' ability to effectively self-govern maxes out around 100 million, maybe even closer to 70 million. If you look at the world happiness report/index, the top 50 countries are all under 100 million (exceptions: US, Mexico) and not especially large landmass (exceptions: US, Australia). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report Growing up watching Star Trek I always thought the idea of some benevolent global government running in a post scarcity future was the goal we should all be shooting for but in retrospect it looks about as flawed as traditional communist command economies.
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    Maybe the effect is countered by the relative autonomy of US states and perhaps money does indeed make happy: https://www.credit-suisse.com/corporate/en/articles/news-and-expertise/the-global-wealth-report-2016-201611.html https://www.credit-suisse.com/corporate/en/articles/news-and... But nevertheless I think that distributed and subsidiary governance is at least less less efficient. That said, I would instantly exchange my government for the united federation of planets.

mxcrossb 7y ago

On a side note, I always wondered if Americans would be more aggressive trying to prevent global warming if these projections were in Fahrenheit, not Celsius.

1024core 7y ago
Nah, Americans (as in, the people in power) would only care if their homes were affected.
numair 7y ago
This may sound really simple and dumb, but I think you’re actually on to something. Americans read all of these stories about 1° warming and have NO idea what it means. In fact, since so much global policy-making involves American multinationals, maybe it should be a rule that all climate increases/decreases are written in the context of Fahrenheit, so Americans better understand what scientists are estimating, regardless of whether it is pro- or anti-climate-science.
- 0xffff2 7y ago
  I don't think it would matter. One (or four) degree(s) is a similar change in either scale. I think the larger issue is the disconnect between global average temperature and local weather systems. I think people read "4 degrees warmer" and think that all of their weather forecasts are going to be 4 degrees higher than they used to be. It seems like a small change when viewed like that, but of course that's not what is going to happen at all.
  - skinnymuch 7y ago
    I’m concerned about climate change. I know about the flooding, glaciers and ice melting, coastal areas and islands filling up with water. I understand some of the natural ecosystem of the world would be messed up with some animals dying out as well. But I have no concept of how much of the latter will be done or how much it’ll effect things. However as I don’t know too much, why would 4 C increase result in a lot of South Asia being uninhabitable and making most of America into hostile land. The other link said most of it would be desert land. And that Siberia and north west Antarctica would be green inhabitable. Wouldn’t part’s of Siberia and any part of Antarctica still be crazy cold and awful places to be? I guess I’m a “dummy” because I also don’t get how global weather increase will mess and change things so much outside of what I acknowledged in my first paragraph. Though again I’m all for fixing up our behavior wrt environment and controlling climate change.

meruru 7y ago

The flooded areas are surprising. I always thought Japan would be the first place to go. Look at Brazil, why is it so flooded compared to everywhere else?

Mikeb85 7y ago

The earth was once 6 degrees warmer according to the geologic record. From what we know, it looked nothing like that map. Edit - here, for people who can't do their own homework: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/travel-through-deep-time-interactive-earth-180952886/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/travel-through... And: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record

goerz 7y ago
Source?
- Mikeb85 7y ago
  Is this a joke? Dunno, grade school? Corroborated by a multitude of sources, some of which are on Wikipedia, and should be general knowledge. Did you not learn about this in grade school?
  - Retra 7y ago
    Is "taught in grade school" your standard of proof?
    - Mikeb85 7y ago
      Some things are common enough knowledge that asking for a source is disingenuous. Everyone should know the earth was once warmer and went through various cooling periods. It's like asking for a source to prove the sky is blue or that the earth is round... This community claims to be one of educated professionals, yet somehow there's comments questioning things that are literally common knowledge and if somehow they don't know, can't spend 2 seconds to google it? Instead write "Source?". It's intellectually lazy as hell.
      - Retra 7y ago
        >Some things are common enough knowledge that asking for a source is disingenuous. Yes. But then we invented science and "common knowledge" was proven ignorant time and time again. >It's like asking for a source to prove the sky is blue or that the earth is round... Hardly. I can't look out my window and see what the temperature was thousands of years ago. >This community claims to be one of educated professionals You're claiming that, not 'the community.' What is intellectually lazy is not providing information that verifies your claims, and instead preferring to debate the social circumstances of an internet discussion. You're not obligated to provide a source. You don't have to do it. But don't think you're somehow more intellectually honest or hardworking because you refuse to. If 2 seconds of googling solves this problem, then you should have probably just done that rather than arguing about whether you should need to.

MrRadar 7y ago

What's going on around the Great Lakes on that map? It looks like most of Michigan has been swallowed by them, significantly more land loss than I would think a 2m rise in water levels would cause. https://i.imgur.com/tdX7vyr.png https://i.imgur.com/tdX7vyr.png

arethuza 7y ago
Aren't the Great Lakes somewhat higher than sea level? (At least until Niagara erodes all the up - which will be 50K years or so). Edit: Lake Michigan is at 176m - which is quite a bit higher than the level seas would reach if all ice melts (which I think is about 90m).
- futureastronaut 7y ago
  Yes. The map is sensationalist trash. Not to say that global warming won't impact the lakes: The far more likely outcome is depletion, as water diversions considered unthinkable become politically feasible, both within and without the basin. A map like that might as well show the Colorado River shores expanding with sea rise, it would make as much sense (for non-Americans, the Colorado is so heavily diverted to southwestern farms and municipalities that its riverbed is dry, or a trickle, most of the year).
  - NittLion78 7y ago
    Of course it won't help the narrative when the Lakes right now are near record highs due to lower levels of evaporation and more rain in the autumn months of the past few years (according to Army Corps of Engineers' data that started records in 1918, anyway). These fluctuations aren't uncommon. Last time they were this high was the mid-80s. But you're right about the political ramifications of where the Great Lakes Compact line gets drawn. Waukesha, WI is one place that comes to mind where their own water supply became inadequate (mostly due to radium levels) and they requested to have access to Lake Michigan's water. My understanding is within a few years, they'll have the infrastructure in place and be able to legally draw from it. It doesn't take a deep imagination to think of what a few dozen new such situations will do to Michigan let alone the other Lakes.

agumonkey 7y ago

Man Russia has it sweet. Also Africa and Australia has a head start, they know how to live in deserts.. but maybe this one will be lunar void of life. Sarcasm aside I wonder: - Will humanity find wisdom and courage in doing what's simple and right (degrowth, relocalized, green first) - Will humanity will pile head on to fix the problem through gigantism (let's be mad: fusion powered geo engineering)