5 ms·

So it’s over, the planet will likely be rendered uninhabitable probably within the next century. Is there any point in even having a new child now?

by xwdv 6y ago

chki 6y ago
>So it’s over, the planet will likely be rendered uninhabitable probably within the next century. I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion but the planet won't be uninhabitable. Certain areas will be uninhabitable and there will probably be massive displacement of people paired with food shortages. But complete resignation is not only unhelpful but also unwarranted.
- klyrs 6y ago
  "Massive displacement" is a tepid euphemism in sight of current politics around human migration, which will only get worse as resources become scarce. Should Canadians be as cruel as Americans have been to their southern neighbors. Hope ya like toilet water, eh.
  - refurb 6y ago
    We have the technology to address sea level rise. Yes, it will be expensive, but it's possible. Look at what the Netherlands did almost 100 years ago. "...It became part of the larger Zuiderzee Works in which four polders totaling 2,500 square kilometres (965 sq mi) were reclaimed from the sea."
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    It's a tepid phrase because the effect just won't be as big as you're thinking. Nobody in the United States is going to need to escape to Canada - the primary displacement problem is that the specific places which support effective agriculture will change.
    - klyrs 6y ago
      There's also the matter of heat waves; summers are increasingly lethal and we've barely started.
- xwdv 6y ago
  Maybe uninhabitable is the wrong. Surely life finds a way, what I’m saying is what will be left is a shitty world where survival is tough and life is crude, short, and brutish.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
0xffff2 6y ago
Uninhabitable? Highly unlikely. Incapable of supporting... checks notes... 7.6 billion people? Probably. I probably wouldn't have chosen to have kids in any universe, but especially as a US citizen, I certainly won't be having kids in this one.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  Is there some specific information you're referring to? I don't know of any reason why a hotter world would become less capable of producing human needs.
  - lazyjones 6y ago
    > I don't know of any reason why a hotter world would become less capable of producing human needs. Didn't you get the memo? The hottest continent on Earth is expected to be completely devoid of humans by 2100. Somehow we can't seem to proliferate when it's warm. /s
bjo590 6y ago
This is hyperbolic. The article was about ice in Greenland, not about the habitability of the planet. Yes, the planet is becoming less hospitable, but we aren't talking about an extension level event for humanity yet.
- lazyjones 6y ago
  > Yes, the planet is becoming less hospitable No scientific arguments exist that would support this claim. Some land area might be lost, but other areas will become accessible through warming (think Siberia, Greenland, Canada). On the contrary, we should expect the planet to become more hospitable, with higher crop yields, more plants and better average climate for human life on land mass. The human population increase is the real problem.
  - korantu 6y ago
    Children population in the world is already constant, which will lead to overall population becoming constant at 10b in about 40 years, iirc Moreover, in many places of the world food is produced inefficiently, so there is a lot of additional food that can be grown even without increasing land use. (currently there is enough food grown to feed everyone, it is logistics problem now)

So it’s over, the planet will likely be rendered uninhabitable probably within the next century. Is there any point in even having a new child now?

by xwdv 6y ago

So it’s over, the planet will likely be rendered uninhabitable probably within the next century. Is there any point in even having a new child now?

chki 6y ago

>So it’s over, the planet will likely be rendered uninhabitable probably within the next century. I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion but the planet won't be uninhabitable. Certain areas will be uninhabitable and there will probably be massive displacement of people paired with food shortages. But complete resignation is not only unhelpful but also unwarranted.

klyrs 6y ago
"Massive displacement" is a tepid euphemism in sight of current politics around human migration, which will only get worse as resources become scarce. Should Canadians be as cruel as Americans have been to their southern neighbors. Hope ya like toilet water, eh.
- refurb 6y ago
  We have the technology to address sea level rise. Yes, it will be expensive, but it's possible. Look at what the Netherlands did almost 100 years ago. "...It became part of the larger Zuiderzee Works in which four polders totaling 2,500 square kilometres (965 sq mi) were reclaimed from the sea."
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  It's a tepid phrase because the effect just won't be as big as you're thinking. Nobody in the United States is going to need to escape to Canada - the primary displacement problem is that the specific places which support effective agriculture will change.
  - klyrs 6y ago
    There's also the matter of heat waves; summers are increasingly lethal and we've barely started.
xwdv 6y ago
Maybe uninhabitable is the wrong. Surely life finds a way, what I’m saying is what will be left is a shitty world where survival is tough and life is crude, short, and brutish.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

0xffff2 6y ago

Uninhabitable? Highly unlikely. Incapable of supporting... checks notes... 7.6 billion people? Probably. I probably wouldn't have chosen to have kids in any universe, but especially as a US citizen, I certainly won't be having kids in this one.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
Is there some specific information you're referring to? I don't know of any reason why a hotter world would become less capable of producing human needs.
- lazyjones 6y ago
  > I don't know of any reason why a hotter world would become less capable of producing human needs. Didn't you get the memo? The hottest continent on Earth is expected to be completely devoid of humans by 2100. Somehow we can't seem to proliferate when it's warm. /s

bjo590 6y ago

This is hyperbolic. The article was about ice in Greenland, not about the habitability of the planet. Yes, the planet is becoming less hospitable, but we aren't talking about an extension level event for humanity yet.

lazyjones 6y ago
> Yes, the planet is becoming less hospitable No scientific arguments exist that would support this claim. Some land area might be lost, but other areas will become accessible through warming (think Siberia, Greenland, Canada). On the contrary, we should expect the planet to become more hospitable, with higher crop yields, more plants and better average climate for human life on land mass. The human population increase is the real problem.
- korantu 6y ago
  Children population in the world is already constant, which will lead to overall population becoming constant at 10b in about 40 years, iirc Moreover, in many places of the world food is produced inefficiently, so there is a lot of additional food that can be grown even without increasing land use. (currently there is enough food grown to feed everyone, it is logistics problem now)