Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Near Term Human Extinction  (Read 44199 times)

harpy

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #200 on: March 02, 2018, 10:16:13 PM »


3.  This brings us to 2.5C over baseline (we're at 1.5C above baseline right now).  Civilzation will utterly collapse at 2.5C over baseline



So in effect you are saying that if global average temps go up 1 (ONE!) degree C from current levels, civilization will collapse.

Why would that happen?

Correct.  Modern civilization is on the brink of collapse right now.  Without any changes in global average temperature from today, civilization will collapse utterly - and most apes on this planet will die. Albeit it may be a much slower collapse (i.e., may take decades rather than years).

As other members here have accurately pointed out, all it would take is consistent years like 2015, 2012, 2017  to collapse the United States economy - which would collapse the world economy, and most likely collapse civilization.  A decade with yearly catastrophic hurricanes decimating entire countries and portions of states, and droughts like the one CA experienced in 2015.  This is not sustainable, even without a further temperature rise.  Have a look at the CA precipitation amounts for 2018.  CA supplies virtually all of the nuts and green vegetables for the united states and much of the world.  Groundwater doesn't last forever.

Human population is also not sustainable and it's extraordinarily unlikely that human population will simply plateau at 8 billion and stay at that level indefinitely.  Nature doesn't work like that.  Apes are not an exception.

Factor in an ice free arctic, and now how will the agricultural regions in the world avoid climate extremes that prevent agriculture from being produced sufficiently to support 7.5 billion+ apes?

Collapse of civilization is ensured at 2.5C above baseline - it's ensured at 1.5C above baseline, and it was ensured even at 0.5C above baseline.  It's just going to happen a heck of a lot quicker at 2.5+C above baseline.

At 3.5C above baseline...I have a hard time imagining this planet at 3.5C above baseline.   


How a collapsed civilization handles 450-500 spent fuel rod containment facilities?  As far as I know, there's no plan for this outside of business as usual.

-and it will not take decades for the aerosol effects to be removed.  Aerosols do not enter the stratosphere, they stick to the troposphere, and are removed from precipitation events.  This process would only take, at most, a couple of months. 

+1-3C if civilization collapses due to removal of global dimming aerosol effect, and civilization is going to collapse.  I don't see any way that we experience anything less than a catastrophic drop in human population by 2026 or 2030.  Extinction?  I don't know .  There's going to be bunker idiots and folks who try to live in the tundra, but that won't last long with lethal doses of radiation, and/or half the year where the sun is not shining.  Good luck growing radioactive wheat in the arctic. 

Too many factors are working against large apes.

The age of the large apes will end soon, and that applies to all of us on this forum.  It's been fun debating this subject, but our fate is sealed.  It's a matter of when, not if at this point.  Unless something fundamentally changes in regards to human population, ecosystem collapse, spent fuel rods, and arctic sea ice thickness and extent - the fat lady has begun to sing.  It's going to be a beautiful and horrifying song, might as well try to enjoy yourselves.

« Last Edit: March 02, 2018, 10:47:18 PM by harpy »

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #201 on: March 02, 2018, 11:19:32 PM »
Quote
-and it will not take decades for the aerosol effects to be removed.  Aerosols do not enter the stratosphere, they stick to the troposphere, and are removed from precipitation events.  This process would only take, at most, a couple of months.

But new aerosols are being produced from burning fossil fuels and biomass.  There won't be an instantaneous reduction in aerosols, because of the new production.

And the current IPCC reports estimates that the cooling effect of aerosols is 0.35 w/m-2.  However, 0.13 w/m-2 comes from dust and organic sources, so the amount caused by "apes" is about 0.22 w/m-2.  If you assume a climate sensitivity of 3 degree increase due to a doubling of CO2 (mid-range of current estimates), removing the cooling effect of aerosols results in about a 0.2 degree temperature increase.  Compared to the 2.5 degree increase (in a decade no less), that's pretty minor.

Edit.  Corrected assumed climate sensitivity and calculation of cooling effect.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2018, 11:25:26 PM by Ken Feldman »

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #202 on: March 02, 2018, 11:43:15 PM »
Harpy,
You fail to give s reason as to why civilization will collapse without any further temperature rise.  This seems rather presumptuous, considering most scientists believe that we could survive another 1C temperature rise.  When the Arctic finally becomes ice-free is uncertain, with many predictions still 50 years into the future.  Assuming that one bad year will repeat annually is baseless, considering it has been a dozen years since the previous occurrence.  California precipitation is around 75% of average to date in the main agricultural regions.  This coming after a well above 2017.  California rainfall has always been quite variable.  This is nothing new.  Weather is very cyclical.  Assuming that the worst of each cycle will prevail in the near term is very short-sighted.  Long-term trends are much more useful in climate science.

Wherestheice

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #203 on: March 03, 2018, 04:47:00 AM »
Lets not forget the fact that we are destroying the biosphere as well. If yall really think we can just somehow escape collapse.... we cant.
"When the ice goes..... F***

aperson

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #204 on: March 03, 2018, 04:57:08 AM »
Lets not forget the fact that we are destroying the biosphere as well. If yall really think we can just somehow escape collapse.... we cant.

How do you think phytoplankton communities will fare? What do you think has changed in ocean algal community resilience since diatoms emerged after the end-Permian?

You're making a lot of sweeping generalizations that you can't support. It's more interesting to dig into the details of what actually happens instead of just saying "X will collapse". Taking a more critical approach may allow you to evaluate the likelihood of claims like the 10C by 2026 graph you posted above.

Wherestheice

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #205 on: March 03, 2018, 05:09:52 AM »
Lets not forget the fact that we are destroying the biosphere as well. If yall really think we can just somehow escape collapse.... we cant.

How do you think phytoplankton communities will fare? What do you think has changed in ocean algal community resilience since diatoms emerged after the end-Permian?

You're making a lot of sweeping generalizations that you can't support. It's more interesting to dig into the details of what actually happens instead of just saying "X will collapse". Taking a more critical approach may allow you to evaluate the likelihood of claims like the 10C by 2026 graph you posted above.

Ask me what you want to know about any of these topics and I will give you the best answer I can. Want to know how 10 C would happen? Collapse will happen. Could be tommorow or 100 years. But our current way of living can’t last forever.
"When the ice goes..... F***

aperson

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #206 on: March 03, 2018, 05:24:15 AM »
Lets not forget the fact that we are destroying the biosphere as well. If yall really think we can just somehow escape collapse.... we cant.

How do you think phytoplankton communities will fare? What do you think has changed in ocean algal community resilience since diatoms emerged after the end-Permian?

You're making a lot of sweeping generalizations that you can't support. It's more interesting to dig into the details of what actually happens instead of just saying "X will collapse". Taking a more critical approach may allow you to evaluate the likelihood of claims like the 10C by 2026 graph you posted above.

Ask me what you want to know about any of these topics and I will give you the best answer I can. Want to know how 10 C would happen? Collapse will happen. Could be tommorow or 100 years. But our current way of living can’t last forever.

Okay, explain how collapse gives 2.5C GMSTA increase due to "fading away of the aerosol masking effect". Please cite actual papers.

Please explain how albedo changes in the Arctic give 1.6C GMSTA by 2026. Please cite actual papers. You are free to assume a seasonally ice free Arctic by 2026.

Please explain how Seafloor methane hydrates contribute 1.1C by 2026. Please cite actual papers. Emission rates as a function of time would be preferred.

Please explain how water vapor feedbacks yield 2.1C of warming by 2026. Please cite actual papers.

Also, please explain what 0.3C of "further feedbacks" in the image he provided is.


And for the record, I know what the actual ranges of some of these feedbacks are based on literature. I don't expect you'll find valid sources for some of these claims. I also think the onus is on the person making a claim to justify it, so if you want to post a picture of 10.02C GMSTA by 2026, back it up with evidence.

El Cid

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 298
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #207 on: March 03, 2018, 07:10:12 AM »


3.  This brings us to 2.5C over baseline (we're at 1.5C above baseline right now).  Civilzation will utterly collapse at 2.5C over baseline



So in effect you are saying that if global average temps go up 1 (ONE!) degree C from current levels, civilization will collapse.

Why would that happen?



Collapse of civilization is ensured at 2.5C above baseline - it's ensured at 1.5C above baseline, and it was ensured even at 0.5C above baseline.  It's just going to happen a heck of a lot quicker at 2.5+C above baseline.



Ok, no more questions here. In your world, whatever happens (you dont even need an ice free arctic, dont need higher temps or anything else), mankind disappears and we all starve to death. Just one last remark: agricultural commodities, ie. food prices are near ten year lows. That is very interesting - to say the least - considering the terrible situation you described. Low prices in my world signal oversupply and an abundance of a certain product...

Wherestheice

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #208 on: March 03, 2018, 10:55:53 AM »

Lets not forget the fact that we are destroying the biosphere as well. If yall really think we can just somehow escape collapse.... we cant.

How do you think phytoplankton communities will fare? What do you think has changed in ocean algal community resilience since diatoms emerged after the end-Permian?

You're making a lot of sweeping generalizations that you can't support. It's more interesting to dig into the details of what actually happens instead of just saying "X will collapse". Taking a more critical approach may allow you to evaluate the likelihood of claims like the 10C by 2026 graph you posted above.

Ask me what you want to know about any of these topics and I will give you the best answer I can. Want to know how 10 C would happen? Collapse will happen. Could be tommorow or 100 years. But our current way of living can’t last forever.

Okay, explain how collapse gives 2.5C GMSTA increase due to "fading away of the aerosol masking effect". Please cite actual papers.

Please explain how albedo changes in the Arctic give 1.6C GMSTA by 2026. Please cite actual papers. You are free to assume a seasonally ice free Arctic by 2026.

Please explain how Seafloor methane hydrates contribute 1.1C by 2026. Please cite actual papers. Emission rates as a function of time would be preferred.

Please explain how water vapor feedbacks yield 2.1C of warming by 2026. Please cite actual papers.

Also, please explain what 0.3C of "further feedbacks" in the image he provided is.


And for the record, I know what the actual ranges of some of these feedbacks are based on literature. I don't expect you'll find valid sources for some of these claims. I also think the onus is on the person making a claim to justify it, so if you want to post a picture of 10.02C GMSTA by 2026, back it up with evidence.



Water Vapor- https://skepticalscience.com/water-vapor-greenhouse-gas.htm

How much does water vapor amplify CO2 warming? Studies show that water vapor feedback roughly doubles the amount of warming caused by CO2. So if there is a 1°C change caused by CO2, the water vapor will cause the temperature to go up another 1°C. When other feedback loops are included, the total warming from a potential 1°C change caused by CO2 is, in reality, as much as 3°C.
 
How much have we warmed from CO2? well most would agree its at least 1 C, so according to this you got another 2 C right there. As far as time scales go, basically once the warming affect of CO2 kicks in, you get more water vapor warming soon after. Which is scary because according to http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/9/12/124002 it takes about a decade for the CO2 warming to kick in. Think about it. We havent felt all the CO2 we have released in the last decade (which is a lot).

Seafloor Methane- http://guardianlv.com/2013/11/global-warming-arctic-storms-releasing-methane/ A 50 GT release of methane could warm the planet 1 degree C or more (1.3 C). The 50 GT burp is highly possible at any time according to https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23923-huge-methane-belch-in-arctic-could-cost-60-trillion#.UpK05sS1ym4 . The methane is already being released, https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2007 . Methane levels have been rising in the arctic. Thats just observation.

Albedo Changes- https://www.the-cryosphere.net/10/477/2016/  The darkening of the Greenland ice sheet started becoming significantly less reflective of solar radiation from around 1996, with the ice absorbing 2% more solar energy per decade from this point. “Future darkening is likely underestimated. We all know im sure that snow and ice reflects radiation from the sun back into space. I havent looked into this part much so idk about the 1.6 C rise from Albedo ( not my predictions)

Further Feedback Loops- https://phys.org/news/2013-02-sunlight-climate-warming-gas-arctic-permafrost.html ..Sunlight stimulates release of climate-warming gas from melting Arctic permafrost, study says... http://science.sciencemag.org/content/340/6129/183 ...Speleothems Reveal 500,000-Year History of Siberian Permafrost .... https://phys.org/news/2014-12-warmer-pacific-ocean-millions-tons.html#nRlv ....Warmer Pacific Ocean could release millions of tons of seafloor methane. Theres dozens more i could list. 0.3 C from that seems very conservative.

Aerosol Masking effect- https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cleaning-up-air-pollution-may-strengthen-global-warming/  The new study relied on four global climate models, which the researchers used to simulate the effects of removing all human-caused emissions of the major aerosols, including sulfate and carbon-based particles like soot. The resulting global warming, they concluded, would be anywhere from 0.5 to 1.1 degrees Celsius.

Lets all remember that science in general is very conservative. 

Do the math. Instead of looking at individual aspects of Climate change, add everything together. Even with all this, we are not considering the biological annihilation we are causing on the planet, Ocean acidification, etc. Nuclear plants, war, disease, thats all another story :-\ .

I am not predicting a 10 C rise in 10 years, but rather about 4 C. Humans probably wont survive that kind of rise.

But hey! Maybe all this is just talk and we will survive. Which for you the readers information I support 100%. I dont want to die, and I want the world to be peaceful and happy. I got important people in my life, losing them and this amazing world would be horrible. Lets all remember just how lucky we are rn! At the end of the day, we are all connected to everything in the world.

Lets make the world a better place, regardless of the outcome!
"When the ice goes..... F***

wili

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2423
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 230
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #209 on: March 03, 2018, 04:54:17 PM »
Wti, elements of your position above seem rather confused. Water vapor is a fast ('Charney') feedback, so the ~1 degree C of warming we have already seen is not just from CO2, but from CO2 plus water vapor plus a couple other Charney feedbacks (clouds and sea ice).

https://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-sensitivity-feedbacks-anyone.html

It is the slower (but not all that slow) feedbacks that are going to start hitting us hard, plus loss of the 'aerosol parasol.'
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

Steven

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 79
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #210 on: March 03, 2018, 05:33:44 PM »
https://phys.org/news/2013-10-climate-geological-instant.html

That paper about PETM is flawed. See

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/12/E1062
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/12/E1064


If civilization collapses, the collapse of global dimming will increase the temperature of earth by ANOTHER 1-3C within a month or two. 

Nonsense.  The "collapse of global dimming" would cause a long-term temperature rise of perhaps as much as 1°C.  Moreover, your timescale is completely wrong.  Even if all anthropogenic aerosols were instantly removed from the atmosphere, it would still take decades for global temperature to catch up to that. The Earth's climate system has huge lags, especially due to the thermal inertia of the oceans, as other commenters upthread have already pointed out.

Wherestheice

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #211 on: March 03, 2018, 06:07:48 PM »
There’s clearly two sides to this argument
"When the ice goes..... F***

Wherestheice

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #212 on: March 04, 2018, 04:50:00 AM »
Wti, elements of your position above seem rather confused. Water vapor is a fast ('Charney') feedback, so the ~1 degree C of warming we have already seen is not just from CO2, but from CO2 plus water vapor plus a couple other Charney feedbacks (clouds and sea ice).

https://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-sensitivity-feedbacks-anyone.html

It is the slower (but not all that slow) feedbacks that are going to start hitting us hard, plus loss of the 'aerosol parasol.'

When the earth warms more, the water vapor will cause further warming.
"When the ice goes..... F***

Wherestheice

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #213 on: March 04, 2018, 05:11:04 AM »
https://phys.org/news/2013-10-climate-geological-instant.html

That paper about PETM is flawed. See

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/12/E1062
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/12/E1064


If civilization collapses, the collapse of global dimming will increase the temperature of earth by ANOTHER 1-3C within a month or two. 

Nonsense.  The "collapse of global dimming" would cause a long-term temperature rise of perhaps as much as 1°C.  Moreover, your timescale is completely wrong.  Even if all anthropogenic aerosols were instantly removed from the atmosphere, it would still take decades for global temperature to catch up to that. The Earth's climate system has huge lags, especially due to the thermal inertia of the oceans, as other commenters upthread have already pointed out.


I think there is a lot of unknowns surrounding "Global dimming“. But what we can say for a fact is that the aerosols are preventing some warming currently. What we can also say is that when they fall out the temperature will rise. Civilization is continuing to pump aerosols in the environment so if civilization went away, the aerosols would definitely fall out. Note that in large volcanic eruptions it’s takes several years for the aerosols to fall out. So maybe after civilization collapses it won’t take a month but rather 5-10 years. We just don’t really know enough about the topic to really know what’s gonna happen. I think both spectrums should be open to discussion.
"When the ice goes..... F***

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #214 on: March 04, 2018, 02:38:19 PM »
https://phys.org/news/2013-10-climate-geological-instant.html

That paper about PETM is flawed. See

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/12/E1062
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/12/E1064


If civilization collapses, the collapse of global dimming will increase the temperature of earth by ANOTHER 1-3C within a month or two. 

Nonsense.  The "collapse of global dimming" would cause a long-term temperature rise of perhaps as much as 1°C.  Moreover, your timescale is completely wrong.  Even if all anthropogenic aerosols were instantly removed from the atmosphere, it would still take decades for global temperature to catch up to that. The Earth's climate system has huge lags, especially due to the thermal inertia of the oceans, as other commenters upthread have already pointed out.


I think there is a lot of unknowns surrounding "Global dimming“. But what we can say for a fact is that the aerosols are preventing some warming currently. What we can also say is that when they fall out the temperature will rise. Civilization is continuing to pump aerosols in the environment so if civilization went away, the aerosols would definitely fall out. Note that in large volcanic eruptions it’s takes several years for the aerosols to fall out. So maybe after civilization collapses it won’t take a month but rather 5-10 years. We just don’t really know enough about the topic to really know what’s gonna happen. I think both spectrums should be open to discussion.

Sure, aerosols will begin to fall out if civilization collapses.  So too will carbon dioxide, methane, carbon black, and a host of other contributors to future warming.  There are a lot of unknowns surrounding global dimming, but would seem to be overshadowed by the greater reduction in greenhouse gases.  This addition to warming is likely to never occur.

Gray-Wolf

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 777
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 37
  • Likes Given: 107
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #215 on: March 04, 2018, 03:45:06 PM »
China's headlong dash for clear urban environments appears to have played a part in the flip in Pacific drivers back in 2014.

China has not ceased in its 'clean up' so ever more solar will be making it to the surface of the Pacific and augmenting the positive drivers we see at work there currently.

Mix that in with the crazy issues in the atmosphere over the pole and we have some very 'interesting times' ahead of us.
KOYAANISQATSI

ko.yaa.nis.katsi (from the Hopi language), n. 1. crazy life. 2. life in turmoil. 3. life disintegrating. 4. life out of balance. 5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
 
VIRESCIT VULNERE VIRTUS

Wherestheice

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #216 on: March 05, 2018, 06:43:44 AM »
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/aerosols.html

Some of you will ignore this because it is ´alarmist´. But there is some actual scientific papers tagged on this post.

I have come to my conclusion. Humanity is screwed. Near term we are gonna see billions die and populations decrease to pre- Industrial levels. This will likely be the last time posting on this thread due to the back and forth arguing on who is right and wrong.

Good day to all!
"When the ice goes..... F***

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #217 on: March 05, 2018, 06:28:59 PM »
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/aerosols.html

Some of you will ignore this because it is ´alarmist´. But there is some actual scientific papers tagged on this post.

I have come to my conclusion. Humanity is screwed. Near term we are gonna see billions die and populations decrease to pre- Industrial levels. This will likely be the last time posting on this thread due to the back and forth arguing on who is right and wrong.

Good day to all!

That blogger can't do math.  In his write up, he indicates that the IPCC AR4 report attributes a cooling effect of 2.7 W/m-2 to aerosols.  He then indicates that James Hansen believes the climate sensitivity is 0.75 degree/W/m-2.  He comes to the conclusion that removal of aerosols would lead to a temperature increase of 2.5 degrees.

However, 2.7 * 0.75 = 2 degrees.  And that's assuming all aerosols disappear overnight.  They won't.  It will take decades to eliminate the fossil fuel plants that produce most of the human caused aerosols and there is no indication that the natural aerosols (from ocean organisms, volcanos, dust, etc...) are going to disappear in the near future.  As I noted above, a temperature change of an order of magnitude less, 0.2 degrees, is what the science currently supports for loss of the aerosol cooling effect.

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #218 on: March 05, 2018, 07:41:55 PM »
There's a new paper on aerosol emissions that has been accepted for publication in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Research Letters.  It's available here: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aab1b2/pdf

Here are the findings related to near term and long term increases in temperature due to reductions of fossil-fuel aerosol emissions:
Quote
We found that aerosol emission reductions associated with the co-emissions with CO2 have a significant warming effect during the first half of the century and that the near-term warming is dependent on the pace of aerosol emission reductions. The modeling results show that these aerosol emission reductions account for about 0.5◦C warming relative to 2015 on top of 1◦C above pre-industrial levels that have been already reached in 2015.

Quote
Aggressive aerosol control due to air quality legislation impacts the peak temperature which is 0.2-0.3◦C above the 1.5◦C limit even within the most ambitious CO2/GHG reduction scenario.

So a mid-century impact of 0.5 degrees C due to the loss of cooling and a long-term impact of 0.2 to 0.3 degrees C due to the loss of cooling being offset by the reduced carbon emissions from retiring the fossil fuel plants.

And it's possible that the decrease in anthropogenic aerosols may lead to an increase in natural aerosol productions and/or that climate change will lead to increases in natural aerosol production.  Here's a good summary of the current science: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40641-018-0086-1 

The key point is: 
Quote
In regions where anthropogenic aerosol loads decrease, the impacts of climate on natural aerosol variabilities will increase. Detailed knowledge of processes controlling aerosol concentrations is required for credible future projections of aerosol distributions.

There's a lot of uncertainty about this subject, but I have yet to read any peer reviewed science that supports a huge temperature increase due to a reduction in fossil fuel produced aerosols.

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4268
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #219 on: March 05, 2018, 08:51:35 PM »
Does anyone remember a temperature increase in the US that supposedly was caused by the no fly rulings just after 9/11?
IIRC some were measuring a 1c or 2c increase during this very short period.


I don't know if that was all BS, or even where I might have come across it.
Terry

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3508
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #220 on: March 05, 2018, 09:32:12 PM »
Does anyone remember a temperature increase in the US that supposedly was caused by the no fly rulings just after 9/11?
IIRC some were measuring a 1c or 2c increase during this very short period.


I don't know if that was all BS, or even where I might have come across it.
Terry

There was a dramatic, immediate spike. Can't recall how much. I'll check into it.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3508
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #221 on: March 05, 2018, 09:36:36 PM »
There was a 1.8C increase in the diurnal temperature range. This was caused by increased solar radiation during the day with increased radiation into space at night.

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/artificial-weather-revealed-post-9-11-flight-groundings

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4268
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #222 on: March 06, 2018, 12:15:44 AM »
There was a 1.8C increase in the diurnal temperature range. This was caused by increased solar radiation during the day with increased radiation into space at night.

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/artificial-weather-revealed-post-9-11-flight-groundings


Thanks
That's a huge swing for something that seems so widely spaced in many locals.
Terry

oren

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3696
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 494
  • Likes Given: 1011
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #223 on: March 06, 2018, 02:19:04 AM »
There was a 1.8C increase in the diurnal temperature range. This was caused by increased solar radiation during the day with increased radiation into space at night.

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/artificial-weather-revealed-post-9-11-flight-groundings
This link is on what seems like a non-scientific site with some agenda. Best to browse the original Nature article, which puts it in slightly different terms.
Quote
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11218772_Climatology_Contrails_reduce_daily_temperature_range

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4268
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #224 on: March 06, 2018, 05:21:42 AM »
Thanks Oren


The change of 2 standard deviations in diurnal spread, the only time that this occurred in their 30 year research window, is significant.  The 1c upturn during daytime would prove more disruptive under warming conditions than any relief that the - .8c nights might provide.


This seems to indicate that shifting to HSR, or other clean transportation systems, could extract a penalty of at least 1c in daytime temperatures at these latitudes. Understanding what effects this would have on weather patterns is well above my pay grade, but I wonder if anyone else knows for a fact what would ensue if jets were ruled to be too dirty, and were permanently grounded.


Terry

Gray-Wolf

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 777
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 37
  • Likes Given: 107
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #225 on: March 06, 2018, 01:20:56 PM »
I may very well just be going off on one here but I remember my Grandparents bemoaning the Space flights as they 'messed up the weather'. To me in early adult life that seemed laughable but then just how much water Vapour does each vehicle leave in the Stratosphere? How much mixing of boundary layers over the full depth of the atmosphere do we see?

If we believe the entrepreneurs we will be seeing sub orbital fast transfer flights over the next few decades so if planes cause issues what will that 'mixing' and addition of water vapour drive when we have multiple launches every day?

When Falcon Heavy goes up that's one hell of a butterfly wing beat!
KOYAANISQATSI

ko.yaa.nis.katsi (from the Hopi language), n. 1. crazy life. 2. life in turmoil. 3. life disintegrating. 4. life out of balance. 5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
 
VIRESCIT VULNERE VIRTUS

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #226 on: March 06, 2018, 03:38:21 PM »
Granted it was a short-term change, but the net 0.2C cooling effect of clouds may be significant.

Forest Dweller

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #227 on: March 06, 2018, 04:16:44 PM »
I'm not too concerned with loss of aerosol masking but here's my 2 cents;

In science we want to duplicate results right?
So what other airplane grounding events do we know of besides 9-11?
Was the Iceland volcano grounding of similar scope and what was the temperature data involved?
Any other events where aerosol emitting industry was halted for a few days, airlines or other?
The oil crisis a few decades ago perhaps?
Interestingly enough this is the one thing we could easily test i believe, a nice task for the IPCC.
Repeat the situation of 9-11, maybe shut down some coal plants for a weekend or so as well....and just watch what happens to diurnal/nocturnal temperature.
According to the hypothesis we should see rapid warming as a result, and who cares if we shut industry down for a few days in light of the threatening situation....go on then IPCC!  ;D

Forest Dweller

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #228 on: March 06, 2018, 05:36:33 PM »
I would like to point out a few misconceptions throughout this topic;

- Wildlife is not thriving in Tchernobyl despite radiaton.
The famous wolves there i. e. have already been shown to have health/reproductive problems.
Wolves travel thousands of kilometers and thrive where they are not killed in Europe, which is why they are successful in Germany, but not in France.
We have no idea how many are local in Tchernobyl and these are not stupid animals, study is near impossible and they would know it is safer from mankind there quickly.
Most positive result i saw was how voles appear to be making antioxydants that help cope with radiaton but it's all preliminary stuff, undesirable to begin with.
Remember cadavers disappear in nature anyway, we have no decent idea usually anywhere and we can't have it in Tchernobyl by a long shot...that is bullshit.

- Nuclear bomb testing can not be compared to reactors, dumps etc.
It was poorly studied and all of it moved underground after Tsar Bomba anyway but has a different signature, time span etc.

- Nuclear disaster as feared upon societal collapse can not be compared to accidents such as in Russia or Japan.
Those are being cooled/ encapsuled or whatever and are mere accidents compared to full meltdowns as described under societal collapse scenario.

- The amount of nuclear threats is much higher.
Unless i have been misinformed the 450 energy reactors + 1260 spent fuel dumps(?).
Not to mention every military and other industrial nuclear industry.
Submarines, tankers and so on.

- Societal collapse means many more industrial disasters.
Remember Bhopal and multiply by a few hundred thousand in the chemical industry alone.
Other leakages everywhere, pollution etc.

- You can not compare to previous extinction events at all and say: "Oh well, life always came back and humans included".
That is total denialist bullshit of the myriad of threats present now and not even historically accurate.
Humans/hominins and other species were wiped out and had nothing like our industrial society which is already responsible for mass extinction nr. 6.
They never even went through the 5 big ones anyway.

- Human/anthropocene influence on disastrous climate, overpopulation, pollution or extinction is a myth.
All of the above and more are witnessed in industrial society, not the agrarian or hunter-gatherers present or past.
We blame humans in general because we do not want to see our complicity as industrial cogs in the machine right now is all whereas non-industrial humans suffer none of these problems while being erased by us all the same.


Andre Koelewijn

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #229 on: March 06, 2018, 06:07:01 PM »
Thanks, Forest Dweller.

The recent discussion boils down to the question: "Is there a spark imaginable that will cause the more or less simultaneous loss of control at 5 to 20 'nuclear locations'?"

If so, the rest of the story seems to be only a matter of time: other locations will follow, mass starvation will occur, and those surviving may last a number of generations, but extinction will follow.
If not, then life will likely become unpleasant for many, at some point mass starvation will occur as well, but by far most of the really dangerous stuff will likely be stored safely in time and a probably unhappy few (order of millions) will survive.

johnm33

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1201
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #230 on: March 06, 2018, 11:48:06 PM »
"Is there a spark imaginable that will cause the more or less simultaneous loss of control at 5 to 20 'nuclear locations'?"
The day before the tsunami in Japan there was a news item that announced all the reactors in Japan were being shut down as fast as possible; somehow stuxnet had got into the isolated systems of the plants. I haven't been paying attention to it much lately [intersting times] but as far as i know they are not confident the systems have all been purged, and so mostly they're still in shut-down.
 So yes. 

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #231 on: March 07, 2018, 01:50:09 AM »
"Is there a spark imaginable that will cause the more or less simultaneous loss of control at 5 to 20 'nuclear locations'?"
The day before the tsunami in Japan there was a news item that announced all the reactors in Japan were being shut down as fast as possible; somehow stuxnet had got into the isolated systems of the plants. I haven't been paying attention to it much lately [intersting times] but as far as i know they are not confident the systems have all been purged, and so mostly they're still in shut-down.
 So yes.
Stuxnet worked by destroying the centrifuges involved in the uranium enrichment processing.  Any speculation that it lead to the Fukushima meltdown (or caused the tsunami) is pure conspiracy theory.

oren

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3696
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 494
  • Likes Given: 1011
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #232 on: March 07, 2018, 02:35:26 AM »
I would like to point out a few misconceptions throughout this topic;
FD thank you for your detailed post. Much of the misconception in this thread has to do with timelines. Everything you wrote is of relevance, but could (and probably will) play out over several decades, let's say around the 2050 time frame - when continued human population growth coupled with carrying capacity issues and severe climate change all come together - rather than in the next 10 years or whatever.

Wherestheice

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #233 on: March 07, 2018, 03:25:48 AM »
the collapse is coming, no denying that. I do agree tho that the timing is hard to figure right now, id say sooner than later.
"When the ice goes..... F***

RikW

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #234 on: March 07, 2018, 09:07:16 AM »
"Is there a spark imaginable that will cause the more or less simultaneous loss of control at 5 to 20 'nuclear locations'?"
The day before the tsunami in Japan there was a news item that announced all the reactors in Japan were being shut down as fast as possible; somehow stuxnet had got into the isolated systems of the plants. I haven't been paying attention to it much lately [intersting times] but as far as i know they are not confident the systems have all been purged, and so mostly they're still in shut-down.
 So yes.

And still they managed to shut them down.

Chances are very high that the earth will be very different from today in 100 years. I fear a large belt around the equator will be unlivable, so massive numbers of refugees. I won't be surprised if it will be several billions of refugees and that massive genocides will happen at borders to 'save' regions. I also won't be surprised if total disintegration of civilization will happen in large parts of the world, for example most or all of Africa. And that will likely trigger massive waste-problems with sudden disruption of service of energy plants/ industries, which will also lead to environmental disasters. But I don't expect that will lead to the extinction of the human race. The human race will survive.

Edit: In my opinion we have lost as humanity when our only solution is massive genocide, but I fear it will happen if we won't save the climate
« Last Edit: March 07, 2018, 09:34:32 AM by RikW »

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #235 on: March 07, 2018, 01:27:25 PM »
"Is there a spark imaginable that will cause the more or less simultaneous loss of control at 5 to 20 'nuclear locations'?"
The day before the tsunami in Japan there was a news item that announced all the reactors in Japan were being shut down as fast as possible; somehow stuxnet had got into the isolated systems of the plants. I haven't been paying attention to it much lately [intersting times] but as far as i know they are not confident the systems have all been purged, and so mostly they're still in shut-down.
 So yes.

And still they managed to shut them down.

Chances are very high that the earth will be very different from today in 100 years. I fear a large belt around the equator will be unlivable, so massive numbers of refugees. I won't be surprised if it will be several billions of refugees and that massive genocides will happen at borders to 'save' regions. I also won't be surprised if total disintegration of civilization will happen in large parts of the world, for example most or all of Africa. And that will likely trigger massive waste-problems with sudden disruption of service of energy plants/ industries, which will also lead to environmental disasters. But I don't expect that will lead to the extinction of the human race. The human race will survive.

Edit: In my opinion we have lost as humanity when our only solution is massive genocide, but I fear it will happen if we won't save the climate

Curious as to why you feel that a belt around the equator will be unlivable.  To date, that has been that area experiences the least effects from any climate change.  What do you expect to change in the future?

johnm33

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1201
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #236 on: March 07, 2018, 02:49:04 PM »
"And still they managed to shut them down" Well almost the three operational at the coastal Fukushima all went into meltdown, [full china]one of them wrecked it's housing and collapsed the spent fuel storage tanks faclility above the reactor. Who thought that was a good idea? Have you noticed the beautiful zirconium sunsets of recent years? No more than rumours of similar problems ar other sites, but my best guess would be that at least one other criticality will be announced 25-50 years down the road, it usually takes that long.

RikW

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #237 on: March 07, 2018, 03:53:47 PM »
"Is there a spark imaginable that will cause the more or less simultaneous loss of control at 5 to 20 'nuclear locations'?"
The day before the tsunami in Japan there was a news item that announced all the reactors in Japan were being shut down as fast as possible; somehow stuxnet had got into the isolated systems of the plants. I haven't been paying attention to it much lately [intersting times] but as far as i know they are not confident the systems have all been purged, and so mostly they're still in shut-down.
 So yes.

And still they managed to shut them down.

Chances are very high that the earth will be very different from today in 100 years. I fear a large belt around the equator will be unlivable, so massive numbers of refugees. I won't be surprised if it will be several billions of refugees and that massive genocides will happen at borders to 'save' regions. I also won't be surprised if total disintegration of civilization will happen in large parts of the world, for example most or all of Africa. And that will likely trigger massive waste-problems with sudden disruption of service of energy plants/ industries, which will also lead to environmental disasters. But I don't expect that will lead to the extinction of the human race. The human race will survive.

Edit: In my opinion we have lost as humanity when our only solution is massive genocide, but I fear it will happen if we won't save the climate

Curious as to why you feel that a belt around the equator will be unlivable.  To date, that has been that area experiences the least effects from any climate change.  What do you expect to change in the future?

Because of the wet bulb temperature. It's getting hotter everywhere, but the air is dry at some places or wet at other places. Around the equator it's hot and wet. But I'm probably making an error in my reasoning ;)

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #238 on: March 07, 2018, 06:40:51 PM »
The idea that 400+ nuclear reactors are going to melt down at once is just pure fantasy.  Most of the reactors operating today will have been shut down for economic reasons long before climate change impacts start reducing the human population (if that ever happens).  The fuel rods will have been cooled in temporary ponds and moved to longer term dry storage casks which can contain the spent rods for a century or more before needing to be replaced.  There wont be a lot of radiation leaking or Chernobyl/Fukushima events happening. 

Humans are the most adaptable species on the planet.   Climate change will cause disruptions and perhaps slow population growth when impacts above 1.5 C to 2 C (such as long term droughts wiping out a lot of crops) start happening, but even those events will take a long time to occur and people will adapt.  Although some people don't like GMO crops, they are being developed and will be used when the alternative is massive famines.  Drought resistance, heat tolerance, the ability to grow in areas where salt water intrusion occurs, are all things that can be bred into plants.  And people will eat less meat which will allow our crops to feed more people.

Yes, some coastal areas will flood due to rising sea levels later in this century, but people will just rebuild on higher ground.  Hurricanes like Maria and Katrina will cause devastation in their paths, but they're not extinction events.

I've yet to see anything from the doom and gloomers that leads me to believe we'll see large decreases in the human population, much less a collapse.

Martin Gisser

  • Guest
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #239 on: March 07, 2018, 07:12:28 PM »
I've yet to see anything from the doom and gloomers that leads me to believe we'll see large decreases in the human population, much less a collapse.
Darfur, Somalia, Syria, Yemen. When ecocide and (sui)genocide go hand in hand and form a feedback loop of death and destruction. Just small examples, yet...

The Arab Spring riots were fuelled by rising prices of bread, after Russia stopped exporting due to drought and fires.

Problem is, people just can't starve peacefully.

For some optimistic counter examples from e.g. Ethiopia and Rwanda see John d Liu's films https://knaw.academia.edu/JohnDLiu
Let's hope the agricultural enlightenment he documents happens quick enough -  and does not get steamrolled by rapid climate disruption.

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #240 on: March 07, 2018, 07:55:50 PM »
I've yet to see anything from the doom and gloomers that leads me to believe we'll see large decreases in the human population, much less a collapse.
Darfur, Somalia, Syria, Yemen. When ecocide and (sui)genocide go hand in hand and form a feedback loop of death and destruction. Just small examples, yet...

The Arab Spring riots were fuelled by rising prices of bread, after Russia stopped exporting due to drought and fires.

Problem is, people just can't starve peacefully.

For some optimistic counter examples from e.g. Ethiopia and Rwanda see John d Liu's films https://knaw.academia.edu/JohnDLiu
Let's hope the agricultural enlightenment he documents happens quick enough -  and does not get steamrolled by rapid climate disruption.

All of the examples you site are situations that could've been avoided.  For example,
Quote
The Arab Spring riots were fuelled by rising prices of bread, after Russia stopped exporting due to drought and fires.
  Why did Russia stop exporting?  Why didn't some other country fill the need?  I don't think it was climate change.

In fact, the hypothesis that climate change will lead to more conflict is unproven.  The evidence currently doesn't support it:

Quote
It is true that impoverishment and human insecurity may arise as a result of climate change, if preventive measures are not undertaken. But there is missing evidence that global warming directly increases conflict. The temperature has risen in the last three decades, but the number of conflicts has significantly dropped since. A prominent study by scholars from the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo, claims that “the causal chains suggested in the literature have so far rarely been substantiated with reliable evidence

Here's a link to the article that quote is from: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/africa-in-focus/2017/01/20/does-climate-change-cause-conflict/

harpy

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #241 on: March 07, 2018, 08:01:09 PM »
Seriously, what's with all the climate change deniers on this forum?  Aren't you people supposed to be over at Alex Jones's message boards?

There's a lot of very interesting responses in this thread, but the deniers (you know who you are) tend to say "I don't think, or that can never happen, or humans are invincible".

The baseline temp is wrong, we're at 1.5C over baseline, not 1 or 0.8 or whatever you're using.  1.5C.  Stick to the facts.  Baseline is PRE Industrial.  We're measuring changes that have occurred since industrialized civilization, not since some date ranges two centuries later. 
« Last Edit: March 07, 2018, 08:17:59 PM by harpy »

oren

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3696
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 494
  • Likes Given: 1011
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #242 on: March 07, 2018, 08:17:04 PM »
Seriously, what's with all the climate change deniers on this forum?  Aren't you people supposed to be over at Alex Jones's message boards?

There's a lot of very interesting responses in this thread, but the deniers (you know who you are) tend to say "I don't think, or that can never happen, or humans are invincible".
Kindly avoid the name calling please.

harpy

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #243 on: March 07, 2018, 08:19:21 PM »
That's an objective statement not name calling.  We're not talking politics here, we're discussing reality.    There's not two sides to this argument.  There's reality, then there's deniers who deny reality.

That's it.  This is a climate emergency, and we have people pretending that nothing is wrong.  Anyone that denies the emergency is denying reality. 

Typical, ignoring the argument and focusing on "rules".  Typical avoidance tactic.

It's the same as folks who can't quit smoking, even though they have cancer.  They'll argue that it's one of the other factors that is causing cancer, never not the cigarettes.  Cigarettes are fine, there's 100000 other way to get cancer, and it's probably one of those. LOOK AT ALL THE EVIDENCE.  Couldn't possible be the pack of cigarettes they've been smoking for 30 year, NEVER.  It's that one time in college they drank too much, or all the year they spent breathing in smoke at work, or that one time they touched lead paint, this or that, etc etc. 

But no, not my precious cigarettes. Just replace cigarettes with addiction to fossil fuels, and cancer as the climate emergency caused by CO2 levels.


« Last Edit: March 07, 2018, 08:30:11 PM by harpy »

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1918
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 128
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #244 on: March 07, 2018, 08:35:57 PM »




That graph deserves a second look in view of the discussions so far.

The first thing I notice is that disaster cost have a similar trend to global temperatures.  As global temperatures increase, disaster cost increase. More warming is expected. An increase in disaster cost are expected unless measures are taken to mitigate disaster loss that can beat the increasing entropy of the climate.

The other thing I notice is that even as disasters increase, insurance losses managed to increase at a much slower pace. The reason for this was clearly stated before. Insurance manage risk. When there is more risk, they make insurance more expensive or payouts more restrictive. They got it down to a science.

 That means that many disasters are already becoming uninsurable. Disasters costs will keep rising but insurance loses remain the same.

So who pays to rebuild if the insurance companies can't pay for everything? The government? In the case of the US they must pay with debt. So the disasters are getting more expensive and we are already paying for them with debt. Thats not sustainable.

Are people going to pay for something insurance companies are not willing to pay for? The answer is clear.


Harpy. prepare for more dissappointment becasue the same people that were claiming that climate change was fake a few years ago have already moved on to climate change is real but is nothing to worry about. 

I understand how you feel. I know with every fiber of my being that CHANCES are that climate change will be really bad. These people downplaying the risk are literally putting our lives, and our families in danger.

Yet we must treat them with respect. It really irks me too, but we are talking about dangers in the future (present for some) and we are trying to preserve civilization.You can't  preserve civilization  by being uncivilized.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

jai mitchell

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1991
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #245 on: March 07, 2018, 08:40:22 PM »
Since we have already locked-in a warming of over 2.4C at today's greenhouse gas emissions this is what is likely to occur (note: http://nationalpost.com/news/world/scrubbing-aerosol-particles-from-the-atmosphere-a-faustian-bargain-study-finds )

1.  We will lose the arctic sea ice during summer minimum during the next 5 years
2.  We will work to reduce our emissions of CO2 but will also reduce our aerosols which will lead to an additional 1C of warming over land and 3.5C warming in the Arctic
3.  We will experience earlier zero sea ice and later refreeze with winter temperatures above freezing in the arctic circle on a regular basis
4. Massive shifts in northern hemisphere jet stream flows will cause massive droughts in the midwest and the south west united states, the amazon basin, congo and indonesia.
5. Large precipitation events in europe and the eastern united states will occur on scales not seen in recorded history
6.  heat waves will begin to affect key regions of Asia and the Middle east but especially including Pakistan and India.
7.  We will begin to experiment with global dimming as a geoengineering strategy. - with catastrophic impacts to the asian monsoon and further increasing western united states' drought.
8.  by 2045 we will see migrations and regional conflicts bloom with up to 1.5 billion people under direct threat.

No near-term human extinction possible in fact the term itself is fake to even consider.
Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #246 on: March 07, 2018, 08:46:24 PM »
Harpy,
Just because disagrees with you, does not mean that they are denying reality.  An example is the temperature baseline which you are choosing.  It is from the coldest period in recent history, and not a true baseline.  Yes, the temperature has increased more since that date, but atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide did not start rising until almost a century later.  Given the choice between your "facts" and scientific data, I will choose the science any day. 

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #247 on: March 07, 2018, 09:01:44 PM »
Seriously, what's with all the climate change deniers on this forum?  Aren't you people supposed to be over at Alex Jones's message boards?

There's a lot of very interesting responses in this thread, but the deniers (you know who you are) tend to say "I don't think, or that can never happen, or humans are invincible".

The baseline temp is wrong, we're at 1.5C over baseline, not 1 or 0.8 or whatever you're using.  1.5C.  Stick to the facts.  Baseline is PRE Industrial.  We're measuring changes that have occurred since industrialized civilization, not since some date ranges two centuries later.

I've argued with climate deniers on other forums and haven't seen any here.  What this argument we've been having is how soon the climate impacts are going to occur and how severe the impacts are going to be.

I've used scientific studies, the IPCC reports and observed facts to support my arguments that we're not heading to a near term human extinction or a collapse of human society.  If you disagree with these studies, find some peer-reviewed scientific studies that support your arguments and post them here. 

As to the temperature increase, the IPCC AR5 published in 2013 concluded:
Quote
The globally averaged combined land and ocean surface temperature data as calculated by a linear trend, show a
warming of 0.85 [0.65 to 1.06] °C3, over the period 1880 to 2012, when multiple independently produced datasets exist.
The total increase between the average of the 1850–1900 period and the 2003–2012 period is 0.78 [0.72 to 0.85] °C,
based on the single longest dataset available4 (see Figure SPM.1). {2.4}
The past 5 years have been warmer still, bring us up another 0.3 degrees (maybe slightly less when you consider the effects of the large El Nino we experienced in 2015-2016).  So we are at about 1 degree C warmer than preindustrial.  That's according to those deniers at NASA and the IPCC. ;D

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 5023
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 743
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #248 on: March 07, 2018, 09:28:09 PM »
Seriously, what's with all the climate change deniers on this forum?  Aren't you people supposed to be over at Alex Jones's message boards?

There's a lot of very interesting responses in this thread, but the deniers (you know who you are) etc etc etc .....................

I hate being shouted at. I hate being told who or what I am by somebody who knows diddly squat about me. And who is Alex Jones ?

For the first and last time:-
The argument is not about the reality of climate change. The argument (in the proper definition of the word) is about the severity and timing of AGW and the severity of consequences. Demanding aquiescence to your point of view is counterproductive and a right old turnoff.

End of message.
Over and out.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Gray-Wolf

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 777
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 37
  • Likes Given: 107
Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« Reply #249 on: March 07, 2018, 09:45:52 PM »
I'm with You Gero!

Let us not forget the latest MetO release about the number of times 1.5 above preindustrial will be reached by 2022 and the early teens paper exploring the loss of Northern Permafrost ( when temps go beyond 1.5 above pre industrial?).

During the recent Nino we saw temp approach the 1.5 figure ( above it in the Feb?) so we are on our way , over the next 5 years, to a planet killer.

I'd also caution of the 'mounds' now across Yamal and the prospects of a warm,sunny summer this coming year ( courtesy of northern blocking aided by low solar).

Only 6 months away. Surely we can be patient only half a year longer?

Some of us have been at this over 25 years so aimlessly waiting another 6 months, after years of failing to muster support for measures to curb warming, is a trifle is it not?
KOYAANISQATSI

ko.yaa.nis.katsi (from the Hopi language), n. 1. crazy life. 2. life in turmoil. 3. life disintegrating. 4. life out of balance. 5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
 
VIRESCIT VULNERE VIRTUS