Why should I care about climate change?

used to be cool wrote:

. . .

To the other guy, I placed a link to geoengineeringwatch.org at the bottom of my last post.

OK, thanks. Didn't click on it the first time.

Taking a look at it now I see that it is a classic nut-job conspiracy site.

Well done!

jewbacca wrote:

Weather patterns change a bit and the sea levels rise some, but so what? How is that going to impact my life? Or broadening the scope, why should the human race care at all?

An authoritative summary of impacts and vulnerabilities is here:

Climate change is relatively slow on a human time scale and quite rapid on a geological time scale. Thus a single generation is likely to see a relatively small part of the impact of their contribution but the effects are cumulative and long lasting. Unless one is in a particularly vulnerable region day to day life doesn't look noticeably different.

In the US coastal regions will have to deal with sea level rise and salt water intrusion (Florida in particular), regions reliant on snow pack for part of their water supply will be impacted (California), and the rest of us have a somewhat increased probability of extreme weather events with localized precipitation being perhaps the most significant.

Thinking more globally there will be social disruption which will have a ripple effect. Drought for instance clearly contributed to the Arab Spring and the current situation in Syria, hence the current refugee crisis. The degree of the contribution and the part of it that is attributable to climate change is uncertain, but "changes in weather patterns" have socio-political effects that are not isolated to those regions directly experiencing he change. Similarly for sea level rise, there will be very large numbers of people in delta countries (Bangladesh) displaced over the next century and conflict will inevitably follow.

Looking beyond the human-centric scenario there are unique ecosystems which are highly vulnerable to climate change.

Global warming is widely overblown in the media. If you casually follow climate change in the media, you'll see stuff like, "If Greenland melts, sea levels will rise 20 feet." And "Polar bears are dying!"

I realize that most posters here get their new from Comedy Central or Facebook, but you take the time to study both sides of this debate, you'll find a considerable body of evidence supporting the skeptic view. Then, there is the whole arrogance of claiming we can forecast the change in a highly complex environment (that we admittedly don't fully understand) 100 years into the future!

A good resource for those who want to learn more is

https://wattsupwiththat.com/

Let's look at just one reason why you should be skeptical.

UNRELIABLE TEMPERATURE DATA DUE TO TEMPERATURE STATION LOCATIONS

Here is a good read on the errors built in to temperature measurements due to unreliable surface station temperature data.

http://www.surfacestations.org/

85%-90% of US surface stations are too close to artificial heat sources that invalidate their results. Of the remaining 15%, warming is only half of that measured in the unreliable stations!

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/29/press-release-2/

There are similar studies for unreliable surface station data in other locations around the world.

You shouldn't. But your great grandchildren should

Well, first you should know what Global Warming is.

Science is where you observe phenomena and the construct a theory to explain it. You then try to find any evidence that your theory is wrong. If any evidence disproves the theory then you modify it or drop it.

Global Warmists only look for evidence supporting their theory while ignoring contradictory evidence and attacking those who present it. Therefore Global Warming isn't science.

Global Warming is simultaneously a political movement, a mythology, an apocalyptic cult, a religion, and a very big business... but it aint science.

So why should you care? Because Global Warmists are very powerful and they are using that power to take your money and tell you how to live even though their "scientific" models have been wrong every time. You have nothing to fear from global warming, but you should be very afraid of Global Warmists.

Jeremiah wrote:

The runaway effect is "manageable"?

Sorry, I mistook your initial post for an honest inquiry.

It was wrapped up in my mention of turning an entire continent into a desert.

Look, I'm a scientist by education and employment, and I'm geniunely curious about the issue. My approach to it is skeptical because that's how I've been trained to approach scientific topics. I have no doubt that humans are influencing climate change, but question is "Does it matter?"

There is plenty of talk about how bad global warming will be for the world, but when I dig into it, the impacts seem relatively small in the short term, and completely unpredictable in the long term. A few inches of sea level rise over my lifetime, for example, doesn't incite me to action. The possibility of a catastrophic events in the long term is both scientifically unprovable and a fear tactic.

So should I care because a few species will go extinct? Or because vacation properties in Florida will end up in the ocean? How realistic are fears of major drought, and how can we tell if such a drought is human influenced or an otherwise natural occurence? Etc.

I expect the next disruptive energy technology will be developed in the coming 50 years, so to me it's really a question of how much effect will humans have between now and then. How realistic is runaway? Is it not more likely that the earth will absorb the excess greenhouse gases as we lessen our dependence on fossil fuels?

I appreciate the links that have been shared and I have been reading through them. The more scientific the source, the better.

Ah, finally the BIGGEST LIAR on LetsRun weights in!

Well done, Kid!

OK. Fair enough.

By far the most knowledgeable poster on these boards regarding the topic of AGW is Citizen Runner. Ask him what you want. Whether or not he will engage in conversation is an unknown. But if he does you will be talking with someone who knows his shit.

Everyone else on here is either:

a) Much like you (I include myself in this category)

or

b) An ignoramus with no understanding but plenty of ABSOLUTE KNOWLEDGE

Good luck!

jewbacca wrote:

There is plenty of talk about how bad global warming will be for the world, but when I dig into it, the impacts seem relatively small in the short term, and completely unpredictable in the long term. .....The possibility of a catastrophic events in the long term is both scientifically unprovable and a fear tactic.

^This.

fisky wrote:

jewbacca wrote:

There is plenty of talk about how bad global warming will be for the world, but when I dig into it, the impacts seem relatively small in the short term, and completely unpredictable in the long term. .....The possibility of a catastrophic events in the long term is both scientifically unprovable and a fear tactic.

^This.

Except that a rational species would consider large scale experimentation on its only life support system to be unwise.

jewbacca wrote:

Weather patterns change a bit and the sea levels rise some, but so what? How is that going to impact my life? Or broadening the scope, why should the human race care at all?

Obviously you're a narrow minded moron. So don't care! Go ahead be a selfish bast@rd while at the same time you freeload and enjoy the Fruits of morals and security maintained by other hardworking people superior to you. When the going gets rough and the virtuous and in power have to make decisions, let them sacrifice you without mercy or stress of scruple.

jewbacca wrote:

Weather patterns change a bit and the sea levels rise some, but so what? How is that going to impact my life? Or broadening the scope, why should the human race care at all?

Water, Man... Water.

It's a beverage, Man.

Speaking as a climate scientist, there are many reasons you should care about global climate change; I'll just illustrate a few examples below.

1. The Syrian Civil War (and resource scarcity conflicts in general): few people realize that one of the precipitating (no pun intended) causes of the Syrian Civil War and the Arab spring was a price spike in basic foodstuffs, particularly wheat and rice, induced by a prolong drought the region was suffering. This reduced food yields, caused crop losses, and pushed people out of the countryside into crowded cities. Current climate models and data analysis suggests that the increased temperatures due to climate change, and its impacts on weakening the predominant wind patterns that bring moisture to the region, have significantly contributed to the severity of the drought.

2. Ocean acidification: About 50% of all the CO2 released due to fossil fuel combustion and land use change has been taken up in the ocean by the dissolution of CO2 into the water and the buffering capacity of seawater. CO2 is converted into bicarbonate (HCO3)- via the reaction between carbonate (CO3)2- and carbonic acid (H2CO3), which originates from CO2 dissolution. However, this reaction is acidifying the ocean and decreasing the concentrations of carbonate. This is very bad, since carbonate is extremely important for coccolithophores, a predominant plankton type in the oceans that rely on carbonate for their "shells", and are a major source of food in the ocean. Acidification is negatively stressing them, which causes a cascade through the food chain in the ocean, ultimately impacting important food species such as salmon, tuna, etc. Similarly, acidification has reduced the shell thickness of west coast mussels by 1/3, leading to higher mortality, changing ecosystems, and (of course) loss of food.

These are just two examples of the impact of global climate change; there are tens of thousands more that we know of, and millions more that we haven't either investigated or even observed yet.

Polynya wrote:

Speaking as a climate scientist, there are many reasons you should care about global climate change; I'll just illustrate a few examples below.

1. The Syrian Civil War (and resource scarcity conflicts in general): few people realize that one of the precipitating (no pun intended) causes of the Syrian Civil War and the Arab spring was a price spike in basic foodstuffs, particularly wheat and rice, induced by a prolong drought the region was suffering. This reduced food yields, caused crop losses, and pushed people out of the countryside into crowded cities. Current climate models and data analysis suggests that the increased temperatures due to climate change, and its impacts on weakening the predominant wind patterns that bring moisture to the region, have significantly contributed to the severity of the drought.

Shame on you for fearmongering to support your agenda. The reality is NO climate regulation ever could have and ever will have made enough impact on the climate to have prevented droughts and violence in the middle east, which has been desert for millions of years. Maybe things would be 0.002 degrees cooler, but it would have happened anyway. It will continue to happen anyway. People like you make me sick, f*** your hyperbole.

Extra carbon in the atmosphere leads to increased food production. Pray it doesn't drop else it'll be Armageddon as large populations run short on food.

Reassuringly, Mars has much more CO2 than Earth and everyone is just dying to get there including NASA so you know it can't be too bad.

jewbacca wrote:

Look, I'm a scientist by education and employment, and I'm geniunely curious about the issue.

If your scientific education leads you to a troll infested running message board as a reliable source for guidance on complex scientific issues, perhaps your college years could have been better spent.

There is plenty of talk about how bad global warming will be for the world, but when I dig into it, the impacts seem relatively small in the short term, and completely unpredictable in the long term.

How could a "completely unpredictable" experiment on a planetary scale possibly go wrong?

So should I care because a few species will go extinct?

I think you should, I'm pretty certain you don't, but thanks for asking.

Is it not more likely that the earth will absorb the excess greenhouse gases as we lessen our dependence on fossil fuels?

Over the moderate term (decades) it takes about an 80% drop in anthropogenic emissions to stabilize at the current ~400 ppm level in which case temperatures would continue to rise slowly. To stabilize temperatures at the current level requires essentially eliminating emissions entirely. Obviously it's unlikely that either of these are going to happen anytime soon, but that's not a particularly good reason to procrastinate moving in that direction during your lifetime.

Sick of agenda hyperbole wrote:

...the middle east, which has been desert for millions of years. . . . People like you make me sick, f*** your hyperbole.

Umm, speaking of hyperbole: that area (and the Sahara, of which the Arabian desert is an extension) was lushly vegetated and widely inhabited by humans within the last 10,000 years:

God save the mullah wrote:

Extra carbon in the atmosphere leads to increased food production. Pray it doesn't drop else it'll be Armageddon as large populations run short on food.

Extra carbon by itself might lead to increased food production, but climate change does not. Rising sea levels, drought, and heat waves all contribute to a decrease in production.

For example, the Russian great wave in 2010 increased wheat prices around the world 60% in a single summer. The 2012 great wave in the Midwest USA significantly impacted corn production.

Thank you for your response. Do you have any links to the papers on this? I'd like to know if the human influence on this drought is measurable. Again, climate change is not a new phenomenon, so the piece that really matters is the level of human influence. Would this drought have occurred anyway? You can't blame every drought in human history on increased CO2 levels, so I'm very interested to know what about this event is different.

I'm very familiar with this and the chemistry behind it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but technically this has no impact on climate change, right? I consider it a separate and more immediate issue.