5 ms·

Unfortunately, no.

the-dude 6y ago
Well, predicting the end of the world and promising an unbearable heat for the non-believers sounds very non-atheist to me. Actually, it sounds very familiar. So far, none of the catastrophic predictions from the last ~70 years have come to fruition. Actually, none of the catastrophic predictions from the last 2000 years have. We will adapt.
- pmiller2 6y ago
  Well, okay. Read this article and the 6+ academic papers linked therein and tell me what you think after that: https://www.resilience.org/stories/2020-06-08/collapse-of-civilisation-is-the-most-likely-outcome-top-climate-scientists/ https://www.resilience.org/stories/2020-06-08/collapse-of-ci...
  - anovikov 6y ago
    If it is already inevitable, then why worry? Just learn what will consequences will be, and put money where it will make profit THEN (like, buy land on high latitudes where it is currently almost worthless, and short land on low elevations and/or low latitudes).
    - _jfoi 6y ago
      All about profit for you. Such a shame .
      - itsthefnlacctdn 6y ago
        We are on an investor's newsboard, these fat cats dont know any other way to live.
    - pmiller2 6y ago
      Because, if you read the article, it's actually not "inevitable." What it would take is drastic, coordinated action, lead by the United States, within the next 10 years to reduce emissions to zero or near zero in order to prevent the worst case scenarios from being realistic. This can be done, but not without the cooperation of the top climate polluters, almost all of which are American corporations. Oh, and also the US government is one of those top polluters.
      - Leherenn 6y ago
        Do you think it can be done? I mean realistically, not theoretically? I see this as far too demanding for everyone, and far too short for viable alternatives to come up to be a realistic target. On the other hand, this year has shown that people are far more prepared to make huge sacrifices for what we think is the greater good than I would have expected just a year ago.
        pmiller2 6y ago
        Honestly? No, I do not. One thing this year has shown me is that a large portion of the population is 100% unwilling to make any sacrifices whatsoever, however small. It's going to take all of us working together to make it happen.
  - the-dude 6y ago
    “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair ( https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/21810-it-is-difficult-to-get-a-man-to-understand-something https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/21810-it-is-difficult-to-ge... ) Obviously, predicting we will adapt and will be o.k. does not generate the same amount of clicks as we are all gonna die!. Predicting doom and the solution to it surely feels good. You might get famous too. Temperature and sealevels have been rising for ages, one would be able to walk to the UK from mainland Europe. Dinosaurs went extinct and Earth is fine : Why are you so self centered?
    - Smaug123 6y ago
      Well, the Earth is fine, but the dinosaurs are not - I really think that harms your point rather than helping it!
      - the-dude 6y ago
        Thanks for the heads-up. However, I do accept I am not almighty.
      - sojournerc 6y ago
        Have you seen a crocodile? They're doing pretty good. Were around with the dinosaurs. Things adapt.
    - pmiller2 6y ago
      I'm not. Earth will be fine without humans, just as it was millions of years ago, before humans were even a thing. If you believe that climate scientists enjoy preaching doom and gloom, you've honestly got a problem. Scientists have every incentive to publish and publicize good science. I suspect you didn't even read the article I linked, much less any of the papers linked within, did you? Tell me: what does your salary depend on you not understanding that makes you unable to even consider the possibility that climate change is real, and it will likely destroy civilization?
      - 6y ago
- xorcist 6y ago
  Let's be clear about facts here. Thus far, every reasonably scientifically based prediction for the past two decades has consistently been conservative. The IPCC has existed for about 30 years now. We are now starting to have data to compare their climate reports with. Independently of how you look at the data, we are mostly tracking the worst expected outcome. Everyone has a duty to do this for themselves. All the data is public.
  - irthomasthomas 6y ago
    It is a too large field for one to research alone, but I am familiar with the effort to track global leaf area and desertification. So here is my small contribution to the discussion: 2013: "Desertification is a fancy word for land that is turning to desert" begins Allan Savory in this quietly powerful talk. And terrifyingly, it's happening to about two-thirds of the world's grasslands, accelerating climate change and causing traditional grazing societies to descend into social chaos." https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI 2014: Global Greening Is Firm, Drivers Are Mixed - Harvard "Evidence for global greening is converging, asserting an increase in CO2 uptake and biomass of the terrestrial biosphere. Evidence for these trends comes from firm empirical data." http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AGUFM.B31A0515K http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AGUFM.B31A0515K 2016: Greening of the globe and its drivers - Nature "Satellite records from 1982–2009 show a persistent and widespread increase of leaf area (greening) over 25% to 50% of the global vegetated area, whereas less than 4% of the globe shows decreasing leaf area (browning)." https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3004 https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3004 Elevated CO2 as a driver of global dryland greening - Nature "Recent regional scale analyses using satellite based vegetation indices such as the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), have found extensive areas of “greening”" https://www.nature.com/articles/srep20716 https://www.nature.com/articles/srep20716 Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36130346 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36130346 "Prof Judith Curry, the former chair of Earth and atmospheric sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, added: "It is inappropriate to dismiss the arguments of the so-called contrarians, since their disagreement with the consensus reflects conflicts of values and a preference for the empirical (i.e. what has been observed) versus the hypothetical (i.e. what is projected from climate models)."

Unfortunately, no.

Well, predicting the end of the world and promising an unbearable heat for the non-believers sounds very non-atheist to me. Actually, it sounds very familiar. So far, none of the catastrophic predictions from the last ~70 years have come to fruition. Actually, none of the catastrophic predictions from the last 2000 years have. We will adapt.

pmiller2 6y ago
Well, okay. Read this article and the 6+ academic papers linked therein and tell me what you think after that: https://www.resilience.org/stories/2020-06-08/collapse-of-civilisation-is-the-most-likely-outcome-top-climate-scientists/ https://www.resilience.org/stories/2020-06-08/collapse-of-ci...
- anovikov 6y ago
  If it is already inevitable, then why worry? Just learn what will consequences will be, and put money where it will make profit THEN (like, buy land on high latitudes where it is currently almost worthless, and short land on low elevations and/or low latitudes).
  - _jfoi 6y ago
    All about profit for you. Such a shame .
    - itsthefnlacctdn 6y ago
      We are on an investor's newsboard, these fat cats dont know any other way to live.
  - pmiller2 6y ago
    Because, if you read the article, it's actually not "inevitable." What it would take is drastic, coordinated action, lead by the United States, within the next 10 years to reduce emissions to zero or near zero in order to prevent the worst case scenarios from being realistic. This can be done, but not without the cooperation of the top climate polluters, almost all of which are American corporations. Oh, and also the US government is one of those top polluters.
    - Leherenn 6y ago
      Do you think it can be done? I mean realistically, not theoretically? I see this as far too demanding for everyone, and far too short for viable alternatives to come up to be a realistic target. On the other hand, this year has shown that people are far more prepared to make huge sacrifices for what we think is the greater good than I would have expected just a year ago.
      - pmiller2 6y ago
        Honestly? No, I do not. One thing this year has shown me is that a large portion of the population is 100% unwilling to make any sacrifices whatsoever, however small. It's going to take all of us working together to make it happen.
- the-dude 6y ago
  “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair ( https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/21810-it-is-difficult-to-get-a-man-to-understand-something https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/21810-it-is-difficult-to-ge... ) Obviously, predicting we will adapt and will be o.k. does not generate the same amount of clicks as we are all gonna die!. Predicting doom and the solution to it surely feels good. You might get famous too. Temperature and sealevels have been rising for ages, one would be able to walk to the UK from mainland Europe. Dinosaurs went extinct and Earth is fine : Why are you so self centered?
  - Smaug123 6y ago
    Well, the Earth is fine, but the dinosaurs are not - I really think that harms your point rather than helping it!
    - the-dude 6y ago
      Thanks for the heads-up. However, I do accept I am not almighty.
    - sojournerc 6y ago
      Have you seen a crocodile? They're doing pretty good. Were around with the dinosaurs. Things adapt.
  - pmiller2 6y ago
    I'm not. Earth will be fine without humans, just as it was millions of years ago, before humans were even a thing. If you believe that climate scientists enjoy preaching doom and gloom, you've honestly got a problem. Scientists have every incentive to publish and publicize good science. I suspect you didn't even read the article I linked, much less any of the papers linked within, did you? Tell me: what does your salary depend on you not understanding that makes you unable to even consider the possibility that climate change is real, and it will likely destroy civilization?
    - 6y ago
xorcist 6y ago
Let's be clear about facts here. Thus far, every reasonably scientifically based prediction for the past two decades has consistently been conservative. The IPCC has existed for about 30 years now. We are now starting to have data to compare their climate reports with. Independently of how you look at the data, we are mostly tracking the worst expected outcome. Everyone has a duty to do this for themselves. All the data is public.
- irthomasthomas 6y ago
  It is a too large field for one to research alone, but I am familiar with the effort to track global leaf area and desertification. So here is my small contribution to the discussion: 2013: "Desertification is a fancy word for land that is turning to desert" begins Allan Savory in this quietly powerful talk. And terrifyingly, it's happening to about two-thirds of the world's grasslands, accelerating climate change and causing traditional grazing societies to descend into social chaos." https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI 2014: Global Greening Is Firm, Drivers Are Mixed - Harvard "Evidence for global greening is converging, asserting an increase in CO2 uptake and biomass of the terrestrial biosphere. Evidence for these trends comes from firm empirical data." http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AGUFM.B31A0515K http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AGUFM.B31A0515K 2016: Greening of the globe and its drivers - Nature "Satellite records from 1982–2009 show a persistent and widespread increase of leaf area (greening) over 25% to 50% of the global vegetated area, whereas less than 4% of the globe shows decreasing leaf area (browning)." https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3004 https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3004 Elevated CO2 as a driver of global dryland greening - Nature "Recent regional scale analyses using satellite based vegetation indices such as the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), have found extensive areas of “greening”" https://www.nature.com/articles/srep20716 https://www.nature.com/articles/srep20716 Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36130346 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36130346 "Prof Judith Curry, the former chair of Earth and atmospheric sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, added: "It is inappropriate to dismiss the arguments of the so-called contrarians, since their disagreement with the consensus reflects conflicts of values and a preference for the empirical (i.e. what has been observed) versus the hypothetical (i.e. what is projected from climate models)."