July is globe’s hottest month in recorded history

“Climate change is here. It is terrifying. And it is just the beginning,” Guterres told reporters in a New York briefing. “The era of global warming has ended; the era of global boiling has arrived.”

Yes indeed.

We'll have to deal with this the rest of our lives... — ChatteringMonkey

"the rest of our lives" isn't very long for old people.

Just saying...

Dubbed "the North Atlantic sea surface temperature anomaly":

High sea surface temperature in North Atlantic
^{— Arctic News · Apr 22, 2023}

Rising temperatures threaten to trigger massive loss of sea ice (and loss of albedo) and eruptions of methane from the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean. Over the next few years, feedbacks threaten to start kicking in with increased ferocity and important tipping points threaten to get crossed, such as the latent heat tipping point and the seafloor methane tipping point.

Record-breaking North Atlantic Ocean temperatures contribute to extreme marine heatwaves
^{— Copernicus · Jul 6, 2023}

While the causes of the anomalous warmth across the northeastern Atlantic are still a matter of research, there are already several contributing factors to take into consideration. These include atmospheric circulation, air pollution and climate change trends.

Keep in mind that in one article you posted, the data only went back to 1980. In the other it was 1991. Any legit scientist would tell you that's not enough data to say something about the climate, so the use of "anomalous" doesn't mean what it appears to. Watch out for articles like that.

Did you see they discovered that the Greenland ice sheet melted 416,000 years ago? That was in a previous interglacial, which is kind of astounding. It means the period we're in is on the mild side. The Greenland ice sheet could melt and we'd still be within normal limits for an interglacial.

We should absolutely be scared senseless. This is unprecedented in human history.

We should absolutely be scared senseless. This is unprecedented in human history. — Mikie

Assuming that your comment is true, what solutions are there that could REALISTICALLY work? I believe that there are no solutions that aren't doomed from the start. And many of the proposed solutions will actually make things worse.

Did you see they discovered that the Greenland ice sheet melted 416,000 years ago? That was in a previous interglacial, which is kind of astounding. It means the period we're in is on the mild side. The Greenland ice sheet could melt and we'd still be within normal limits for an interglacial. — frank

And fossil fuels had not been used when the Greenland ice sheet melted 416,000 years ago. Something else caused it. This also suggests that we are still within normal limits for an interglacial.

nd fossil fuels had not been used when the Greenland ice sheet melted 416,000 years ago. Something else caused it. This also suggests that we are still within normal limits for an interglacial. — Agree to Disagree

Yea. When Greenland melts again, the oceans will rise by around 20 feet.

Yea. When Greenland melts again, the oceans will rise by around 20 feet. — frank

How long do you think that this will take?

I live about 1 m (metre/meter) above sea level. Currently sea level is rising by about 3 mm per year. I don't need to worry for about 333 years. Even if sea level is rising at 5mm per year I don't need to worry for about 200 years. As Bobby McFerrin sang, "Don't worry, be happy".

I believe that there are no solutions that aren't doomed from the start. — Agree to Disagree

Plenty of solutions. They’re being employed as we speak. Hardly doomed. It’s a matter of time and political will.

When 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions, it’s not hard to see what the problem is.

How long do you think that this will take?

I live about 1 m (metre/meter) above sea level. Currently sea level is rising by about 3 mm per year. I don't need to worry for about 333 years. Even if sea level is rising at 5mm per year I don't need to worry for about 200 years. As Bobby McFerrin sang, "Don't worry, be happy". — Agree to Disagree

It's hard to say, but you can look at what's happening now. The east coast of North America is shrinking as we speak. It's been doing that for years, so it would be a little crazy to buy property right on the beach. Rent maybe, but don't buy. I think the abrupt movements will be a result of hurricanes.

So just look around and decide based on that.

Plenty of solutions. They’re being employed as we speak. Hardly doomed. It’s a matter of time and political will. — Mikie

There is not much political will to do things that people don't want (if you live in a democracy).

Are most people really willing to make the changes that are required?

Please tell me some of the "plenty of solutions", and I will tell you why they won't work.

There is not much political will to do things that people don't want (if you live in a democracy). — Agree to Disagree

People do want them.

Please tell me some of the "plenty of solutions", and I will tell you why they won't work. — Agree to Disagree

No thanks. If it makes you feel better, believe whatever you’d like. Doesn’t change the facts.

When 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions, it’s not hard to see what the problem is. — Mikie

I believe that it is incorrect to hold those companies responsible for 71% of global emissions. The companies are only supplying what people demand. It is people who must reduce their demands. Then the companies will reduce the supply.

The biggest problem is that most people don't understand the real facts (they believe propaganda). And they don't see what the real solutions are.

No thanks. If it makes you feel better, believe whatever you’d like. Doesn’t change the facts. — Mikie

Many people are concerned about cows because they produce methane. Do you know how many cows there are in the world? Just under 1 billion.

32.62% are in India. Good luck trying to get them to reduce numbers.
20.62% are in Brazil. It is a major industry. Good luck trying to get them to reduce numbers.
10.77% are in China. Good luck trying to get them to reduce numbers.
9.47% are in the United States. Good luck trying to get them to reduce numbers.

I try to determine the facts. Many people just believe the propaganda.

The companies are only supplying what people demand. — Agree to Disagree

It’s true that this is a common myth used by industry, but it’s on par with the “carbon footprint”: a way to divert blame to the individual consumer and away from the corporation. It’s brilliant propaganda, no doubt.

Exxon knew about the risks of climate change for decades and deliberately spread misinformation about it— all for profits. To turn around and put the onus on ordinary people is a complete joke.

Many people are concerned about cows because they produce methane. — Agree to Disagree

And your answer is “good luck trying to reduce numbers.” Got it. Excellent analysis.

Who are you and why are you trolling this thread?

It’s true that this is a common myth used by industry — Mikie

Imagine that an oil company shuts down. What would happen?

A new oil company would start up to meet the gap between demand and supply, or an existing oil company would grow to meet the gap between demand and supply.

How does that "solve" climate change?

People have to reduce their demand to have any hope of "solving" climate change. And even that might not be enough.

And your answer is “good luck trying to reduce numbers.” Got it. Excellent analysis. — Mikie

Cows are only one issue. There are many more.

I am not going to list them all. There are too many of them.

Please tell me any solution that you have and I will tell you why it won't work.

People have to reduce their demand to have any hope of "solving" climate change. — Agree to Disagree

No, they don’t.

Please tell me any solution that you have and I will tell you why it won't work. — Agree to Disagree

Like with the ludicrous cow example? Where you simply declare “good luck with that”? That’s not an analysis— it’s childish nonsense.

I’m not interested in the armchair thoughts of a random internet guy, or what s/he thinks is possible or isn’t possible. The facts are quite clear; the climate scientists are quite clear. The solutions are already available and being employed. I’ll repeat: the issue is time and political will. For some industries, like cement and steel, we’ll need more funding and research— even though technologies already exist that look promising.

But like I said, if you want to go on believing that it’s impossible, for whatever reason, you’re welcome.

Who are you and why are you trolling this thread? — Mikie

People have to reduce their demand to have any hope of "solving" climate change. And even that might not be enough. — Agree to Disagree

Seems like a perfectly reasonable position to me. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a troll. Sounds more like an ad hominem to me.

My wife and I did a little excursion for lunch on Sunday (my Mini got 60 mpg on the trip so I don't feel so bad about that). On the way home we stopped at a rural antique store. I parked next to a giant black Ford truck that was idling, nobody in it. The people were walking around browsing the store. They just left it idling for 20 minutes or more to keep the AC going. It wasn't even that hot out.

People and their inherent stupidity, their willingness to project problems on others while completely ignoring their own culpability, are definitely at the heart of this problem. However if a majority of people won't wake up to the fact that they are causing the problem, they might still get behind initiatives to curtail production through increasingly stringent regulations, thereby indirectly regulating their own behaviours.

Who are you and why are you trolling this thread?
— Mikie

People have to reduce their demand to have any hope of "solving" climate change. And even that might not be enough.
— Agree to Disagree

Seems like a perfectly reasonable position to me. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a troll. Sounds more like an ad hominem to me. — Pantagruel

Plus he's right. People would have to reduce their demand.

My wife and I did a little excursion for lunch on Sunday (my Mini got 60 mpg on the trip so I don't feel so bad about that). On the way home we stopped at a rural antique store. I parked next to a giant black Ford truck that was idling, nobody in it. The people were walking around browsing the store. They just left it idling for 20 minutes or more to keep the AC going. It wasn't even that hot out.

People and their inherent stupidity, their willingness to project problems on others while completely ignoring their own culpability, are definitely at the heart of this problem. However if a majority of people won't wake up to the fact that they are causing the problem, they might still get behind initiatives to curtail production through increasingly stringent regulations, thereby indirectly regulating their own behaviours. — Pantagruel

Every year I'm amazed at the demand for air conditioning. People make their dwellings colder in the summer than they would be in the winter.

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a troll. — Pantagruel

To come here and announce “Give me any solution and I will tell you why it won’t work,” use an example of cows, declare “good luck with that,” and expect to be taken seriously, is exactly the issue. Whether it’s truly trolling or just childishness, I don’t know.

To come here and announce “Give me any solution and I will tell you why it won’t work,” use an example of cows, declare “good luck with that,” and expect to be taken seriously, is exactly the issue. Whether it’s truly trolling or just childishness, I don’t know. — Mikie

Granted, that last part was really poor. However, up until then I thought the points were legitimate. The best argument becomes meaningless when it declares itself unassailable.

People and their inherent stupidity, their willingness to project problems on others while completely ignoring their own culpability, are definitely at the heart of this problem. — Pantagruel

Which is the same excuse fossil fuel companies give. Just lower your carbon footprint. Never mind that the entire continent of Africa emits only 4% of global emissions a one ton per capita. Their “inherent stupidity” and “ignoring their own culpability” is the “real” problem.

Give me a break. The issue is that the wealthier nations have benefited from fossil fuels for over a century and have crippled government ability to do anything about it. Despite having the solutions right in front of us.

If ordinary people are responsible for anything it’s allowing themselves to be fooled by propaganda. But even there the fight has never been fair.

Every year I'm amazed at the demand for air conditioning. People make their dwellings colder in the summer than they would be in the winter. — frank

It's almost like they enjoy the exaggerated sensation of being in control.

Never mind that the entire continent of Africa emits only 4% of global emissions a one ton per capita. — Mikie

What does this have to do with anything? Obviously, the problem has to be addressed where it is created. If I read you right, you would advocate for a campaign of public awareness to drive political will to regulate industries, which are the material if not the final cause of climate change. Well that's exactly what I suggested people could be persuaded to do, essentially curtailing their own worst tendencies, indirectly.

It's almost like they enjoy the exaggerated sensation of being in control. — Pantagruel

For a lot of people it's normal to sit watching television, eating carbs because the television is tedious and boring, probably taking some addictive benzos, so just crank up the air conditioner. I don't think they're trying to overconsume, it's just that their world is configured to keep them in that state.
Overhauling the system would be difficult to engineer.

The way to change demand and behaviour is with incentives and disincentives. A tax on meat, a subsidy on public transport. The way to change production is by regulation with a Ban of CFC s for example, or a ban on the sale of gas boilers, or change the building regulations. The world can be reconfigured quite easily, we have been doing it for centuries.

The way to change demand and behaviour is with incentives and disincentives. A tax on meat, a subsidy on public transport. The way to change production is by regulation with a Ban of CFC s for example, or a ban on the sale of gas boilers, or change the building regulations. The world can be reconfigured quite easily, we have been doing it for centuries. — unenlightened

It's doable. People would be healthier if we did. Reduced healthcare costs...