But I don't blame you really, you are only a pawn in their game.
— unenlightened

Oh, the irony, it burns. — Agree-to-Disagree

You two are so poetical. You both move forward one square at a time, while capturing diagonally, and if you happen to begin the debate, your first move has the option to move forward two squares instead of one...like the rest of us

One could say that, in a sense, spite really is a major contributor. — Echarmion

Can we discount spite as a reasonable response? Might spite not be called for in certain situations?

My main question is: What if there were greater existential threats to humanity than climate change, would the apathy on those issues not be good reason to be spiteful over all the climate change hype?

What if the problem of climate change has less to do with human caused carbon emissions, and more to do with the natural phenomenon of human conflict, transgression, &c.? Could science even measure that?

You two are so poetical. You both move forward one square at a time, while capturing diagonally, and if you happen to begin the debate, your first move has the option to move forward two squares instead of one...like the rest of us — Merkwurdichliebe

Checkmate. :cool: :up: :party:

thank you :halo: @unenlightened also knows that I wear the laurel wreath.

What if there were greater existential threats to humanity than climate change, would the apathy on those issues not be good reason to be spiteful over all the climate change hype? — Merkwurdichliebe

I have posted something like this before.

I have lived through many existential threats to humanity.

- All through my childhood the doomsday clock was sitting at 5 minutes to 12 (fears about nuclear war between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R)
- predictions of worldwide famine in the 1970s and 80s
- Malthusian panic and the population bomb
- the 1973 oil crisis caused by the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries
- acid rain
- ozone depletion
- an impending ice age
- Halley's comet
- the Large Hadron Collider
- the Y2K bug
- various pandemics
- The Mayan Calendar prediction of 2012
- Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 1990s
- Peak Oil In 2000
- Peak Oil in 2010
- Peak Oil in 2020
- Pending depletion and shortages of Gold, Tin, Oil, Natural Gas, Copper, Aluminum
- Oceans dead in a decade (prediction made in 1970)
- Covid
- etc

My biggest fear now is that humanity and the earth will be decimated by the attempts to "solve" global-warming/climate-change.

My biggest fear now is that humanity and the earth will be decimated by the attempts to "solve" global-warming/climate-change. — Agree-to-Disagree

I understand, self inflicted decimation, so that even if all the models turned out to be entirely accurate, so that the current green revolution were the perfect solution, we will have weakened ourselves in the global arena so much that there is little hope of enforcing the green agenda on the will-be global hegemons that care little for our green agenda.

The vast majority of humanity was affected by unusual heat over this 12-month period, researchers found, with 7.3 billion people — 90% of the global population — experiencing at least 10 days of high temperatures “with very strong climate fingerprints.”

In India, 1.2 billion people — 86% of the population — experienced at least 30 days of high temperatures, made at least three times more likely by climate change. In the United States, that figure was 88 million people, or 26% of the population.

Some cities were particularly hard hit. In the US, these were concentrated in the South and Southwest. Houston experienced the longest extreme heat streak of any major city on Earth, according to the report, with 22 consecutive days of extreme heat between July and August.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/11/09/climate/global-warming-hottest-year-history-climate-intl/index.html

Just as was known and predicted, decades ago. Only getting worse from here.

Can we discount spite as a reasonable response? Might spite not be called for in certain situations?

My main question is: What if there were greater existential threats to humanity than climate change, would the apathy on those issues not be good reason to be spiteful over all the climate change hype? — Merkwurdichliebe

I think this would be entirely to convenient. A nice and easy self-absolution.

If there are greater existential threats, then of course we would have to fight them concurrently. Of course since climate change is heavily bound up with our economic system, we'd need to be doing that regardless.

Spite is the easy way out. Masking your own unwillingness to act by pointing to the hypocrisy of others.

What if the problem of climate change has less to do with human caused carbon emissions, and more to do with the natural phenomenon of human conflict, transgression, &c.? Could science even measure that? — Merkwurdichliebe

Then we'd try to address that. Certainly the problem of climate change goes beyond simply making a few personal choices. It's a systemic issue. But starting from the perspective that it is some metaphysical force that cannot be addressed anyways is again a very convenient way to justify one's one comfortable inactions.

My biggest fear now is that humanity and the earth will be decimated by the attempts to "solve" global-warming/climate-change — Agree-to-Disagree

But the earth and humanity are already being decimated. It seems very silly to cling to this specific status quo as if it were suddenly the divine providence, as opposed to just another contingent situation we find ourselves in.

I understand, self inflicted decimation, so that even if all the models turned out to be entirely accurate, so that the current green revolution were the perfect solution, we will have weakened ourselves in the global arena so much that there is little hope of enforcing the green agenda on the will-be global hegemons that care little for our green agenda. — Merkwurdichliebe

Are you under the impression that the western way of life currently stands any chance of surviving? Because I don't. Right now, the authoritarian, technocratic vision, which in some ways is being pioneered by China, is clearly winning. And this is not just a case of "China taking over" but of an inability to envision an alternative to clearly falling systems.

My main question is: What if there were greater existential threats to humanity than climate change, would the apathy on those issues not be good reason to be spiteful over all the climate change hype? — Merkwurdichliebe

There is no 'if' about it. The greatest threat to humanity is the collapse of the economy. The new industrial revolution combining 3d printing and AI mean that mass production and consumption are becoming unnecessary, as a means to wealth and power. The mass of humanity entirely lacks the wisdom to control the economy, and so mass production and consumption - and hence the mass of humanity - will end. The failure to tackle climate change is just a convenient means to accelerate things a little. "Keep calm and carry on", is all we know how to do, like our cousins the lemmings.

‘The science is irrefutable’: US warming faster than global average, says report — Oliver Milman @ The Guardian

This headline is misleading because it creates the impression that the US is warming faster than other countries.

The fact is that almost every country is warming faster than the global average. The reason is that the global average includes the oceans which cover about 70% of the earth, and they are warming slower and less than the land.

Is this headline intended to cause fear and anxiety?

‘Insanity’: petrostates planning huge expansion of fossil fuels, says UN report — Damian Carrington @ The Guardian

The world’s fossil fuel producers are planning expansions that would blow the planet’s carbon budget twice over, a UN report has found. Experts called the plans “insanity” which “throw humanity’s future into question”.

The energy plans of the petrostates contradicted their climate policies and pledges, the report said. The plans would lead to 460% more coal production, 83% more gas, and 29% more oil in 2030 than it was possible to burn if global temperature rise was to be kept to the internationally agreed 1.5C. The plans would also produce 69% more fossil fuels than is compatible with the riskier 2C target.

The countries responsible for the largest carbon emissions from planned fossil fuel production are India (coal), Saudi Arabia (oil) and Russia (coal, oil and gas). The US and Canada are also planning to be major oil producers, as is the United Arab Emirates. The UAE is hosting the crucial UN climate summit Cop28, which starts on 30 November.

Is there any hope for humanity and the earth?

The greatest threat to humanity is the collapse of the economy. — unenlightened

:up:

This headline is misleading because it creates the impression that the US is warming faster than other countries. — Agree-to-Disagree

Taken out of context, it might appear to be, but the article provides further detail. The associated report was the work of 'an exhaustive distillation of climate science compiled by more than 750 experts across the US federal government'.

The report shows “more and more people are experiencing climate change right now, right outside their windows”, said Allison Crimmins, a climate scientist and director of the National Climate Assessment. Crimmins said that escalating dangers from wildfires, severe heat, flooding and other impacts mean that the US suffers a disaster costing at least $1bn in damages every three weeks now, on average, compared to once every four months in the 1980s. ....

Scientists who worked on the 32-chapter report, which touches on everything from climate change’s impact upon the oceans to agriculture to transportation to cultural practices, say that scientific confidence about the influence of global heating upon extreme weather and other phenomena has only strengthened since the last report in 2018. ...

The report’s findings include:

* The climate crisis is causing disruption to all regions of the US, from flooding via heavier rainfall in the north-east to prolonged drought in the south-west. A constant is heat – “across all regions of the US, people are experiencing warming temperatures and longer-lasting heatwaves” – with nighttime and winter temperatures rising faster than daytime and summer temperatures.

* People’s health is already being harmed by worsened air quality from smog, wildfire smoke, dust and increased pollen, as well as from extreme weather events and the spread of infectious diseases. Children born in 2020 will be exposed to far more climate-related hazards compared to people born in 1965.
* There are “profound changes” underway in the water cycle, raising the risk of flooding, drought and degraded water supplies for people in the US. Snow cover in mountains is decreasing, while the nation’s supply of groundwater is under threat from warming temperatures.

I don't think it's 'alarmist'. I think it's alarming. As to why the US, in particular, is exposed to such effects, there might be geographical, topological and climatic reasons for the impact on the US in particular, but I guess one would have to read the report to find out.

Is this headline intended to cause fear and anxiety? — Agree-to-Disagree

Of course it is. Headlines are designed to grab your attention, by evoking some emotion.

It is a tragedy that because such manipulation has been going on for a century and more, we have learned to ignore these things as the exaggeration has become wilder and wilder. The same thing happens with fire alarms. Too many false alarms result in folk ignoring them when the fire is real. Thus a whole academic discipline of climate scientists and Earth science researchers end up being treated like a hysterical headline writer.

The collapse you describe in the economy is not such a big threat. It will be painful and might required decades of authoritarianism and revolution. Or even a collapse in civilisation. But the threat from climate change is existential. Anyone who has looked into it realises this and usually refrains from telling others for fear of becoming a doom monger.

My biggest fear now is that humanity and the earth will be decimated by the attempts to "solve" global-warming/climate-change.

Your arguments fail if one simply substitutes the idea of pollution for the idea of greenhouse gasses.

The collapse you describe in the economy is not such a big threat. It will be painful and might required decades of authoritarianism and revolution. Or even a collapse in civilisation. But the threat from climate change is existential. — Punshhh

The economic collapse is part of climate change, just because the economy is predicated on the eternal expansion of fossil fuel consumption and waste dumping . When the burgers run out the white man will get angry. Angry toddler with nuclear arsenal may not wait for the seas to close over his head.

Fair dues.

The economic collapse is part of climate change, just because the economy is predicated on the eternal expansion of fossil fuel consumption and waste dumping . When the burgers run out the white man will get angry. Angry toddler with nuclear arsenal may not wait for the seas to close over his head. — unenlightened

I've been pondering for years the way the present situation is similar to the world prior to the collapse of the Bronze Age. One expert, Eric Cline, believes the end of the Bronze age was brought about by a "perfect storm" of factors including war, natural disasters, and class warfare internal to the great nations of the time. Any one of them would have been survivable, but together, they weren't. What I disagree with is the notion that the coming collapse, if there is one, will mean the end of the human species. I mean, it could, but there isn't reason to believe it has to.

One of the things that was spawned by the Bronze Age collapse is the very thing we all think is killing us now: the free market economy. The seeds of what we are were created in that event. My guess is the same will happen again: the collapse will spawn a new human species who will one day discover where they came from, as we only discovered the Bronze Age in the 20th Century.

By the way, the book of Genesis is basically made up of mythology from the Bronze Age, although it's splintered and rearranged. The Old Testament is a link to that lost world. I wonder what myths of our own will survive.

Civilisation collapse is an interesting topic. There is evidence of them imploding, over exploiting resources or succumbing to disease. In the case of easter Island, they became extinct.

I doubt very much that any of these means would wipe out humanity. That would require a significant natural intervention, like an asteroid, or rapid changes in the global conditions. However I consider our current bloated civilisation(in terms of numbers) to be more vulnerable than smaller cases.

The issue with climate change is the consequences of a rapid mass extinction, or the rapid changes that would result from a runaway climate change process. These would both impact simultaneously and I doubt if humanity would survive. Although some mammals might survive, or vertebrates at least.

If mammals survived humanity would evolve again.

In the event that we mitigated climate change rapidly and managed to reverse it to some extent, we might just hang on. Although this would depend on the extinction event to be quite limited and the runaway affects of climate change were slowed sufficiently for us and nature to adapt.

In the event that we mitigated climate change rapidly and managed to reverse it to some extent, we might just hang on. Although this would depend on the extinction event to be quite limited and the runaway affects of climate change were slowed sufficiently for us and nature to adapt. — Punshhh

I haven't seen any scientists talk about "runaway climate change." I don't even know what that's supposed to be. There are positive and negative feedback loops, there are tipping points, but no runaway. The earth has been much hotter than it will be with anthropogenic climate change, and so we know what that looks like.

And if humans were wiped out, I'd put my money on insect supercolonies to evolve into a new form of life. Just as we're made up of individual cells, they'll be made up of individual organisms. That would be cool.

And if humans were wiped out, I'd put my money on insect supercolonies to evolve into a new form of life. Just as we're made up of individual cells, they'll be made up of individual organisms. That would be cool. — frank

I would put my money on bacteria. Bacteria have always ruled to earth, and always will rule the earth.

Bacteria love global warming. They would like temperatures to be about 5 to 10 degrees Celsius warmer than current temperatures. Then they can reproduce at their optimum rate, replicating once every 20 minutes.

What I disagree with is the notion that the coming collapse, if there is one, will mean the end of the human species. I mean, it could, but there isn't reason to believe it has to. — frank

That is about where I am. A lot depends on all those tipping points and positive and negative feedbacks as well as what humans do in the next couple of decades. A runaway hothouse scenario is possible that would eliminate almost all complex land based life. 6°C is more possible, and would be unspeakably bad. But there is no precedent, so nobody knows.

I'd put my money on insect supercolonies to evolve into a new form of life. — frank

They'll use your money for nest material.

I would put my money on bacteria. — Agree-to-Disagree

They'll eat your money.

Bacteria love global warming. — Agree-to-Disagree

I know, they write operas about it. You just have to have tiny ears and they only last about twenty seconds.

They'll use your money for nest material. — unenlightened

I was hoping they would dig up an empty bag potato chips and put it in a museum.

It may be out of date terminology these days. Or climate scientists don’t mention it because it’s too scary and might be counterproductive to efforts to raise awareness of the issues.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_greenhouse_effect

Yes insects could inherit the earth. It largely depends on which animals become extinct and which survive. It may only be bacteria though if the warming gets to much.

Here's a handy summary of roughly how very fucked we are and why we are not going to be unfucked by science magic or very stable geniuses.

https://www.okdoomer.io/10-reasons-our-civilization-will-soon-collapse/

And here's some mainly US history on the politicisation of the issue and the betrayal of the science.

It may be out of date terminology these days. Or climate scientists don’t mention it because it’s too scary and might be counterproductive to efforts to raise awareness of the issues. — Punshhh

I see. But that article says there is no chance it could happen on earth right now. It said that in a few billion years when the sun is hotter, it would be possible.

I would put my money on bacteria. — Agree-to-Disagree

They've already won. Always have. Plants and animals are just bacterial megacities.

Here's a handy summary of roughly how very fucked we are and why we are not going to be unfucked by science magic or very stable geniuses. — unenlightened

My father was an esteemed professor of medicine and one of the generation of doctors that introduced birth control to civilisation. He read the Club of Rome report which was famously pessimistic about the future of Western civilisation. He was utterly convinced that India would face mass starvation and economic collapse in his lifetime (he died in 1993), hence his interest in birth control programs in India. He had a rather pessimist outlook, although his public persona was never dour or negative. But, in any case, he was wrong. Some unexpected developments came along that completely changed living standards in India. One was the ‘green revolution’ which dramatically improved crop yields. Another was the ‘tech revolution’ which gave hundreds of millions of Indians a pathway out of subsistence farming and into middle-class technologically-enabled lifestyles. So I agree that the world is facing vast challenges, but trying to resist doomsayers, on that account. (By the way, a provocative book on the subject is John Michael Greer’s Collapse Now and Avoid the Rush.)