5 ms·

I don’t think any of these are really that critical: they will become a problem in a few centuries if we do absolutely nothing but will likely be fine. Take oc

I don’t think any of these are really that critical: they will become a problem in a few centuries if we do absolutely nothing but will likely be fine. Take ocean deoxygenation: it happens locally due to fertiliser runoff in places that have a history of low oxygen. It’s good to put some resources towards fixing this, but it’s not useful to think of it as an extinction level problem that we “now have.”

AtlasBarfed 3y ago
Wow, you have the entirety of the world ecosystem, from deep ocean currents and biology, to the entire 70% of the world's surface oceans, to the jungle rainforests, arctic/antarctic ice, atmospheric changes, solar radiation variation, historical records, 100% accurate computer simulations/predictors, all nailed down? All the interaction of species, effects of (mass) extinctions? Invasive species? Habitat destruction, soil loss from farming, AND you can predict the impacts of human industry, economics, and technology change? You have ALL THAT NAILED DOWN, internet expert? Forgive me if I don't take your assurances about that as being "no big deal" with any iota of reliability. There are literally 20 major scientific domains that all are in lockstep agreement about anthropogenic global warming, from geologists, atmospheric scientists, basic chemistry and physics, oceanographers, biologists, archaeologists, historians. A massive collection of scientific inquiry that basically all ends at the same conclusions. It's quite literally thousands of PhDs, maybe tens of thousands. Of course, all of them don't know as much as you, internet guy.
- brutusborn 3y ago
  Yeah I’ve read a lot actually, which is why I’ve changed my mind about the severity of these problems. Most predictions are just conjecture with no real link to good models. I’m always happy to read more papers if you know of any good ones. All the ones I’ve read on low ocean oxygen have convinced me it isn’t a very critical problem. Just a few things you get wrong: thinking models are 100% accurate, thinking scientists have everything “nailed down” and assuming that I don’t know enough to back up my opinion.
  - AtlasBarfed 3y ago
    Actually, I know you don't. The complexity involved exceeds the intellectual ability of a single person, no matter how arrogant they are. Because you, single person, do not have the ability to ingest all the data, do not have access to the necessary supercomputers, do not have the decades of time to write and adapt the simulation software, do not have the PhDs. You are simply one brain. Who very most certainly does not have the accuracy of the current models (yours is FAR less reliable, because it is your lone opinion), you think you have everything nailed down to brazenly assert "it won't be that bad", and well, you are just one dumb internet person, so I KNOW you don't know enough to back up your opinion. If you followed the simulations alone, you'd see that they have had a surprisingly good track, even the late-1990s models are doing disturbingly well (which were more pessimistic than what the climate scientists wanted to say back then). Ocean acidification and the potential collapse of oceanic phytoplankton should scare the living shit out of you. Fishery health aren't really the concern if oxygen production from phytoplankton drops. The inability to eat sushi is far down the list from "inability to breathe". Hint: phytoplankton produce 70% of the oxygen we breathe, and our society is actively participating in Russian Roulette on a global scale to see if we kill ourselves with that, among other "fun games" that "you aren't concerned about".
    - brutusborn 3y ago
      You are also one brain. I look at the results from other scientists in the exact same way you do. Just because I don’t build my own climate models doesn’t mean my opinion is incorrect. I build models as a job, so I have a decent understanding of what to look for in a good model. In fact I follows many scientists who do all the things you mention and who agree with me. Some even think climate change might be good overall! Most skeptics think that it is real and that it is bad, but that it is not something worth panicking about. As I said before, I’m always open to learning more. What predictions frighten you the most? You mention ocean acidification, when do scientists predict that this problem will become existential?
- 4RealFreedom 3y ago
  That was misguided and rude. Please follow the comment guidelines.
myshpa 3y ago
> Take ocean deoxygenation: it happens locally due to fertiliser runoff Two types, not one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_deoxygenation#Types_and_mechanisms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_deoxygenation#Types_and_...
- brutusborn 3y ago
  Thanks for the info. I think my point stands for open ocean deoxygenation. It is a natural process that global warming makes worse. The critical point is how much worse? Is it now an existential risk or just slightly worse than before? I wouldn’t claim I have knowledge that it’s not a problem, but I’d like to see a model where it becomes a problem and for that model to predict observations. Until then, I just mentally file this away under doomer predictions.
  - myshpa 3y ago
    > a natural process that global warming makes worse https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abm3468 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abm3468 Global decline in ocean memory over the 21st century https://phys.org/news/2023-04-devastating-greenland-antarctic-ice-sheets.html https://phys.org/news/2023-04-devastating-greenland-antarcti... 'Devastating' melt of Greenland, Antarctic ice sheets found The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are now losing more than three times as much ice a year as they were 30 years ago https://www.commondreams.org/news/ocean-warming-study https://www.commondreams.org/news/ocean-warming-study the planet has accumulated as much heat in the past 15 years as it did in the previous 45 years, the majority of the excess heat has been absorbed by the oceans https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/may/15/oceans-have-been-absorbing-the-worlds-extra-heat-but-theres-a-huge-payback https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/may/15/oceans-h... A technical chart in a chapter of the latest UN climate assessment laid out the unfathomable heat gain. Between 1971 and 2018, the ocean had gained 396 zettajoules of heat. How much heat is that? Scientists have calculated it is the equivalent energy of more than 25bn Hiroshima atomic bombs. And that heat gain is accelerating. A study in January found the ocean gained 10 ZJ more in 2022 than the year before – enough heat to boil 700m kettles every second. https://phys.org/news/2023-05-climate-ocean-plankton-microbes-carbon.html https://phys.org/news/2023-05-climate-ocean-plankton-microbe... Warming climate could turn ocean plankton microbes into carbon emitters https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330316398_How_fast_are_the_oceans_warming https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330316398_How_fast_... How fast are the oceans warming? - Observational records of ocean heat content show that ocean warming is accelerating https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/17/world/four-climate-charts-extreme-weather-heat-oceans/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/17/world/four-climate-charts... Four alarming charts that show just how extreme the climate is right now https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-24/antarctic-sea-ice-levels-nosedive-five-sigma-event/102635204 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-24/antarctic-sea-ice-lev... Antarctic sea ice levels dive in 'five-sigma event', as experts flag worsening consequences for planet https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/25/atlantic-ocean-amoc-climate-change/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/2... Scientists detect sign that a crucial ocean current is near collapse > I’d like to see a model where it becomes a problem and for that model to predict observations https://www.resilience.org/stories/2021-08-16/revisiting-the-limits-to-growth/ https://www.resilience.org/stories/2021-08-16/revisiting-the... https://advisory.kpmg.us/content/dam/advisory/en/pdfs/2021/yale-publication.pdf https://advisory.kpmg.us/content/dam/advisory/en/pdfs/2021/y... "I conducted a data update to Limits to Growth (LtG), best known from the 1972 bestseller that forecasted a scenario of global societal collapse occurring around the present time if humanity did not alter its priorities. Empirical data comparisons since then indicated that the world was still heading for collapse. ... I found that the scenarios aligned closely with observed global data, which is a testament to the LtG work done decades ago. The two scenarios aligning most closely indicate a halt in growth over the next decade or so, which puts into question the usability of continuous growth as humanity’s goal in the 21st century. Both scenarios also indicate subsequent declines, but only one—the scenario in which declines are caused by pollution, including greenhouse gas pollution—depicts a collapse pattern. The scenario with the smallest declines aligned least with empirical data, however, absolute differences were rarely big and sometimes insignificant. This suggests that it’s almost, but not yet, too late for society to change course." https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332655753_Limits_Revisited-A_review_of_the_limits_to_growth_debate_A_report_to_the_All-Party_Parliamentary_Group_on_LImits_to_Growth https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332655753_Limits_Re... "We unravel the arguments that have raged for forty years in its aftermath and explore more recent findings which relate to the original hypothesis. There is unsettling evidence that society is still following the ‘standard run’ of the original study – in which overshoot leads to an eventual collapse of production and living standards. Detailed recent studies suggests that production of some key resources may only be decades away. Certain other limits to growth – less visible in the 1972 report – present equally pressing challenges to modern society. We highlight, in particular, recent work on our proximity to ‘planetary boundaries’ and illustrate this through the challenge of meeting the Paris Agreement on climate change. We also explore the economic challenge of a ‘secular stagnation’. If the Club of Rome is right, the next few decades are decisive." > I just mentally file this away under doomer predictions Ok :)

AtlasBarfed 3y ago

Wow, you have the entirety of the world ecosystem, from deep ocean currents and biology, to the entire 70% of the world's surface oceans, to the jungle rainforests, arctic/antarctic ice, atmospheric changes, solar radiation variation, historical records, 100% accurate computer simulations/predictors, all nailed down? All the interaction of species, effects of (mass) extinctions? Invasive species? Habitat destruction, soil loss from farming, AND you can predict the impacts of human industry, economics, and technology change? You have ALL THAT NAILED DOWN, internet expert? Forgive me if I don't take your assurances about that as being "no big deal" with any iota of reliability. There are literally 20 major scientific domains that all are in lockstep agreement about anthropogenic global warming, from geologists, atmospheric scientists, basic chemistry and physics, oceanographers, biologists, archaeologists, historians. A massive collection of scientific inquiry that basically all ends at the same conclusions. It's quite literally thousands of PhDs, maybe tens of thousands. Of course, all of them don't know as much as you, internet guy.

brutusborn 3y ago
Yeah I’ve read a lot actually, which is why I’ve changed my mind about the severity of these problems. Most predictions are just conjecture with no real link to good models. I’m always happy to read more papers if you know of any good ones. All the ones I’ve read on low ocean oxygen have convinced me it isn’t a very critical problem. Just a few things you get wrong: thinking models are 100% accurate, thinking scientists have everything “nailed down” and assuming that I don’t know enough to back up my opinion.
- AtlasBarfed 3y ago
  Actually, I know you don't. The complexity involved exceeds the intellectual ability of a single person, no matter how arrogant they are. Because you, single person, do not have the ability to ingest all the data, do not have access to the necessary supercomputers, do not have the decades of time to write and adapt the simulation software, do not have the PhDs. You are simply one brain. Who very most certainly does not have the accuracy of the current models (yours is FAR less reliable, because it is your lone opinion), you think you have everything nailed down to brazenly assert "it won't be that bad", and well, you are just one dumb internet person, so I KNOW you don't know enough to back up your opinion. If you followed the simulations alone, you'd see that they have had a surprisingly good track, even the late-1990s models are doing disturbingly well (which were more pessimistic than what the climate scientists wanted to say back then). Ocean acidification and the potential collapse of oceanic phytoplankton should scare the living shit out of you. Fishery health aren't really the concern if oxygen production from phytoplankton drops. The inability to eat sushi is far down the list from "inability to breathe". Hint: phytoplankton produce 70% of the oxygen we breathe, and our society is actively participating in Russian Roulette on a global scale to see if we kill ourselves with that, among other "fun games" that "you aren't concerned about".
  - brutusborn 3y ago
    You are also one brain. I look at the results from other scientists in the exact same way you do. Just because I don’t build my own climate models doesn’t mean my opinion is incorrect. I build models as a job, so I have a decent understanding of what to look for in a good model. In fact I follows many scientists who do all the things you mention and who agree with me. Some even think climate change might be good overall! Most skeptics think that it is real and that it is bad, but that it is not something worth panicking about. As I said before, I’m always open to learning more. What predictions frighten you the most? You mention ocean acidification, when do scientists predict that this problem will become existential?
4RealFreedom 3y ago
That was misguided and rude. Please follow the comment guidelines.

myshpa 3y ago

> Take ocean deoxygenation: it happens locally due to fertiliser runoff Two types, not one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_deoxygenation#Types_and_mechanisms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_deoxygenation#Types_and_...

brutusborn 3y ago
Thanks for the info. I think my point stands for open ocean deoxygenation. It is a natural process that global warming makes worse. The critical point is how much worse? Is it now an existential risk or just slightly worse than before? I wouldn’t claim I have knowledge that it’s not a problem, but I’d like to see a model where it becomes a problem and for that model to predict observations. Until then, I just mentally file this away under doomer predictions.
- myshpa 3y ago
  > a natural process that global warming makes worse https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abm3468 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abm3468 Global decline in ocean memory over the 21st century https://phys.org/news/2023-04-devastating-greenland-antarctic-ice-sheets.html https://phys.org/news/2023-04-devastating-greenland-antarcti... 'Devastating' melt of Greenland, Antarctic ice sheets found The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are now losing more than three times as much ice a year as they were 30 years ago https://www.commondreams.org/news/ocean-warming-study https://www.commondreams.org/news/ocean-warming-study the planet has accumulated as much heat in the past 15 years as it did in the previous 45 years, the majority of the excess heat has been absorbed by the oceans https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/may/15/oceans-have-been-absorbing-the-worlds-extra-heat-but-theres-a-huge-payback https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/may/15/oceans-h... A technical chart in a chapter of the latest UN climate assessment laid out the unfathomable heat gain. Between 1971 and 2018, the ocean had gained 396 zettajoules of heat. How much heat is that? Scientists have calculated it is the equivalent energy of more than 25bn Hiroshima atomic bombs. And that heat gain is accelerating. A study in January found the ocean gained 10 ZJ more in 2022 than the year before – enough heat to boil 700m kettles every second. https://phys.org/news/2023-05-climate-ocean-plankton-microbes-carbon.html https://phys.org/news/2023-05-climate-ocean-plankton-microbe... Warming climate could turn ocean plankton microbes into carbon emitters https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330316398_How_fast_are_the_oceans_warming https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330316398_How_fast_... How fast are the oceans warming? - Observational records of ocean heat content show that ocean warming is accelerating https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/17/world/four-climate-charts-extreme-weather-heat-oceans/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/17/world/four-climate-charts... Four alarming charts that show just how extreme the climate is right now https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-24/antarctic-sea-ice-levels-nosedive-five-sigma-event/102635204 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-24/antarctic-sea-ice-lev... Antarctic sea ice levels dive in 'five-sigma event', as experts flag worsening consequences for planet https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/25/atlantic-ocean-amoc-climate-change/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/2... Scientists detect sign that a crucial ocean current is near collapse > I’d like to see a model where it becomes a problem and for that model to predict observations https://www.resilience.org/stories/2021-08-16/revisiting-the-limits-to-growth/ https://www.resilience.org/stories/2021-08-16/revisiting-the... https://advisory.kpmg.us/content/dam/advisory/en/pdfs/2021/yale-publication.pdf https://advisory.kpmg.us/content/dam/advisory/en/pdfs/2021/y... "I conducted a data update to Limits to Growth (LtG), best known from the 1972 bestseller that forecasted a scenario of global societal collapse occurring around the present time if humanity did not alter its priorities. Empirical data comparisons since then indicated that the world was still heading for collapse. ... I found that the scenarios aligned closely with observed global data, which is a testament to the LtG work done decades ago. The two scenarios aligning most closely indicate a halt in growth over the next decade or so, which puts into question the usability of continuous growth as humanity’s goal in the 21st century. Both scenarios also indicate subsequent declines, but only one—the scenario in which declines are caused by pollution, including greenhouse gas pollution—depicts a collapse pattern. The scenario with the smallest declines aligned least with empirical data, however, absolute differences were rarely big and sometimes insignificant. This suggests that it’s almost, but not yet, too late for society to change course." https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332655753_Limits_Revisited-A_review_of_the_limits_to_growth_debate_A_report_to_the_All-Party_Parliamentary_Group_on_LImits_to_Growth https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332655753_Limits_Re... "We unravel the arguments that have raged for forty years in its aftermath and explore more recent findings which relate to the original hypothesis. There is unsettling evidence that society is still following the ‘standard run’ of the original study – in which overshoot leads to an eventual collapse of production and living standards. Detailed recent studies suggests that production of some key resources may only be decades away. Certain other limits to growth – less visible in the 1972 report – present equally pressing challenges to modern society. We highlight, in particular, recent work on our proximity to ‘planetary boundaries’ and illustrate this through the challenge of meeting the Paris Agreement on climate change. We also explore the economic challenge of a ‘secular stagnation’. If the Club of Rome is right, the next few decades are decisive." > I just mentally file this away under doomer predictions Ok :)