13-Foot Sea Level Rise Now 'Inevitable'

[diddle]

http://www.theguardian.com/environme...cientists-warn

Bit of a large time frame, regardless make sure you sell any beachfront property you have while the time is right.

[Ticj]

How much will it take for people to finally get it.

[hornyphiltrum]

I have a feeling people get it but they just don't care.

[Lightwysh]

How can we really prove it's caused by humans and not a natural phenomenon?

[Deleted]

The Maldives should be renamed Atlantis in this case.

[Reeve]

There's a certain amount of tribalism in the whole global warming thing. There's a certain tribe of people that have hitched their wagon to many things, including the idea that global warming is a bunch of nonsense. If they even consider the idea that it might not be bunk, they're betraying their own sense of identity as a member of the tribe of people who think it's nonsense. The same is true of many other issues as well.

[Kujako]

How can we really prove it's caused by humans and not a natural phenomenon?

You can't. But that's why science doesn't really deal in "proof" but falsifiable evidence. Meaning, that the scientific stance is "prove it's not, cause the evidence so far says it probably is".

[diddle]

How can we really prove it's caused by humans and not a natural phenomenon?

This here is why we're dealing with problems like this. Also, common sense - it'd be one hell of a coincidence this is all happening right after the start of industrialization.

[Common Sense]

I live thousands of feet above sea level and hundreds of miles away from the nearest beach. /flips hair
What a shame for all the beautiful beach side cities and resorts though.

[Lightwysh]

This here is why we're dealing with problems like this. Also, common sense - it'd be one hell of a coincidence this is all happening right after the start of industrialization.

Or like the many times throughout Earth's history, the climate naturally warms and cools. The caps melt and thaw. The cycle repeats itself.

[Marema]

I don't think people have said that humans are 100% cause of global warming, but that we contribute greatly to it.

Look at it this way: If something were to take 1000 years to happen naturally, human contributation makes it happen in 100 years instead.

I don't understand why people actually think that humans somehow have no effect on climate. We continually destroy sections of the planet and yet for some reason magically have no effect on climate. /facepalm.

[Lightwysh]

If our contribution is negligible to nonexistent, then reducing that contribution will have no effect, except accelerating the development of things we should develop anyways. Our current preferred fuel sources are limited and we'll have to wean ourselves off of them eventually.


If our contribution is significant or the primary cause, then reducing that contribution will save the world and make Captain Planet happy.

I don't disagree here. We should look into cleaner and more sustainable energy/manufacturing.

But saying the Global Warming/Cooling is anything more than a natural phenomenon is silly, seeing as we cant really review in detail the entirety of Earth's climate history aside from a few known ice age's and thaws. Even those we can't know for sure the details of how fast the climate changed vs how it changed prior and compare it to how it's changing now.

[Garnier Fructis]

Or like the many times throughout Earth's history, the climate naturally warms and cools. The caps melt and thaw. The cycle repeats itself.

Leaves fall off of trees. Shaking a tree causes the leaves to fall faster.

Rate of change is not a difficult concept. Seriously.

I don't disagree here. We should look into cleaner and more sustainable energy/manufacturing.

But saying the Global Warming/Cooling is anything more than a natural phenomenon is silly, seeing as we cant really review in detail the entirety of Earth's climate history aside from a few known ice age's and thaws. Even those we can't know for sure the details of how fast the climate changed vs how it changed prior and compare it to how it's changing now.

If it goes in cycles by your own admission, why do we need to review the entire history? Cyclical phenomena are, by definition, repeating.

[Deleted]

I have a feeling people get it but they just don't care.

I don't care, I'm not wasting my time worrying about something that is pretty natural to this planet. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for creating a more healthy environment when it comes to big companies and clean energy and whatnot. But there is little the average Joe can do when almost all of the human made Co2 comes out of industry and then taking into account that only 2% out of all Co2 is human produced.

98% of Co2 comes from natural sources such as:
-Ocean atmosphere exchange
-Plant and animal respiration
-Soil respiration and decomposition
-Volcanic eruptions.

Now I wanna repeat again that I'm all for funding stuff to create a more healthy and clean energy/environment and they can even use the global warming bullshit they usually use...but I draw the line when they start spreading dooms talk crap about the end of the world as we know it. Using global warming as a tool to push forward your own agenda can only go so far until you become a crazy professor who likes to become famous for retarded statements.

[Tekkommo]

Or like the many times throughout Earth's history, the climate naturally warms and cools. The caps melt and thaw. The cycle repeats itself.

I agree with you, but I also think we are speeding it up. I doubt by much though.

edit: guy above me has put it pretty nicely.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Or like the many times throughout Earth's history, the climate naturally warms and cools. The caps melt and thaw. The cycle repeats itself.

But these cycles in no way prove that the current warming period is natural. For one thing, it's warming at 7 times the rate of any past "normal" cycle.

The other is that we know what the greenhouse effect is, what causes it, we've seen historical examples of warming related to carbon levels, and humans are dumping carbon into the atmosphere at a rate that corresponds with this 7 times faster warming rate. That's not even the tip of the iceberg of climate change research. That's one tiny little piece of ice in the massive iceberg.

[Deleted]

Leaves fall off of trees. Shaking a tree causes the leaves to fall faster.

Rate of change is not a difficult concept. Seriously.

I suggest you go read on about the facts, I think you heard something of the earth is changing more in the last 100 years crap...there is a widespread of misinformation on the subject. As I said, I support the goal of creating a better world...people thinking the human race can do anything to change the life cycle of this planet deserve to be kicked in the nuts.

- - - Updated - - -

But these cycles in no way prove that the current warming period is natural. For one thing, it's warming at 7 times the rate of any past "normal" cycle.

The other is that we know what the greenhouse effect is, what causes it, we've seen historical examples of warming related to carbon levels, and humans are dumping carbon into the atmosphere at a rate that corresponds with this 7 times faster warming rate. That's not even the tip of the iceberg of climate change research. That's one tiny little piece of ice in the massive iceberg.

No it is not...stop quoting bullshit you heard somewhere random.

[Spectral]

While I certainly wouldn't call myself a "skeptic" or any of the other euphemistic labels that people, I will say that the margin of error on the "when" part of the equation makes it hard to build a coherent policy consensus around.

[Garnier Fructis]

I don't care, I'm not wasting my time worrying about something that is pretty natural to this planet. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for creating a more healthy environment when it comes to big companies and clean energy and whatnot. But there is little the average Joe can do when almost all of the human made Co2 comes out of industry and then taking into account that only 2% out of all Co2 is human produced.

There's such a thing as unstable equilibrium. You cannot just look at 98% vs 2% and declare that the 2% has no negligible effect. That's completely unscientific and in many cases just plain wrong.

[Reeve]

I don't care, I'm not wasting my time worrying about something that is pretty natural to this planet. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for creating a more healthy environment when it comes to big companies and clean energy and whatnot. But there is little the average Joe can do when almost all of the human made Co2 comes out of industry and then taking into account that only 2% out of all Co2 is human produced.

98% of Co2 comes from natural sources such as:
-Ocean atmosphere exchange
-Plant and animal respiration
-Soil respiration and decomposition
-Volcanic eruptions.

Now I wanna repeat again that I'm all for funding stuff to create a more healthy and clean energy/environment and they can even use the global warming bullshit they usually use...but I draw the line when they start spreading dooms talk crap about the end of the world as we know it. Using global warming as a tool to push forward your own agenda can only go so far until you become a crazy professor who likes to become famous for retarded statements.

Average Joe can choose a more fuel efficient vehicle, choose to drive less often, choose to support legislators or legislation that promotes a transition to less CO2 intensive transportation/industry, etc. Hell, Average Joe can keep his car's tires inflated to the proper pressure.

Average Joe can, in fact, do stuff.