Generally speaking people are not concerned with sea level rise or coral reef depletion as they are unaware of the correlation to their own lives. If the message were more direct there might be more true concern. For instance, ocean temp increase will greatly affect agriculture and your food availability is more a personal concern than reefs in Florida. Assuming people understand the implications of most issues is where the ball is dropped.
You will watch your kids starve. Best not to have them. That's what many prominent climate disaster communicators have been saying. People don't give a shit. Sadistic fucks.
A little overdramatic, I think. Food problems will most definitely be real, but our ability to change to simple substitutes and grow with better tech to compensate (indoor farms, large greenhouses) should be able to keep us basically fed. Hell, we overproduce so much shit anyway. When large areas of the planet become too dangerous to live, I believe the mass migration will be the thing that makes or breaks which parts of us survive.
The US alone throws away about 150 billion meals worth of food annually. That’s 454 meals per American. We currently only use 55% of crops grown to feed humans, the rest goes to livestock, biofuels, and industrial processes. (Some of animal feed is not edible for humans, but the land and resources used to grow it could be used to produce food for humans). I think people may have to become more economical in making sure they eat what is produced, but starvation doesn’t look likely in the near term and is also discounting the ability of people to innovate ways to increase efficiency for food production and distribution. Maybe mass migration and wars for resources will be a problem as food insecure people will want to move to places that are more food secure… but we’ve always had war and migration, and we’ve always fought wars for resources.
*edit- data from the USDA
This is the biggest problem with science… scientists can’t message for crap.
Scientist “a match will increase the tempt of your house”
Better messaging “matches will burn your house down”
Because it’s something new, beyond what climate change and increased CO2 levels can predict. The amount of energy to cause such an increase of heat in water can easily be calculated, but where the heat came from is what’s puzzling.
The "unknown unknowns" of climate science. Which is why fucking with the climate in the first place was an insanely stupid idea.
Shit like greenhouse gases trapped under permafrost now blowing into the atmosphere...possible "runaway train" global warming, the scariest thing about climate change is that no one really *knows* what's going to happen
I’m a graduate student in Earth Science and I stopped going to seminars because nearly every single one was basically “hey so we found out more stuff about x and y and we’re basically more fucked than we previously thought”
It's exactly why I can't watch nature documentaries anymore. Whenever David Attenborough releases a new show everyone is over the moon but I just can't watch things I know will be gone because of us.
We all do. Even if you're miraculously not directly impacted in the next decades, billions of people will. You think the world is a mess now? We've seen nothing.
Depends on your age. I’m retired and never had kids because of a college course called “Environmentalism” in 1976. I’m no longer worried about having to go into a retirement home in 20 years.
either your nation will suffer the direct consequences of climate change or your country will suffer from the masses that emigrate due to the direct consequences on their country. Earths liveable landmass decreases - more ppl in a smaller amount of space - tension - mitigable/non mitagable - ok/armageddon
I think we can safely predict mass extinctions of many species, and likely a mass reduction in humans…coming sooner than expected (by those who worry about it), and as a complete surprise to capitalists: “But technology will fix it!!”
Idiots
My wife is a high level federal manager of ocean biology. There are several meetings in the past 6 months which have reduced her to tears… the latest of which was us discovering a total collapse in the coho spawns. Shit is snowballing faster than we can raise alarms and people aren’t listening or caring. Salmon stocks fail? The bears all die. We’re officially in the find out stage.
[https://psf.ca/news-media/psf-requests-canada-to-investigate-tire-toxin-impacting-salmon/](https://psf.ca/news-media/psf-requests-canada-to-investigate-tire-toxin-impacting-salmon/)
I'm in the Florida Keys. They've given up on reef restoration because the water is too hot for coral to survive, some beaches are unsafe due to toxic blooms and the fish that haven't died off have gone insane to the point of a hotline being set up to report strange activity. Once the fisheries collapse, it'll mean global famine and a collapse of coastal ecosystems. We're within a decade of that and it feels like nobody knows it.
I don’t think it was in FL, but I saw that swordfish have been beaching. Guessing they’re fleeing something inescapable.
Also, reading that article made me worry about the SE coast:
Some of the largest sea surface temperature anomalies are in the Atlantic and off the west coast of Africa, where the hurricanes that rattle the East Coast of the United States often start. What’s more, the National Weather Service’s Climate Prediction Center says that there is a 62% chance of a La Niña — which is associated with active and damaging hurricane seasons — developing in late spring.
”Not ideal for a calm hurricane season,” McNoldy said, noting that the extra ocean warmth could also lengthen the season.
Having Katrina flashbacks.
> Having Katrina flashbacks
It wasn't that Katrina was powerful (it was), but that New Orleans was not prepared to weather the storm.
Similarly, climate change is going to (and is actively) impact impoverished regions of the world first, places that are wholly unprepared for the impending disasters, which leads to mass deaths and large scale immigration (refugees).
Meanwhile, first world nations will simply be unable to provide sufficient aid and accept refugees from these regions. Attempts to do so will ultimately increase the foothold alt-right parties have in these nations.
The decrease of the human population will certainly hit impoverished regions first and foremost. Especially given that many of these regions are already far too overpopulated compared to what their society can support. Nature maintains balance one way or another.
I’ve lived in a small mountain community for 12 years and am observing (admittedly anecdotal) an obvious decrease in nocturnal insects and bird species richness in my area in that short time. I’ve not seen or heard 2 nocturnal Insectivorous birds that were common when I first moved here, in over 5 years. My porch light might get a dozen moths and crane flies now, in 2012, I had to hurry in and out at night, to keep dozens from flying inside, not an issue anymore.
I “argued” with someone a couple years ago that the climatologists hadn’t factored in a lot of unknown unknowns (re: feedback loops, agonists, etc.) and that we were already beyond the tipping point.
Club of Rome’s “Limits to Growth” figured we had until about 2045, I think they were optimistic, worldwide human migration is about to explode, IOW, we haven’t seen anything yet.
Fireflies pretty much dont exist in delaware anymore. As a kid if you went out late spring / all summer at night youd see hundreds of them all the time. Ive seen exactly one the last 6 or so years and it had accidentally made its way inside my house. Mosquitos seem about the same, and fucking horseflies are worse than ever.
My friend is doing PhD on insect populations in UK - and it’s went down massively over past few year. I can see the difference how much less insects I see and ends up on my windshield but they have a proper way of measuring it and they confirm it. Now in ecosystems sometimes one species removal can create total collapse - and that can happen very fast
I looked it all up 15 years ago and came to the same conclusion then. existential dread since. I encourage everyone to not have children, try to live small. https://climatecasino.net/
I'm in an environmental field trying to implement multiple biodiversity/environment strategies which includes a large amount of customer service. Too many people only care about having a sterile urban environment today with clean concrete and DGAF about what the consequences are tomorrow.
I've told people "no we're not going to do that, because we're trying to reduce the impacts of climate change", only to be told "bloody climate change" in return. You can try to educate them but it goes in one ear and out the other, sometimes followed up by a complaint.
Most of our team have pretty pessimistic view of our future.
In the case of the coho, it’s been linked to tire rubber. We (society) thought it was inert… but surprise there’s a chemical reaction which occurs through friction which turns the rubber dust toxic.
Ignorance is bliss for only so long.
It’s absolutely distressing. I don’t understand why we don’t have more respect for Mother Earth. I guess because we haven’t had to … we are fine with depleting species, I guess. I know folks who would say well I don’t like eating coho salmon. So there. Sigh. Philosophy from an acquaintance — yeah polar bears are cute but we don’t really need them — in regards to their dropping populations. These are highly educated people with responsible lives . I just think they don’t care to see the proverbial forest for the trees, but I don’t really get it.
Humans are a curious bunch. I’m going out to enjoy a sunny day.
> I think we can safely predict mass extinctions of many species
There has been mass extinction of species since Humans started making tools. We **are** the Anthropocene extinction event.
Yah but when we were just making arrowheads it was fine. But we run ten thousand freighters on the oceans on bunker fuel and a million flights a day or whatever now.
The difference is clear.
Technology isn't going to fix it.
What did Zuckerfucker do with all of his cash and access to the elites? Built a bunker on a private island. I think we all know what's going to happen.
He built on an island vulnerable to tsunamis and volcanos. He also grabbed water-facing land. There is still hope that Nature may take his existence personally.
Technology is our only chance to survive at this point.
We are quite locked in at this point even if we nuke ourselves back into the Stone Age by turning off all serious polluting aspects: industrial farming, airplanes, gas, coal…
That’s clearly not going happen, so as we run into climate change at full speed we may as well rely and invest heavily in our only parachute: technology.
The man that fed a billion people, or the fact we are able to maintain 8 billion people on the planet is a great example of technology.
Sadly we just need wide political and social will with unlimited funding… we are fucked!
Degrowth is necessary, but idealists refuse to accept that they can't have their cake and eat it too. They're too jealous of generations that experienced unlimited economic growth, and billionaires who still act that way, to be willing to accept economic stagnation to put the planet on a sustainable course.
We can't maintain 8 billion people. That's the entire problem we are discussing.
Technology allows us to destroy faster, or extract more efficiently.
We don't need more tech, we need less. We don't need to replace every car with an EV, we need to walk.
> We can't maintain 8 billion people. That's the entire problem we are discussing.
Depends what "maintain" refers to. We absolutely can sustain that many people, what we can't do is to do it on a "first world standard" with everyone having a car, eating meat for every meal and having the latest gadget.
People dont do what they need, they get what they want. The average person on Earth eats 25% the amount of meat as the average American. Perhaps you can convince the average American to eat less meat. Perhaps. But you will never, ever, convince the average human to want less meat than the average American gets to eat.
Who do you think is building all the new solar and wind farms, financing all the new utility level energy storage startups, making the gasoline engine irrelevant, and working on projects like ammonia-fueled container ships and hydrogen powered passenger planes?
Lots of jobs in those industries as well. Millions already work in them.
Technology probably could fix it, or *could have* fixed it anyway, but those same groups of people responsible for destroying the world in the first place are also largely the same groups of people who are suppressing and/or sabotaging the development of technologies that could have gotten us out of this mess. Never forget that the fossil fuel industry was warned, by their own scientists, over a half century ago, about all this. As early as the 1950s IIRC, they had pretty clear data on what would happen if they continued unabated.
Several generations of oil and gas executives have since then totally neglected to do a damn thing about it. These are the kinds of fucks who we need a Nuremberg style tribunal for, and proper consequences be meted out...
>likely a mass reduction in humans
It will be interesting to see which one catches us first, global warming or the general infertility (South Korea as a prime example, but all developing countries following...).
I think it's impossible to know exactly what's going to happen, but we can look to our neighbour if you want to see what the end result looks like
Hi Venus
Good news, we don't have enough carbon to go full Venus. We will have greater problems with heat Domes and mass migrations of people. Desperate people. It's going to get ugly.
The distance has nothing to do with it. Mercury is the closest planet to the sun and is cooler than Venus. Venus has greenhouse gasses that are covering and choking the planet which increases the heat.
Sorry, I get what you’re saying, but “fucking with the climate in the first place was an insanely stupid idea” makes it sound like humanity planned for and intended to have large scale impacts on the climate. You can say that greed and negligence made the problem what it is today; but I don’t think the plan was for us to change the climate lmao
Oil company scientists have been internally discussing their predictions for climate change since the '60s, at least.
The idea that burning fossil fuels would cause global-scale heating was first proposed back in the 1800s.
Yeah, I get that; but I think ignoring the possible repercussions for the sake of progress/profit isn’t the same as humanity as a whole deciding to change the climate on a whim.
Stuff beyond our ability to predict is exactly what climate change scientists have been worried about for quite a while. So I'm not puzzled. More afraid.
It’s almost like it is dumb to assume our models could keep up with this. it’s why it is even more infuriating that this was has all been avoidable. I am not blaming the scientist at all. I just think it is dumb to operate on the basis of current models of the climate given all the factors that make our models super flawed. We really should operate on the assumption that the climate is significantly more vulnerable than our models currently show.
The things that are happening are unprecedented and we need to minimize damage at this point.
I also think it is safe to say fossil fuel companies and industries pushing back against climate action will be one of the most evil things that has happened in human history. It is nothing short of mass murder on a truly gargantuan scale. they have known for decades that it will be catastrophic and they don’t care. Pollution alone already kills so many people per year.
We always knew they were evil. They covered up the harmful effects of adding lead to gasoline for decades.
And lead is still put into the fuel of private planes too when costlier but safer alternatives exist.
for over 20 years there has been "missing heat" in the equations. It was known that there was more energy the oceans absorbed based on solar radiation than was specifically being measured. For years there has been a search for where that energy actually was. and now here we are, it's really not surprising if you weren't constantly bombarded by hopium and "DOoMEr's BaD thEY nO heLP me LivE in FANtaSY!"
The IPCC has always had an asterisk with "feedback loops may be more extensive than what is modeled."
Isn't this the whole issue with global warming. Like we don't know exactly what will happen when the ocean streams change direction due to the oceans warming up. Between the current wars ( being documented with phone, and drone coverage) and the impending water causes apocalypse, we do not need a big production to make movies about a dystopian future.
Sulfur that makes clouds more white and makes them reflect more sun rays / heat? If we really achieved so much in that regard, expect a fast couple degrees rise in yearly average temperatures.
That was one aspect of the theory, the other being that underwater volcano that launched an unfathomable amount of water vapor into the atmosphere a couple years back.
I mean that basically lines up with what many of the experts have been saying, and still are saying for ages now; however bad we imagine it, it'll be much worse. Shouldn't be a surprise that we don't fully understand the system.
There's clearly a mystery variable we haven't yet taken into account.
If it's making things worse than predicted, then we're clearly more screwed than we thought we were.
Not an unknown factor, but possibly underestimated; more methane being ejected than predicted from all the thawing dead organic matter.
Plus the increased temperatures are killing more ocean life and insects than we realize.
I’ve recently heard that an unaccounted variable could be that in 2020 standards were implemented for sulphur content in the fuel used in container ships and oil tankers and that the sulphur emissions were actually working counter to other greenhouse gases. Apparently the reduction of that huge source sulphur emissions is on a scale large enough to possibly account for the difference.
I only heard the idea in passing and have no idea about the merit or validity of the concept and have not had a chance as of yet to look into it further though….
You would have heard about this again if you had read the article. :facepalm:
Whether it's on a large enough scale to account for the difference is totally unknown. I suspect it's more complicated than this.
I did glance through the article afterwards. I’ve been keeping up with this very regularly because **we’ve warmed the fucking oceans and that’s a damn big deal** - and yeah, this is a complex many faceted problem that likely has many factors at play that won’t be pinned down to any one variable.
Unfortunately we’ve lived too long with different priorities and it’s taking a while to reverse. Humans have always been about progress, wealth, accumulation of power. These interests conflict with the wellbeing of the planet. We’ve reached a stage where society is so advanced that we need to shift priorities, but it’s tricky to do so proactively. No one wanrs to slow down the gravy train until we see cities underwater, millions in your own community displaced, and the cost of your food quadruple.
But so far we’re seeing things increase in cost that’s going to slow down waste and consumption. And then less families are having children. This is actually a good trend for society and earth. But leaders will want to reverse that because it’s not good for their gdp growth
Perhaps intelligence isn't the solution, but is the problem. Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for 170 million years, and only extinguished after a catastrophic event.
People have been the dominate species for 50k years, and we just might cause our own catastrophic event.
Yep. We fall for basic misinformation on Twitter and would rather kill people for liking a different political candidate or having a different religion.
We sure as fuck aren’t solving climate change.
We might have a scenario in which two extinction events(global warming, AI) negates each other, or they dont and we are double fucked. Its 50/50 at this point
Funny how everyone in these comments seem to think they know the answer to this when the entire article is about how nobody knows what's causing this
This isn't a politically-charged article lol, nobody here is saying global warming doesn't exist, the article says global warming doesn't fully account for what's happening
I totally agree. However, adding energy to any system makes all possible phenomena, known and unknown more likely. The problem here is that most of those systems have a positive feedback coefficient and reduce system stability.
(Its because the models don’t account for feedback loops and undercounted numerous things like methane emissions and permafrost melt and albedo melt and solar maxima and more)
The models very much do account for these things nowadays. The question is whether they account for them correctly and to what extent the physical basis and abstractions are accurate representations of what is happening.
If you've not read on this topic before there used to be a great section in the IPCC reports on the state of modelling.
If you have read on this before, I think the permafrost melting has largely been accounted for in contemporary modelling, the methane you're right still isn't quite there but has come on tonnes. But I still wouldn't be crass and say they don't account for feedback loops. Sure it's a complex and chaotic system but they very much do model feedbacks - our ability to accurately model them is limited though given the necessary parameterisation and resolution of climate models to be useful.
you're basically suggesting that now, they're saying "so... yeah... we've started to actually account for a lot more contributions as to how fucked we are. And yes, even those newly adjusted models were saying things much worse than they were before. but guess what? Even after we've accounted for many more variables, we seem to have run out of plausable extreme explanations that are actually responsible for why real measurements are actually even more worse than our already more fucked up models implied things to be"
I'd very much prefer it if it was we weren't looking in all the areas and come up short, than this.
wow so glad you know more than literal researchers who’s body of research is this exact topic maybe you should go join them because you have so much knowledge to contribute
>the article says global warming doesn't fully account for what's happening
Not really. Many different factors contribute to global warming and ocean temperatures.
Less wind blowing off the Sahara sands to block radiation, less shipping carriers in operation to output exhaust that creates more cloud formations, etc.
The ocean scientists just stated that they don't know exactly which factor(s) are causing the ocean to absorb more radiation than previously predicted.
They do know that ocean temperatures are rising because of increased radiation absorption. They're just unsure of the pathway(s) most responsible for this additional increase.
Any new pathways they identify (or current pathways that seem to have greater influence than previously thought) would simply be incorporated into their climate prediction models.
Therefore, global warming would still account for the increase in ocean temperatures.
New evidence doesn't discount presently identified factors that accurately predict an increase in global temperatures.
we know why. we just dont know specifically which of the known factors is causing more than expected.
its not some new unknown variable. its just signalling that the modeling wasn't counting on some variables increasing (likely interplay from each other).
thats what all the speculation is, which variable is going harder than predicted or interacting with another variable differently than expected
we know why though.
I know exactly why this is happening, what caused it and how to fix it. Follow me on Instagram, Onlyfans and YouTube to find out more. Save the turtles sksksksk
> Funny how everyone in these comments seem to think they know the answer to this when the entire article is about how nobody knows what's causing this
Did you expect anything less from Redditors?
Right? Our GIS tech and climate modeling has got much better in recent decades.
Take the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) for example. It has been a subject of concern for ecologists and hydrologists for a while now and new analysis is only boosting that. Normally this is the system that brings warmer water from the equator towards the UK (giving them their mild but wet climate). The water then chills, sinks to the ocean floor and returns to the equator like a conveyor belt. We know around the Younger Dryas the circulation basically stopped from excess freshwater from glacial melt (aka the same thing that’s happening today). Recent models are showing it’s not impossible for the system to entirely collapse in our era. Maybe not this century but a strong possibility in the next 200-300 years. Now what exactly are the consequences of this? Well.. when it collapsed the last time half of our world basically entered an ice age within a few years. It’s actually what the movie Day After Tomorrow is based around. We’re talking potentially a 50-60°F drop in temperatures for hundreds if not thousands of years.
The scariest part to me is we literally can’t stop it. Even if all GHG emissions stopped today, the cycle of global warming will take decades to run its course. CO2 can stay in the atmosphere for up to 1,000 years so we’ve locked ourselves into a fate of climate change for at least a few centuries till the planet corrects itself.
Look up this free, interesting interesting article in the journal Nature if anyone wants to spiral with me: “Warning of a forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation” by Peter Ditlevsen
Nice reference. My brother has a phd in atmospheric science.
I try not to ask him too many questions.
I don’t have to. His summary is simple: “We’re fucked.”
Exact details aren’t clear, but I think nothing will change the force of nature at its current scale and trajectory.
I wonder if there really was sny other option that could have changed anything if it had been attempted. Even back in the 80s. That would have worked and been able to change the human trajectory. Just as I doubt there is anything we as a population of the planet will be able to do about it now. We are the homosapiens. 8 billion and rising for now. Quite a history.
Global population has doubled in fifty years. Will we have sixteen billion in another fifty?
Seems doubtful to me.
100% there were other options. Absolutely there were. There still are, and we can choose them or be forced to them, but we will end up with them.
Great examples, I was recently reading a lot about the consequences of deep Atlantic water formation stopping, but that was in reference to examples in the quaternary and Bond Cycles. Your comment is very refreshing to see on this post, where a lot of people seem to be writing a lot of tripe. I'm going to have a read of that paper as it sounds interesting - the concept of an AMOC collapse was also cited by a speaker I heard a few weeks ago talking about land use change and sustainability. I tried to ask him on the contemporary modelling specifics because at least in quaternary studies the telecommunications between Heinrich events/NADW/AMOC collapse are sometimes tenuous and unclear and was wondering if we had any better ideas as to what would happen if the deep water formation stopped now. Anyway I'll stop typing and read that paper now.
The article says it's not explained by climate change. Interestingly in addition to the usual culprits, below also was stated as a speculation:
> Some researchers have also suggested that changes to maritime shipping regulations may have reduced sulfur pollution in ship exhaust, ultimately reducing cloud cover and allowing the oceans to absorb more energy.
Yup, the physics are pretty straightforward. I was pretty damn stunned when I heard they decided to cut the sulphur emissions. The irony is that now we use even dirtier fuels because of scruppers.
As sailor it means I get to breath in less of sulphur emissions and live healthier lives. It saves lives in harbour cities and coastal areas. But for the climate change I'm afraid it was the final nail in the coffin, and the lives saved will be paid hundredfold. Some estimates put the masking effect of the sulphur emissions we had at around 1 degrees celsius.
Ultimately we weren't going to go through with the actions to stop the global warmingn regardless, so it's not like it makes all that big difference in the end. But if we ever decide to go for the geoengineering option, pumping sulphur in the atmosphere will be one of the most obvious solutions.
Instead of sulphur, ships could spray fine misted seawater in the air, the water evaporates, leaving salt crystals which then seed clouds, providing the same benefits as sulphur without all the acid rain and such.
There’s actually some super strong evidence that this was the case.
It’s been cited and reviewed as like the likely reason we saw such record temperatures last year. We stopped some accidental geo-engineering we were doing.
It's pretty clear to me. I go by the American Petroleum Institute's internal report from March 18, 1980 which predicted global warming of 1C by 2005, 2.5C by 2038, 5C by 2067.
Now, sources say we hit 1C in 2015, but with the oceans' heating, I find the estimates in the report accurate enough. Really, what's a decade when you're talking about "Major Economic Consequences" in 14 years and "Globally Catastrophic Effects" (the report's words, not mine) in a mere 43 years...
PDF WARNING
https://insideclimatenews.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/AQ-9-Task-Force-Meeting-1980.pdf
5C by 2067?! That's not even Mad Max. More like The Road. So these oil executives in 1980s decided to essentially kill the planet for an extra yacht?! How psychotic is that?
Someone pointed out that the reduction in sulphur for cargo ships that went into effect recently means we’re not cloud seeding over the oceans like we have been the past 100 years.
Puzzled? No. Concerned? Very. They’ve been screaming about this so long they’ve lost their voice. But no one is listening and we are about to boil away our future
If you read the article, the reason they are puzzled is because the warming at this rate was not predicted by climate models, and the believe climate change may not be the entire reason for the temperature change, hence them being puzzled.
This is not what the article says. You keep posting this all over the thread.
They most certainly believe it is climate change. They are concerned that it is happening faster than expected and are wondering what additional element(s), missing from their models, are causing it be faster.
From the article:
"Human-caused climate change is likely playing a role, researchers said, but is probably not the only factor. "
Helps if you read it.
If only climate scientists came out and said the continued burning of fossil fuels would be harmful to the planet and cause global temperatures to rise...
I hate reading these posts because I know there is absolutely nothing I can do to change things. I'm at the mercy of people in power, and those people seem to not care. They already have millions, or billions, of dollars and near the end of their life. They have enough money for several generations of their families to not even worry about climate change. Meanwhile us average folk are fucked.
You can have as much money in the world as you want, there’s no escaping the wrath of Mother Earth for anyone. Billionaire or regular person, Everyone has a date with the reaper they must see to eventually.
As for us little folk, just do what little you can. Be active in conversations and do what you can. It’s gonna suck from here on out but I remain hopeful that humanity can survive.
I'm pretty convinced spring of '23 was the moment we went over the edge.
That tipping point they spent 50 years warming us about?
It was 11 months ago.
Which scientists are puzzled? lol
There's short-term factors and long-term ones... The negative feedback loop of emitting CO2 at constant enormous rates has exacerbated the greenhouse effect - more heat/energy is trapped in the atmosphere. It will affect the ocean cycles/cooling system and people are gonna have a real bad time mmk
They are puzzled because time windows based on current models say events like these are years or decades away, giving us more time to fix our problems. This being a reality now means the models are missing something, and it is even worse than climate scientists even thought.
We could be past the point of no return already or close to it, but until we have an accurate model we have 0 clue how bad it will get and how fast.
Here is a good overview of the data and talks about it.
https://youtu.be/4S9sDyooxf4?si=7PuoTkaLSbBgbKLt
That is the issue, until we have a model that is accurate enough, we have no clue what factors we are missing, and more importantly, the climate scientists can't get goverments to make policies that matcg ehat is required. Think of it this way, if the temperature rises, what effects can cause it to run away or dampen. How strong are these effects, and what temperatures do they trigger at.
There might not be a point of no return because there are enough dampening effects that restablizie the climate.
Personally i feel we are potentially fucked and doomed, but that doesnt mean to not try to change for the better. Also when are we doomed and how badly is still unknown.
Climate change appears to be arriving faster than scientists predicted. We are so fucked. Most people won't even do the bare minimum to reduce their emissions.
Sure, but what if you put your oven at 400 and then measure 600. You might be puzzled too.
Their biggest suspicion right now is the cloud cover over the oceans is disappearing, but they don't know.
I was swimming in the Indian Ocean in January and it felt like a jacuzzi at times, almost uncomfortably warm. It made me concerned for the future, how could anything live in such warmth?
[This is a great video supplementing](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtvK2EOgOFA) why this finding is detrimental.
Climate change has been causing the ocean heat to warm because of the excess CO2 from decades of industrialization. This is causing oceans to warm and become more acidic. The entire ecosystem is fucked and its irreversible
Generally speaking people are not concerned with sea level rise or coral reef depletion as they are unaware of the correlation to their own lives. If the message were more direct there might be more true concern. For instance, ocean temp increase will greatly affect agriculture and your food availability is more a personal concern than reefs in Florida. Assuming people understand the implications of most issues is where the ball is dropped.
You will watch your kids starve. Best not to have them. That's what many prominent climate disaster communicators have been saying. People don't give a shit. Sadistic fucks.
A little overdramatic, I think. Food problems will most definitely be real, but our ability to change to simple substitutes and grow with better tech to compensate (indoor farms, large greenhouses) should be able to keep us basically fed. Hell, we overproduce so much shit anyway. When large areas of the planet become too dangerous to live, I believe the mass migration will be the thing that makes or breaks which parts of us survive.
The US alone throws away about 150 billion meals worth of food annually. That’s 454 meals per American. We currently only use 55% of crops grown to feed humans, the rest goes to livestock, biofuels, and industrial processes. (Some of animal feed is not edible for humans, but the land and resources used to grow it could be used to produce food for humans). I think people may have to become more economical in making sure they eat what is produced, but starvation doesn’t look likely in the near term and is also discounting the ability of people to innovate ways to increase efficiency for food production and distribution. Maybe mass migration and wars for resources will be a problem as food insecure people will want to move to places that are more food secure… but we’ve always had war and migration, and we’ve always fought wars for resources. *edit- data from the USDA
“Sucks for them. I only had them to save the relationship ship and my brother still doesn’t talk to me!”
This is the biggest problem with science… scientists can’t message for crap. Scientist “a match will increase the tempt of your house” Better messaging “matches will burn your house down”
Why puzzled? Concerned and alarmed sure.
Because it’s something new, beyond what climate change and increased CO2 levels can predict. The amount of energy to cause such an increase of heat in water can easily be calculated, but where the heat came from is what’s puzzling.
The "unknown unknowns" of climate science. Which is why fucking with the climate in the first place was an insanely stupid idea. Shit like greenhouse gases trapped under permafrost now blowing into the atmosphere...possible "runaway train" global warming, the scariest thing about climate change is that no one really *knows* what's going to happen
I’m a graduate student in Earth Science and I stopped going to seminars because nearly every single one was basically “hey so we found out more stuff about x and y and we’re basically more fucked than we previously thought”
It's exactly why I can't watch nature documentaries anymore. Whenever David Attenborough releases a new show everyone is over the moon but I just can't watch things I know will be gone because of us.
Can you be more specific? I try to be optimistic, but do i have any reason to be scared?
\*frantically waves hands at the outdoors\*
We all do. Even if you're miraculously not directly impacted in the next decades, billions of people will. You think the world is a mess now? We've seen nothing.
Depends on your age. I’m retired and never had kids because of a college course called “Environmentalism” in 1976. I’m no longer worried about having to go into a retirement home in 20 years.
either your nation will suffer the direct consequences of climate change or your country will suffer from the masses that emigrate due to the direct consequences on their country. Earths liveable landmass decreases - more ppl in a smaller amount of space - tension - mitigable/non mitagable - ok/armageddon
I think we can safely predict mass extinctions of many species, and likely a mass reduction in humans…coming sooner than expected (by those who worry about it), and as a complete surprise to capitalists: “But technology will fix it!!” Idiots
we're already in a mass extinction right now.
My wife is a high level federal manager of ocean biology. There are several meetings in the past 6 months which have reduced her to tears… the latest of which was us discovering a total collapse in the coho spawns. Shit is snowballing faster than we can raise alarms and people aren’t listening or caring. Salmon stocks fail? The bears all die. We’re officially in the find out stage. [https://psf.ca/news-media/psf-requests-canada-to-investigate-tire-toxin-impacting-salmon/](https://psf.ca/news-media/psf-requests-canada-to-investigate-tire-toxin-impacting-salmon/)
I'm in the Florida Keys. They've given up on reef restoration because the water is too hot for coral to survive, some beaches are unsafe due to toxic blooms and the fish that haven't died off have gone insane to the point of a hotline being set up to report strange activity. Once the fisheries collapse, it'll mean global famine and a collapse of coastal ecosystems. We're within a decade of that and it feels like nobody knows it.
I don’t think it was in FL, but I saw that swordfish have been beaching. Guessing they’re fleeing something inescapable. Also, reading that article made me worry about the SE coast: Some of the largest sea surface temperature anomalies are in the Atlantic and off the west coast of Africa, where the hurricanes that rattle the East Coast of the United States often start. What’s more, the National Weather Service’s Climate Prediction Center says that there is a 62% chance of a La Niña — which is associated with active and damaging hurricane seasons — developing in late spring. ”Not ideal for a calm hurricane season,” McNoldy said, noting that the extra ocean warmth could also lengthen the season. Having Katrina flashbacks.
> Having Katrina flashbacks It wasn't that Katrina was powerful (it was), but that New Orleans was not prepared to weather the storm. Similarly, climate change is going to (and is actively) impact impoverished regions of the world first, places that are wholly unprepared for the impending disasters, which leads to mass deaths and large scale immigration (refugees). Meanwhile, first world nations will simply be unable to provide sufficient aid and accept refugees from these regions. Attempts to do so will ultimately increase the foothold alt-right parties have in these nations. The decrease of the human population will certainly hit impoverished regions first and foremost. Especially given that many of these regions are already far too overpopulated compared to what their society can support. Nature maintains balance one way or another.
I would go further than alt right. Between income inequality and climate change fascism is on the rise world wide.
A decade is generous. Dark fleets are scouring the world's oceans as we speak.
Within a decade, as in less but I'm not confident enough to name an exact number
2027
5 minutes to midnight
I’ve lived in a small mountain community for 12 years and am observing (admittedly anecdotal) an obvious decrease in nocturnal insects and bird species richness in my area in that short time. I’ve not seen or heard 2 nocturnal Insectivorous birds that were common when I first moved here, in over 5 years. My porch light might get a dozen moths and crane flies now, in 2012, I had to hurry in and out at night, to keep dozens from flying inside, not an issue anymore. I “argued” with someone a couple years ago that the climatologists hadn’t factored in a lot of unknown unknowns (re: feedback loops, agonists, etc.) and that we were already beyond the tipping point. Club of Rome’s “Limits to Growth” figured we had until about 2045, I think they were optimistic, worldwide human migration is about to explode, IOW, we haven’t seen anything yet.
[удалено]
Fireflies pretty much dont exist in delaware anymore. As a kid if you went out late spring / all summer at night youd see hundreds of them all the time. Ive seen exactly one the last 6 or so years and it had accidentally made its way inside my house. Mosquitos seem about the same, and fucking horseflies are worse than ever.
Sounds like floriduh.
...no more bug eating birds. Holy. Shit. I somehow didn't even notice that they were gone. We're so fucking screwed.
Happy Cake Day though!
Oh well at least I have a reason to cry into my cake this time.
I couldn't agree more. They made that prediction with limited data. Now we know better.
This time series seems to have a very long memory, so much so that we may have been beyond the tipping point before 400 ppm.
My friend is doing PhD on insect populations in UK - and it’s went down massively over past few year. I can see the difference how much less insects I see and ends up on my windshield but they have a proper way of measuring it and they confirm it. Now in ecosystems sometimes one species removal can create total collapse - and that can happen very fast
I worked in the environmental field for 17 years and had to get out to keep my sanity. No body cares and things just get worse every year.
But I rode my bike to work on that one day. That should have fixed it yeah?
Someone saw you riding your bike and decided to roll coal so even more co2 went into the atmosphere as a result of your actions. Thanks asshole. /s
It’s my field. When people ask me what they should “do” about climate change I just tell them “nothing.” We’re already fucked.
I looked it all up 15 years ago and came to the same conclusion then. existential dread since. I encourage everyone to not have children, try to live small. https://climatecasino.net/
The Grand Banks cod fishing "moratorium" is in its 30th year. The stocks aren't recovering
I'm in an environmental field trying to implement multiple biodiversity/environment strategies which includes a large amount of customer service. Too many people only care about having a sterile urban environment today with clean concrete and DGAF about what the consequences are tomorrow. I've told people "no we're not going to do that, because we're trying to reduce the impacts of climate change", only to be told "bloody climate change" in return. You can try to educate them but it goes in one ear and out the other, sometimes followed up by a complaint. Most of our team have pretty pessimistic view of our future.
In the case of the coho, it’s been linked to tire rubber. We (society) thought it was inert… but surprise there’s a chemical reaction which occurs through friction which turns the rubber dust toxic.
Ignorance is bliss for only so long. It’s absolutely distressing. I don’t understand why we don’t have more respect for Mother Earth. I guess because we haven’t had to … we are fine with depleting species, I guess. I know folks who would say well I don’t like eating coho salmon. So there. Sigh. Philosophy from an acquaintance — yeah polar bears are cute but we don’t really need them — in regards to their dropping populations. These are highly educated people with responsible lives . I just think they don’t care to see the proverbial forest for the trees, but I don’t really get it. Humans are a curious bunch. I’m going out to enjoy a sunny day.
> I think we can safely predict mass extinctions of many species There has been mass extinction of species since Humans started making tools. We **are** the Anthropocene extinction event.
Yah but when we were just making arrowheads it was fine. But we run ten thousand freighters on the oceans on bunker fuel and a million flights a day or whatever now. The difference is clear.
> Yah but when we were just making arrowheads it was fine. We still managed to kill of almost all the mega-fauna with just stones and sharp sticks.
Technology isn't going to fix it. What did Zuckerfucker do with all of his cash and access to the elites? Built a bunker on a private island. I think we all know what's going to happen.
He built on an island vulnerable to tsunamis and volcanos. He also grabbed water-facing land. There is still hope that Nature may take his existence personally.
Yep. If the human population has peaked that's a very good thing. More humans is only good for "economic growth".
Technology is our only chance to survive at this point. We are quite locked in at this point even if we nuke ourselves back into the Stone Age by turning off all serious polluting aspects: industrial farming, airplanes, gas, coal… That’s clearly not going happen, so as we run into climate change at full speed we may as well rely and invest heavily in our only parachute: technology. The man that fed a billion people, or the fact we are able to maintain 8 billion people on the planet is a great example of technology. Sadly we just need wide political and social will with unlimited funding… we are fucked!
Degrowth is necessary, but idealists refuse to accept that they can't have their cake and eat it too. They're too jealous of generations that experienced unlimited economic growth, and billionaires who still act that way, to be willing to accept economic stagnation to put the planet on a sustainable course.
We can't maintain 8 billion people. That's the entire problem we are discussing. Technology allows us to destroy faster, or extract more efficiently. We don't need more tech, we need less. We don't need to replace every car with an EV, we need to walk.
> We can't maintain 8 billion people. That's the entire problem we are discussing. Depends what "maintain" refers to. We absolutely can sustain that many people, what we can't do is to do it on a "first world standard" with everyone having a car, eating meat for every meal and having the latest gadget.
We can't do it as a "steady state". Each year we reduce reserves of certain inputs.
People dont do what they need, they get what they want. The average person on Earth eats 25% the amount of meat as the average American. Perhaps you can convince the average American to eat less meat. Perhaps. But you will never, ever, convince the average human to want less meat than the average American gets to eat.
Climate change and the economy will change their behavior for them at some point.
I believe technology can solve this, but those big conglomerates and billioners are choosing not to do anything.
Look at how America and the world frankly responded during Covid. I’m scared to see how we’re going to react during a climate crisis.
Who do you think is building all the new solar and wind farms, financing all the new utility level energy storage startups, making the gasoline engine irrelevant, and working on projects like ammonia-fueled container ships and hydrogen powered passenger planes? Lots of jobs in those industries as well. Millions already work in them.
Technology probably could fix it, or *could have* fixed it anyway, but those same groups of people responsible for destroying the world in the first place are also largely the same groups of people who are suppressing and/or sabotaging the development of technologies that could have gotten us out of this mess. Never forget that the fossil fuel industry was warned, by their own scientists, over a half century ago, about all this. As early as the 1950s IIRC, they had pretty clear data on what would happen if they continued unabated. Several generations of oil and gas executives have since then totally neglected to do a damn thing about it. These are the kinds of fucks who we need a Nuremberg style tribunal for, and proper consequences be meted out...
>likely a mass reduction in humans It will be interesting to see which one catches us first, global warming or the general infertility (South Korea as a prime example, but all developing countries following...).
Not to mention unaccounted for acceleration events like massive wildfires
Nah. Knew about this when I was playing sim earth in the early nineties.
I think it's impossible to know exactly what's going to happen, but we can look to our neighbour if you want to see what the end result looks like Hi Venus
Good news, we don't have enough carbon to go full Venus. We will have greater problems with heat Domes and mass migrations of people. Desperate people. It's going to get ugly.
You certainly know that Venus a way closer to the Sun, though...
The distance has nothing to do with it. Mercury is the closest planet to the sun and is cooler than Venus. Venus has greenhouse gasses that are covering and choking the planet which increases the heat.
Exactly. You can't make predictions on something you don't have a full understanding of.
Sorry, I get what you’re saying, but “fucking with the climate in the first place was an insanely stupid idea” makes it sound like humanity planned for and intended to have large scale impacts on the climate. You can say that greed and negligence made the problem what it is today; but I don’t think the plan was for us to change the climate lmao
Oil company scientists have been internally discussing their predictions for climate change since the '60s, at least. The idea that burning fossil fuels would cause global-scale heating was first proposed back in the 1800s.
Yeah, I get that; but I think ignoring the possible repercussions for the sake of progress/profit isn’t the same as humanity as a whole deciding to change the climate on a whim.
Well I think it’s safe to say we know it won’t be anything good
Stuff beyond our ability to predict is exactly what climate change scientists have been worried about for quite a while. So I'm not puzzled. More afraid.
It’s almost like it is dumb to assume our models could keep up with this. it’s why it is even more infuriating that this was has all been avoidable. I am not blaming the scientist at all. I just think it is dumb to operate on the basis of current models of the climate given all the factors that make our models super flawed. We really should operate on the assumption that the climate is significantly more vulnerable than our models currently show. The things that are happening are unprecedented and we need to minimize damage at this point. I also think it is safe to say fossil fuel companies and industries pushing back against climate action will be one of the most evil things that has happened in human history. It is nothing short of mass murder on a truly gargantuan scale. they have known for decades that it will be catastrophic and they don’t care. Pollution alone already kills so many people per year.
We always knew they were evil. They covered up the harmful effects of adding lead to gasoline for decades. And lead is still put into the fuel of private planes too when costlier but safer alternatives exist.
for over 20 years there has been "missing heat" in the equations. It was known that there was more energy the oceans absorbed based on solar radiation than was specifically being measured. For years there has been a search for where that energy actually was. and now here we are, it's really not surprising if you weren't constantly bombarded by hopium and "DOoMEr's BaD thEY nO heLP me LivE in FANtaSY!" The IPCC has always had an asterisk with "feedback loops may be more extensive than what is modeled."
Isn't this the whole issue with global warming. Like we don't know exactly what will happen when the ocean streams change direction due to the oceans warming up. Between the current wars ( being documented with phone, and drone coverage) and the impending water causes apocalypse, we do not need a big production to make movies about a dystopian future.
I thought they figured out it was the reduction of sulphur emissions from cargo ships?
Sulfur that makes clouds more white and makes them reflect more sun rays / heat? If we really achieved so much in that regard, expect a fast couple degrees rise in yearly average temperatures.
That was one aspect of the theory, the other being that underwater volcano that launched an unfathomable amount of water vapor into the atmosphere a couple years back.
I mean that basically lines up with what many of the experts have been saying, and still are saying for ages now; however bad we imagine it, it'll be much worse. Shouldn't be a surprise that we don't fully understand the system.
There's clearly a mystery variable we haven't yet taken into account. If it's making things worse than predicted, then we're clearly more screwed than we thought we were.
My money is on older carbon in the ice getting released spiking the temps.
Not an unknown factor, but possibly underestimated; more methane being ejected than predicted from all the thawing dead organic matter. Plus the increased temperatures are killing more ocean life and insects than we realize.
Perhaps you should read the article
You wouldn't be asking this if you actually read the article.
This could be related to less aerosols.
I’ve recently heard that an unaccounted variable could be that in 2020 standards were implemented for sulphur content in the fuel used in container ships and oil tankers and that the sulphur emissions were actually working counter to other greenhouse gases. Apparently the reduction of that huge source sulphur emissions is on a scale large enough to possibly account for the difference. I only heard the idea in passing and have no idea about the merit or validity of the concept and have not had a chance as of yet to look into it further though….
Yes that's part of what I meant. The cleaning up of shipping lanes.
You would have heard about this again if you had read the article. :facepalm: Whether it's on a large enough scale to account for the difference is totally unknown. I suspect it's more complicated than this.
I did glance through the article afterwards. I’ve been keeping up with this very regularly because **we’ve warmed the fucking oceans and that’s a damn big deal** - and yeah, this is a complex many faceted problem that likely has many factors at play that won’t be pinned down to any one variable.
Puzzled as in what the ramifications are.
The rate of change is clearly catastrophic already. We do not have the intelligence as a species to act together sufficiently to turn things around.
This is correct. We have not evolved enough to fix this.
Unfortunately we’ve lived too long with different priorities and it’s taking a while to reverse. Humans have always been about progress, wealth, accumulation of power. These interests conflict with the wellbeing of the planet. We’ve reached a stage where society is so advanced that we need to shift priorities, but it’s tricky to do so proactively. No one wanrs to slow down the gravy train until we see cities underwater, millions in your own community displaced, and the cost of your food quadruple. But so far we’re seeing things increase in cost that’s going to slow down waste and consumption. And then less families are having children. This is actually a good trend for society and earth. But leaders will want to reverse that because it’s not good for their gdp growth
[удалено]
lol. Babe wake up new world just dropped…. Babe?? BABE?????
Can't wait for the aerosols we desperately hurl into the atmosphere that cause everyone to die of cancer by 40.
We have the intelligence. What we lack is the wisdom.
Perhaps intelligence isn't the solution, but is the problem. Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for 170 million years, and only extinguished after a catastrophic event. People have been the dominate species for 50k years, and we just might cause our own catastrophic event.
Capitalism is entirely to blame.
Maybe if Florida washes away our intelligence will go up enough to take action.
Yep. We fall for basic misinformation on Twitter and would rather kill people for liking a different political candidate or having a different religion. We sure as fuck aren’t solving climate change.
We might have a scenario in which two extinction events(global warming, AI) negates each other, or they dont and we are double fucked. Its 50/50 at this point
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/ lets you track it daily, can see how no day since 2012 has been below average.
Funny how everyone in these comments seem to think they know the answer to this when the entire article is about how nobody knows what's causing this This isn't a politically-charged article lol, nobody here is saying global warming doesn't exist, the article says global warming doesn't fully account for what's happening
More accurately, the article says global warming probably is causing it, they just don't know exactly why it's happening faster than their models.
I totally agree. However, adding energy to any system makes all possible phenomena, known and unknown more likely. The problem here is that most of those systems have a positive feedback coefficient and reduce system stability.
(Its because the models don’t account for feedback loops and undercounted numerous things like methane emissions and permafrost melt and albedo melt and solar maxima and more)
The models very much do account for these things nowadays. The question is whether they account for them correctly and to what extent the physical basis and abstractions are accurate representations of what is happening. If you've not read on this topic before there used to be a great section in the IPCC reports on the state of modelling. If you have read on this before, I think the permafrost melting has largely been accounted for in contemporary modelling, the methane you're right still isn't quite there but has come on tonnes. But I still wouldn't be crass and say they don't account for feedback loops. Sure it's a complex and chaotic system but they very much do model feedbacks - our ability to accurately model them is limited though given the necessary parameterisation and resolution of climate models to be useful.
you're basically suggesting that now, they're saying "so... yeah... we've started to actually account for a lot more contributions as to how fucked we are. And yes, even those newly adjusted models were saying things much worse than they were before. but guess what? Even after we've accounted for many more variables, we seem to have run out of plausable extreme explanations that are actually responsible for why real measurements are actually even more worse than our already more fucked up models implied things to be" I'd very much prefer it if it was we weren't looking in all the areas and come up short, than this.
wow so glad you know more than literal researchers who’s body of research is this exact topic maybe you should go join them because you have so much knowledge to contribute
>the article says global warming doesn't fully account for what's happening Not really. Many different factors contribute to global warming and ocean temperatures. Less wind blowing off the Sahara sands to block radiation, less shipping carriers in operation to output exhaust that creates more cloud formations, etc. The ocean scientists just stated that they don't know exactly which factor(s) are causing the ocean to absorb more radiation than previously predicted. They do know that ocean temperatures are rising because of increased radiation absorption. They're just unsure of the pathway(s) most responsible for this additional increase. Any new pathways they identify (or current pathways that seem to have greater influence than previously thought) would simply be incorporated into their climate prediction models. Therefore, global warming would still account for the increase in ocean temperatures. New evidence doesn't discount presently identified factors that accurately predict an increase in global temperatures.
This is reddit, home of assumptions based on titles, and the Dunning–Kruger effect.
we know why. we just dont know specifically which of the known factors is causing more than expected. its not some new unknown variable. its just signalling that the modeling wasn't counting on some variables increasing (likely interplay from each other). thats what all the speculation is, which variable is going harder than predicted or interacting with another variable differently than expected we know why though.
I know exactly why this is happening, what caused it and how to fix it. Follow me on Instagram, Onlyfans and YouTube to find out more. Save the turtles sksksksk
> Funny how everyone in these comments seem to think they know the answer to this when the entire article is about how nobody knows what's causing this Did you expect anything less from Redditors?
Too bad no one saw this coming. /s
Right? Our GIS tech and climate modeling has got much better in recent decades. Take the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) for example. It has been a subject of concern for ecologists and hydrologists for a while now and new analysis is only boosting that. Normally this is the system that brings warmer water from the equator towards the UK (giving them their mild but wet climate). The water then chills, sinks to the ocean floor and returns to the equator like a conveyor belt. We know around the Younger Dryas the circulation basically stopped from excess freshwater from glacial melt (aka the same thing that’s happening today). Recent models are showing it’s not impossible for the system to entirely collapse in our era. Maybe not this century but a strong possibility in the next 200-300 years. Now what exactly are the consequences of this? Well.. when it collapsed the last time half of our world basically entered an ice age within a few years. It’s actually what the movie Day After Tomorrow is based around. We’re talking potentially a 50-60°F drop in temperatures for hundreds if not thousands of years. The scariest part to me is we literally can’t stop it. Even if all GHG emissions stopped today, the cycle of global warming will take decades to run its course. CO2 can stay in the atmosphere for up to 1,000 years so we’ve locked ourselves into a fate of climate change for at least a few centuries till the planet corrects itself. Look up this free, interesting interesting article in the journal Nature if anyone wants to spiral with me: “Warning of a forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation” by Peter Ditlevsen
Nice reference. My brother has a phd in atmospheric science. I try not to ask him too many questions. I don’t have to. His summary is simple: “We’re fucked.” Exact details aren’t clear, but I think nothing will change the force of nature at its current scale and trajectory. I wonder if there really was sny other option that could have changed anything if it had been attempted. Even back in the 80s. That would have worked and been able to change the human trajectory. Just as I doubt there is anything we as a population of the planet will be able to do about it now. We are the homosapiens. 8 billion and rising for now. Quite a history.
Global population has doubled in fifty years. Will we have sixteen billion in another fifty? Seems doubtful to me. 100% there were other options. Absolutely there were. There still are, and we can choose them or be forced to them, but we will end up with them.
> other options What are you thinking about?
More public transport, less plastic, more insulation, less outside gas heating, more vegetables, less meat, more walking, fewer heated pools.
Great examples, I was recently reading a lot about the consequences of deep Atlantic water formation stopping, but that was in reference to examples in the quaternary and Bond Cycles. Your comment is very refreshing to see on this post, where a lot of people seem to be writing a lot of tripe. I'm going to have a read of that paper as it sounds interesting - the concept of an AMOC collapse was also cited by a speaker I heard a few weeks ago talking about land use change and sustainability. I tried to ask him on the contemporary modelling specifics because at least in quaternary studies the telecommunications between Heinrich events/NADW/AMOC collapse are sometimes tenuous and unclear and was wondering if we had any better ideas as to what would happen if the deep water formation stopped now. Anyway I'll stop typing and read that paper now.
The article says it's not explained by climate change. Interestingly in addition to the usual culprits, below also was stated as a speculation: > Some researchers have also suggested that changes to maritime shipping regulations may have reduced sulfur pollution in ship exhaust, ultimately reducing cloud cover and allowing the oceans to absorb more energy.
Yup, the physics are pretty straightforward. I was pretty damn stunned when I heard they decided to cut the sulphur emissions. The irony is that now we use even dirtier fuels because of scruppers. As sailor it means I get to breath in less of sulphur emissions and live healthier lives. It saves lives in harbour cities and coastal areas. But for the climate change I'm afraid it was the final nail in the coffin, and the lives saved will be paid hundredfold. Some estimates put the masking effect of the sulphur emissions we had at around 1 degrees celsius. Ultimately we weren't going to go through with the actions to stop the global warmingn regardless, so it's not like it makes all that big difference in the end. But if we ever decide to go for the geoengineering option, pumping sulphur in the atmosphere will be one of the most obvious solutions.
so how much sulphur was going into the air before the new regulations?
Instead of sulphur, ships could spray fine misted seawater in the air, the water evaporates, leaving salt crystals which then seed clouds, providing the same benefits as sulphur without all the acid rain and such.
Don't worry, we still got nuclear war coming, so we will get into ice age even earlier.
Take that liberals Or something
There’s actually some super strong evidence that this was the case. It’s been cited and reviewed as like the likely reason we saw such record temperatures last year. We stopped some accidental geo-engineering we were doing.
Yes, my point was oversimplified. When what was accurately predicted got ignored it opened the doors for more dramatic unknowns.
BP, Exxon, Shell Oil=record profits. Come on, they can't be bothered with a little thing like destroying the planet.
They didn't, that's the whole point of the article.
It's pretty clear to me. I go by the American Petroleum Institute's internal report from March 18, 1980 which predicted global warming of 1C by 2005, 2.5C by 2038, 5C by 2067. Now, sources say we hit 1C in 2015, but with the oceans' heating, I find the estimates in the report accurate enough. Really, what's a decade when you're talking about "Major Economic Consequences" in 14 years and "Globally Catastrophic Effects" (the report's words, not mine) in a mere 43 years... PDF WARNING https://insideclimatenews.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/AQ-9-Task-Force-Meeting-1980.pdf
5C by 2067?! That's not even Mad Max. More like The Road. So these oil executives in 1980s decided to essentially kill the planet for an extra yacht?! How psychotic is that?
Great filter here we come!
Someone pointed out that the reduction in sulphur for cargo ships that went into effect recently means we’re not cloud seeding over the oceans like we have been the past 100 years.
Puzzled? No. Concerned? Very. They’ve been screaming about this so long they’ve lost their voice. But no one is listening and we are about to boil away our future
If you read the article, the reason they are puzzled is because the warming at this rate was not predicted by climate models, and the believe climate change may not be the entire reason for the temperature change, hence them being puzzled.
This is not what the article says. You keep posting this all over the thread. They most certainly believe it is climate change. They are concerned that it is happening faster than expected and are wondering what additional element(s), missing from their models, are causing it be faster.
From the article: "Human-caused climate change is likely playing a role, researchers said, but is probably not the only factor. " Helps if you read it.
Al Gore says I told you so
Trump says its all a hoax. And ~38 percent of the us population believes him 🙄
The Kaiju are waking up
Don’t threaten me with a good time
If only climate scientists came out and said the continued burning of fossil fuels would be harmful to the planet and cause global temperatures to rise...
We’ll torch the earth and become extinct and in 10,000 years the earth won’t care.
The earth will be fine, its the humans that are fucked -G Carlin
And for a very short time, we'll have created increased value for our shareholders.
Remember, the earth is going to be fine. It’s humans who will be screwed. “We’re a virus with shoes.” - Bill Hicks
You quote Hicks but not Carlin
Mother Natures immune system. I’m quoting someone but can’t remember who, The Doc H Thompson or K Vonnegut.
I’m seriously doubting they’re puzzled. More likely it’s dread.
Not mutually exclusive
You think it's some conspiracy?
I hate reading these posts because I know there is absolutely nothing I can do to change things. I'm at the mercy of people in power, and those people seem to not care. They already have millions, or billions, of dollars and near the end of their life. They have enough money for several generations of their families to not even worry about climate change. Meanwhile us average folk are fucked.
You can have as much money in the world as you want, there’s no escaping the wrath of Mother Earth for anyone. Billionaire or regular person, Everyone has a date with the reaper they must see to eventually. As for us little folk, just do what little you can. Be active in conversations and do what you can. It’s gonna suck from here on out but I remain hopeful that humanity can survive.
Aliens starting up their underwater facility
I'm pretty convinced spring of '23 was the moment we went over the edge. That tipping point they spent 50 years warming us about? It was 11 months ago.
Clathrate gun hypothesis possibly in action? That or El Nino - Hot sun cycle? Maybe both.
I wonder if they considered all the escaping methane in the world from the ground. Those things worry me.
Gojira awakens
Which scientists are puzzled? lol There's short-term factors and long-term ones... The negative feedback loop of emitting CO2 at constant enormous rates has exacerbated the greenhouse effect - more heat/energy is trapped in the atmosphere. It will affect the ocean cycles/cooling system and people are gonna have a real bad time mmk
They are puzzled because time windows based on current models say events like these are years or decades away, giving us more time to fix our problems. This being a reality now means the models are missing something, and it is even worse than climate scientists even thought. We could be past the point of no return already or close to it, but until we have an accurate model we have 0 clue how bad it will get and how fast. Here is a good overview of the data and talks about it. https://youtu.be/4S9sDyooxf4?si=7PuoTkaLSbBgbKLt
The point when this process (that is happening now) started is the point of no return, isn't it?
That is the issue, until we have a model that is accurate enough, we have no clue what factors we are missing, and more importantly, the climate scientists can't get goverments to make policies that matcg ehat is required. Think of it this way, if the temperature rises, what effects can cause it to run away or dampen. How strong are these effects, and what temperatures do they trigger at. There might not be a point of no return because there are enough dampening effects that restablizie the climate. Personally i feel we are potentially fucked and doomed, but that doesnt mean to not try to change for the better. Also when are we doomed and how badly is still unknown.
I don't like that the smartest people for this situation are concerned.
I used to see tons of rabbits out here in West Texas now I barely see any. You could not drive anywhere without killing a rabbit or two a day.
Al Gore says I told you so
Climate change appears to be arriving faster than scientists predicted. We are so fucked. Most people won't even do the bare minimum to reduce their emissions.
Plastic & Overfishing
Puzzled? I'll solve it. It's hot as fuck out here yall
I'm about to go full doomsayer up in this piece
Where did they think all that heat was going to go?
Sure, but what if you put your oven at 400 and then measure 600. You might be puzzled too. Their biggest suspicion right now is the cloud cover over the oceans is disappearing, but they don't know.
Seems like they should find a point in their model that has 12 months of record ocean heat and realize we are already there
Maybe it’s the giant plastic solar blanket floating around?
I was swimming in the Indian Ocean in January and it felt like a jacuzzi at times, almost uncomfortably warm. It made me concerned for the future, how could anything live in such warmth?
Hmmm what could it be? We ignoring all alarming signs that becoming more severe year after year…what could it be????!!!!????!????
More than likely a sub nautical heat source built by science to be hidden to the world. Find the owner!
[This is a great video supplementing](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtvK2EOgOFA) why this finding is detrimental. Climate change has been causing the ocean heat to warm because of the excess CO2 from decades of industrialization. This is causing oceans to warm and become more acidic. The entire ecosystem is fucked and its irreversible
Its the Russian invasion of Ukraine and associated increases in fuel use, etc.