Be honest, is it too late to stop climate change? What went wrong?

Home Forums Science & tech Be honest, is it too late to stop climate change? What went wrong?

Viewing 38 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #119655
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Be honest, is it too late to stop climate change? What went wrong?

    • #119656
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I don’t know much about it, but I don’t see why someone wouldn’t do stratospheric aerosol injection at some point. India could do it for example, seeing as they stand to lose a lot from climate change and are big enough to do it…i think. Near arctic countries wont do it because they not-so-secretly want climate change. for some reason china considers itself a near-arctic country.

      • #119667
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >stratospheric aerosol injection
        just a band-aid at best
        If a leaking faucet is overrunning a bath tub, the solution is not to build taller walls on the tub, you turn off that faucet.

        • #119702
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >the solution is not to build taller walls on the tub, you turn off that faucet.

          yet there are no good solutions.

          • #119711
            Anonymous
            Guest

            grow a pair, take the least worst solution or see the shit really hit the fan

    • #119657
      Anonymous
      Guest

      It’s too late to overcome your addiction to asian tits

    • #119658
      Anonymous
      Guest

      YOU DIDN’T LISTEN!
      HOW DARE YOU?
      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mptNDINqYnQ

      • #119666
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Kek these videos are great

    • #119659
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Physically: The worst is still avoidable.
      Economically: Dunno. Maybe it was always too late.

    • #119660
      Anonymous
      Guest

      HOW DARE YOU

    • #119661
      Anonymous
      Guest

      medium-term corporate interests control US policy

      • #119689
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Do they control China and India too?

      • #119705
        Anonymous
        Guest

        no the lobbyist boogey man is stupid. What they’ve successfully prevented every country from being carbon neutral.

    • #119662
      Anonymous
      Guest

      It’s already started and will keep getting worse for years even if we went zero emission today, the thing is it’ll be ever worse and take longer to recover if we don’t take action.
      The stupid thing is we have been able to produce all electricity without CO2 since the 50s and have known global warming is a thing since the 80s.
      https://www.climatefiles.com/exxonmobil/1982-memo-to-exxon-management-about-co2-greenhouse-effect/

    • #119663
      Anonymous
      Guest

      consumers are insulated from their choices, and the economic cost of things is not commensurate to the ecological long term costs. there are also so many people that it’s impossible to get enough people to agree on the correct course of action. mix in disinformation by interested parties and an stupid/uneducated and apathetic public and you get where we are.

    • #119664
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Stopping climate change is like stopping the wind from being a thing. You might as well flay a stick around like a scrotebrain and call it a day.
      We shouldn’t look for a solution if we don’t even know what the climate problem is. We don’t even know if there is a climate problem.

      • #119675
        Anonymous
        Guest

        How do you stop that which does not exist?

        I get why the energy sector, auto industry and heavy industry want to claim global warming isn’t real but what do you gain from parroting their claims?
        Do you actually believe that everyone has spent 30 years talking about something that doesn’t exist and if so what is their motive?

        • #119677
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >I get why the energy sector, auto industry and heavy industry want to claim global warming isn’t real
          Without the energy sector, auto industry and heavy industry, everybody’s lives would be shit.

          >Do you actually believe that everyone has spent 30 years talking about something that doesn’t exist and
          Yes.
          it is not everyone*
          the narrative changed from global cooling to global warming to polar bear being extinct, none of which actually happened.

          >if so what is their motive?
          making everybody’s lives shit while the rich warmist doomist "prophets" keep using jets and polluting more than 90% of the rest of us, while screaming at us on how bad we are at the "climate problem". I believe it is all for interests, and politcal gains.

          • #119682
            Anonymous
            Guest

            https://i.imgur.com/J6Y8iJ0.gif

            >global cooling
            this meme again lol

          • #119683
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >Without the energy sector, auto industry and heavy industry, everybody’s lives would be shit.
            They can move to lower emission options, it isn’t a chose between staying with 1920s technology or going full primitivist

            >the narrative changed
            Depending where you live the effects of average global temperature rise is different, for example the UK is getting colder because the melting polar cap is cooling the ocean.

            >while the rich warmist doomist "prophets"
            Name a billionaire "warmist", as for billionaire deniers I’ll go with Rupert Murdoch and Robert Mercer for a start while you find some.

            "Going Green" is how they want to control everybody. If you scare everyone into thinking there’s a big bad enemy (climate change) they’ll all band together and listen to fight that bad enemy. Just look at the zoomers now. They all want environmental degrees and to drive electric meme cars and not have kids for muh environment. They’ve effectively scared an entire generation to do what they want.

            >"Going Green" is how they want to control everybody
            How does my life change if instead of my power coming from coal it comes from nuclear?
            >not have kids
            I think that’s mainly economic, when a man doing unskilled work could pay off a house while supporting a stay at home wife and 5 kids they did, now they can’t so don’t.

            • #119687
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >move to lower emission options
              Electric cars cost a shit ton and come with their own down sides
              Making electric cars is as bad for the environment as making normal cars, some would argue they are even worse.
              >the melting polar cap
              Polar caps have been going through cycles of melt-freeze since they basically were a thing. There is no such thing as a static state of anything in this universe, it is even more stupid to blame humanity for it.
              >while the rich warmist doomist "prophets"
              Any career politician pushing for "green".

            • #119700
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >going full primitivist
              This is what the majority of eco people want, an ecofascist state where you live a very meek existence in servitude towards the climate.

              Obviously our only real option is technology but we are not close to anything considered carbon neutral.

              • #119707
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >what is nuclear

        • #119678
          Anonymous
          Guest

          "Going Green" is how they want to control everybody. If you scare everyone into thinking there’s a big bad enemy (climate change) they’ll all band together and listen to fight that bad enemy. Just look at the zoomers now. They all want environmental degrees and to drive electric meme cars and not have kids for muh environment. They’ve effectively scared an entire generation to do what they want.

          • #119680
            Anonymous
            Guest

            the climate science is pretty convincing that we, humans, are changing our climate in ways that will make human life on average more challenging as time progresses. there’s not any debate on that point

            it’s a reasonable thing to be concerned about. the real debate is what to do about it

            • #119686
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >the climate science is pretty convincing
              Midwit.

          • #119723
            Anonymous
            Guest

            I’m a zoomer studying architecture and one of the reasons I didn’t pursue Building/Construction Science is because most of the emphasis seems to be on things like bioswales and oxygen producing living wall installation, passive cooling etc. I would have loved to learn about earthquake strengthening and mitigation but it seems unlikely that sort of thing is offered in any courses. Either way there’s a fair number of us not really interested in climate change strategies. Besides, I’m pro-nuclear power and I just keep my mouth shut on climate discussions because people here are still incredibly anti-nuclear.

      • #119753
        Anonymous
        Guest

        How do you stop that which does not exist?

        >You didn’t see global warming because it’s not there

    • #119665
      Anonymous
      Guest

      How do you stop that which does not exist?

      • #119671
        Anonymous
        Guest

        sis there’s been multiple real life controlled studies done on climate change

        • #119672
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Lol. What kind of midwit falls for something like """climate change"""
          All the studies are done to promote political agenda.

          • #119704
            Anonymous
            Guest

            I would say all the political agendas use climate changes as a weapon.

          • #119721
            Anonymous
            Guest

            It was a joke. It’s the only science field without true controlled experimental studies.

        • #119673
          Anonymous
          Guest

          "controlled studies"
          like this one?
          https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaa5632

          • #119676
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >paying to read a paper
            I freaking hate what has happened to academia, I just want to read their methodology for myself but my options are to pay for it or trust a reporter.

          • #119681
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Please explain what’s wrong with this paper.

    • #119668
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >is it too late to stop climate change?
      In the short term, yes. In the long term, if we switch to renewables and begin mass-scale carbon capture and storage, and no feedback loops take off, we’ll fix it in over the course of several centuries.

      >What went wrong?
      Fossil fuels were too good of an energy source when you factor in cost and other factors to pass up. Plus there were monetary interests on all sides to keep fossil fuel usage.

    • #119669
      Anonymous
      Guest

      The Cold War prevented nuclear power from spreading to every nation.

    • #119670
      Anonymous
      Guest

      You can’t. I’ll keep polluting with my straight piped no def no emissions control diesel faster than you can do anything about it.

      • #119674
        Anonymous
        Guest

        This. Humanity is going to lose anyway, so why not play for the winning team?

      • #119679
        Anonymous
        Guest

        There is a good reason for this. The faster civilization collapses thanks to climate change, the more likely we avoid creating a AGI/strong AI. Causing a climate collapse ASAP is humanity’s moral imperative. If I could press a button to press the clathrate gun I would. Doing so would save humanity from a far worse fate than a simple existential threat.

    • #119684
      Anonymous
      Guest

      UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report
      https://www.ipcc.ch/

    • #119685
      Anonymous
      Guest

      You driving to work to keep buying shit to put in your air-conditioned home while you wait for your Burger King order to arrive. You moved away from your family but you still travel back and forth to visit. You always needed more today, and you’ll always need even more than that tomorrow. Fast.

    • #119688
      Anonymous
      Guest

      How come carbon dioxide doesn’t cause the greenhouse effect on Mars?
      Mars has more than 1500% more CO2 in it’s atmosphere than Earth does and yet Mars has no measured atmospheric greenhouse effect.

    • #119690
      Anonymous
      Guest

      It’s easily avoidable. It’s just artificial rules keeping the US from being more or less completely carbon neutral. Nuclear would be ~1/2 the price of solar today (0.03 or so) if it weren’t for politicians meddling with the NRC and purposely sabotaging it.
      Compare US in pic related with something like France.

      • #119697
        Anonymous
        Guest

        All infrastructure in the US is high priced for some reason.

    • #119691
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >Be honest, is it too late to stop climate change?

      Yes.
      It’s about a 100 years too late.

      >What went wrong?

      We genuinely can’t make any of the necessary changes to the economy, technology, and society, that would be capable of effectively stalling or combating climate change at this stage.
      We need direct access energy and our best source of that is fossil fuels. Renewable energy in the form of solar and wind are a joke (UK’s current energy crisis being acerbated by the fact that the wind "didn’t blow enough that year") and things like geothermal and hydroelectric are limited to geography. People are also still irrationally afraid of Nuclear Energy. Everything that would be required of us to ‘fix’ global warming would also, effectively, destroy the economy, society, and make literally everyone upset.

      What we can do at this point, and what would make a huge difference; is to shift the environmental narrative away from carbon emissions and back to actual tangible and objective goals such as:
      Reforestation, habitat protection and conservation. It isn’t good enough to simply plant trees- you actually have to leave them alone and let them grow.
      Actually taking overfishing seriously. We’re unironically running out of fish.
      Cleaning up the freaking plastic in the ocean. Please for the love of christ can we leave the freaking ocean alone.
      Funding & promoting ‘rewilding’ projects that rebuild biomes by reintroducing key species that have been extirpated or extinct. Most people have heard of the cascade success of wolves in yellowstone park, but the reintroduction of beavers into California has been quite effective at restoring salmonids and aspen/cottonwood forests.

      • #119706
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Actually taking overfishing seriously. We’re unironically running out of fish.

        Already solved via aquaculture despite envirocunts wanting to ban it.

    • #119692
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I can’t believe that anyone with an IQ higher than 110 believes that le evil carbon atoms will make Earth hotter.

      • #119693
        Anonymous
        Guest

        welcome to the 20th century

    • #119694
      Anonymous
      Guest

      We can slam the brakes now and hope to avoid the worst outcomes.

    • #119695
      Anonymous
      Guest

      To stop?

      We’re in it. It’s a question of how bad things will get. We’re seeing more extreme weather events, we’re starting to see water wars, the climate is changing.

      Of course, the denialists actually have a point here; the climate is always changing. Thing is, for as long as we’ve had recorded history, the Earth has been getting further away from the sun, so the fact global average temperature is increasing is more concerning than most would admit.

      Beyond that there’s this idea of carbon feedback loops, warm oceans can’t hold as much gas, releasing more co2, causing the oceans to get warmer, causing more CO2 emissions.

      Then, finally, there are social factors. Wars will likely be the product of climate change, and will inevitably make the problem worse.

      So the question isn’t "can we stop?", It’s too late, it’s happening, the question is "will the generation being born today have children that survive to be adults?"

      • #119698
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Wars will likely be the product of climate change,

        holy shit the FUD.

        • #119703
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Wars for resources like the ones that happened from the time I was age twelve to, like, yesterday.

          Not directly related to climate change, but surely it’s pretty freaking suggestive that even in the closest thing we have to a post-scarceity Civilisation there’s wars merely to maintain certain levels of convenience.

        • #119709
          Anonymous
          Guest

          syria boiled over because of a long drought
          The effects came earlier because Turkey didn’t just wait passively to get bonked up, it built dozens of dams to buffer the rivers, leaving syria and iraq without water

      • #119699
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Oh, also, look into the carbinoferous period; plants did the inverse of what we’re currently doing. There’s at least a chance that out of all this more complex lifeforms will arise. Humans will undoubtedly cause some unusual selection pressures on our way out.

      • #119754
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Of course, the denialists actually have a point here; the climate is always changing.
        what freaking point? There is no point here.

        • #119755
          Anonymous
          Guest

          It’s literally a "gotcha!" tactic.
          >"’Climate Change’? Heh, the climate is always changing scrotebrain!"

    • #119696
      Anonymous
      Guest

      to avoid the worst of it? no

      to avoid it entirely? yes

    • #119708
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >he doesn’t know global warming will actually cause a counter reaction in the climate causing a mini ice age to prevent it from getting too HOT
      >he fell for the propaganda
      >ngmi go back to reddirt.com bitch scrote

      • #119712
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >farmlands freezing is somehow better
        Even if for arguments sake you were right that will still destroy the food supplies.

        • #119715
          Anonymous
          Guest

          it would do worse than destroy food supplies but would make it almost impossible to grow food anywhere on Earth without climate controlled farming, at least if it get really hot we could just move civilization to rivers and live like the Egyptians did along the Nile.

          • #119720
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Wrong. Look up "wet bulb temperatures"

      • #119714
        Anonymous
        Guest
    • #119710
      Anonymous
      Guest

      What went wrong was the scrotebrained delusion among some scrotebrains that they can "stop" a natural process on earth to save their filthy, diseased and dying civilisation. It was all a political larp, no one ever cared about ecosystem, because if they did instead of seething about climate change (which is a natural process on earth), they would be campaigning against actual ecological destruction due to pollution, erosion, desertification (due to industrial agriculture), excessive exploitation (mining etc), deforestation etc, but turns human greed and ignorance is bigger than his instinct to survive.

      • #119717
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >What went wrong was the scrotebrained delusion among some scrotebrains that they can "stop" a natural process
        Which natural process is causing rapid warming during a period in the Milankovich cycle when we should be slowly cooling? Which natural process is causing the observed radiative forcing from CO2 to rise rapidly? Which natural process is causing the ratio of carbon isotopes in the atmosphere to be increasingly skewed toward that of fossil fuels?

    • #119713
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I’ve put a lot of thought into this issue, and I actually found the solution years ago. It’s kinda sad that no one else has been able to solve it yet.

    • #119716
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Global warming is real and that’s a good thing.

    • #119718
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Get poor people rich so they don’t wanna pollute and move away from boomer industrialization. Where my peace prize at?

    • #119719
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Yes. But climate change isn’t a binary issue. The more the global average temp rises, the more issues we have. It’s not linear either because of methane deposits, ocean and air current changes, ocean levels and glacier melts, atmospheric co2 and a bunch of other things. So we’re looking at something like if we get +2.5c then stuff happens and we get another +2c no matter what, and then if the total goes over +5c we get another +2c no matter what, etc. Latest calculations estimate that we’d need about 10x more greenhouse gases than what we have deposited in all the oil and coal reserves known, to actually get a runaway greenhouse effect. But those estimates are woke af on estimates on how much carbon sink we’ll still have available. And as the temperature, ocean acidification, fires and desertification increases, so too will our carbon sinks decrease. So the real question is: is there a point where our dying carbon sinks will no longer be enough? It’s possible.

      Either way, the world will become uninhabitable for a vast majority of complex life including humans anywhere near the equator way before then.

      As for what went wrong? Greed and selfishness. Not blind greed, people often misunderstand this. It’s not that Timmy wants a billion billion and doesn’t care if the world burns. It’s never that straightforward. It’s that EVERY business, the world over, has since forever faced the same dilemma: if you do your thing responsibly but your competition doesn’t, then they will win and you will go out of business. So every person, every business has always struggled with having to take shortcuts in order to stay afloat. This is the same reason for concern behind AI development. You can’t prohibit it, because whichever makes the better one will win over anyone else.

      And this shared greed and individualism, is what is going to kill us. And there is no way to stop it. Even if we had a utopia, people would always be like that. It’s in our nature.

    • #119728
      Anonymous
      Guest

      our inactivity – we had plenty of time to stop it just a couple decades ago, but spent too much time dicking around with non-binding emission targets and not planting enough trees and now it is too late and we are where we are now

    • #119729
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >climate change
      who cares.

      Ive been told my whole life how its all over and how im suffering tremendously and every time there’s any kind of weather anomaly (and there are always weather anomaly) its cause
      >Mother Nature is angry.
      fuck the planet.

      • #119730
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Oh, so Mother Nature needs a favor. Well, maybe she should have thought of that when she was besetting us with droughts and floods and poison monkeys!

      • #119732
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Oh, so Mother Nature needs a favor. Well, maybe she should have thought of that when she was besetting us with droughts and floods and poison monkeys!

        Woke af as fuck.
        >waaaah we need to coexist with nature
        No, we need to work on conquering and taming nature so we don’t have to live to its gay whims anymore.

    • #119733
      Anonymous
      Guest

      yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah whatever post more asians

      • #119748
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >but anon, don’t you care about the globe?

    • #119735
      Mrrandom
      Guest

      Yes. The entire human economy depends on dirty fuels. How do you get away with that? Money. Sure but it would even almost bankrupt rich nations like Sweden and America and Germany. How does the rest of humanity afford it? What went wrong? Too little too late. Only thing we can do now is adapt. Some of us will make it, some won’t.

    • #119736
      Anonymous
      Guest

      https://i.imgur.com/AWBvw81.gif

      Don’t care. Coom. B-Boobah

    • #119737
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >Implying that’s a bad thing

    • #119745
      Anonymous
      Guest

      losing wwii

      • #119749
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Maybe, the Nazis at least understood letting capitalists pollute your world for a buck was a bad idea.

    • #119750
      Anonymous
      Guest

      The primary method of combating climate change now is to modernize the power infrastructure so that extreme weather events don’t radically disrupt the economy. Our power grid and delivery infrastructure is nearly a century freaking old and has had no real innovation or modernization to match the era that we live in.

      As such, tropical storms are evolving quicker and stronger storms are living longer . This is in turn causing larger radii of damages and their formation and evolutionary phases are considerably greater now, so repeated blows to the head as a result are more likely (figuratively) to societal infrastructure.

      Moving transport networks deep underground, moving electrical delivery deep underground, moving energy generation from fossil fuels to renewable sources backed by large volume and long-term battery storage, all are major changes that need to happen and within the next 20 years or the planet will literally fuck us over by repeated disruptions to the point that it’ll push major economies to the bring from cyclical destruction along coast lines and in dry/arid areas with large surface area forest fires.

    • #119751
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Wrong?

    • #119752
      Anonymous
      Guest

      The country that has the most advanced oil shale production technology, with almost 50 billion barrels of oil in reserves, who just happens to be on a trend of isolationism, wants the entire world to switch to """green energies""" (which uses OIL to get rare resources).
      pure coincidence.

Viewing 38 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
startno id