191–200 of 408 posts
1) The war in Ukraine - changes in air travel routes will affect cloud cover.
2) Wild fires in Canada - this is really huge at the moment.
3) That giant blob growing in the Atlantic Ocean.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keep calm, carry on, adapt. Slow-moving crises are not crises, they're problems, not emergencies. ---- Here, have some literature, down-voters! ---- [1] Nine long and nearly continuous sea level records were chosen from around the world to explore rates of change in sea level for 1904–2003. These records were found to capture the variability found in a larger number of stations over the last half century studied prev…
Wake me up when the banks stop giving 30 year loans for coastline property. Who do you trust? Bankers or the "experts".
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bill Gates has been buying up water reserves, has investments in polluting industries, and he's got an interest in keeping the public thinking it's "not so bad". It is. Bill Gates is also behind the "our world in data" series on youtube, that consistently misrepresents climate science to make it seem like we can solve it with enough "green industry", when the only real solution is degrowth, we can't afford to keep si…
Degrowth is not a solution. Geo-engineering is our only way out of this mess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Climate change is terrifying, but I also have a hard time taking self titled Doomers totally seriously. It makes sense to consider all of the worst case scenarios for any event, and to prepare for them. But Doomers seem to have an obsession with it, and a need to convince others that the worst will happen. I noticed this a lot in 2020. COVID was (and is) awful, but there was so much shit that Doomers claimed would ha…
Apocalyptic Ideation see also: the book of revelations There will always be people fixated on The End, some because they think we all deserve it, others because they can't seperate their own existential crisis from potential global crises
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At a certain wet bulb temp humans cannot cool themselves off - they die without access to some other means to get cool (like cold water, air conditioning, etc).
The threshold at which humans can no longer cool themselves naturally varies based on factors like health, activity, clothing and humidity. Typically, a wet-bulb temperature above 95F (35C) poses a severe risk to health, especially with high humidity. It's important to note that such extreme wet-bulb temperatures are relatively rare in most parts of the world
The concern the top-level comment has is that sooner rather than later these cases will not be as rare and so more people will become familiar with this concept.
As this post hints at in the discussion of sulfur emissions at sea, all it takes to significantly slow global warming is one country or sufficiently motivated non-state actor deciding to go all-in on geoengineering (like seeding the stratosphere with sulfur dioxides). Compare this to the collective action problem of everyone, including rapidly industrializing poorer countries, spending trillions to decarbonize their…
So given this context and assuming it is accurate, where do you think would be the most viable areas to live? If I were to consider for the US, I'd say inland northern states like Wisconsin and Michigan thanks to the Great Lakes...
This guy's blog is subtitled "Eliot Jacobson's Collapse of Everything Blog". Is this his schtick? Does he just say the world is ending all the time, or is what he's saying true?
Climate change is many things: - Real. - Influenced by human activity, both positively and negatively. - Difficult to study, because we only have decades of hard data for what is a phenomenon spanning eons. - A narrative pushed by Western economies to discourage economic development of the Global South and maintain hegemony. If the former were actually serious about mitigating it, it would harshly regulate planned ob…
Which one do you think is winning?
(Also, when you say the Global South, do you mean the Global South that tends to be exempt from, or subjected to less stringent carbon limitations than the developed world? Or do you mean the Global South that everyone starts complaining about as soon as I mention that maybe we should reduce our emissions...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am very familiar with how a wet-bulb thermometer works and some of the ways it's useful (like at altitude for weather forecasts, and as one of the ways to build a hygrometer) but I'm struggling to make the connection that you've made as to why it'll be a household term. Mind explaining?
Because a wet-bulb temperature of 35C is generally considered deadly, perhaps as low as 31C. Global warming that kills large swathes of Burma or India would be a household term I'd think.
> people cannot carry out normal outdoor activities past a wet-bulb temperature of 32 °C (90 °F), equivalent to a heat index of 55 °C (130 °F) [0]