The Uninhabital Earth, Consequences of +4 Deg C. or More

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Huntn, Feb 19, 2019.

  1. Huntn macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #1
    The “Look I’m holding a snowball crowd”, please ignore this thread. I won’t be debating the existence of global warming with you.

    I listened to an alarming interview this morning on NPR with the author of this book: The Uninhabital Earth who claims that before, the worst case temp increase ceiling was a 2deg C temp rise, and that now 2deg has become the base and the new ceiling has been adjusted by global warming experts to 4 degrees which results in a rather horrific outcome. Even at 2deg, the estimate is 150M dead from a hostile climate, food production cut in half.

    Impacts of a 4°C global warming
    https://www.greenfacts.org/en/impacts-global-warming/l-2/index.htm

    This report spells out what the world would be like if it warmed by 4 degrees Celsius, which is what scientists are nearly unanimously predicting will happen by the end of the century if no significant policy changes are undertaken.

    It is a stark reminder that climate change affects everything. The solutions lie in effective risk management and ensuring all our work, all our thinking, is designed with the threat of a world in which warming reaches 4°C above preindustrial levels (hereafter referred to as a 4°C world ) in mind.

    The President of the World Bank Group, is very clear in its foreword of the report : The explored consequences of an increase of the global earth temperature of 4°C are indeed devastating.

    Among the foreseen consequences are:

      • the inundation of coastal cities;
      • increasing risks for food production potentially leading to higher malnutrition rates; many dry regions becoming dryer and wet regions wetter;
      • unprecedented heat waves in many regions, especially in the tropics;
      • substantially exacerbated water scarcity in many regions;
      • increased frequency of high-intensity tropical cyclones;
      • irreversible loss of biodiversity, including coral reef systems.
    The scientific evidence, is unequivocal about the fact that humans are the cause of global warming, and that major changes are already being observed: global mean temperature is now 0.8°C above pre industrial levels; oceans have warmed by 0.09°C since the 1950s and are acidifying. Sea levels rose by about 20 cm since pre-industrial times and are now rising at 3.2 cm per decade; an exceptional number of extreme heat waves occurred in the last decade; major food crop growing areas are increasingly affected by drought.
     
  2. s2mikey macrumors 68020

    s2mikey

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2013
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #3
    And what does this president of the world bank have to do with this? I bet he/they benefit somehow from the global warming scare. Just like Al Gore and propped up green companies. Follow the cash.

    We’re all gonna die I guess. Oh well. Let’s max out our credit cards then.....right? ;)
     
  3. Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #4
    I believe in the distinct possibility this is or is part of the Great Filter that we will not be smart enough to overcome and we will deserve the end result whatever befalls us.
     
  4. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #5
    So... I'm glad to be in Scotland. :p

    Seriously though, even up here there are obvious signs of climate change, from rising water table levels killing off our local coastal forest to changes when insects and birds become active in the Spring so that breeding birds are missing the spring bloom of insects and therefore being less successful in raising chicks. Even the marine life around the UK is changing. It does not bode well.
     
  5. Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #6
    At 75’ elevation I assume I’ll be expired before I’m underwater. :oops:
     
  6. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #7
    guy selling book is fearmongering to get sales,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,news at 11.

    Gore, "polar icecaps could be gone by 2013, scientist told me"
    AOC, "world is going to end in 12 years"
    :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
     
  7. blackfox Suspended

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #9
    You do know what the World Bank does, right?
     
  8. Falhófnir macrumors 68040

    Falhófnir

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2017
    #10
    I can only suggest you read up on the chain-reaction release of methane from melting arctic permafrost. It's very true to say the climate is a complex system with a lot of natural factors inputting to how it changes over time, but I think you'd probably be surprised by how little it takes to nudge us onto a different trajectory. At present we've been in an ice age for the last 2.75 million years, we've seen repeated cycles of glaciation, punctuated by warm interglacial periods like the one we are currently in. That is to say currently we are at the top end of the normal temperature scale over the period of the last 2.75 million years. To further escalate the temperature takes us into territory uncharted in all of human history (we've been around approx. 200,000 years). It risks nudging our climate onto a path that takes us out of the 'known' (glacial climate state) and into the 'unknown' (greenhouse climate state, where there is no ice on Earth at all). To change our climate to that extent would very likely cause biosphere collapse on an unimaginable scale. I would seriously question if we'd be able to survive it as a species (life on the whole would of course go on, but it's path would once again change just like the the asteroid impact that offed the dinosaurs and allowed for the rise of mammals). It's easy to be blasé about a few over the top comments, but ultimately it is entirely plausible we could trigger something which could conceivably destroy us in just a few generations.
     
  9. bambooshots macrumors 65816

    bambooshots

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2013
    #11
    Short of a asteroid striking the poles and melting the ice there, I’m not going to worry too much about global warming.
     
  10. BeeGood macrumors 68000

    BeeGood

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2013
    Location:
    Lot 23E. Somewhere in Georgia.
    #12
    Where exactly are you getting those numbers? And how exactly are they derived?
     
  11. Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #13
  12. BeeGood macrumors 68000

    BeeGood

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2013
    Location:
    Lot 23E. Somewhere in Georgia.
    #14
    I’m sure this guy knows way more about the science of climate change than I do, but I’m struggling to understand how he’s predicting a body count from an increase in average temps.

    Are you sure he’s not estimating 150 million displaced?
     
  13. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502a

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #15
    Note that at one point in time global human population was down to 50k so I see no realistic scenario where climate change would make us go the way of the dodo.

    An end to human civilization and/or billions killed is a real possibility.
     
  14. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #16

    The UK Met Office often gets weather reports wrong. The thing is, they accurately predict events, but they often get the timing wrong. With respect to climate change there is a similar problem to weather: the feedforward and feedback processes are complex and nonlinear, so when tipping points will be tripped is hard to predict. What does happen in science as knowledge accumulates is that the predictions get more accurate. So far as a I can tell, the predictions are no less dire now than when the issue of climate change was first raised, but the timing seems pushed back by a few decades. So we're faced with predicted catastrophic consequences probably no longer for our children, but for our grandchildren. I don't see that as any vindication of an attitude that we shouldn't try to stop contributing to climate change.
     
  15. Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #17
    As I recall it was dead, and if you look at the World’s population many are living in already challenged areas. Compared to 7.5 billion...
     
  16. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #18
    The entirety of the food web that supports 7+ billion people on this planet is tuned to the climate we’ve evolved into. What in the world do you think happens when you change the very small envelope of conditions that support this food web?
     
  17. Falhófnir macrumors 68040

    Falhófnir

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2017
    #19
    Well, one estimate that sticks with me was that melting arctic permafrost could release up to 10-16 billion tons of Co2 equivalent greenhouse gases per year when things really start to move. Consider the total cumulative effect of human activity to date is ~45 billion tons to contrast. Imagine that being repeated every 3-4 years!

    In such a runaway greenhouse scenario causing a shift in climate state and a virtual guarantee of unthinkable extinctions wiping out vast swathes of global ecosystems I think civilization as we know it ending is pretty well guaranteed. For recommended reading on just how quickly complex societies can unzip I would point you to the late Bronze Age collapse and fall of Meso-American civilisations. Unprecedented mortality from collapsing food yields would be tied to this; and I really don’t think it’s completely unthinkable we’d get completely wiped out as part of it, particularly if wars began over scarce resources.
     
  18. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #20
    I wouldn't want to be living on permafrost right now. Already in Russia and the PRC transportation infrastructure (rail lines and roads) based on the assumption of hard frozen ground is beginning to fail. Do you know what permafrost becomes when it thaws? Bog.
     
  19. BeeGood, Feb 24, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2019

    BeeGood macrumors 68000

    BeeGood

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2013
    Location:
    Lot 23E. Somewhere in Georgia.
    #21
    I have no idea, but I’m sure you have it all figured out.

    It’s not like the climate is complex and interwoven or anything. Your right. I’ll just pretend like I know with absolutely certainty how this will play out a century from now.
     
  20. Anarchy99 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2003
    Location:
    CA
    #22
    just to hear the pro-"we must stop climate change by anything necessary" opinion, im going to pose some unpopular questions.
    DISCLAIMER I DO NOT CONDONE THESE VIEWS

    I'm just posing them for discussion because if "climate change is our WW2" and "The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change" then its something that should be addressed...
    unless of course its not as important as people are claiming.

    anyway the average 1st worlder produces 70 times the green house emissions than the average 3rd worlder.

    shouldn't you be pro-wall/border security and anti-mass immigration from the 3rd world to any 1st world country etc.?

    in that same vain using stats from pre-industrialized times is a unfair comparison.
    pre-industrial earth sustained between just under to just over 1 Billion people.

    the other 6+ billion exist because of petroleum products (machinery to make work easier, petroleum based fertilizers to grow food where it couldn't prior and more overall, plastics etc.)

    would you be OK with killing off billions to get us back to around to the 1 billion mark the earth could sustain the human race without these advantages?

    if so how do you choose who dies?
     
  21. BeeGood macrumors 68000

    BeeGood

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2013
    Location:
    Lot 23E. Somewhere in Georgia.
    #23
    I’d be interested in knowing how he came to that number. Yes, there are 7.5 billion people on earth but nearly all of them currently occupy about 10% of the earths surface area. Even if the majority of that 10% becomes uninhabitable in 100 years, might it be possible that other chunks of the earth’s surface move from uninhabitable to habitable?

    Understand that this isn’t an argument to ignore climate change and do nothing. But I believe the reason why so many people roll their eyes at reports like this is because jarring figures like what you quoted often get tossed out with no explanation or backing. And then when someone questions it, they either get snide remarks or get told to read a 200 page publication in a journal. That’s a poor way to convince people.
     
  22. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #24
    So you can acknowledge that the climate is a complex system (as you did in response to me), but the only acceptable way to discuss it is to strip away that complexity and boil it down for people that don’t have good faith in hearing about it in the first place?
     
  23. jeyf macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    #25
    global warming
    maga peeps will dig their high heels in until they have to save the top two floors of the trump tower.
     

Share This Page

250 February 19, 2019