Where's Global Warming when they need it? Mongolia has just seen its harshest winter in 50 years.

[wanderlust]

see excellent visualization of the changes of average global temperature for the last 22ky, starts 10ky before end of last ice age.
What is interesting is the narrow range of the temperatures for the last 11ky (since end of ice age), and then rapid change in last 200 years.

https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1732:_Earth_Temperature_Timeline

Randal Munroe of XKCD cartoon has a rare gift of explaining complicated stuff in simple terms. "Thing explainer" uses just 1000 most common words https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thing_Explainer (and pictures)

 

[Gr8ful]

Global warming refers to the average temperature of the GLOBE getting WARMER. That's why it is a more descriptive term than "climate change" - which could be accurate if the climate changed in either direction.

Weather is a local phenomenon that can actually get colder in some locations and hotter in other locations as the global average get hotter. Like a boiling pot of water shows more activity than a cold pot of water.. In fact, scientists have long predicted that global warming would result in greater weather extremes. Now we are seeing just that. But, we all already knew this didn't we?

Good to hear from you Ron! I thought you might have been Sea Shelling with John, boy he gets some dandies doesn't he? Glad you're back!

 

[rruff]

see excellent visualization of the changes of average global temperature for the last 22ky, starts 10ky before end of last ice age.
What is interesting is the narrow range of the temperatures for the last 11ky (since end of ice age), and then rapid change in last 200 years.

I like to go back even further. Geologically speaking, glaciation is a very new phenomena, ~3M years. The earth in this time has been quite a bit colder than it ever was prior. We are currently in one of the brief "warm periods" between glaciations, and we are due for another ice age. The weird thing to me is that we know what an ice age is like, and it would be devastating to a large part of the world. If we hadn't "accidentally" warmed the planet, we'd be scrambling to figure out some way to do it! A few degrees of warming is probably a minor inconvenience by comparison... with coastlines changing, weather patterns changing, some species dying and others growing, inhabited places that are already hotter than hell becoming even more difficult to live in, etc. But overall the planet will support more life, with more rainfall, longer growing seasons, more viable land, etc. The issues are "change" and "uncertainty". I'll take that any day over an ice age!

~50M years ago the earth was over 20F hotter than it is now! This wasn't that time of the dinosaurs, that was earlier... rather this was when most mammalian species originated, flourished and expanded, as well as the sort of plant life we are accustomed to.

 

[Happy Camper]

That was an interesting graphic rruff posted, so I decided to look up the organization. And I'm glad I did. It's another fascinating treasure-trove of science. I had read about some of the earlier core samples from previous versions of this group. But it was harder to come by at that time.

Anyone that enjoys science will enjoy the linked articles based on their findings. I've already burned a couple hours reading. This is real hands on science, literally and figuratively.

https://www.iodp.org/

 

[wanderlust]

I like to go back even further. Geologically speaking, glaciation is a very new phenomena, ~3M years.

... if you don't count https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth 650mya. But back then, all the animal life was in the oceans.
So yes, lots of climate variety is possible - question is,:

what is range of temperatures in which our civilization as we know it can exist?

That's exactly what that XKCD cartoon shows: how small were the changes that we noticed, and how much bugger change are we making now.

A few degrees of warming is probably a minor inconvenience by comparison... with coastlines changing, weather patterns changing, some species dying and others growing, inhabited places that are already hotter than hell becoming even more difficult to live in, etc. But overall the planet will support more life, with more rainfall, longer growing seasons, more viable land, etc. The issues are "change" and "uncertainty". I'll take that any day over an ice age!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise can max out at 1.2m (4 feet) by 2100 and ~20 meters == 60 feet by 4000 (or sooner, nobody knows how and when Antarctic glaciers can slide to the ocean, rising level, then keep melting for 1000 years)
"In the long run, sea level rise would amount to 2–3 m (7–10 ft) over the next 2000 years if warming amounts to 1.5 °C (2.7 °F). It would be 19–22 metres (62–72 ft) if warming peaks at 5 °C (9.0 °F)"

Worst case scenario"
https://sealevel.nasa.gov/understanding-sea-level/global-sea-level/ice-melt

"If all glaciers and ice sheets melted, global sea level would rise by more than 195 feet (60 meters). "

Lots of coastal infrastructure and whole cities would be underwater. Lots of agricultural land lost. Hundreds of millions of ecological migrants. Better than mile-thick glaciers in NYC like it was during most recent glacial period, but not fun.

What IS funny that worst flood it wound be in China, and China is not doing it's share to combat it.

 

[Happy Camper]

Time to start working on a low cost, high strength dome idea for Atlantis 2.0!

 

[dreamrunnerjt]

We have the Biodome here in Arizona. Don’t know if it would be strong enough for underwater.

 

[rruff]

"In the long run, sea level rise would amount to 2–3 m (7–10 ft) over the next 2000 years if warming amounts to 1.5 °C (2.7 °F). It would be 19–22 metres (62–72 ft) if warming peaks at 5 °C (9.0 °F)"

For humans, 2000 years is a very long time. Adjusting over long time spans will not be difficult. But it also isn't going to get that hot... I'll take that bet and even give you 100-1 odds! The US and others are doing something about it; as much as we reasonably can given the small risk. We will slowly phase out fossil fuels.

Not that it will matter though, because we will face a serious AI induced massive upheaval in society within decades that will make all this a moot point. Global warming disaster stories are mostly a diversionary tactic to keep the masses distracted, like so many others.

 

[Happy Camper]

For humans, 2000 years is a very long time. Adjusting over long time spans will not be difficult. But it also isn't going to get that hot... I'll take that bet and even give you 100-1 odds! The US and others are doing something about it; as much as we reasonably can given the small risk. We will slowly phase out fossil fuels.

Not that it will matter though, because we will face a serious AI induced massive upheaval in society within decades that will make all this a moot point. Global warming disaster stories are mostly a diversionary tactic to keep the masses distracted, like so many others.

That sounds rruff...

 

[jacqueg]

We have the Biodome here in Arizona. Don’t know if it would be strong enough for underwater.

The sealed Biodome turned out not to be completely self-sustaining, IIRC.

Very interesting tour, recommended if you are ever out that way. It is still being used for various research projects.

 

[Happy Camper]

The sealed Biodome turned out not to be completely self-sustaining, IIRC.

Very interesting tour, recommended if you are ever out that way. It is still being used for various research projects.

Who woulda thunk it? I think it's fascinating, but I don't think I could stay in there for years.

They just have to unleash their inner Matt Damon and science the crap out of it.

Really though, is helping us learn more about what we don't know. And that is extremely important.

 

[rruff]

The sealed Biodome turned out not to be completely self-sustaining, IIRC.

You mean Biosphere 2 near Oracle? That was definitely not able to self-sustain. Cool experiment, though. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/jul/13/spaceship-earth-arizona-biosphere-2-lockdown

 

[wanderlust]

Not that it will matter though, because we will face a serious AI induced massive upheaval in society within decades that will make all this a moot point. Global warming disaster stories are mostly a diversionary tactic to keep the masses distracted, like so many others.

Runaway AI is the scary part.
Humanity has several ways to get extinct. Runaway AI will not be upheaval, it could be "game over" and if we are lucky they will keep humans as pets
As I mentioned before, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox suggest that civilizations like ours (which should exist, we already know several exoplanets good for life) do not survive.

One of the short sci-fi stories which made impact on me is "They are made of meat" - about humans encountering advanced intelligence.

 

[rruff]

Runaway AI is the scary part.

That isn't the sort I'm worried about. Advanced AI that is controlled by humans would suck more predictably, because the oligarchs would have no incentive to keep us useless humans around. It would be like feudal times, only with AI taking the place of serfs, peasants, and slaves. We'd be more like vermin in that scenario (consuming resources and polluting while providing no benefit)... only easier to kill.

Runaway AI might have all sorts of motives once its survival was secure... it might even care about us. I know it's unlikely, but...

Liked the story!

 

[Happy Camper]

Yeah they are forgetting to implement the three laws of robotics.

 

[RonDean]

Good to hear from you Ron! I thought you might have been Sea Shelling with John, boy he gets some dandies doesn't he? Glad you're back!

G8, No. For all / any of your or other's personal pokes, I'm not back. Just making an occasional flyby these days and looking for another RV forum. Life is just too short to spend much more time doing things that are not fun. And I've found little of that here lately.

 

[Gr8ful]

Don't leave because we don't agree on EVs. I won't answer any of your posts. You don't even read mine or you'd have seen I posted an article on EVs comparing the total cost & pollution of EVs & Petro cars in the Interesting EV thread. EVs were the clear winner! You should watch it as it has lots of facts. Why can't people agree to disagree & still respect each other anymore?

 

[Happy Camper]

Don't leave because we don't agree on EVs. I won't answer any of your posts. You don't even read mine or you'd have seen I posted an article on EVs comparing the total cost & pollution of EVs & Petro cars in the Interesting EV thread. EVs were the clear winner! You should watch it as it has lots of facts. Why can't people agree to disagree & still respect each other anymore?

Because it's easier to find a group that agrees with you. Which leads to less actual discussion. Which leads to less actual solutions. Which leads everyone believing what they and their group believe is correct to the exclusion of other beliefs. Which leads to those groups shouting at each other without listening to other possibilities or ideas.

Which leads to no compromise politics. Which leads to everyone being mad their opinion isn't shared by everyone. Which leads to a general sense of helplessness. Which leads to less happy younger people. Which leads to a study showing younger people are less happy.

 

[wanderlust]

Social media made it easier to find far away rare people who think like you ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_tail ). But because we can maintain stable social relationships with only about 150 people (and introverts even less, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number ) as a result we have less relationships with people who we disagree with.

I specially follow few youtubers with which I don't agree 100% but who are smart. To tell me what the youtubers with whom I agree will not tell me. And it takes effort to do that.

Dilbert had a hilarious cartoon, where he is reporting he invented social media, which will make profit for the company, but destroy humanity. His Pointy Haired boss just asked: ok, when you can start. I cannot find it.

 

[RonDean]

OK, I'll stick my toe in here a bit more.

I agree that if we all just shop for news and opinions we agree with, we'll miss a lot. That applies to both (all) sides of politics and or issues we face today. It's unfortunate that so many of us have accepted tribalism. There are some on this forum that have "knee jerk" responses to certain ideas and people. Happy makes a good point about finding opposing opinions. I try to find sites that are as moderate and fact based as possible. There are fairly impartial bias rating sites that I check with when I see something that seems a bit questionable. IMO, just listening to two extremes which cannot even agree on basic scientific facts is NOT a recipe for clear thinking. If anything, it makes us more likely to choose one of the two extremes rather than look for agreement and compromise.

It''s not all us, either. The internet is also at fault. The algorithms are designed to show us more of what we have already looked at. That gets us even more biased information and opinion. The net isn't trying to educate us, Its currency is "eyeballs" leading to eventual sales. Unless we take heroic measures we never even see the news being feed to people with different interests and history. I've found that in some cases, like YouTube, it helps to clear history fairly often. But, anyone that thinks we all see the same "facts" is sadly mistaken.

My final observation on these forums, is we fail to appreciate these are real living and breathing people we are talking to. When we are face to face we tend to try a bit harder to see possible agreement or compromise. But, just words on a screen? That's not real people we can sympathize with. I see far more effort to see the other side when we are discussing things around a campfire. That is why I plan to check here much less often and do more of my talking "out there."

Add: This is also why I have chosen to include my actual picture in my profile. I thought it might help a little. shrug...