What they don’t tell each other is that “Little” is an understatement and we shot way past the prior “Medieval Warm Period” long ago and are only accelerating.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age#/media/File%3...
Their current messaging is back to:
“Climate change is a hoax for science grants and political power”
Insane that these idiots picked the one time a problem is actually really real as the time they decided to call out the tactic.
If you take every shot you're probably going to miss a lot.
https://www.space.com/climate-change-termination-event-end-i...
Can you please elaborate?
Either way, I’ve seen the Little Ice Age come up enough lately to be extremely irritating. So, I knee-jerked the rebuttal.
Now I think eschelon was actually asking if we are overriding the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_glaciation which would normally take millions of years to happen.
I edited my comment to include sources for things I knew off-hand. I left the core comment largely intact, just changing a few words to better flow with the sources.
I want more information and reading around the questions I asked.
From my understanding, it looks like we're about to enter a period that is actually slightly more sustainable for humans on average (increases in arable land, easier to access hydrocarbons - yikes) [1].
But from there, we may quickly slip into ranges that kill everything. Especially if the Clathrate gun hypothesis [2] or similar runaway mechanisms turn out correct.
And obviously even if slightly warmer temperatures are better for people on average, every temperature increment results in enormous and permanent erasure of species diversity. That's an incalculable loss that we cannot recover.
---
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/12/16/magazine/russ... "And no country may be better positioned to capitalize on climate change than Russia. Russia has the largest land mass by far of any northern nation. It is positioned farther north than all of its South Asian neighbors, which collectively are home to the largest global population fending off displacement from rising seas, drought and an overheating climate. Like Canada, Russia is rich in resources and land, with room to grow. Its crop production is expected to be boosted by warming temperatures over the coming decades even as farm yields in the United States, Europe and India are all forecast to decrease. And whether by accident or cunning strategy or, most likely, some combination of the two, the steps its leaders have steadily taken — planting flags in the Arctic and propping up domestic grain production among them — have increasingly positioned Russia to regain its superpower mantle in a warmer world." (There are lots of other geopolitical takes on climate change that cite similar outcomes for a host of other countries.)
I would think food costs would skyrocket before canada and siberia are pumping out grain in massive quantity.
Adjustment at that scale can also carry other risk such as disease and civil war.
Or nothing at all may happen
It really does depend on the rate of change.
It wasn't there. echelon added the references later, presumably en lieu of responding to everyone. Everything below the -- is new.
This means they deny climate is changing.
The more you know…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record#/m...
As you can see, we are indeed coming out of one of the coldest periods ever in Earth's history.
Humans didn't exist. I suspect most current plant/animal species are "devolved" by such swings.
No, the chart does not say that. The 2050 and 2100 dots are projections from the IPOC RCP8.5 “high emissions” scenario. Also, absolutely nothing on that says we’re going to +25c. That part of the chart (that goes to 25) is in F, and it still doesn’t say we’re going to 25f either.
Lots of people wonder why we have so many climate deniers. A lot of the reason is because of guys like this ^ on the opposite end of the spectrum, spewing their fears into a hyperbolic, warped reality. What we need more of is a balanced, realistic, objective view. That will allow us to get to work on a solution.
The first apes evolved about 20 million years ago, when the world was much hotter. I suspect we can survive those conditions again.
And regardless of climate change, most current plant/animal species will go extinct (or already have) due to habitat destruction and mass exploitation. As a cause of mass extinction, that's a much bigger problem than climate change.
If you discount this of course we aren't effecting anything unprecedented. We were once a ball of magma. But, as has been pointed out here, rate and cause of change is incredibly important. A swing set and an explosion will both launch you into the air.