OK, so what's the game plan?
We're doomed, so load up on ammo, water, and forget about the conservation thing because it's futile.
Funny thing is that the megaphone holder is the one with the keys to the gun locker....
Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse
21–30 of 84 posts
Re: Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse
#22Alright, I've just read the paper and I'm surprised that it got published in Nature. I mean, as far as crystal ball gazing goes, saying that "shit might, y'know, change in the future and stuff" is pretty reliable, but I'm not really sure how it counts as science . Link to actual paper (may or may not work outside the ivory tower I currently occupy, someone please check and let me know): http://www.nature.com/nature/j…
The paper is pretty calm and careful about predictions, as far as I can tell. What assertion from the paper (which is behind a paywall at Nature.com, but can be found free online via sneaky methods like googling the title), specifically, do you feel is unsubstantiated or overblown? Current models of the entire planetary ecosystem are admittedly quite primitive, but they often have proven to be predictive. That which…
>Current models of the entire planetary ecosystem are admittedly quite primitive, but they often have proven to be predictive.
I am not sure the current model has predictive power. Predictions in science have to be specific enough to yield testable result. However, predictions of this sort have been vague enough to be inclusive of any anomalies. And this characteristic is a common hallmark of non-science.
I am not saying that climatology is non-science. However, I do think that there are claims being made that are not entirely scientific.
Re: Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse
#23The planet is fine it's not going to collapse.
A few species on a thin smear of biosphere on the outside of the planet might be in trouble - but the planet is perfectly safe until the sun expands.
Re: Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse
#24"They are not all accounted for, the lost seeing-stones. We do not know who else may be watching."
This sort of study is not science and only as good as the quality of their assumptions. I'm glad the authors and all participants got their names in a prestigious journal and I hope it helps their careers.
Re: Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse
#25I hate being that person, but I have to honestly ask, if the scientific community as a whole cannot agree on exactly how much effect humans personally cause to the environment today, how can anyone claim with the level of surety that these people seem to have that something major is going to happen, that humans can mitigate, within a lifetime?
Public uncertainty does not prevent isolated individuals from getting science done. There's no reason to suspect that publicized uncertainty about global warming has anything to do with objective difficulty in obtaining solid evidence rather than its tendency to attract polemicists, cranks, and opinionated amateurs.
Re: Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse
#26Being able to accept the fact that we as individuals die, what is the thing that stop us from accepting that we as a civilization, and as a species will eventually cease to exist?
The planet will still be here and there will surely be life left once conditions don't permit humans to survive, but even if it should be impossible for life to persist on Earth, so what?
It's not like Nature and the Universe were made for us to eventually dominate and expand, they just exist and so do we, for a while.
PS: Obviously I don't think we should just nuke everything because we're /eventually/ going to die, but I find the general fear and surprise at the fact that we as a species could cease to exist interesting. Like we're entitled to live forever because the Universe is ours or something.
Re: Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Current models of the entire planetary ecosystem are admittedly quite primitive, but they often have proven to be predictive What have they predicted?
I don't know, but I also want to point out that "often proven to be predictive" is pretty weak cheese. I mean, I have a model for predicting the result of coin flips which is often predictive. It's called "heads".
El Niño is the main thing that springs to mind when thinking about predictive powers of (short term) climate modelling. They are getting reasonably good at that.
Also, your coin flip is not a predictive model any more than claiming that using the same numbers every week on the lottery is a predictive model. For one thing, it makes no attempt to model anything, and for another, it has no attempt to be predictive, it just attempts to be right nearly half the time (edge), through understanding of the likely odds, which is a different thing altogether.
Re: Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse
#28I think we don't know the long term effects of the things we are doing.
But the usual cure people propose, a massive expansion of government, is worse than the disease. It will ultimately lead to more wars and an end to dealing with threats to our existence.
But doing nothing is not viable either. We need to get control of the planet. We simply cannot just let the next ice age or global warming occur.
This sort of thing is the ultimate "tragedy of the commons". And some of those most familiar with that concept seem the least likely to apply it the effects of technology.
Re: Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse
#29The planet is fine it's not going to collapse. A few species on a thin smear of biosphere on the outside of the planet might be in trouble - but the planet is perfectly safe until the sun expands.
Why stop there then? If you've decided that 'safe' indicates the continuation of the mass that comprises our planet, and not the particular, temporarily-compatible, form it takes today, then why even worry about the expansion of the sun? Or a collision which may shatter it? In how many ways is an asteroid cloud meaningfully less 'safe' than a single barren rock of comparable mass?
I mean, you've already dispensed with the anthropocentric definition of "safe" that implies "for human civilization". So why stop at the anthropocentric definition of "planet"?
Why not take comfort in the fact that matter can neither be created nor destroyed, and as such, even being baked by the sun or destroyed in a collision of galaxies or pulled into a star or black hole will leave the energy that comprises "Earth" quite safe and sound?
If we want to imply that man is insignificant, surely the fact that our planet itself is insignificant would only underscore that point.
Re: Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know, but I also want to point out that "often proven to be predictive" is pretty weak cheese. I mean, I have a model for predicting the result of coin flips which is often predictive. It's called "heads".
Are you suggesting that models are not a useful scientific tool?
Going from "We can be confident in our models" to "We can be confident in our planetary models" is a big step up in scale and complexity.