All due respect to climate scientists, but they should tell us how bad it really is
Posted by Wrong-Two2959@reddit | collapse | View on Reddit | 330 comments
First of all, climate scientists deserve a lot of respect and the last thing they need is to get more crap since deniers already make their lives a lot harder, I imagine. I have nothing but respect for them.
At the same time, I believe it is no longer time to just give people hopium. Only this year they admitted 1.5C is dead.
The last chapter on climate change books don't need to tell us how "it's not to late, that if we just work together and change our ways..." The time of action is well past us. You can call me a doomerist, but humanity has made it choice long ago: "WE WILL NOT CHANGE".
The IPCC reports, from what I understand, need approval from world governments, and by extension (since they are very corrupt), from businesses interests. That's why sometimes those estimates use an awful concept when talking about the real world: Accounting tricks.
Accounting tricks must work for business and corrupt governments, but when we are talking about physical reality, it doesn't make sense. You may not count US Army's emissions but they're still there. Reality is not convenient like that. The fact that grown people rely on magical thinking like this... let's face it, it's delusional.
tl;dr stop saying goofy shit like "gobsmackingly bananas" to your reaction to ocean temperatures and give straight to us with "shit is fucked"
cycle_addict_@reddit
Shit's fucked.
We are going down a path that's never happened before at the speeds we are observing.
Really bad times are coming
voice-of-reason_@reddit
The main thing I learnt from my climate science degree: don’t have kids.
PussInBoots23@reddit
I'm 27 and I feel so bad for the children. Every time I see a kid it makes me want to cry. I wanted to be a teacher.
Whangarei_anarcho@reddit
I'm a teacher of young children - I follow a 'garden-based curriculum'. All we do is learn about the earth and how to grow food.
Mediocre-Corner-4188@reddit
You need to teach about the importance of planting native plants to feed our wildlife, too.
Whangarei_anarcho@reddit
we visit a nature reserve weekly to play / plant trees / pest and weed control.
idmarrybroccoli@reddit
I am 27 as well and currently studying to be a teacher. I also wanted to be a mom someday and I'm sad about that everyday. Sometimes I catch myself thinking hopium thoughts, that it's not gonna be that bad.
Mediocre-Corner-4188@reddit
It's not going to be that bad due to climate change. The biggest threats are wars, economic depressions, losing jobs to AI. There've been waycworse times and obviously people still had children and those children survived. Your clock is ticking, so have a few kids. You won't regret it.
Jolly_Chair_2686@reddit
What is up with this seemingly rampant female teachers having sex with students? Hot teachers too.
idmarrybroccoli@reddit
Yeah either this is a joke I'm not getting or you're hugely misunderstanding something.
Jolly_Chair_2686@reddit
I'm not hugely misunderstanding anything.. my X feed is a constant barrage of female teachers screwing their pupils
idmarrybroccoli@reddit
Yeah but you made that connection of teachers wanting to screw the children under our comments. Your brain went there, none of what we said implied that so maybe evaluate that
heppyheppykat@reddit
we do need kids, and we need to be the ones having them- not the right wing climate deniers who won't stop having children because they don't care. By 2050 if none of us have children the world will be being populated by voters raised by climate denial. I am scared of that happening
ptlprints@reddit
I was a preschool teacher. At naptime I’d sit and watch them sleeping, or hold them if they needed it, and just do the mental math on how long they could theoretically live - 2100 or even longer?!?! - and just howl and howl in anguish on the inside.
Mediocre-Corner-4188@reddit
People still had children just before and during both World Wars, people in Ukraine are still having children, the Chinese people still made children during Mao's murderous communist takeover. You're aware, I'm sure , that there were no glaciers at the top of the Alps just 2000 years ago, right? They had no fossil fuels to burn then, 98% of the North ND South American forest canopy and prairie were intact then, yet it was a much warmer climate era. There have always been fluctuations in climate. There always will be.Ask yourself- how was there a mile thick sheet of ice covering North America a mere 10,000 years ago? Couldn't have been human beings causing that- there weren't enough people. Have your children, plant native trees and shrubs and forbs, pray we don't end it all in a nuclear mess. Don't cop out. Having kids is the reason you exist. ❤️
voice-of-reason_@reddit
I’m sorry to be dismissive, I know you are trying to be positive, but I strongly suggest looking up “milankovic cycles”.
Todays warming is happening, at best, 10x quicker than natural and at worst 100x faster and it’s also exponential.
It’s hard to picture but the world in even 20 years time will be unrecognisable. Maybe one day I will choose to have kids, but if I do that it will be despite that fact that those kids will face more struggles than I did.
Superfluous_GGG@reddit
If it makes you feel any better, most millennials are fucked too.
Mediocre-Corner-4188@reddit
You may be screwed, but it won't be climate change that's doing it. It's habitat destruction. Plant native plants . They'll survive hot/cold, wet, dry. They've adapted to thousands and thousands of years of climate swings. Stop being such doomsdsyers. There were no glaciers on the Alps 1000 years ago, yet no fossil fuels were used.Slight variations in the amount of energy the sun puts out probably cause climate changes versus CO2 in the atmosphere. Don't believe everything you hear or read. Use your head and think. I visit the same beach house my parents rented on vacation 70 years ago and the shore is not any different than it was 65 years ago when I first went there. It only seems the hurricanes and tornados are worse/more frequent/ stronger because more areas are developed now than they were just 50 years ago, and a 24/7 news cycle brings it to you constantly. You need to think logically and not just accept things the biased news people tell you. Have children. They are the greatest joy in life. Plant native species so that the floral and fauna that makes our earth amazing will be there for them tomorrow.
Street-Common-4023@reddit
Me born in 2006 . Pain
TheWhalersOnTheMoon@reddit
Hey, so that degree paid for itself already! Congrats...
voice-of-reason_@reddit
That’s a fantastic way to look at it, thank you
reddolfo@reddit
An even better benefit was given to your children who you saved from being doomed to a life of conflict and survival and pain.
Jolly_Chair_2686@reddit
With that attitude though you are going to force the third world to be imported to the first world because there aren't enough bodies to do the work.. then the third world will get horny and might rape your first world women. Regardless of climate doom.
collapse-ModTeam@reddit
Hi, Jolly_Chair_2686. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/collapse for:
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
You can message the mods if you feel this was in error, please include a link to the comment or post in question.
CheckPersonal919@reddit
You do realize that unemployment is at it's peak, right? So many people have been layer off in just the past year. There are more than enough people to join the workforce if they are well compensated.
There are too many people doing useless jobs, useless management and bureaucratic inefficiencies that's holding back true productivity.
The world is severely overpopulated, if everyone were to live like an Average American it would take 5 Earths to sustain the entire population.
And last but not the least people are not cogs for the economic engine, they are not indentured servents, it up to them what kind of life they want to live.
cityflaneur2020@reddit
It's the most triggering thing you can tell people. That's when they'll hate you the most, when you're telling them the truth.
SpongederpSquarefap@reddit
That's one of the two solid things I've learned from this information
The other is I'm never going to get my pension or retire, yet I still save and pay into it
Nothing feels real
hysys_whisperer@reddit
Nothing is stopping you from pulling a Diogenes of Sinope
Sabertooth512@reddit
Diogenes of California
Taqueria_Style@reddit
Diogenes of the HR department?
Front 242 Headhunter
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
I have to pay into it by law. It really, really sucks.
hysys_whisperer@reddit
Do you know who Diogenes of Sinope was?
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
Yeah, I just dont want to live in a barrel with a cloth over my shoulder drinking from polluted waterways. Winter would kill me. Im glad I can live with a roof over my head and eat food. I would have to go poverty level or unofficialy invoice my stuff (Im B2B so tough luck) to get out of paying into my retirement.
PowerandSignal@reddit
Easy for you to say...
Counterboudd@reddit
This is what is hard- knowing in your heart that none of what you do day to day will be “real” or relevant when it all goes away, yet having to hedge your bets not knowing how long it might last. Fighting a war on two fronts basically to keep surviving in today’s society while knowing you only have a few good years left to enjoy while also trying to prepare on some level for what comes next. Every day it feels like I’m placing bets and gambling on where I put my energy.
h2ogal@reddit
This is so true. A foot in each future possibility.
Are we 10 years from +4c? If so I should retire now and just ride my bike around the world and spend my savings cause we’re all going to die real soon.
Or are we 30 years from that and I should keep saving in case of crazy shortages and inflation over the next few decades?
Or are we 15 years out from +2c and I should spend my $ on prepping and resilience?
I’m doing all 3 but not all in on any one approach. Confusing.
ValMo88@reddit
According to American Resiliency’s post on SoCal, posted yesterday, 2C was expected in 2050 - and we are already there (in Southern California)
https://youtu.be/jkSOfeCN89k?si=Re-CRZrKFZoCjErK
h2ogal@reddit
So Venus by Tuesday?
Vendrah@reddit
According to thissource, in 2060's we should reach +4c if same pace is kept, so its the 30 years option (more like 35).
dancingmelissa@reddit
Everything matters. Just not always in the way you thought it did.
kupo_moogle@reddit
This succinctly described exactly how I’ve been feeling. Hard to plan for two scenarios when timelines are uncertain.
SpongederpSquarefap@reddit
It's good in some ways too - none of my choices matter so I can play video games for hours without a worry
dancingmelissa@reddit
Money is a human concept. Think of saving as practicing for when things really are tight without freaking out about it.
Rude_Priority@reddit
Yep, have only got 11 years til retirement, I know my superannuation account probably won’t be worth anything by then.
deadblankspacehole@reddit
I have no pension plan whatsoever. We won't make it to whenever that time is and if we do I have got property but again... Life will not be like it is now
I truly believe this so my actions will align. I've been like this for twenty years, it's getting unbearable. Shit better blow up in the mainstream soon or I'm going to regret my decision because maybe everything is fine?
Everyone else is cracking on like normal and I'm the fruitcakr
WanderingGrizzlyburr@reddit
Amen! I’m in my early 40s my wife and I met in college and I explained everything that was going to happen in the next 50 years and she was like “Who the heck would bring a kid into that?
Best decision we made (at 21 years old in the year of our Lord 2003)
Jolly_Chair_2686@reddit
The third world will be imported to the first world if the first world doesn't have kids. There needs to be bodies to work. They won't all be good people either.
pinguicula_gigantea@reddit
Having too many kids is kinda what got us in this predicament to begin with.
saturnui99@reddit
Turned 24 last week. I’m never having kids, we’re so fucked. And I’m born in 2000.
voice-of-reason_@reddit
Happy belated birthday to a fellow millennium baby
swampscientist@reddit
That’s actually pretty sad. Not in general, but like for you specifically
voice-of-reason_@reddit
I think it’s more so sad in general tbh
_you_are_the_problem@reddit
On the other hand, an increasing population of childless and unmarried individuals means a greater potential pool of lone wolves with a chip on their shoulder against a belligerent government and nothing to lose. Sucks for the establishment, but a little catharis for the proletariat wouldn't go amiss.
TheCamerlengo@reddit
JD Vance would like to have a word with you. ;-)
Contagious_Zombie@reddit
I was born in the ’80s and I'm going to be cooked too at this rate.
Hot-Personality-5107@reddit
If global warming keeps at it we’re fucked. If we stop having kids, we’re definitely fucked. Blissful idiots will keep having kids, best to have some informed kids growing up to.
m00z9@reddit
..very. soon. ..
og_aota@reddit
My God, if they just all made a pact to go back to using an older, far more representative and academically honest pre-20th century climate baseline,...? Governments and Industry lobby groups would shit bigger bricks than the ancient Egyptians used to build the pyramids!
Status-Platypus@reddit
You may have gotten your wish. This just dropped in the last week: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-024-01580-5
SketchupandFries@reddit
My "model" of humanity on Earth is thus..
A man, living quite happily in a greenhouse at the end of his garden gets all the nutrients, food and oxygen he needs from the plants around him. Then one day, he decides to pull up 90% of all the plants still in their plastic plant pots and burns them, inside the greenhouse.
He doesn't open the door. The air inside is now filled with smoke, burnt plastic, carcinogens and very little Oxygen. Given some time he might be okay, except the man is now frantically pulling out all the remaining plants and plastic pots and throwing them into the fire.
arschhaar@reddit
We have been changing, just - not enough. But we also need to keep beating that drum to limit the impact. Each degree is going to make things several times worse, so there's no 'it's pointless now'. Giving up and not doing anything will just make shit much worse.
gangstasadvocate@reddit
They do. They should hammer at home even more publicly and on mainstream sources, but it’s not hard to find many posts on here saying, shits fucked. Source: climate scientist.
Masterventure@reddit
And then you have people like Simon Clark, who has giant reach "somehow" and feels like a total appeaser.
3wteasz@reddit
The thing is... If we really stop oil now, society goes to shit within two days. That's the dilemma. By not being straight, we have a couple weeks/months/years more of relative peace, but by saying the truth and a large fraction of people suddenly believing it, it's over the day after tomorrow.
mem2100@reddit
Renewable deployment could be much faster.
Nuclear could be subsidized until it becomes competitive again as base load.
Transmission grid needs to transition to DC.
TLDR; We could mash the pedal on transitioning away from carbon fuels....
3wteasz@reddit
And now you slip in that stupid nuclear again. It accounts for less than 5% of the energy, and it's available in 20 years. Stop it already, it is not fucking part of the solution! This is the very problem, naive people saying naive things because they have a political agenda.
mem2100@reddit
I'm not pro nuke due to politics. I'm pro nuke because base load is difficult sans a lot more pumped storage than we currently have.
Human stupidity regarding nuke plant risk is the only reason we have old plants with old tech.
As to the claim that nuclear power creates more emissions during construction, of course it does. So what. Total co2 divided by total power shows nuke to be a very low carbon intensity power source.
3wteasz@reddit
But we need to reduce emissions now, not "netto in some decades"... Do you get that? It's btw funny that the only people still clining to nuclear are some stupid German liberals or French people... Why might that be...
mem2100@reddit
Sure. This is why we need to accelerate our renewables deployment right now.
Ah well, I'm descended from those stupid German people, so I guess your nuke stereotype has some merit.
That said, the idea that we can replace all our carbon based power generation plus all our transportation consumption with renewables, is wildly optimistic. We are currently forecasting renewables to reach 40-60 percent of power generation.
Nuclear reboot has only progressed at a glacial pace because our political climate is so carbonated.
3wteasz@reddit
You know, I am not in general against nuclear, but I am against the people that use the "but it's green!" argument to continue their rent-seeking behavior. Those people want public subsidies, without which nuclear won't be economically viable. It's different in France than it would be in Germany. Afaik EDF is state owned (so hardly any money exchanges hands into private hands, other than salaries), but our German companies are not, they are private. The profits they'd make enrich individual dudes that already have 10 Porsches. And for state-owned companies it makes economically no sense to waste energy in reestablishing a nuclear industry again in Germany, as renewable are vastly cheaper and reduce emissions way faster and more efficiently.
mem2100@reddit
The economics of renewables change significantly as you shift a preponderance of your generation stack to them. Because at that point, you need to have a lot more battery/hydro/pumped storage capacity. Or a lot of hvdc/uhvdc so you can use the law of large numbers...
TuneGlum7903@reddit
Really?
Because James Hansen and the Climate Alarmists disagree.
James Hansen, and the team of climate scientists who work with him, are calling for a HUGE build out of nuclear power plants AND a global program to “turn the sky WHITE” with sulfate particulates. In conjunction with a CRASH effort to slash Global CO2 emissionsbas quickly as possible.
By their reckoning, “It’s the ONLY plan that has a chance of working and preserving our civilization.”
Anything short of that, “is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic while we wait for the ship to go down”.
endadaroad@reddit
Maybe, instead of preserving our civilization, we need to design a new one.
3wteasz@reddit
So... I think in that regard those people are a bit dilusional. Anybody who clings onto "preserving the civilisation" is in for a big surprise. We need to prepare for the next civilisation, we need to transition to another underlying principle that is not economic growth; and that is another goal than what those people seem to have in mind. Out civilisation is so intimately tied to consumerism that it's probably not worth to preserve it. Or would there be a way to surgically remove the believesystem and still maintain the civilisation? I don't know, but I have a feeling that even only a serious attempt at it will lead to huge ripples...
TuneGlum7903@reddit
Yeah, I can see what you are saying. Saving civilization "as is" seems like a flawed proposal from the start. It only makes sense if you have a vision of what you are saving it FOR.
Otherwise, "why bother?"
For me, that's when the discussion gets interesting.
Mazzaroth@reddit
The median construction time required for nuclear reactors worldwide from 1981 to 2022 is 7.5 years. (ref)
3wteasz@reddit
It's unfortunately premium stats, so I can't see it for myself. I'd make the claim that it's due to faster projects in the past, because the ongoing projects almost have Wikipedia pages that are outdated since longer than the building of the plant should have taken...
Mazzaroth@reddit
Sorry. I join a capture.
3wteasz@reddit
and how long is the respective planning time and all the other administrative stuff?
malcolmrey@reddit
so when do you propose to run something that is available in 20 years? in 10, 20, 30 years or never?
do you have a better alternative?
3wteasz@reddit
Why do you ask about "something"? It's not about some other thing, it's about nuclear. I would not start this for the foreseeable future at all. It could be an interesting solution to get some energy for extremely sensitive/essential tech where it doesn't matter what the cost is, but for retail use it makes no sense whatsoever. We need the money for reeducation campaigns to teach people to use less energy or waste less food, establish recycling infrastructure and the like, stuff that reduces our footprint; at least for as long as we are in overshoot. This must be the primary goal, just like growth was until now, it must be reduction of overshoot from now on. We don't even know whether we still have a chance under this regime, but since we are in a triage situation, we need to do everything to survive to the next year. I'm deliberately lot saying we need degrowth, because not even that automatically optimizes for reduction of overshoot, maybe it does so coincidently as a side effect (with the nasty main effect that we certainly get a socialist dictatorship) but we need it with highest priority and based on something similar to the constant small-scale negotiations a (free) market provides.
The initial revolutions we get from this will be a walk in the park in comparison to what will come otherwise. And maybe just maybe those revolutions will reduce the amount of people to a bearable amount.
malcolmrey@reddit
at first i've read "reeducation campaigns" as "reeducation camps" and then was so proud that i could write the following: "then you need to concentrate on another type of camps :)"
but then reread it and it is campaigns and felt sad :(
anyway, humanity goes towards Idiocracy, i don't think reeducation will be able to change that at this point
Coincidentally, if we do nothing then we should expect a big reduction anyway
3wteasz@reddit
well, tbh, we are currently not even trying at the slightest, so I am not so sceptical yet. I have this feeling that we need a new idea based on which we could announce this new moonshot project, something awesome everybody wants to work towards almost voluntarily. It's just "amazing", that human survival doesn't seem to be it...
malcolmrey@reddit
hey, you can't compete with tiktok :-)
Numerous-Macaroon224@reddit
Not the same person.
We need to make the idea of using less resources cool and mainstream.
Shifting my lifestyle philosophy has made my life cheaper, simpler, and less stressful. I’m not so concerned about making a mountain of money. I’ve ditched superfluous stressors like booking a repair for my non-existent car.
Unfortunately, there’s an industry called marketing that is literally our enemy. They’re a massive force, criminally intrusive, and as loud as can be. They fund much of this website.
We will never replace our current energy needs with solar or wind. Our civilization is in collapse. There’s not enough time.
If we settle on degrowth, it may get us more time. Let’s do it for the little ones who should grow old, the folks who can die naturally before SHTF, and as a BIG fuck you to the culture that caused this mess.
Also, r/circlesnip. Consider going vegan and not having children. I do both. Vegan at 22, vasectomy at 25, happily married anyway at 26 🤵♂️.
malcolmrey@reddit
no kids for me too, but i do eat some chicken a couple of days per wee
i do agree about living less stressful, i started going to the swimming pool/saunas almost every day and i relaxes me a lot :)
no need for car repairs too, i own a bike and use it daily (though I'm in europe so it's much easier than in US)
hysys_whisperer@reddit
The alternative is solar plus PV, by donating/sacrificing SE Asia to all be like Baotau lake.
malcolmrey@reddit
as our not so great politician said: "that is a sacrifice i am willing to make"
fedfuzz1970@reddit
If there was a national, well delineated plan, I believe everyone would get behind it. Right now, people won't do what their neighbors and governments refuse to do or only pay lip service to.
mem2100@reddit
The primary silver lining in Ukraine, has been the realization that Russian conventional military capabilities are weak. We expected them to crush the Ukrainian army via overwhelming air dominance. But that never happened.
China has never demonstrated a powerful "modern" offensive capability. Especially wrt air power.
This begs the question: What poses a greater risk to the success of our republic: (1) Other Great Powers or (2) A much hotter Earth?
At the moment, we spend 1.5 Trillion/year on defense. I'd like us to shift 20-30 percent of that to decarbonizing our economy. The EU is headed that way. And they are ALSO rolling out the CBAM (carbon border adjustment mechanism) to tax the hell out of products made more cheaply in China/India using GHG intensive methods.....
If we do that, we will basically force China/India to rapidly reduce carbon intensity - or begin to lose the US/EU as trading partners.
Sinistraministra@reddit
What's the benefit of going to DC instead of AC?
mem2100@reddit
Efficient delivery over distance. Ability to transmit via underwater cable.
Flyingfishfusealt@reddit
DC is more efficient over long distances? AC can't be put through cables if those cables are surrounded by water?
So if I had a 48v DC power system, what gauge wire do I need at 100 amps, and what gauge wire do I need if that 48v system is AC? Why do the necessary sizes change?
This sub is full of normies.
mem2100@reddit
https://www.electricaleasy.com/2016/02/hvdc-vs-hvac.html?m=1#:~:text=An%20HVDC%20line%20has%20considerably,greater%20controllability%20compared%20to%20HVAC.
TuneGlum7903@reddit
It's much for efficient but there are issues using it over long distances. Edison wanted DC but at that time it was impossible to overcome the difficulties and AC became the standard.
obiwanjacobi@reddit
Oil is used for literally everything. Not just energy. We grow our food in it, literally as fertilizer, pesticide, herbicide. It’s required as a base for almost every prescription medicine. To have sterile operating rooms. To make anything plastic or rubber. For food storage. To make toothpaste.
There is not a single thing in any store that can be made - or made at the same scale it is currently made - without oil
mem2100@reddit
Yes. Oil is foundational to modern civilization.
And we are lucky that it and its refined products have such a high energy density. Gasoline contains 33.7 KWH/ gallon. That is 12 KWH/KG.
Gasoline 12KWH/KG Tesla car battery: 0.21KWH/KG
About a 60-fold, greater energy density per KG.
The trouble is that the true cost of heating up planet Earth is both delayed and enormous.
Carbon (oil gas coal) while essential, are destructive.
Most of our carbon consumption can be drastically reduced by renewables coupled with storage.
And most of what's left after that, can be replaced with nuclear base load....
OptimistRealist42069@reddit
This is the number one reason we need to stop burning it. It’s way too precious and useful just to burn for energy. Can’t believe that this angle isn’t pushed more.
flavius_lacivious@reddit
The people making those decisions are 70. They won’t be here for it.
Felarhin@reddit
Oil consumption would drop by 97% of everyone were to accept the living standards of the average person in India.
TubularHells@reddit
So would quality of life. What would be the point of having a world full of poor, miserable people? If that is our future, it's better to walk hand in hand into extinction.
waitingundergravity@reddit
You would still be living a quality of life greater than the vast majority of humans who have ever lived. The current Western lifestyle is an extreme aberration of luxury that never had a sure economic basis to prop itself up. Saying that you want either that or extinction is just wanting extinction.
TubularHells@reddit
That's a very low bar; even in 'developed' countries, life is still full of stress and suffering. As an antinatalist, I'm totally cool with extinction. A miserable, mediocre life is not worth living.
Felarhin@reddit
Who says they are all miserable? You won't be able to have many of the current luxuries you are used to, but you have everything you need and then some.
TubularHells@reddit
I'm pretty sure most of them live lives of quiet desperation. People are good at (hiding their) suffering. It makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, but that doesn't make it ok. We need to raise the bar, not lower it. Each day should be better than the last, not worse. We need to live, not just survive. Luxuries are necessities if we want to be more than mindless gene replicators. The status quo is not acceptable. The human condition is not acceptable. Fix it or end it, transhumanism or extinction, paradise or nothing.
3wteasz@reddit
Yeah. How du we get people to accept this way of life before they eat the planet everybody else also wants to walk on?
Felarhin@reddit
Kind of have to do it by force but force also requires carbon emissions so bit of a catch 22 there.
angrycanuck@reddit
The issue is that the people who pay climate scientists don't want to narrative to be so negative. Climate scientists also need to eat and pay bills.
Source: person who eats
kylerae@reddit
Exactly! They also want to get out what they can get out. I believe it was during an interview with Hansen on the Climate Emergency Forum, he actually discussed the main hold up of getting his paper "Global Warming in the Pipeline" through peer review was changing something in the paper from "will" to "can" or something like that. Some scientists might have to change the way they communicate the facts just in order to actually get their research out their to the public with peer review.
TuneGlum7903@reddit
As much as I respect James Hansen, his papers can be "opaque" at times. They tend towards an "inside game" style of discussion in which he assumes the reader KNOWS EVERYTHING about all the players and the issues.
He writes for the "Climate Science" community. Not for the average person.
His books are better but then those don't have to go through peer review.
reddolfo@reddit
They're written for publication and review by peers, similarly trained. It's exactly what we should expect from him. He knows better than to waste time trying to convince people who can't even comprehend the simple physics of EEI for example.
hysys_whisperer@reddit
If you read an actual article, then the summary of that article, then the news story over the summary of the article, you'll notice that at the start, it's stunningly real, but then each layer adds roses to roses.
By the time it gets to the average headline only reader, it looks like a giant pile of roses as they walk by. When in actuality it's a pile skunk shit, but with roses staked so deep you no longer smell it from the outside.
Lurkerbot47@reddit
Read a book last year called Fire and Flood that related to this. Its main thesis was highlighting the lag in earth systems and our reaction to them. Science takes a couple years to understand it, then media takes a while to report on it, then it takes even more time for (inadequate) policy to be created in response.
We’re always behind the 8-ball when it comes to climate and it’s going to bite us in the ass very soon. What we’re experiencing now is just a nibble…
TuneGlum7903@reddit
This is a good observation of the information flow process. It's like that old game of "telephone" where the first person tells a story to the second, the second to a third, and so on. Until the last person tells the story they heard and you all laugh at how the original story got so distorted.
Most people don't even realize how much the "info bubble" they live in is only an approximation of reality.
As usual, I wrote an article on it.
029 – Thinking about Culture and Information Transmission. Most of what you “know” is incorrect or outdated. That has implications. The parable of “Clovis Culture”.
Surprisingly, people don't like to hear that about 80% of what they "know" is probably outdated and incorrect.
chop-diggity@reddit
What’s for dinner?
ilikecactii@reddit
It's also just really unfair to expect even more from the people who are already having to face up to this depressing work every day. Scientists are the last people to blame for anything here.
reddolfo@reddit
I'm so sorry for the thousands and thousands of biologists and earth scientists who signed up to study the topics of their dreams, only to end up as literal funeral ulegists for the living things they study and love so deeply. I dunno how you do it.
theguyfromgermany@reddit
Scientists don't mainstream news.
pajamakitten@reddit
They do if it fits the narrative. If it turned out that climate scientists were wrong about everything then you can bet the mainstream news would run that story.
theguyfromgermany@reddit
Sorry, my comment missed the word "controll".
double-yefreitor@reddit
are you really a climate scientist? if so can you elaborate on what is being misrepresented in the media?
gangstasadvocate@reddit
Oh no, my bad I’m not one I was just imitating the style of posts to look for. Of actual climate scientist saying that off the record.
PowerandSignal@reddit
🤦♂️
Thedogsnameisdog@reddit
Due to the lag between atmospheric 1.5 was dead at least 20 years ago. 2.0 is dead now. Thanks to tipping points we really don't know where this is going or how it may eventually stabilize.
We are the walking dead.
PaPerm24@reddit
Pretty sure ive read the sensitivity to doubling co2 is atleast 4c, and we nearly doubled co2. So 4c is locked in. which means the feedback loops that add another 2c atleast are locked in. So 6 c minimum by 2060-2100?
Terrible_Horror@reddit
I always believed it’s RCP 8.5 or worse. And I hope and pray that I am wrong.
Bajadasaurus@reddit
I absolutely believe it. Do you happen to have a study you can link?
TuneGlum7903@reddit
Comments on Global Warming Acceleration, Sulfur Emissions, Observations — (16 May 2024) James Hansen, Pushker Kharecha, Makiko Sato
“Global temperature (12-month mean) is still rising at 1.56°C relative to 1880–1920 in the GISS analysis through April (Fig. 1). [Robert Rohde reports that it is 1.65°C relative to 1850-1900 in the Berkeley Earth analysis.3] Global temperature is likely to continue to rise a bit for at least a month, peak this summer, and then decline as the El Nino fades toward La Nina.”
Takeaway:
12 Month Mean GMT:
GISS (Moderate/Minimizer Aligned Agency) says +1.56°C above an 1880–1920 average baseline.
Berkeley Earth (Moderate NGO) says +1.65°C above an 1850–1900 average baseline.
Who you listen to, can shave about a tenth of a degree over the amount of warming that gets reported. GISS is regarded as the “gold standard”. BTW- when the press says that we are at “+1.56°C of warming”. That’s whose number they are using.
“Acceleration of global warming is now hard to deny. The GISS 12-month temperature is now 0.36°C above the 0.18°C/decade trend line, which is 3.6 times the standard deviation (0.1°C). Confidence in global warming acceleration thus exceeds 99%, but we need to see how far temperature falls with the next La Nina before evaluating the post-2010 global warming rate.”
“Present extreme planetary energy imbalance will limit La Nina-driven temperature decline.”
Thus, El Nino/La Nina average global temperature likely is about 1.5°C, suggesting that, for all practical purposes, global temperature has already reached that milestone.
reddolfo@reddit
If there's any cooling data emerging from La Nina, I'm not seeing a single hint of it.
Thedogsnameisdog@reddit
It was in the IPCC reports as the justifications for 1.5 and 2C.
mycatpeesinmyshower@reddit
The “we still can save us if we only” line is written by journalists in mainstream media in order to get published usually. There are editors and other people who require such statements.
I mean all of us here figured things out despite the media. It’s not like it’s a secret. What would happen if the majority of people also figured it out? Do you think governments would change? I don’t. We still need fossil fuels to eat - and the rich still want the status quo.
Graymouzer@reddit
Well, it may be technically true, but if you look at what we are actually doing it is very unlikely. China and India are building new coal fired power plants. The US has greatly expanded its ability to ship LNG and oil and is now the worlds greatest fossil fuel producer. Are all those billions in new fossil fuel infrastructure going to be abandoned in a few years? Are all those people who work there going to let their representatives vote to close their workplaces down? 1.5 degrees is dead as a target. 2 is now the best case but it is very unlikely. 2.5C to 3.5C is now the optimistic scenario but there is little reason to be optimistic. That would require some action. We have no idea how bad 2 or 3 degrees will be over the next century let alone the next few thousand years we will have to live with consequences of it. We are playing Russian roulette with our species survival and the survival of all the other species we share this world with and we are doing it so a handful of rich people can add some zeros to their digital bank accounts.
mycatpeesinmyshower@reddit
FYI I think you replied to the wrong comment
Graymouzer@reddit
Oops.
thunda639@reddit
The problem is that Inevitably someone ask well what can we do now... and someone has a pipedream that we could destroy the economy to save the world.
At this type of overhaul to how we do business, especially as consumers, would cause widespread violence. Wars would break out, billions would die, from war, starvation, and lawless anarchy of a world populated by primarily American and Russian weapons.
How bad is it really? We need a mass cull of humans to save the planet. Not because the planet can't support the numbers we have, it can. But because the world is populated by 250million.entitled pieces of shit that wpuld rather see the would burn than stop using oil.
Socialimbad1991@reddit
Wild thing is that right wing politicians are acting exactly as you'd expect them to act during a climate crisis all the while still telling their voters it's fake news. The emperor truly has no clothes
BlackMassSmoker@reddit
In my view, the drip drip drip of climate news has normalised it for people. I look back over the last 10 years at least and see headlines saying "glaciers disappearing at alarming rate" or "planet heating up at an alarming rate" or "insects disappearing at an alarming rate". Yes it's all very alarming.
But you read this again and again, and you still get up and go to work. I've said this many times, but people think climate change is this distant thing, while ignoring it's happening right now Many people I hear discussing this still talk about 1.5C by 2050. Wtf?
The alarm bell to do something has been ringing for awhile, by people sounding the alarm. Problem is, despite the evidence and warnings, people look out the window, see life is rolling and just carry on.
youcanteatcatskevn@reddit
The standard response I get from family and friends is "..eh...I've been hearing about this for the past twenty years and we're still here, so..." and they brush it off.
PowerandSignal@reddit
That's such a classic response. I hear it a lot also. It's so funny because these people think that since they've been hearing it for 20 years it's meaningless, or overblown. They never seem to put together that 20 years, or 40 years, or more of warnings about deteriorating conditions doesn't mean the situation is static, or in some kind of equilibrium. In reality all these observations of negative events are building up like floodwater behind a dam. At some point they won't be contained any longer, and then all hell will break loose. What we are already seeing in heatwaves, massive hurricanes, raging wildfires, etc. are just the various leaks beginning to breach, in advance of the entire structure reaching its breaking point. We don't really know when the whole thing will give out.
Taqueria_Style@reddit
Legitimately I don't even get their perspective on this. Like... they're waiting for the Death Star to suddenly explode?
Things have been getting more shit for decades. We just keep re-adjusting our shit tolerance levels.
endadaroad@reddit
Boiled frog, anybody? Twenty years ago, we heard stories of wild fires or floods once every few years, and they were usually in predictable places. Now, we hear about wild fires and floods almost constantly during wild fire or flood season, and occasionally we are having wild fires and floods out of season or in places where wild fires and floods didn't previously happen. The media doesn't take the time to report these non normal events as non normal events, they just slip them in with the rest of the normal bullshit they spout. Go back to sleep, folks, but don't forget to stop and buy gas and pay your electric bill. And while you are out there is a new cute little dress shop that is having a sale and be sure not to miss the annual gluttony festival coming up in the city park.
PowerandSignal@reddit
Cute little dresses kind of keep the whole thing chugging along, imo.
/s (?)
SweetCherryDumplings@reddit
Did all their lives get better in the last twenty years? Can they see that out of the 20, the worsening is faster during years 15-20 than it was during years 0-15? It doesn't make one popular at parties, but there are ways to make people who never learned their algebra comprehend what "accelerated change" means...
Genericuser2016@reddit
My mom insists that climate scientists have been predicting the world will end in 10 years for the past 50 years. I've never heard of such a prediction, but she insists that that's the case and they've been full of shit this long so it must just be a ploy to "control people".
endadaroad@reddit
The ploy to control people is in the denial of climate change.
ValMo88@reddit
Our brains have a hard time understanding exponential .
You should watch this video - a thought experiment on exponential growth. If a bacteria culture Doubles every minute, starts growing at noon, and has filled a cup at 1:00 - most smart and well educated people will tell you that at 12:30 the cup is half full.
Our mind think in linear change. At 12:59 the cup is half full. At 1:05 We no longer talking to cups we’re talking about what would fill the back of a pick up truck.
https://symsoil.medium.com/your-brain-climate-change-explained-over-coffee-d10bc8fb5473
One_Television_764@reddit
They, willfully or otherwise, lack an understanding that 20 years is literally nothing on geological timescales. I think it's one of the most frustrating counterpoints people use. Even if our data is off by hundreds of years, it would be like taking out machinists calipers to measure how many thousandths of a millimeter you were off from a perfect bullseye on a dart board. Well, it's 0.03mm to the left of perfection, not accurate.
RustyMetabee@reddit
They don’t want to leave anything for future generations? This exact attitude is why we’re as fucked as we are. I’m so glad I do t have kids.
decapods@reddit
All of my closest friends have kids, so I feel I can’t tell them that I think we have like 20 years until collapse is unbelievably bad. They know generally what I think, I just don’t update them on my ever shortening timeline.
I think if we were like 5 years younger a few of them would be child free because the change in climate coverage happened that made it clear this is a now problem.
mooky1977@reddit
I have kids. I fear for their future. I also have a wife who's like most mainstream people about climate change.
pajamakitten@reddit
That is what annoys me most about this attitude. Do these people not care about their kids or grandkids enough to do something for them?
TheOldPug@reddit
Most people don't realize they have the option to not have kids. They've always been told their lives will be meaningless without them, that it's what they were "put on this earth" to do, and you're seen as this weird loner if you don't want them. Having kids is just what you do, and if you stopped and thought maybe you shouldn't do it because your children would be unlikely to thrive, that would be called 'defeatist' as though it was a personality flaw on your part.
malcolmrey@reddit
I rarely bring the subject anymore but I'm smiling inside whenever someone mentions some signs. Recently it was "the plants in my garden sprouted earlier this year and then there was sudden freeze and some of them died".
Personally, my depression stopped once I accepted the outcome and nowadays I try to live my live to the fullest. Recently in that heat I started going daily to our aquapark, some swimming and some saunas, the cold water pools outsider are amazing right now.
FirmFaithlessness212@reddit
No telling the turkey about Thanksgiving I suppose. The problem with exponential growth is everything seems fine and dandy until the curve goes vertical in the very last moments.
Also, consider that what goes on in one minute in the future is entirely premised on the status of affairs in the previous minute, and so on and so forth, and you realize there is no to very little free will. We are made to consume and ignore, until it hits.
mygoditsfullofstar5@reddit
"...eh... I've been told I've had stage 3 cancer for a whole year and I'm still here, so..."
JJY93@reddit
Every week at work we test the fire alarms. There was an actual fire last week and it took us 5 minutes to realise that the alarm actually meant something.
Sounds irrelevant, but my point is that if there’s constantly alarms going off, people tune them out and ignore them.
cbih@reddit
Remember when they had the climate scientist on The Newsroom and just laughed it off?
noburnt@reddit
What's that noise? Is it important?
Jorgenlykken@reddit
True, and for all these years the saying has been: «We have a chance if we change ting NOW» … Wolf-wolf in practice
OldConsideration4351@reddit
I was trying to change things 20 years ago and realized then that no one would ever change unless literally forced to. I'm a little surprised they're still waiting to act when changes are happening all around us ever damn day. But denial and comfort are strong forces.
MrMelick@reddit
A significant number of people refused to wear mask during a pandemic because it was inconvenient and not 100% comfortable and threw a fit, imagine changing lifestyle for less car usage, less plane travel and less meat...
Jolly_Chair_2686@reddit
Yes, it's hopeless.
Kiss_of_Cultural@reddit
Doesn’t help on both fronts that the government response is either “we’ve got this” or “it’s not that bad” or “it’s not a problem for you” or “it’s not a problem right now.”
Covid is still raging with 2+ waves per year, no real immunity, causing immense disregulation which is causing lots of other nasty infections that would normally be rare to be “common” and slowly disabling the entire population, but the covid emergency funding ended and everyone heard “COVID is over” and stopped masking.
Drs and the news and gov are normalizing all of it, just like our summers are getting hotter and severe weather is less predictable, but it keeps being sold as normal.
prettyrickywooooo@reddit
Truth and now we hope they aren’t downplaying the rapid changes in H5N1
Kiss_of_Cultural@reddit
Right? We are being hit from every angle right now, but maintaining the status quo is more important than preparing and protecting people from very real dangers.
MrMelick@reddit
true the governments has handled the worst possible way, just like they do with climate change
ceoyeah@reddit
And I feel crazy because this is still happening. People who made fun of those people are now doing the same thing while the pandemic is still spreading, killing and disabling an enormous amount every day.
pajamakitten@reddit
Most people do not realise this though. They do not go outside and experience the natural environment, they are not paying attention to weather abnormalities across the globe, they do not know what the AMOC or Cascadia Subduction One are. They are so distracted by their bread and circuses that they have tuned out the natural environment.
HailBuckSeitan@reddit
I stopped trying to encourage people I know to do something as simple as ditching plastic water bottles. Either get a filter or refill the big blue jugs at the grocery store and it was like pulling teeth. “i don’t have time for that” or “it’s expensive” even though cases of water every week was probably more expensive. I was just getting really fucking angry with people so I just stopped trying to get others to see the light and make small changes. I’ve accepted that we’re fucked and I will just focus on my own habits. It’s really depressing.
zedroj@reddit
Um, I think it was summed up already, if you are suiciding yourself out of protest by immolation, humans fucking stupid not listening
RIP Wynn Bruce, some of us hear you
unrelatedtoelephant@reddit
It wouldn’t matter. A lot of people would deny it until their electricity shuts off and they die of heatstroke in the summer. Many humans cannot process far off risk in a logical fashion, it’s always been something difficult
h2ogal@reddit
I realized this during Covid when in the US people were in hospital literally dying of Covid while insisting that the disease was all a conspiracy.
So how can we possibly get everyone onboard with climate change.
justadiode@reddit
And when they die, their last words will be "those fucking Russians with their Gasprom and the Chinese with their coal powerplants". Except when we're talking about people dying in other countries, then switch it up as needed.
It's kinda between mind-blowing and heartbreaking to see the world engaging in PvP just as the biggest PvE event is taking place.
bluehorserunning@reddit
FWIW, scientists have been screaming about this at the tops of their lungs for decades… they’re just doing it in science-speak.
Like, when Watson and Crick published the structure of DNA, the method of inheritance wasn’t actually 100% known. We were pretty sure it was DNA based on labeling and tracking, but a lot of people were still arguing it was proteins. There was one sentence at the end of their paper along the lines of, ‘it has not escaped our attention that the pairing structure of this molecule would enable replication of new, matching molecules,’ or something like that. And boom, mike drop, that exploded like a bomb in biology. Everyone knew exactly what they meant- that DNA could be unzipped, and a new matching set of bases added to each side, resulting in two new molecules, each identical to the first.
Likewise, you’re seeing articles like, ‘photoperiod based migration patterns in x songbird results in temporal dysalignment with temperature-based spring insect flushes,’ (songbird chicks are starving because insect peaks, which they count on for food, are happening earlier due to warming, whereas migratory dates are remaining the same because birds base it on how long the days are and the angle of the sun, which is stable). I’m paraphrasing because I read that one like 15 years ago.
Adept-Mastodon-7497@reddit
That last time that carbon and temperatures ranged like they do now the American mid west was a desert; California was a swamp; the equator was uninhabitable and north of the 60th parallel was closer to the climate we would expect to see for the last decade.
Just be ready for if the cold snap happens in our life time (60-100 yrs). Actions of our world are only present as a result of equal and opposite reactions (even if they build for half a century). A populated and diverse humankind would be like winning the lottery after the climate adjustment that is coming.
DamnYankee1961@reddit
World governments will never tell the peasants that the end is near..obey to the very last moment. Gives the elite more time to crawl into their bunkers, we are just worker drones for the elite.
Agisek@reddit
Yet another redditor doesn't understand the term "infohazard".
Certain information can't be released to the public in its entirety or without being doctored first, because it could have devastating consequences.
If the scientific community came out and claimed that the world is over and there is nothing we can do anymore, because the corporations killed the ecosystem, how long do you think it would take for people to stop working and start killing the upper management?
ptlprints@reddit
As long as they still need that paycheck to survive, no one’s spontaneously stopping work or killing their managers. People have kids to feed. If the floor is immediate homelessness you’re going to take the option of ”vaguely conceptualized later problems”.
Schtuck_06@reddit
Until something happens that involves over 1 million people dying, no one will care. The media has done a real disservice to humanity's future.
ptlprints@reddit
Over 1 million people have died from COVID in the US alone. I don’t think that’s going to do it.
RabiesScabiesBABIES@reddit
Hello from your friendly climate scientist mod! I have a lot to say about this post.
I want to start by telling y’all about the type of climate science I do: I focus on adaptation and resilience. This means I work closely with the populations most impacted by climate change in my region, climatologists, climate modelers, local governments/decision makers, and social and physical scientists of all kinds. I decided on climate resilience because I listened to the science, observed the lack of action, and recognized that change regarding climate won’t be chosen, it will be forced on us through climate impacts. My research aims to reduce the impacts of my region's deadliest climate hazard. Lives are literally on the line.
Here's what I don't do: make policies. The institution I work for is strictly policy neutral. My research and work exists to inform those who make the decisions and policies. I regularly present to my state legislature and am asked to comment on federal policy as well. Commenting on federal policy based on evidence from my research is not the same as writing those policies or implementing them.
RabiesScabiesBABIES@reddit
Now on to the post!
Thanks, the type of science I do is very challenging and often heartbreaking. It feels like too little too late – because it is too little too late. Climate scientists have been shouting into a void since before I was born, but your elected officials and corporations worked together to ignore, discredit, and dismiss our findings. The lack of past action on climate is not the fault of climate scientists. Climate denial in government absolutely makes our work much harder, for obvious reasons. Mostly, climate denial in our day-to-day lives is just annoying. I personally choose not to engage with it. Other scientists do choose to engage with it. Occasionally, climate denial in our day-to-day lives is dangerous. I have colleagues who have been threatened. I honestly assume I will be threatened one day. This is not unique to climate scientists. Scientists who work on vaccines, public health, stem cells, and women’s health have all been threatened, stalked, and hurt.
My brother/sister in collapse, WTF? I get a kick out of how "all due respect to climate scientists" is followed by a complete lack of respect for climate scientists with zero understanding of how science works. There’s no climate scientist I know who gives people “hopium.” I have never, ever delivered “hopium” to legislators, media, or the communities I work with. I think folks who say this are telling on themselves, and I see it shockingly often on this sub. What that tells me is that you aren’t reading research and studies from climate scientists. PRIMARY SOURCES. They matter. It illustrates a dependence on others digesting complex information and then criticizing scientists for how their work is represented by the media who’s writing for an audience with a proclivity for using words like “hopium” and a 6th grade reading level at best.
Who is “they?” Climate scientists are not a monolith. You should know that so many different fields are involved in climate science. There are glaciologists, pyrologists, sociologists, hydrologists – more than I can list here. As a rule, you should remember that scientists can disagree with one another, and often do. To expect us to be some monolithic hive-mind is completely unrealistic and unfair. “They” is bandied about on a regular basis as if there’s some conspiracy in climate science. All scientists are beholden to the scientific process. That means transparent methodology, replicable/repeatable results, and peer review. Granted, this is a process that takes time. Scientists, even climate scientists, sometimes reach different conclusions – that’s normal science. Remember that scientists are people and not all people are good or always do the right thing. I’m well aware that the scientific process has been hijacked in the past by corporate interests. Happily, and because of the scientific process, these bought scientists and their conclusions are proven false. I also know that people are losing faith in our institutions and science generally. That is by design. That is where the conspiracy is.
RabiesScabiesBABIES@reddit
Yeah, they do need to do that. We do need to change. Not because change avoids a very bad outcome at this point, but because change will avoid an unthinkable outcome. We are at a point where we can’t avoid a very bad outcome. It’s impossible. Nothing to be done about what’s baked in at this point. The past has passed. Anything we do now will help to avoid the unthinkable. It’s still a necessary thing to do. What’s the alternative? Not calling on people to take action? Rage, rage against the dying of the light and all that. Think of it this way. You have a patient that’s bleeding out. You can stop the bleeding, but not completely. What do you do? You stop the bleeding as best you can. It’s not a perfect metaphor, I know. I went into climate resilience because of the disaster that’s already baked in, I stay because of the worse disaster that’s coming. Change, whether we intentionally embrace it or now, will happen. Change is (shout out to the amazing Octavia E. Butler). I believe it will likely be forced upon us. It will be terrible. One good thing to do now is to frantically claw back emissions. The best thing to do is find an adaptive and resilient path through the future assuming emissions continue. I need everyone to know that the adaptive and resilient paths are by no means easy or comfortable or attractive. Adaptation and resilience are the best out choices out of a truly dismal set of options. But, goddamnit, I have to say I tried.
The IPCC is the United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change.
Have you ever even read an IPCC report? Please educate yourself further.
As for the “accounting tricks,” I agree. It does amount to magical thinking. We aren’t going to cap and trade and carbon offset our way out of this. Your beef isn’t with climate scientists, it’s with economists and policy makers.
RabiesScabiesBABIES@reddit
What, you think scientists can’t be shocked? You think we should hide our reactions? All this tells me is that you read some article or tweet and your only takeaway was semantic. Folks on this sub absolutely rag on climate scientists for how we are portrayed in the media. When we give interviews, we don’t have control of what a journalist does or does not quote. In my interviews, I basically stick to a script to avoid this issue. When we tweet, we are tweeting as individuals. I think the problem here is twofold: you have a legit problem with how media portrays the climate crisis AND you want to hold climate scientists to a higher standard than others. There’s an odd expectation that climate scientists have a crystal ball and perfect language for everything. The whole “faster than expected” phrase completely ignores the fact that Earth is a chaotic, complex, non-linear, interconnected system that even our best models can’t possibly capture (all models are wrong, but some are useful). Climate science is taking place in an environment of deep uncertainty. That’s why we often communicate risks in terms of likelihood (very likely, not likely, etc.). It really discredits all the aspects of climate science when people chant the “faster than expected” phrase over and over. Here’s how it works when earth systems change: climate scientists make a hypothesis, gather data, analyze data and make a conclusion. To publish that conclusion, the paper goes through peer review. It’s challenged and dissected. Once published the takeaways are used to update models, or inform policy, or any number of things. Climate scientists are amazing, climate scientists are not clairvoyant. All science is a process.
This was gobsmackingly bananas exhausting to write and I feel like I hardly scratched the surface.
TuneGlum7903@reddit
Sigh, this was a great comment and I FEEL what you are saying. Your position is basically where I was at 5 or 6 years ago.
Things have CHANGED in that time.
The "science" you are basing your work on is deeply flawed and I can prove it to you. I have literally written several thousand pages detailing exactly how it is flawed and how, historically those flaws happened.
There was a meeting at Woods Hole in 1979 and there were factions there. One group, the Moderates, set their 2XCO2 warming estimate at +1.8°C to +2.5°C. The other group, the Alarmists, estimated 2XCO2 as +4.5°C to +6°C.
Those numbers are for 560ppm levels of CO2. Only ONE of them can be right.
So, when you use the Moderate estimates in your models and planning, you ARE choosing a side. Whether you see it that way or not, you are choosing which theories and models you see as "valid" and which ones you ignore.
The difference between these two positions is to great to "paper" over. The Moderate "guestimates" for warming are 1/2 those of the Alarmists.
If the Moderates have been wrong, and delusional about how to interpret the evidence that is developing. Then they have killed us all.
We have a RIGHT to demand an accounting at this point. The evidence is that we believed you and you are wrong.
RabiesScabiesBABIES@reddit
I was not in existence in 1979. You assume quite a lot about the models I use. I work with scientists who model multiple scenarios (like the "alarmist" one identified above) and talk to decision makers about why it's necessary to plan for the worst possible outcomes. We (my team) do not pick between "moderate or alarmist" nor do we identify with any factions in the history of climate work. As evidence shows us earlier estimates are not accurate, we adjust accordingly.
Please publish. I mean that.
TuneGlum7903@reddit
I am publishing, being here is a form of publishing my work. Other than writing a book there are few "mainstream" outlets that are going print what I have to say.
I am still too FRINGE.
Yet I keep gaining followers, why is that?
My predictions keep coming true. Things I predicted 2-3 years ago are unfolding as I said they would. Predictive ability is a key feature of a theory or model is it not?
Good models indicate what's going to happen "in the future".
Bad/flawed models leave people like Zeke Hausfather "gobsmacked". When things that shouldn't be able to happen, suddenly do.
This makes a HUGE difference now. We aren't talking about being a few tenths of a degree off, one way or the other. We are talking about COLLAPSE and billions dying because the "Climate Science" was flawed.
You surely would agree that even if the results are the same, the difference between hitting +2°C in 2100 and hitting +2°C in 2035 is important. I think we will be around +6°C by 2100.
That's what we need to be planning for.
I think the evidence supports that analysis of the science.
050 - The Earth’s Climate System - A Short Users Guide. Part 03. Permafrost Melting — The role of permafrost in the Climate System.
051 - Unclothing the Emperor : Understanding “What’s Wrong” with our Climate Paradigm. In order to understand “Why” things are happening “FASTER than Expected”.
052 - Unclothing the Emperor : Understanding “What’s Wrong” with our “Climate Paradigm”. Part 2 - Acceleration of the Rate of Warming (RoW).
053 - Hansen dropped a new paper on Friday morning. Let’s UNPACK what it MEANS.
054 - Unclothing the Emperor : Understanding “What’s Wrong” with our “Climate Paradigm”. Part 3 - Latitudinal Gradient Response and Polar Amplification.
056 - Unclothing the Emperor : Understanding “What’s Wrong” with our “Climate Paradigm” - Part 4. The PERMAFROST — is MELTING, “faster than expected”.
057 - Short Takes — A few thoughts on Climate Models.
lavapig_love@reddit
Sure, you have a right to demand an "accounting".
The problem is that to a police officer, "accounting" looks an awful lot like "resisting arrest" and "questioning authority". Both shootable offenses.
So, unless you're willing to get off Reddit and talk about things that break Rule 1 on this sub, you're not really doing much to help, y'know?
leifsinton@reddit
It's really fucking bad dude, and they keep telling us but we get hand waving 'it'll be fiiiiine' back to them.
Like in covid people weren't dropping dead in the street with blood shooting from their orifices so huge swathes of people cracked on if nothing was happening.
Gnug315@reddit
The problem is that people stopped respecting authority, ie. experts. This happened for many reasons, but can generally said to be a cultural problem.
So, when an INTJ-personality scientist who has dedicated their life to studying something says “We need to prevent X at any cost,” we think they are like most people: exaggerating and lying.
No, they are honest, correct, and literal.
If God came down from the heavens and said it, I’d bet people would listen.
ValMo88@reddit
I am a new subscriber to “American Resiliancy” and believe this scientists’ description of why government officials don’t do more public education.
https://youtu.be/jkSOfeCN89k?si=Re-CRZrKFZoCjErK
Thank you the prior administration (sarcasm & anger)
eclipsenow@reddit
Nonsense! They did NOT admit 1.5C is dead because it isn't! You don't know what you're talking about. Google what increments climate is measured in and get back to us - because it isn't one year. One year is a blip! One year is a weird Samoan Volcano and El Nino. (Hint so you don't have to google - when we've been over 1.5C for 20 years get back to me.)
"no longer time to just give people hopium"
So if it's a choice between your online echo-chamber and SCIENCE - well SCIENCE can take a hike, right? It's not telling the story you want to hear!
Seriously mate, Climate Doomers are the new Climate Deniers. They're more interested in their own conspiracy theories and tales of the apocalypse than they are in the actual climate science - and sneer at anyone ‘naïve’ enough to try and be an ‘activist’. They remind me of this famous climate interview from Aaron Sorkin’s “The Newsroom”. https://youtu.be/pNYp6oc37ds
No wonder Big Oil sponsor Climate Doomers! Atmospheric Physicists Simon Clark explains. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XSG2Dw2mL8
Some climate doomers cite the "hot models" - but Zeke explains why this is wrong. https://www.theclimatebrink.com/p/revisiting-the-hot-model-problem
Michael Mann explains those who exaggerate climate sensitivity:
https://michaelmann.net/content/comments-new-article-james-hansen
And despite recently teaming up with some rather Doomer modellers (about climate sensitivity) - James Hansen explains why he's not a Doomer. And he cited "hot models".
https://www.columbia.edu/\~jeh1/mailings/2023/GoodNews.28December2023.pdf
Johan Rockstrom of Planetary Boundaries fame is the climatologist showing why we CANNOT go over 1.5 degrees! He writes for the Club of Rome's "Earth4All" institute. Yet even he now has hope because finally - wind and solar are the right price. HE says they're on a doubling curve that should give us hope! Not hopium - hope!
https://youtu.be/7KfWGAjJAsM?t=1191
More on Climate Doomers, and how their origins are not even from the Climate Community but just a guy selling a book.
Part 1: https://physicalattraction.libsyn.com/climate-201-climate-doomism-i
Part 2: https://physicalattraction.libsyn.com/climate-201-climate-doomism-ii
TuneGlum7903@reddit
This a moment when knowing the history of Climate Science is useful. Because the history tells you why Climate Scientists are very restrained about they say.
There are "factions" in Climate Science. There are the "Moderates" and the "Alarmists" and the Moderates have dominated the field since the 80's.
The Moderates SEVERELY PUNISH Climate Scientists who make statements that cast doubt on the Moderate "Climate Paradigm" of how the Climate System works.
They control departments and agencies. They allocate research grants and funding. They review papers and decide what gets published where.
Going against the prevailing paradigm means "career death". Going against the prevailing paradigm means losing all credibility and getting labeled a "Doomer". Michael Mann might even call you "mentally ill".
And even if you do try to "speak out", no one will hear you or listen. Because the mainstream media will be filled with people like Hanbah Ritchie and Michael Mann telling everyone that they shouldn't listen to you. Because you are just an attention seeking, financially motivated, sad person preying on people's fears.
Few are willing to run that gauntlet.
Just ask James Hansen.
birdy_c81@reddit
This 100%
cabalavatar@reddit
Makes me wonder if someone will start harassing Paul Beckwith because he cites new James Hansen work on his YT channel all the time. And on the message boards on YT on climate science, Michael Mann sure doesn't have a favourable reputation for being honest, kind, and transparent.
get_while_true@reddit
"Oh him? He didn't get the results we ordered."
Sadly, this is pervasive throughout history and society.
robinkin@reddit
And Guy McPherson.
lamby284@reddit
You wouldn't pay attention anyway. The things we know make a difference, y'all don't want to do.
Eric_Licausi777@reddit
All the rich fat cat elites and philanthropists that practically bleed and shit money who live in massive mansions, have 15 cars, use private jets to fly everywhere, and hoards of stocks and money locked away would most likely come up with a plan to avert our destruction. And then they’ll make us pay for it.
EJgone@reddit
https://thehighwire.com/editorial/new-peer-reviewed-study-co2-has-zero-impact-on-climate-change/
npcknapsack@reddit
"akin to the doctors who dared speak up about the deadly mRNA COVID-19 shots"
What the fuck idiot rag did I just read...
WIAttacker@reddit
"Experts agree: Turbocancers are caused by toxic mRNA COVID-19 jabs"
wow, what a great source of information, I am sure whatever they will say about climate change has been well researched and definitely isn't an emotional diarrhoea of some conspiracy nut.
goodheartedalcoholic@reddit
tbf, humanity didnt make this choice. a powerful minority did. the idea of "humanity" as an agent that makes choices is misleading.
HamHamLunchbox@reddit
There is basically zero hope for us if we dont reduce greenhouse gases by 50% by 2030 and reduce them to zero by 2050. In case „we“ can manage to achive this, we might be able to prevent the worst effects.
Vegetaman916@reddit
There is zero hope because we don't have until 2030. We have until maybe 1995, at best, and that means...
4C minimum is already "baked in." That much can't be prevented or mitigated.
And that is the truth that climate science has already spit out, despite people's insistence on not seeing it.
Because it isn't just the science that guarantees it, it is the continuing action-pattern of society, which there also isn't time to change. Such changes in attitudes take generations, and we have a few years left, at best.
Business as usual will continue, and once you factor that into the science... the results are clear.
TuneGlum7903@reddit
Well that's the problem isn't it?
You see +4°C minimum already "baked in".
Moderate "mainstream" Climate Science says you're WRONG.
Who are people going to believe?
Some crazy "Doomer" who wants to scold them for their lifestyle and take away their toys. Or, the REAL Climate Scientists they see on TV getting interviewed who tell them that we are looking at only +2°C of warming by 2100 if we get to NETZERO by 2050.
Which, Hannah Ritchie tells you in her new book, is going to happen almost "painlessly" because renewables are "so cheap" now.
The difference between these two viewpoints is HUGE.
I agree. It normally takes decades to organically change a societies views on a subject. Paradigm shifts, as Kuhn pointed out, tend to be generational matters. Particularly when entrenched interests are profiting from continuation of the existing paradigm.
The situation seems hopeless. The most probable outcome is BAU right up until the point of sudden, total, catastrophic collapse.
KNOWING that, what can you do?
Hope for a horrific "mass casualty event", ala Ministry of the Future chapter one, that's so BAD it forces an "epiphany" on the global population. Something like an "aliens are invading" and the world united to defeat them story-line.
Basically hope and work towards a "Green Revolution".
OR
Opt out and pursue a "Collapse" project. IE. working on surviving the Collapse personally, as a family, or as a community. If not survival, then perhaps doing something to preserve human knowledge for the post-collapse dark age. Or, maybe just thinking about how to live through the collapse and die with some dignity and grace.
Basically, give up on societies ability to respond to the crisis and pursue individual goals.
Personally I think either choice is valid at this point. Because I completely agree with you, that until we are ALL seeing the "same reality", it's going to be BAU.
_rihter@reddit
Am I evil if I wake up every morning and go to bed at night with that hope?
I cannot mentally handle BAU anymore.
TheWhalersOnTheMoon@reddit
Bro what are you talking about, we got this ALL UNDER CONTROL.
Just need one more World Cup in the middle east, then we swear we're gonna get right to fixing all of this with magi...i mean technology that we've been keeping under wraps to fix all of our mistakes.
RustyMetabee@reddit
Constant wildfires, deadly heatwaves, monstrous storms, floods, drought…what are you hoping to prevent that isn’t already happening?
shroomigator@reddit
How about preventing all of that from getting much, much worse?
I mean, we can stop refining oil, or we can wait until the wind gets so strong that it blows the refinery off the landscape, in which case we'll stop refining oil
Life will be underground, and underground you can't burn anything.
RustyMetabee@reddit
And which do you think the capital owners are going to go with: stop refining oil, or milking every last penny possible from the capitalist system until it literally falls apart?
We can prevent homelessness and world hunger too, yet here we are. Just because we have the means to do something doesn’t mean it’s going to get done.
shroomigator@reddit
If the capital owners were some outside force, and we were all going to die because of their actions, we would band together and neutralize them.
RustyMetabee@reddit
Right, but millions die every day because of their actions currently and we do nothing. What difference will the means of their death make?
Bigboss_989@reddit
Exactly damage is done no matter what we do rise up and out an end to this we extinguish civilization and all life in earth faster you don't think they know it. They know everything. Inflation problem cost of living crisis that's global. Hmmm how about that limits to growth update it's all lining up way too well if you ask me.
shroomigator@reddit
You might be doing nothing. Not all of us are.
Ghiacciojojo@reddit
If we stop refining oil, billions will starve to death. Agriculture is highly dependent on oil.
shroomigator@reddit
That happens anyway, when we stop refining oil because the refinery got blown from the landscape.
But the refinery is a lot tougher than the farm.
The farm will be blown from the landscape long before that happens
Ghiacciojojo@reddit
It's not as easy as you're making it out to be. Most of the population will never give up their current oil-dependent lifestyle unless forced to, and even then there would be massive unrest and famine. Think about it, would you want to live without electricity and food?
shroomigator@reddit
I think it's cute that you think anyone will have electricity and food for much longer.
The wind, remember?
Getting stronger and stronger every year.
Making the temperature swing more and more, every year.
Power lines cannot withstand it. Farms cannot withstand it.
These are the final decades of human civilization as we know it. Our world failed because we never found a way to work together for the common good.
TheLatestTrance@reddit
There is no way we can. Emmisions are going up, and the rate is increasing. We can't even slow down.
Grand_Dadais@reddit
Oh there is a chance, it's called peak cheap oil and we may hope that the effects come with some brutal force to all importing countries (hello Europe).
It would create a massive recession (that probably would last because how would we get out of it if we can't drill more).
I mean, at this point, that's my hope, regardless of the impacts it will have to the people I love or me... A drastic cuba crisis but for rich countries that do not produce their own oil would be absolutely glorious :]]
dresden_k@reddit
Ok. I'll tell you. It's fucked.
moonlitmistral@reddit
https://archive.ph/Gflow
Back in 2014, hopium-peddling Michael Mann actually told it like it is. He even acknowledged the aerosol masking effect.
Fox_Kurama@reddit
They did. Oil-funded scientists and "moderates" dismissed them for being fear-mongering doomers. And so nothing changed. The mass media would rarely even let one talk, often before puppeting out the "don't be a doomer" rhetoric. And so, nothing changed.
I think the finale from The Dinosaurs did it best.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnFjAkAs_q4
The rich and wealthy believe that technology is so bright and shiny, and that it can fix anything if they throw enough money at it. It won't be until the end when they realize that no amount of money will make any sort of bunker society capable of lasting. No magical robot workers to do all the work to keep them and the survivors they like alive in some underground paradise with artificially lit forests and gardens.
They think that somehow, they will be able to create their own special survival dream that works even if 99% of everyone else dies. They think we can magically throw some new technology at the problem to fix it. Incidentally, this was basically what the finale of The Dinosaurs did. A major problem occurred because they disrupted a major natural system, so they threw a technology solution at it which solved the issue, while also causing an even worse issue. This happened once or twice more, before they had basically blotted out the sky as their solution, resulting in the earth turning into a frozen wasteland (the show's dinosaurs are cold-blooded, so this was basically like global warming to them)
lilith_-_-@reddit
Some of them are killing themselves over it. Let that sink in
phallicVegetables@reddit
The frog hasn't quite realized the water in the pan is heating up.
Zuljo@reddit
The crisis is relative to your ideology. Hopefully we can anyone a beter organization of society around human nee (socialism) rather than greed (Capitalism). Failing that we'll be the only ones capable of rebuilding anything after the apocalypse. The materialist basis for restoration capitalism will not exist in any collapse scenarios. The capitalists will make the world a tomb and socialists will be the ones to excavate mankind.
so_Humble@reddit
Even the role and label “climate scientist” is practically meaningless. Many of these so called scientists are so fearful of losing their academic and professional standing that they would not speak the truth. They use their “credibility” to spout out what their leaders require. Those who do speak the truth have been shunned and outed. It’s total group-think insanity that’s running the ship. Science has been undermined and turned against itself, which is a perfect analogy of our species in general.
RabiesScabiesBABIES@reddit
Hello, resident climate scientist and mod here. That's not how that works at all. I have no "leaders" who tell me what to say. My funding is far more at risk from climate denying administrations than it is from anything I say or publish. There's no conspiracy within climate science to obfuscate or deny the truth of the climate crisis. Science takes time, which can feel frustrating given the severity of our situation. I can understand that frustration. I can see that for a person who doesn't understand how science works peer review might seem like scientists are being "shunned and outed." Peer review makes sure that data, methodology and conclusions are replicable and repeatable.
so_Humble@reddit
The fact you say “that’s not how it works at all” and your demeaning “for those who don’t understand how science works” is just an indicator of the superiority complex at play, the group think. I get it. You “know”.
I trust the scientific method in itself. But to deny that science is performed by humans who exist within a controlled environment, and whose very identities are shaped and formed to conform, and thus can be tainted and deformed by that environment is to deny science itself. Science is at the mercy of the scientific fact that ideologies have a tendency to undermine science itself. That’s just science. With that said it is our “science” that is ultimately at the mercy of science.
This paper is an example of one who spoke out, but has since been demonized by so called scientists: https://lifeworth.com/deepadaptation.pdf
Who are the “peers”? Who pays their way? What institutions do they perform for? What underlying assumptions go unquestioned?
Group think is real. Group think is a scientific phenomenon. Do you say group think is not a problem within your group of peers?
There’s so many examples throughout the history of so call science that shows just how ignorant and arrogant these groups of scientific peers are to science itself because the science undermines their personalities and roles in society. That’s science.
TuneGlum7903@reddit
Do you consider yourself a Moderate or an Alarmist?
Because I see "factions" in the field and know it's history. You are painting an idealized version of how "science" works. But, science is a social process and that has consequences.
Are you familiar with Kuhn's book, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions"?
Because, as someone with a doctorate in anthropology, I see a "Paradigm Shift" happening in the field of Climate Science.
RabiesScabiesBABIES@reddit
Agree. More than familiar with Kuhn.
SwampTerror@reddit
They don't want mass hysteria. But we should know the truth about how grim our future is. It's kinda like infantalizing us to keep the reality secret or handled with kids gloves.
False-Verrigation@reddit
They actually can’t.
All the models are deliberately fucked, at the very base level. Since the 1970’s.
So you would need to first build a model that has “better” or alternatively “more correct” information. And all the math would need to be redone also, because that has been deliberately mucked up also.
This is why some of the prehistoric climate models may actually be better. No oil funding to dictate their construction, maybe. You’d need to dig deep into the assumptions to see.
LongmontStrangla@reddit
Nothing is going to turn this around. We are absolutely, hopelessly, fucked. I don't see the need in forcing an existential crisis for humanity. A ticking clock would bring out the worst in a lot people.
Wave_of_Anal_Fury@reddit
Early 2020: "Stay home to contain the spread of a deadly virus called COVID-19, and if you absolutely must go out for essentials, always wear a mask and practice social distancing. If you don't, you could be dead in 7-14 days."
How well did that work when scientists told people how bad it really is?
A significant portion of humanity responded like petulant children warned against eating their entire bag of Halloween candy immediately following trick or treating. They refused. They rebelled. They went to parties and family gatherings. Because they had rights that would not be denied in the face of scientists relaying how bad it really was.
And just like the child who worships at the throne of the porcelain god finds out when they let loose with a technicolor yawn after eating too much candy, people on their deathbeds with a breathing tube rammed down their throats realized that they should have listened to the warnings. They saw their loved ones die after picking up the virus at one of those parties or family gatherings. Children were left with one parent, frequently losing both.
We're a greedy, selfish, idiot species that showed its lack of concern for science 4 years ago, and we will not ever allow warnings to deter us from doing all of the things we want to do.
RandomBoomer@reddit
People who were literally gasping for their last breath of air still used it to deny they had Covid. Denial is strong in our species.
WhatMissMoiraWants@reddit
Lmao they have been telling us.
notislant@reddit
Im sure some are brutally honest. But when all the media/politicians are owned by greedy massive corporations then what chance does it have.
Even if it does its news for a week or two and everyone goes back to ignoring it.
gravityrider@reddit
The problem is people start to realize at 2c corn stops pollinating and put together what that means for civilization...
DirewaysParnuStCroix@reddit
Generally, for the most part, there's a culture within academia of staying within a comfortable margin of error. You see it a lot with certain hypotheses, they're often very hesitant to stray beyond what their modelling methodology tells them. That's how we end up with often contradictory coincidental theorem.
Another issue there is the current neglect of cross theorem analyses. Accounting for all known current factors, we're currently on an inevitable hyperthermal warmhouse to hothouse trajectory. But you'll still get certain sections of academia insisting that some regions of the planet will get colder in response to climate change, despite those particular hypotheses being arguably refutable given the latest evidence. But that's a whole other subject. Speaking from personal experience, but there seems to be a fatal underestimation of just how warm the planet currently is and what the paleoclimate tells us is the likely outcome. On this part I would agree with the OP's sentiments, the field of climatology needs to accept that the Holocene dynamic is dead. I understand why this isn't a larger theme than it currently is, given the volatility these climatologists are facing from particular portions of the public and extremist politicians. If they start getting more vocal about how bad the situation is, that's just more ammo to be used against them. Yes, it's a pathetic situation when we can't be more factually vocal about an irrefutably and demonstratable occuring crisis because humans are so easily radicalized by the same sectors of society that got us into this mess.
SirNurtle@reddit
Honestly I can definitely believe that some places could get colder from personal experience
Where I live (Cape Town) ever since the drought we had a couple years ago, its been getting wetter and colder, like near sub zero temperature levels of cold with some areas inland even experiencing heavy snowfall, which is happening more and more frequently.
MySixHourErection@reddit
Shit’s fucked isn’t a scientific statement though. Every climate scientist I know, and I know a few, will say this in private, but they are paid to report facts and predictions as best they can, not provide opinions, or if they do to not go too far out on a limb. Also keep in mind that the data is squishy. They aren’t measuring every emission, but estimating, often based on self reporting. You can read “shit’s fucked” between every line, but I would expect to see it explicitly in either a scientific document, or a government document.
DenseVegetable2581@reddit
They are, but no one is listening. This planet is hurting bad, but the planet always wins the war
SeriousAboutShwarma@reddit
OP they've been trying to tell you since the 70s how bad it's going to get. The media landscape is awash with privately owned and mediated / censored media adjacent to the interests literally creating the climate change, do you think they're going to let anyone from news casters to state representatives actually tell you the real picture when all those facets involved benefit from the status quo or only slow / marginal changes to it?
pajamakitten@reddit
Said as if we were all alive back then.
mem2100@reddit
Why do you talk this way?
High-quality content about climate forecasts, risks and issues has been available on line and via msnbc, nbc, CNN for decades.
This is like righties complaining that no one talks about the medical dangers of protracted use of puberty blockers.
JustAnotherUser8432@reddit
They did tell people how bad it was. No one listened. If I was them I’d be saving myself as best I could and letting society rot.
tekano_red@reddit
It's not them it's us. Choose to not be manipulated like an idiot. Our society as a whole is immature and ignorant and failed to develop beyond the 'this is mine' stage of childhood.
get_while_true@reddit
I realized this in children's school.
As I grew up and during workforce, it just looked worse. At least the kids were open-minded, even though they learned bullying at home.
mynam3isn3o@reddit
They have to maintain objectivity to establish integrity. If your doctors diagnosing cancer went on an emotional tirades about how fucked their patients were in front of their patients, they’d lose all trust. Rather, they objectively explain the diagnosis, potential causes, potential treatments, and most likely outcomes. Climatologists must take the same approach.
That being said, the data on warming is pretty clear.
Tired4dounuts@reddit
Yeah blame the scientist for the politicians blocking them.
daRaam@reddit
They have. For many years.. Over and over again.
bladecentric@reddit
When people are given bad news, they tend to blame the messenger. Nobody respects a truth teller, even when they say they do. So you have to lie in a way you hope others might arrive at the truth, or absolves you from blame when your forecasts of doom come true.
Luffyhaymaker@reddit
Jessica Wildfire talked about that in one of her articles. It was straight facts, I love her newsletter
sirspeedy99@reddit
We have already passed the point of no return sometime in the mid 2010's. The time to plan was the 90's and the time to act was the 2000's.
Vamproar@reddit
Most of them do. It's the media (owned by billionaires) who actually manage to keep how totally screwed we are the open secret that it is.
Ok-Status7867@reddit
It’s a crock of shit
blackcatwizard@reddit
Remember they're employed and can't necessarily say "shit's fucked". You could argue that's part of the problem, I certainly would. I'm sure off the record that's their sentiment.
Vegetable_Log_3837@reddit
Also “shits fucked” isn’t a scientific statement. They can only publish something like “we observed the glacier melt X volume, using these methods with this margin of error.”
Source: I have an earth science degree and the professors were openly “shits fucked” sitting around the campfire, but their published work has to be much more specific and repeatable and all the stuff that makes science scientific.
Indigo_Sunset@reddit
'We have a 90% probability shit's fucked'
'So, there's a chance?'
'No, the remaining 10% is equal parts margin of error and further grant applications'
blackcatwizard@reddit
Wait, what? It's not?
It's true though. And same, degree in Neuroscience and a bit of research. There's always been a problem of translation of science for the average person.
Sinistar7510@reddit
A classic...
[YouTube] Toby ruins it for everyone
Jorgenlykken@reddit
Seen with doomer goggles this video was hillarius😅
Antani101@reddit
I wanted to post this.
This episode aired in 2014, and is set in 2012.
It's been known for a while.
Sinistar7510@reddit
I just thought it was funny that when asked "Are you going to get in trouble for saying this?" his reply was "Who cares?" :)
poppa_koils@reddit
The other jaw dropper...
https://youtu.be/wTjMqda19wk?si=xfv10IWKXgIzB0Eb
MorganaHenry@reddit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc1vrO6iL0U
cr0ft@reddit
Doesn't matter. Not in capitalism.
The old adage of "it's difficult to make a man understand something if his salary depends on not understanding it" thing comes into play. The people in power are making money off our downfall, so they'll fight tooth and nail to avoid commonsense changes.
TuneGlum7903@reddit
It's not just "capitalism". There is also the "tyranny of the quotidian".
Dishes that need to be washed, kids that need to be fed, laundry that never ends, etc, etc, ad infinitum. For most people that eats up most of whatever "free time" that they had.
"Being Informed" is a CHOICE and it comes at a COST.
SuperLeroy@reddit
Now do the 35 trillion dollar debt.
All due respect to economists but they really should tell us how bad it really is.
Pick any corrupt organization, it's all the same.
And the biggest irony is how fox news uses fear mongering to keep their audience enthralled.
The climate disaster is a much bigger concern than any gay / trans / person of color wearing a tan suit will ever be.
But you'd never know if you watched fox news.
Their agenda is by design and the people behind the scenes are bread and circusing us until it doesn't matter anymore
TheCaveEV@reddit
The time to change was honestly probably the 50s to 70s, and that was never going to happen so long as it threatened capital
Counterboudd@reddit
I agree with you. I didn’t realize the house of cards until I started working for a government agency where we are expected to report our CO2 emissions and reduce emissions supposedly in line with the Paris accords. I looked at the statewide data and the numbers increased year over year except for 2008 when the state laid off a ton of people due to the recession. The only thing that would stop emissions growth was a sharp economic downturn. I asked my supervisor about how we’re supposed to be down 70% emissions within ten years if we’re still increasing year over year. They told me that we were “mandated to be carbon neutral by 2040” so it would happen easily at that point. I asked if we have any of the technology to be carbon neutral or how that was expected to work. No response. The whole thing rests on the mistaken belief that some technology that can fix all of this is imminent and we can create essentially something from nothing- a magical clean form of energy that will sustain 8 billion people to live a modern lifestyle while causing absolutely zero emissions fully integrated into every industry on the planet within 15 years. Meanwhile we’re basically at the starting line of even accurately reporting emissions. The whole thing is a fantasy because there is no realistic solution that doesn’t take us back to pre-industrial society. I talk to coworkers, people who studied science and presumably know more than I do, and they just seem sort of indifferent and say “well the science says there’s an x probability of y increase” completely ignoring the massive elephant in the room. It’s so hard to do my job with a straight face when absolutely none of it matters and if anything is making things worse every day as I sit on a laptop sucking up electricity every day planning development that should not be done and isn’t needed for any reasonable purpose and navel gazing. It’s so hard to put any effort in knowing that the world would be better off if I literally sat on my hands. I spend most of my time preparing my property for the worst when it inevitably comes in the hopes that I might stand a chance of a few years of surviving- the lifestyle my peasant ancestors enjoyed and I would find preferable to whatever we’re doing now. If only we could have the societal collapse without the cascading effects of global warming. But unless it all falls apart, no one would choose to let it.
Dessertcrazy@reddit
Although many have indeed come out with “we’re fucked”, some might hold back. Here’s why. As a scientist who made vaccines, I became a target during Covid. This didn’t just get death threats online, but I received them irl. I had a guy pick up a rock and threaten to bash my brains in. I was asked to leave a party, because scientists are evil, and she didn’t realize I was evil when she invited me. I’ve been told by countless people that I need to just say I’m a baker, because I retired early to start a bakery, and please don’t reveal that I’m a scientist when I’m with them. Plus, you get “splained to” by every Tom, Dick, and Harry.
Tl:dr: they are afraid of violence.
TuneGlum7903@reddit
As a man in his 60's, the population with the HIGHEST mortality risk from Covid, I want to express my PROFOUND gratitude for your work.
Dessertcrazy@reddit
Thank you!
Pollux95630@reddit
They don't need to tell us when we can already see it and feel it every single day just how bad it is. There is no saving this sinking ship...so go play a violin on the deck of the Titanic and enjoy what time you've got left.
NihiloZero@reddit
Climate scientists, being under unique and long term scrutiny, have tended to be very conservative about their predictions -- because they don't want to appear alarmist and because predictions tend to be less precise the further out you project them. So they've tended to only present the information that they have absolute confidence in and that, in turn, has made all the actual outcomes seem worse and "sooner than expected."
Along similar lines... it is very difficult to analyze the repercussions in complex systems -- like the Earth's atmosphere, its interaction with the biosphere, and other subjects that can impact each other in surprising ways that defy simple models.
And then, of course, even when the climate scientists are perfectly clear and say things like... "Climate change is a threat to human civilization and an existential threat to human existence," you still got a bunch of clowns ignoring every sign -- literal or metaphorical -- that climate change is real. That's not even talking about all the people making a ton of money off of the destruction of the Earth.
Then, just today, in another article I was reading about how dire predictions supposedly tend to get less response from governments than predictions that seem more manageable. I don't necessarily know how accurate or true that is, but it at best it seems to present a "damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario." You understate the problem and people say that makes it more pointless to try -- because "people are ignorant sheep and the world is going to hell." You try to state clearly how bad the problem is... and people don't see the point in trying because "wow, we're already kinda super fucked anyway."
And, of course, even when people try to change things... well, so far people haven't really been able to change things very much for the positive. But... I guess we'll see how it plays out. My guess is that it's going to keep getting hotter. And probably faster than expected.
PowerandSignal@reddit
Two thoughts on this:
How much do you want to panic people? We're exceptionally irrational as a whole. If a large mass of people start actively engaging with the knowledge that society and civilization as we know it is doomed, shit is likely gonna get real weird real fast, and probably violent to boot. Even if rational analysis says the downfall, although stunningly fast in geologic terms, will happen in increments at various points around the globe, not a sudden all at once event. Humans aren't very good at rational.
The information is already out there. The majority of people either choose to maintain a comfortable vagueness about what it means, or else haven't yet found the time to examine what is being reported. I'm not sure what level of reporting urgency is required to overcome the analytical inertia surrounding this topic. Or if there even is an achievable level of urgency, since this seems like a society-wide psychological coping mechanism.
TuneGlum7903@reddit
Yeah, when that social "tipping point" is hit and "shit gets REAL" for the majority of the population. Things will get CRAZY.
GenZ already thinks they have "no future" and are showing signs of "disengagement" from social norms like "go to college and get a good job".
BandAid3030@reddit
Okay.
Shit is fucked.
Thermohaline circulation in our oceans represents the long and slow heat memory of our planet, and it's currently at risk of total collapse. It needs temperature gradients in order to move heat between the equator and the poles, but also around the oceans to circulate nutrients, help animals migrate and to deliver rainfall.
The atmosphere is the short term and quick heat memory of our planet. Pressure and humidity systems move heat through the atmosphere and these often result in hot and cold fronts.
As the long memory of the oceans collapses, we should expect to see that there will be more reliance on the short term quick memory of the atmosphere. We should expect to see bigger cyclones (hurricanes, typhoons, etc) developing earlier in the season.
That's what we're seeing.
Here's another beauty for you.
Since roughyl 10,000 years ago, 2 billion hectares of deforestation has been experienced over the globe. The first 1 billion hectares were lost between 10,000 years ago and 1900. The second billion hectares has occurred in the past 125 years.
We can't kill ourselves quickly enough. We are nearly past the point of action using simply decarbonisation practices. We are going to need to geoengineer a solution to buy time on this front.
Just for good measure, the Western housing market is basically cooked by money laundering for organised crime and the governments of our countries will do nothing about it because they have property portfolios too.
dumnezero@reddit
https://scientistrebellion.org/
Scientists’ warning on affluence | Nature Communications
World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency 2021 | BioScience | Oxford Academic
Future of the human climate niche | PNAS
World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency 2022 | BioScience | Oxford Academic
Scientists' warning on climate change and insects - Harvey - 2023 - Ecological Monographs - Wiley Online Library
TuneGlum7903@reddit
You always bring me the "very best" doom.
decapods@reddit
I know Twitter is a Nazi hell scape, but I still follow several active climatologists on there. Most of them are screaming from the rooftops that we aren’t going to fix it.
A few weeks ago there was a public feud between several climatologists as Michael Mann has switched directions and now says we can fix everything and there’s not enough evidence that we’ve surpassed the 1.5C mark.
Mann gets a lot of interviews, but he certainly isn’t speaking the same as many other scientists.
TuneGlum7903@reddit
Mann is basically a "spokesman" for the Moderate paradigm in Climate Science. He represents that "faction".
The people like Elliot Jacobson on X are members of the Alarmist faction.
babywantmilky@reddit
and get assassinated by the Coca Cola company? no thanks /s
nomoredanger@reddit
Climate scientists aren't a monolith, nor do they have much control over how their data is reported on once news outlets get a hold of it. You're remembering headlines you saw while scrolling on this sub and thinking those represent what scientists are doing or saying, where all it really represents is how you personally consumed that information.
Myth_of_Progress@reddit
And on top of that, this classic SMBC comic on "science journalism" also came to mind ...
BloodWorried7446@reddit
remember that unless you are working in the field you are reading what the media has chosen to report. And depending on the channel they are not reporting much as there is an election in the US and the associated soap opera, two major conflicts (Ukraine and Gaza), an olympic games,a euro cup.
When they do report climate associated news they are reporting the acute events, floods, droughts, wildfires and not the long term things like the 3mm sea level rise every year.
remember we’ve busted every temperature record in recorded history but the attitude of the populous as well as the media is well it’s only 1.5C. That’s the difference you feel when you put on a sweater.
IronyDiedIn2016@reddit
It’s very hard to convince people to change.
The costs to de carbonize your life in the United States is probably north of $60k more if you are financing things.
You need year round solar power and an electric car. Then you need to also donate to a tree planting organization to offset carbon from what you eat and any flights you might take.
Most Americans don’t have $60k lying around to make the switch.
All scientists can really do is advise the government. Governments have to act to make changes and citizens have to act to compel governments.
If the United States dropped Chinese solar tariffs and started allowing Chinese EVs suddenly the costs to de carbonize drop to 30k or less. If solar installs were done like they are in Australia it would only cost $10k to convert a single family home to solar. We could halve the cost to de carbonize the economy just through legislation. Solar incentives should be price capped like electric car incentives are. No one can afford $120k to install solar panels.
The governments inaction is the problem and it is motivated by corruption, greed and lobbyists.
Tech companies and fossil fuel companies are on the same side of the coin. They both are generating tremendous CO2 emissions. Tech is not a silver bullet. Your precious internet and cloud services are the first things that go down when society starts collapsing.
To your point about scientists. It is because the government is run by losers. If you take any of these politicians and put them in charge of a major business it would fail. Most of them don’t have real skills. They are good at kissing butt or raising money or giving speeches. You need actual engineers and scientists in charge not politicians.
Interwebzking@reddit
I imagine the lack of straightforward information is to prevent the world from descending into chaos now. It’ll happen eventually. But I believe there’s nothing that can be done to prevent this from happening in the future.
UND_mtnman@reddit
I'm a meteorologist, so climate adjacent. I'm in this sub and r/preppers quite often for a reason.
totalwarwiser@reddit
Dunno, just this week on the main tv chanel of my state they were discussing if the state will be considered liveable by 2050.
OrcaResistence@reddit
Hi, environmental scientist here. It is fucked, without huge changes to society and a move to post scarcity societies we are fucked.
Outrageous_Sell69@reddit
They do. Why it seems like they don't is the effort of very good propaganda machines.
ainsley_a_ash@reddit
What I've been told by my professors and other climate scientists (a conversation that has been going on since college 20 years ago) is that most people are struggling with the concept of climate change (well not quite so much now but still) and fairly adverse to acknowledging anthropogenic driven climate change, and to be actually honest with people would cause you to both lose your job and discredit the climate science research in general because it so fucking bad that direct honesty would trigger a level of disbelief that would sabatoge any positive efforts.
My uni professors were basically living the early script of don't look up 20 years ago.
flavius_lacivious@reddit
Do something to help.
If you hate your job, get a job that helps the situation — work from home, plant trees, work for a climate publication, write a blog talking about this — do something, anything.
If you believe alternative energy sources are a way to go, get a job in solar or wind. Make some big sacrifices now.
I guarantee you if you answer the “why apply here” question with, “I believe the only hope of saving the planet is to develop and adopt alternative energy sources, so I want to work for a company that is building a solution,” they WILL hire you.
You don’t personally need to fix this, only make a sliver of difference. All of us. Do your tiny part.
Fucking try.
gardening_gamer@reddit
"Always up in arms, without lifting a finger"
Architects, "From The Wilderness"
FantasticOutside7@reddit
Great response, and I’ll add stop consuming. Sure, protests and strikes and boycotts and such are all great, but they require coordination to be effective. Reducing your consumption is something that we can all do without having to coordinate. Just do it!
Shuteye_491@reddit
Talk to a climate scientist and they will: the presented narrative is determined by the money men, not the data.
FrogTopH@reddit
Let's not upset the masses. We don't want them thinking that the survival of others will impede their chances of survival.
decapods@reddit
We don’t want the masses to blame the rich. Let’s remind them that there are poor people on food stamps and immigrants.
FrogTopH@reddit
Poor people aren't poor because someone else is rich. Poor people are poor because they're inferior.
decapods@reddit
NatGeo in 2015 aired “Bill Nye’s Climate Meltdown” co starring Arnold Schwarzenegger.
At one point Bill Nye talks to a climate scientist who shows him his doomsday bunker. When Bill Nye asks him what he thinks will happen, he says he thinks it will get to 7C.
At the time, I remember thinking it was a little funny and a little sad. And for many years I’ve changed my mind and agreed with him.
ConsiderationSea1347@reddit
You are mixing up climate scientists with science journalists and politicians.
AlwaysL82TheParty@reddit
They have been. For decades. It's the "gatekeeping" MSM (as well as the economists and politicians) that water it down ala Don't Look Up.
shroomigator@reddit
Grown people, unfortunately, rely on magical thinking.
If they didn't, churches would be broke.
fedfuzz1970@reddit
In a skeptical world, the only thing holding back climate scientists from being even more direct is that they can only make estimates. Their biggest critics, the deniers, love to say when??? They also love to point out that a date "certain" has passed and nothing happened. That is enough to trash all of their statistics and analysis thereof.
GuillotineComeBacks@reddit
They will tell what the numbers they got tells them. The problem is that science doesn't work like you think it is. They can't just say DOOM without proof. Saying they aren't because things found are worse post-fact is fallacious.
ishitar@reddit
The only thing anyone needs to know is Jevon's paradox. The increase in efficiency of something is only going to increase utilization. This goes for energy as a broad category. This chart explains it all: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-primary-energy
Climate scientists are only worried about empirical data and models on that data. They are not concerned with human mass psychology that has us all individually upping our consumption because why not? We are locusts and nothing is going to stop us from destroying the world's habitability to the point it can only sustain the most basic life, if even that.
MyCuntSmellsLikeHam@reddit
I went to the Smithsonian yesterday. The exhibit on the PETM and the parallels with what’s happening now was abysmal. They might as well not even have it there at all. Why can’t they just be honest. I’m at a museum, give me the data
musicallymad32@reddit
16 to 20 oz
zeitentgeistert@reddit
I suggest to watch this here regarding the role WE are playing in all of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqXys5VluIQ
Apart from that, what exactly do you want the scientists to tell us since "WE WILL NOT CHANGE" anyway?
HardNut420@reddit
Hopium
Vreas@reddit
Most reports I’ve seen are direct and paint the picture accurately without sensationalized BS. Hell I remember watching Chasing Ice like a decade ago and being concerned. Plus the army college of war published a report on the risks of climate change to military structure and effectiveness. It wasn’t very positive.
pajamakitten@reddit
You think people would listen or care if they did that? They could tell us directly but people would call them doom-mongerers, or just state they are wrong because they remember a day when it was cold outside. People will ignore climate scientists when they are giving us a soft touch approach to how bad it is. They will deny it until they are hungry and the climate outside is unrecognisable to what it is today.
Least-Lime2014@reddit
They do all the time. But maintaining capitalism and producing useless ass commodities and maintaining our class based society is way more important than maintaining our habitat.
Ancient-Being-3227@reddit
The real core problem, as with everything else on this planet, is that there are just too many people and the majority of them are ignorant or idiots. Humans only believe what they want to believe, and most just simply don’t understand what’s happening. They refuse to believe, don’t have the education to understand, or are just plain dumb.
The destruction of the human species by the human species was guaranteed from the dawn of the Industrial Revolution and I’m pretty certain we’re experiencing the Fermi Paradox. .
Wheresthecents@reddit
I guess it would look like this...
inomrthenudo@reddit
Sounds exactly where we are headed
AccurateRendering@reddit
Climate scientists can (and do) predict the probability of wild fires, storms, drought and crop failures. What happens after that is politics. Don't blame the climate scientists for not providing water to Africa.
_Cromwell_@reddit
American Resiliency is a great source for a balance between the tough real info but also planning and Resiliency discussion (preparing to live in a new world). She doesn't really cuss though if that's what you want.
https://youtu.be/BuMEXVEEQ2M?feature=shared
I know you meant more mainstream places/news, but what is mainstream is what people are watching and using.
Tsurfer4@reddit
I agree. She doesn't sugarcoat what the science says and focuses a lot on adaptation, hence the "resiliency". I'd rather the mainstream pivot to adaptation as well.
clockworksnorange@reddit
Who here is just ready for the big one? I'm ready to go let's hurry it up.
WacoCatbox@reddit
I thinkb a lot of the more optimistic ones are that way because they've literally invested their lives in their work and it's probably really tough to let go of the notion that they can play a part in making a difference. This probably fuels most of the "we can still...if we..." type of talk.
middleagerioter@reddit
Bless your heart.
5280TWGC@reddit
I think thy are telling us if one is listening and thinking
MightyBigMinus@reddit
You are not arguing with "scientists" you are arguing with vague meme voices in your head. Take for instance this statement: "Only this year they admitted 1.5C is dead."
Who is "they"? can you show us where this admission was made in 2024, by what body?
I can show you this: https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ (published in 2018)
The "special report" that the ipcc did in-between ar5 (2014) and ar6 (2021) because they thought the time left to be able to hit 1.5 was so dire/short that they couldn't wait three more years for ar6 to publish. That was the scientists saying "last call for any hope of 1.5" and as the eventually published ar6 clearly shows we did not make it. So you could argue "the scientists" admitted 1.5 was impossible anywhere between 2018 and 2021. And thats the IPCC, the most conservative body, so I'm sure you can dig up plenty of papers before that.
Vegetaman916@reddit
The admission was made by the science itself, not the scientists.
We track temperatures and GHG compositions and ocean acidity and a thousand other factors. Each of us tracks them daily, and for our own informational awareness. And thus, everyone knew the moment when the average was more than 1.5C for a full year straight.
The scientists don't need to tell us. That is why we have our own minds and the ability to parse data.
TinyDogsRule@reddit
More of this?
https://youtu.be/iAGBj9ssQDs?si=Sw42cqh5xf020fCZ