Climate Change!

[TheWanderingScholar]

I have a feeling it would at the minimum decrease traffic at least for transportation, so that would kind of counterbalance new oil production.

[Riggerjack]

Eh. The kids need something to protest. New pipelines mean new new protests, and new places to party!

[batbatmanne]

I too am having an impossible time imagining that we are going to come to grips with this problem. These days the only time I feel optimistic about the future are when I'm feeling my most misanthropic. Oh well. I wish I had more of a stash at this point in my life, but I probably have enough time to make some money before any kind of collapse takes place in Canada. Never having kids will help. I can't imagine dooming them to the future anyways.

On the bright side, I have front row seats to the next few decades, which are bound to be exciting and maybe not so bad for myself. I may be among the most privileged humans to ever have existed.

[steveo73]

Yup, pretty much doomed. Need to learn how to best thrive and survive under situation of profound variability. Global averages will not be as relevant.

How true is this ? I mean I've been a skeptic on CC for years. I'm starting to think I should review the science but when I hear claims like this I start to think CC is a fraud. I don't believe it can be that bad.

[steveo73]

I too am having an impossible time imagining that we are going to come to grips with this problem. These days the only time I feel optimistic about the future are when I'm feeling my most misanthropic. Oh well. I wish I had more of a stash at this point in my life, but I probably have enough time to make some money before any kind of collapse takes place in Canada. Never having kids will help. I can't imagine dooming them to the future anyways.

On the bright side, I have front row seats to the next few decades, which are bound to be exciting and maybe not so bad for myself. I may be among the most privileged humans to ever have existed.

On what basis do you believe this ? Seriously what do you think is going to happen. The world ends ?

[ducknalddon]

How true is this ? I mean I've been a skeptic on CC for years. I'm starting to think I should review the science but when I hear claims like this I start to think CC is a fraud. I don't believe it can be that bad.

I went to a talk by Nicholas Stern a little while ago, ten years after his review was published it looks like it was pretty much spot on, maybe even too conservative in some areas.

[7Wannabe5]

@steve73: I meant that the human race is doomed to experience some worst-case scenario global climate change and some profound suffering, not that the human race will be doomed to extinction by the effects of global climate change. I do believe it will be the cause of some huge economic and ecological losses during a period which will be shortly followed by scarcity of resources. IOW, analogous to the problem of having to clean up after an out of control Frat party, shortly followed by the realization that there will never be enough beer money to throw an out-of-control Frat party again.

There are people who are more like the "they" we sometimes think will figure this out for "us." For instance, the largest co-operative of farmers in the United States owns and operates its own petroleum refineries and industrial fertilizer production facilities. Maybe we could ask their governing/coordinating board about their plans if there are 10 years of highly unpredictable and variable weather followed by petroleum prices going up to $120/barrel? We could also ask them for their best estimate for the price of corn and wheat under that situation, and then fairly readily calculate the spike in the world-wide human starvation rate adjusted for transportation costs from center of production.

In my lifetime (30 years?), and my locale (Great Lake region of Midwest) I doubt I will see anything much worse than something like the need for a universal food welfare rationing card. Maybe my kids will end up with a lifestyle that is more like the 1930s than the Jetsons. Dunno.

[jacob]

"Doom" is interpreted differently according to who you talk to. I'd liken CC for the world to something like emphysema or diabetes for an individual person. It's a long-term progressively built-up disease that's practically impossible to cure/revert, once it's pushed far enough.

Diabetes or emphysema do not result in well-defined event-associated death (unlike a heart attack or a stroke), instead they (diabetes more so) are system-failure diseases that result in cluster of different problems: infections, blindness, numbness, ...

This makes it easy for people to ignore or explain away something like cuts or bruises that won't heal as something else if they so desire. For example, FIL had uncontrolled diabetes for 10+ years while being in denial about it. He figured that the doctor was just out to get his money. The doctor's warnings certainly didn't feel like doom to him and therefore nothing was done. Ditto emphysema.

It took a minor stroke to accept the reality of the problem. Because of the delay, we're now talking injections for every single meal, a dozen different daily pills, and being permanently hooked up to a 40ft long plastic tube with oxygen from a big-ass pump for COPD. A lot of resources, both money and "life-energy" is thus being diverted from enjoying retirement towards mitigating the consequences of prior inaction.

I'd be tempted to say that "you can imagine how this goes". Yet, when he warns younger people to lose weight, stop drinking soda, put down the cigarettes, ... and listen to their doctor so they won't end up in the same situation, they happily ignore these warnings because they believe that medical science somehow doesn't apply to them personally. So I think maybe only a few people can imagine it ... and for them, it does look like doom. Overall, most humans are just not very good at grokking complex system problems that progressively build up over many many years---and putting themselves in their own future shoes. Evolution has conditioned us to focus on simple local short-term dangers, like a lion about to eat us. Now, an attacking lion, that's doom. However, making the suggestion that maybe one should not casually walk into an area full of hungry lions is easily dismissed as alarmist.

Fun quiz: What does this look like? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMnkmlrJ9GA (comments about warnings around 3:17)
1) Doom?
2) A youtube video to be forgotten tomorrow when you go looking to buy that retirement cabin in the woods?
3) A random fire?
4) A symptom of "planetary diabetes" that happened to someone else?

Compare to the view from a few miles further away: What does it look like from this perspective? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KzfC3SKe8Y
1) Doom?
2) A youtube video to be forgotten tomorrow when you go looking for that house in a scenic small-town location?
3) Some random smoke that smells bad and/or ruins your view?
4) A symptom of "planetary diabetes" that happened to someone else?

The city was later evacuated.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/ ... -tennessee

[steveo73]

What I'm reading is generic doom predictions. I need facts. What specifically could happen ?

I get the impression that this is like preppers. They are planning for a world war or zombie apocalypse that won't happen.

I studied GW at university years ago and came to the conclusion that it was bullshit. There has been so much science around this topic that is bullshit. I was thinking of having another look at it to determine if it is factual or not but I read stuff like this and it makes me think we still have no idea if there is an issue or not.

[theanimal]

@ Steveo73- Everything you'd need to read was laid out here or can be found from here:viewtopic.php?f=20&t=4654

We don't need go in circles and have a round 2 of this again.

[theanimal]

Jacob- I see cancer as a better analogy than diabetes. Cells (humans) are affected in certain regions of the body (world) and other regions are still OK. As time passes and the disease is not treated, more cells become cancerous. That's at least what I'm thinking when I see those videos and read of reports from elsewhere.

I do find it interesting in all these extreme events, rarely does anyone link them to changes in the climate. The cognitive dissonance is immense.

[jacob]

@theanimal - I fail to see the cancer analogy unless you're talking about the expression of symptoms rather than the underlying causes. I think CC has more in common with metabolic syndrome ... i.e. too much sugar creates systemic problems that result in all kinds of bodily weirdness, none of it good. Much like too much CO2(e) messes with both the radiative balances and the chemical and biological balances or pathways (carbon cycle, nitrogen cycle, ...) of the planetary support systems and make it harder for species (including humans) to thrive. I also think that diabetes is a better metaphor because it's nearly symptom free for many years and tends to kill/cut life short from a resulting side-effects rather than directly. Also, it's a permanent sentence. Nobody ever gets to declare themselves diabetes free once they've gotten it hard. Also in terms of treating it, the approach is to inject chemicals to restore a balance ... not to cut the problem away.

Anyhoo, my aim was just to give a relatable metaphor that people might be able to identify both with how the disease acts systemically but more importantly to explain how most humans react to the idea of problems until they're "right in your face" and how it's mostly futile to convince them because their "way of life is not negotiable"---until, of course, it eventually is when forced by external circumstances. This suggests to me that humans for the most part will do close to nothing to prevent CC. If that many individual humans can't even prevent themselves from getting diabetic, I would not expect any preemptive actions on more complex and global problems.

In any case, if my metaphor is not obvious, then it's not that good of a metaphor.

[steveo73]

@ Steveo73- Everything you'd need to read was laid out here or can be found from here:viewtopic.php?f=20&t=4654

We don't need go in circles and have a round 2 of this again.

I don't want to go in circles. I would like clear predictions of what could happen backed up with the available evidence. At the moment it's just doomsday stuff. The world is ending. We are all doomed. What does this mean ?

That thread has links to the skeptical science website. That site is from the guy that makes up statistics and all sorts of unscientific stuff. That is exactly the sort of stuff I'm trying to avoid.

Is there anywhere that provides clear well reasoned factual information.

[jennypenny]

@steveo--I'm pretty sure Jacob shut down debating the science here and asked that we stick to discussing effects and impacts. If you like Martenson over at Peak Prosperity, his podcast this week was an update on where the climate science stands at the moment. The guest posted additional material in the comments section.

https://peakprosperity.com/podcast/1038 ... -revisited

[George the original one]

I would like clear predictions of what could happen backed up with the available evidence.

Did you not pay attention to the arctic ice cover vanishing this year? Do you understand how much that affects heat absorption/reflection in a positive feedback loop?

Anyway, I can tell you directly how CC is currently affecting my life. Affecting my life TODAY, not in some theoretical future:

1) The positive feedback with the el nino cycle creates warmer ocean currents that are clobbering coho populations off the Oregon coast after two decades of positive population gains due to fisheries protection and significant habitat improvements. We've had el nino cycles in those past two decades, but the results have been no where near as bad as the past two years. Coho have a 3-4 year life cycle, so you might see the extinction of many fish runs (read: coho gene pools) if this doesn't improve in the next 3 years since we've now had 2 bad years of coho returns. Both wild and hatchery fish are affected, so there is no way to "bio-engineer" a solution.

2) Warmer ocean currents off the Oregon coast increases the occurrence of algae responsible for domoic acid. Domoic acid is a lethal poison for humans that prevent us from eating certain shellfish: pacific razor clams, dungoness crab, red rock crab. Closures are becoming more frequent (2nd year in a row that fall has been closed to harvesting these shellfish due to domoic acid; never used to happen!) and will likely become permanent if CC continues.

[George the original one]

I also think that diabetes is a better metaphor because it's nearly symptom free for many years and tends to kill/cut life short from a resulting side-effects rather than directly. Also, it's a permanent sentence. Nobody ever gets to declare themselves diabetes free once they've gotten it hard. Also in terms of treating it, the approach is to inject chemicals to restore a balance ... not to cut the problem away.

Type II diabetes is curable via diet/exercise. Yes, like many diseases, one is more susceptible to relapse after having it. Most people, however, will not change their lifestyle to achieve the cure and/or ignored the symptoms/diagnosis too long so they never dig their way out of the disease.

[steveo73]

I would like clear predictions of what could happen backed up with the available evidence.

Did you not pay attention to the arctic ice cover vanishing this year? Do you understand how much that affects heat absorption/reflection in a positive feedback loop?

Anyway, I can tell you directly how CC is currently affecting my life. Affecting my life TODAY, not in some theoretical future:

1) The positive feedback with the el nino cycle creates warmer ocean currents that are clobbering coho populations off the Oregon coast after two decades of positive population gains due to fisheries protection and significant habitat improvements. We've had el nino cycles in those past two decades, but the results have been no where near as bad as the past two years. Coho have a 3-4 year life cycle, so you might see the extinction of many fish runs (read: coho gene pools) if this doesn't improve in the next 3 years since we've now had 2 bad years of coho returns. Both wild and hatchery fish are affected, so there is no way to "bio-engineer" a solution.

2) Warmer ocean currents off the Oregon coast increases the occurrence of algae responsible for domoic acid. Domoic acid is a lethal poison for humans that prevent us from eating certain shellfish: pacific razor clams, dungoness crab, red rock crab. Closures are becoming more frequent (2nd year in a row that fall has been closed to harvesting these shellfish due to domoic acid; never used to happen!) and will likely become permanent if CC continues.

I just looked this up and tried to get a factual basis for discussion. From what I can tell we actually don't know what the effects will be. I did look at this site http://climate.nasa.gov/effects/ but I think it's still hard to get good information on this topic.

I like the points that you made however I doubt that these have been confirmed via scientific analysis as being caused via AGW CC. Do you have any links to prove these comments ?

I'm starting to think though that there may actually be a problem however it's a really tough subject because the proof isn't clear cut (sites like Skeptical Science have actually done GW a massive disservice) but if there is a problem proving it is probably extremely hard and the potential impact although unclear may be significant.

I will try and find some clear cut rational arguments but what if we have to wait and see what happens ? Is this a serious option at this point ?

[BRUTE]

what if we have to wait and see what happens ? Is this a serious option at this point ?

that's the crux - if group A cannot convince group B that X is a terrible problem, then the only way to make group B comply/help is use of force. it does not matter that group B is "wrong" or "dumb" - if the argument isn't good enough, group B remains unconvinced and nothing happens.

[ducknalddon]

I'm starting to think though that there may actually be a problem however it's a really tough subject because the proof isn't clear cut (sites like Skeptical Science have actually done GW a massive disservice) but if there is a problem proving it is probably extremely hard and the potential impact although unclear may be significant.

Perhaps you need to examine what made you skeptical in the first place, maybe you have a bias that you aren't acknowledging.

[7Wannabe5]

In my limited,and not entirely successful, attempts to convert the deniers in my social circle, I have found that identifying the simple piece of science missing in the discussion has been most effective at resolution in the realm of pragmatism.