7 ms·
Am I the only one who is stunned that there appears to be a climate catastrophe happening with virtually no reaction from the general population?
by jpmattia 3y ago
Am I the only one who is stunned that there appears to be a climate catastrophe happening with virtually no reaction from the general population?
- generalizations 3y agoI guess people adapt quickly.
- croes 3y agoBecause back then we had hot summers too /s
- justinzollars 3y ago[flagged]
- addisonl 3y agoYou’re in this thread multiple times saying “5 million years ago…” “3 million years ago…” no one is fooled by your attempts to gaslight us on how serious our situation is today.
- justinzollars 3y agoThanks for pointing that out. Corrected back to the USGS historical reference.
- twiddling 3y agotrot out some maps from 1934. or maybe relate MeeMaw's recollection of "that hot summer"
- justinator 3y agoIt's almost like there's a... mass campaign against science and facts! Perhaps spearheaded by the very corporations that benefit from oil and gas extraction! And orchestrated by politicians who are given vast amounts of money from these companies to tell their party members not to worry, that those who believe in all this are damn dirty liars and to continue to spend spend spend!
- doitLP 3y agoIt’s almost like…several major scientific and political institutions spent the last 3 years destroying what little trust they had left, campaigning under the banner of “trust the science!” /s The information war rages on both sides. But the fact remains that too much doomerism without any clear way for an individual to make a difference and politicians carrying on like normal leads to apathy. Our movies and TV are already saturated with barren hellscapes. Why confront the actual reality when you feel powerless to stop it, and doing anything necessarily means austerity?
- akira2501 3y agoOr fatigue. You can't continually hype total doom and "near catastrophes" lacking any sort of solution, and in some cases explicitly denying that there even could be a solution, for a decade and expect people to keep showing up to care. This recent version of climate doomerism lacks all practicality and provides no solutions other than total tyranny of the state over the individual, for your own good, of course. It appears to me that the movement has been fully captured by politicians who are no longer interested in actual science or engineering of solutions. Personally, I checked out about a year ago. As I suspect the people pushing this message the hardest don't actually want to work with me to improve the future, they just want to control my purchasing decisions.
- fnimick 3y agoIf you mean you can't purchase stuff that would harm the planet.... yeah? That's how a solution works? We can't say "everyone has the freedom to pollute as much as they want" and get through this.
- akira2501 3y agoThere is so much international shipping of consumer goods that the entire shipping fleet is the 5th largest source of pollution on the planet. It outranks most nation states. From here you could address the wage issues that cause this amount of shipping to occur in the first place. You could make the fleet more efficient and use newer technologies and fuels that pollute less. You could simply incorporate the cost of that pollution into the "cheap" consumer products so conveyed through one of any of a dozen means. You could do all of these at once. So, my point would be, where is the prioritization here? It seems like corporate profits come first, then environmentalism entirely at the consumers expense comes next, mostly to make the corporations feel better about their blood money. And.. I'm supposed to be on board with this because of "sustainability?" I'm on board. The issues do actually need to be addressed. I don't believe we are currently doing that in any meaningful way.
- fuddle 3y agoUnfortunately news sources such as Fox News don't mention climate change when reporting on this. A lot of people aren't even aware of the impending climate catastrophe. https://www.foxnews.com/us/florida-water-topped-100-degrees-twice-week-set-world-record-hot-tub https://www.foxnews.com/us/florida-water-topped-100-degrees-...
- frabjoused 3y agoRead the comment section of that article, it is pretty grim.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mrguyorama 3y agoDespite the fact that every single one of my family members remembers 8 foot tall snow banks every single winter from 1960 to 1990, and we haven't seen anything even close to that basically since 1990, and they STILL claim climate change is a hoax..... Remember, a convincing argument to these people was a Senator bringing a snowball onto the senate floor and claiming climate change can't be real because it still snows in DC. They do not give a fuck about the facts, they aren't stupid, they just don't care and think they will be able to survive, and they will enforce that belief by continuing to push for an insular US that shuts out the rest of the world and will likely have to start firing on desperate climate asylum seekers after about 30 years and eventually even that won't prevent the US from suffering under climate change so they will have to find scapegoats to blame the suffering on as things just continue to suck. Most of them just DGAF because they are 80 years old and won't see any of the repercussions so they are happy to borrow value from the future to enrich themselves in the now. Even plenty of the Democrats don't seem to care to do anything because they'll be dead by then. Fuck, Feinstein refuses to vacate her seat seemingly because she needs the damn health insurance, which is probably the closest to being a normal american she has ever been.
- melling 3y agoFox frequently mentions Climate Change. They simply have a different point of view. People trying to address the issue are “alarmists “ https://www.foxnews.com/video/6313629464112 https://www.foxnews.com/video/6313629464112 https://www.foxnews.com/science/climate-alarmism-robbing-students-hope-ambition-earth-science-professor-says https://www.foxnews.com/science/climate-alarmism-robbing-stu...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- vkou 3y agoThe general population reacts in a few prescribed pathways. People's opinions are almost entirely shaped by the media they consume, and people with power over that media use that to their gain. Right now, a majority faction of the people with power stand to benefit from starting a climate catastrophe[1], so we're getting a climate catastrophe. [1] Or stand to lose from trying to stop one.
- berkle4455 3y agoWith the current state of things, approximately half of the world's population actively fights or pushes back on the simple idea that this is even occurring, much less accepting it as reality, and definitely much less taking action to change behavior.
- afarrell 3y agoWhat reaction would you expect to see?
- ndsipa_pomu 3y agoI'd like to see people pushing back against motor-normativity and voting out any politician that makes money from oil companies. Also, boycotting any sports event that has a major oil company sponsor would be an easy thing for people to do. I think it's going to keep carrying on like this for a while until people start rioting and destroying the capitalist institutions that have been hiding and dismissing our problems for decades.
- lotsofpulp 3y agoYou will not see that. Washington state enacted a mild carbon emissions tax as of Jan 1 that has caused gas prices in the state to go up to the highest in the country, as well as price increases in everything else. Which is exactly what it was supposed to do, to get people to consume less. However, a significant proportion of Washington residents are clamoring for their leaders to now reduce the carbon tax. Everybody is “green” until sacrifices get put on the table.
- twiddling 3y agoIt will be a factor in the gubernatorial race. Queue videos of crying mothers not being able to drive the truck to the store and feed their children.
- mrguyorama 3y agoBut but but that oil based politician says if we get rid of oil then we have to live like we are in the stone ages and that sounds hard so I'll just deal with it until it blows over
- enraged_camel 3y agoMass panic. IMHO it is the only rational reaction to various climate systems (and associated biosphere ecosystems) starting to break down.
- HardlyCurious 3y agoI'm trying to understand how climate change can cause a heat wave in the ocean. Not saying Im skeptical curious, but I just want an explanation. Temperature always tries to diffuse, increasing entropy in the process. So if there is an especially hot body of water due to climate change it means that water had to be in contact with air of higher temperature. And the water is currently hitting temps above the air temperature for the area. Key largo for example has highs in the 88-90 range this week. Heat index is much hotter because of the humidity, but that isn't relevant for heat transfer into the ocean from the air. I get water is warmer on average because of global warming. So I get any hot spots will be hotter on average in a warmer world. I just don't get how water is ending up hotter then the air. Is there some geothermal source we haven't identified? Edit: So a number of responses have brought up solar heating, often in very dismissive ways. I'm certainly aware of solar heating of water, but the solar heating is the part of the equation that isn't changing. So yes, solar heating can make water hotter then the air, but I wouldn't expect the offset to be changed with or without global warming. Meaning that the delta between the normal ocean temp and this anomaly shouldn't be larger then the delta between normal air temp and the current air temp. What I should have made more clear in my comment was that I didn't understand how a heat surge above air temperatures could be attributed to a atmospheric heat source such as GHGs.
- kerowak 3y agosun
- empath-nirvana 3y agoThis particular buoy is in shallow water in waters with seagrass and run off from the land. In general though, the ocean is _vast_ and stores a lot of heat, and changes temperature slower than the air does. When it's cold outside, the ocean radiates heat to warm the air and vice versa.
- HardlyCurious 3y agoMaybe the question should be, what is the normal summer high for these buoys? Headlines make it sound like a significant departure, but I don't think I have seen any article talking what the normal summertime high temps are. Maybe its a case of sensational media misleading for headline clicks.
- soulofmischief 3y agoEveryone's too busy keeping up with rent and inflation.
- tick_tock_tick 3y ago> climate catastrophe What's happened that you expect the general population to care about? It's hotter, a couple more storms or fires but not too many more.... You call it a catastrophe but the effect on the average persons like in this country is little to nothing.
- esalman 3y agoAverage people are already losing flood insurance in Florida and fire insurance in California. Sooner or later they are going to feel the pinch.
- madaxe_again 3y agoThey already are, but it isn’t yet in your face enough for most. Things like food price increases or insurance woes are readily abstractable or blameable on other phenomena. There are enough extreme events happening now, however, that it won’t be long before everyone, everywhere, has either been directly affected by or knows someone who has been directly affected by an extreme weather event. This kind of rapid change could be the best hope we have for remedying the situation, as rather than being frogs in slowly warming water, we will find ourselves thrown directly into the skillet.
- frumper 3y agoThe average person in California doesn't live near wildfire areas. Seven percent of the population is in a high risk area. Last year 876 structures were lost, or damaged, due to a wildfire. Not exactly moving any needles for the average Californian.
- hellomyguys 3y agoThis ignores the impact of wildfire smoke on people, which affects a much larger population.
- frumper 3y agoYour insurance carrier isn’t going to cancel your policy because of smoke
- netsharc 3y agoMaybe it's really head in sand sort of thinking, "If I ignore it, hopefully it'll go away and I'll be fine.". I think if people really come into grips with it, they'd be living in despair fighting a frustrating battle (either against the physics, or against the governments/corporations who are moving too slowly, or against the other humans who don't really seem to give a crap). Then there's a segment who are thinking "Well, we're fucked, might as well enjoy our short lives.", which I'll admit I'm a part of (cast the first stone, why don't you). I also have a growing anxiety of how bad it'll be in 5-10 years (refugee crises, humans/countries becoming more selfish and isolationist, so the rise of tribalism (and great, I don't look like a native of where I live), countries growing desperate for food/water resorting to use their military, leading to resource wars).
- matthewdgreen 3y agoWe need to rapidly increase spending on low-carbon infrastructure, remove permitting delays on building new power systems, and add carbon taxes. We also need to get serious about emergency solutions like solar radiation management, because it looks increasingly likely we'll need them to stave off total disaster. There are still technical arrows in our quiver that could save us, but none of them matter if major political parties decide to prevent us from using them. So the real answer is: vote.
- fnimick 3y agoIf it costs the average person a dollar more or requires them to drive a mile less, it won't happen. People are selfish and will gladly vote away their future for a more convenient today. This isn't a 'party' problem - this is what the public wants.
- matthewdgreen 3y agoI don't think the general public wanted offshore wind to be delayed by two years under the previous administration [1], but that's what they got. I don't think the broader public really wanted tariffs on solar panels, but that's what they got [2]. You are right that the public isn't up for major personal sacrifice, but this stuff is qualitatively different: even sensible actions that don't impose burdens on the public are being maliciously blocked. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/21/us/offshore-wind-delays-inflation-whales-climate/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/21/us/offshore-wind-delays-infla... [2] https://www.seia.org/sites/default/files/2019-12/SEIA-Section-201-Factsheet-Dec2019.pdf https://www.seia.org/sites/default/files/2019-12/SEIA-Sectio...
- dqv 3y ago>stunned Maybe. I would say it's more dismay. The unfortunate truth is that a wide-reaching and long-lasting catastrophe is probably the only thing that will activate enough people's collectivist instinct to demand change. Sriracha shortages won't wake people up, but widespread monthslong food shortages will. Power outages for a few weeks in a few counties in Florida, USA won't wake people up. A hurricane that causes monthslong power outages for 50 million people in the southeast USA will. The young ones obviously have a much stronger sense of this collectivism, but even then, they are stuck in the coerced-work-to-survive loop that isn't easily escapable without major system failures.
- local_issues 3y agoI'm a part of a group trying to reduce driving on 1 small section of a neighborhood street in favor of wider sidewalks and maybe bike parking, in a very liberal area. You would think we're proposing a second Holocaust from the reaction. Insane. Accusations that we're trying to round everyone up so we can send them to Trump's camps, to wipe out everyone over 50, etc. We're fucked. I don't pay attention to this stuff anymore, I've done what I can.
- gmerc 3y agoFundamentally everything comes down to that people don’t want to change. Any solution pushed is a solution that does not require change. electric cars are still cars recycling means you don’t change consumption at all carbon capture means you continue to emit. Humans don’t seem capable of change
- fnimick 3y agoHumans on a large enough scale are basically toddlers, it seems. Nobody is willing to give up the slightest luxury today in order to have a better tomorrow. It's incredibly disappointing.
- matthewdgreen 3y agoHuman beings are making a conscious decision to fight change. See e.g., the two-year delay on offshore wind construction under the previous administration. There are still fossil-fuel adjacent groups fighting this: https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/21/us/offshore-wind-delays-inflation-whales-climate/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/21/us/offshore-wind-delays-infla...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Zetice 3y agoWeren't we told over and over again that cooler-than-normal years don't disprove climate change? Wouldn't that logic also apply here, that hotter-than-normal years don't individually demonstrate anything? Sure, climate change is happening and it's making the hot years hotter, but pointing at this year as "the disastrous consequences of climate change" feels like trying to have your cake and eat it too.
- UncleOxidant 3y ago> A buoy in the Florida Bay hit 101.1 degrees Fahrenheit at a depth of 5 feet Monday I have a feeling that most people have no idea what it means - they don't have the science background to make any sense of it. 101.1 degrees at the surface would be bad enough, but this is 5 feet down. That seems pretty catastrophic.
- jredwards 3y agoWhen did you become stunned and how long has it lasted? Most people don't have the stamina to remain shocked for decades.
- sfn42 3y agoWhat are you doing? We are reacting. I'm not having kids. That's my reaction. I wouldn't want to be born into a crumbling civilization so I won't put someone else in that situation. Beyond that I'm living my life to the best of my ability, trying to make the most of my time here. Can't really do much else, just grabbing some popcorn and watching it burn I guess.