4 ms·
A third of humans are fed as a result of the melt of the Himalayan ice sheet. No ice sheet, no runoff, no flooding the rice paddy's, no rice…. famine.
by an-allen 9mo ago
A third of humans are fed as a result of the melt of the Himalayan ice sheet. No ice sheet, no runoff, no flooding the rice paddy's, no rice…. famine.
- tasuki 9mo agoAre you saying we need global warming for the melt to increase?
- bamboozled 9mo agoWhat about all the people who say the world will be greener and therefore there will be more plants and food? It's almost like they just made that up to suit their worldview?
- timr 9mo agoThe world will be greener in a high-CO2 environment. There’s no legitimate argument over that fact. Where you go wrong is in misrepresenting the argument as “more plants and food”. That’s a straw man. Certainly it’s more favorable for growth of plants that make food, but that doesn’t mean that existing patterns of food production will exist unchanged, or that adaptation won’t be required. But we’re also talking about a 100+ year change timeline. People who tell you that this year’s weather are indicative of urgent, rapid change are exaggerating. You seem to be willing to accept wild extrapolations of doom without evidence, while rejecting scientifically well-founded statements of fact, so I’d challenge you to examine your priors.
- agentultra 9mo agoAt the levels of concentration of CO2 we’re seeing, plants are decreasing in size. Trees grow smaller. There’s a balance to how much CO2 plants can adapt to and absorb while maintaining their growth and yields.
- timr 9mo ago> At the levels of concentration of CO2 we’re seeing, plants are decreasing in size. Trees grow smaller. No, they don't. Not due to CO2, anyway (maybe temperature, or changes in precipitation for particular plants). Even if you want to (inaccurately) argue that specific plants will grow smaller, abundant CO2 will lead to more plants. > There’s a balance to how much CO2 plants can adapt to and absorb while maintaining their growth and yields. Again, no. Plants are limited by their genetics, and the availability of inputs, one of the most important of which is carbon. CO2 does not limit a plant's growth. That's just silly.
- agentultra 9mo agoRight, my bad... it's not directly the CO2 but the effects of CO2 on climate that is restricting plant growth overall [0]. The net effect is the same. We're not going to see Northern Canada turn into a lush farmland. It's much more complicated than that. [0] https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/co2-trees-1.5000709 https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/co2-trees-1.5000709
- timr 9mo ago> Right, my bad... it's not directly the CO2 but the effects of CO2 on climate that is restricting plant growth overall [0]. The net effect is the same. The net effect is not the same. The net effect is that the earth has been getting greener, in multiple measurable ways, since at least the 1980s. See my sibling comments containing the IPCC AR6 report citations, where they state that this global greening is happening, and has been happening for decades, with high confidence.
- therealpygon 9mo agoI mean, didn’t take more than 15 minutes for one to comment with some talking points designed for those who can’t read a scientific paper.
- screye 9mo agoThe world will become unevenly greener. Population density and recent population rise is inversely correlated with places that will get greener. Polar and Continental regions will get greener at the expense of the tropical and equatorial regions. Mass migration is the inevitable conclusion of uneven impacts of climate change. Ie. In 2026, Political climate and physical climate are moving in mutually incompatible directions.
- red-iron-pine 9mo agoput another way, it's Central Canada that's going to be the rainforest the existing rainforests will turn into Sahara 2.0
- guelo 9mo agoThe greening is uneven. Canada/Siberia are getting warmer so plants have longer growing seasons there. But it's getting browner in other areas because of increased drought and heat. Overall the predictions are for lower global food production on net.
- red-iron-pine 9mo agoit'll be warmer but not better for growing -- you need sunlight, and a warm winter in Canada still means great darkness. long days in the summer but the tropical plants from equatorial regions would suffer
- QuantumGood 9mo agoThat is a very long chain of dependencies (what is a dependency, what is not can be shown differently than below), meaning there are less and less likely to be many people following the entire chain of dependencies. This is sometimes a key part of how a straw man is constructed. > all > the people > who say > the world will be > greener > and therefore there will be > more plants > and food
- abc123abc123 9mo ago[flagged]
- reeredfdfdf 9mo agoThe thing is, not all edible plants like higher temps. Then there's the issue of changing weather patterns, more extreme weather, drought. Agriculture is easier when weather stays predictable and pattern. Also, it's entirely possible Europe will get a new ice age as a result of global warming, as it might cause AMOC to collapse. Thus, it appears global warming is causing more harm than good to food production.
- throwawayqqq11 9mo agoI cant read GPs flagged comment anymore, but guessing from your response, it must have been something like "climate change is actually good for plants bc CO2 is just plant food. Checkmate liberal.". Your reply to this assumed idiotic take was quite good, stable conditions are generally preferable but i think you missed one good point. Even though some small increases of parameters like temperature or CO2 can have initial positive effects, in some cases, these effects dont scale linearly with the parameters! This is not how metabolism works! You dont eat and grow infinitely more, the more (not just food but one ingredient) sugar is on the table too! This over and over repeated idiocy bothers me so much, because its main purpose is to support irrationality and ignorance. This is poisioning the dialog and not my hostilty towards it!
- jibal 9mo agoA reliable citation for any of these claims is lacking.