/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12189967
Climate change doesn't happen all at once, it is gradual. Altough we have less than a decade to prevent a positive feedback loop at the poles.

>>12189967
In the 70s it was 10 years
In the 80s it was 10 years
In the 90s it was 10 years
...

Climate science is NOT science, it's a political stance.

>>12190014
>Altough we have less than a decade
Holy shit just stop parroting the same stupid thing over and over again you stupid leftist fuck.

I dunno, I'm inclined to believe the professionals but they have been constantly wrong in their predictions and models. At this point we'll just have to wait and see and take things as they come.

>>12190014
>Altough we have less than a decade to prevent a positive feedback loop at the poles.
post papers demonstrating this or fuck off.

>>12189967
Climate Change is not a existential threat to human civilisation but desertification, rising water level and more extreme weathers are already occurring. While this phenomenon today is human made it is not unique in geological history. In the Jurassic age the CO2 conentration was six times higher than today and it was 10-15 degrees hotter, no ice on the poles and all.
What we should do is to shape the weather to our benefit and with fusion powered carbon capture we could do so.

>>12189967 Back in 1970 a book published describing research for modeling the world economy called "Limits to Growth" described the model for continuing things as they are showing a peak in population somewhere between 2020 and 2040 primarily due to increase in pollution - specifically described was CO2 although what it would bring about was not clear. Updates since show that we are still on that model - so off hand I would expect that we have about 20 years before disaster - probably due to climate change but possibly due to other pollution effects.

>>12190133
The drop in population was due to increase in death rate more than a decrease in birth rate - not a happy thought. Over the next 50 years population decreased to approximately 1/3 of the peak (from 10 billion to 3 billion). Grim

>>12189967
Until 1999
t. Child of the 80's

it doesn't exist
suck dics tranny

>>12189967
50000 years till current interglacial period ends

>>12190026
Preach brother, preach.

>>12190076
>human made
fuck off asshole

>>12190064
What happened to those deep sea vents which were previously inactive but only actived after the temps rose?

>>12190076
Fusion powered carbon capture, that simple easily available technology within our grasp.

>>12190030
Stop parroting the same stupid thing over and over again you stupid rightwing nut.
450ppm/+2C is a tipping point. At the current pace it'll start around 2030.

>>12191038
what will you say when no significant changes will be present 30 years from now on?

>>12191050
Just 30 more you fat american swine!

>>12191025
ITER has began reactor assembling and in `35 we might see the first energy net gain by a fusionreactor which would open the possiblity of DEMOS to produce fusion in the 40s. And before you go "in 30 years", remember that the first electric motors were built in 1740s but only became practical for work in the 1840s.
The first photovoltaics were developed back in 1839, but only thanks to space money in the 60s they became viable technology to get energy.
The idea of Fusion Reactors was developped in 1946, in the 90s we made the first viable fusion reactions. We are expecting net-gain fusion reactions by the 30s, the timescale is nothing to sneer at.

>>12191064
you need to go back

>>12191050
Seen California lately?

>>12191091
same wildfires and peak temperatures as in the mid-90s

>>12191106
is this what cloverfield movies r about?

>>12191106
More like nuclear war at the bottom eating climate change in the middle

>>12191167
>same wildfires
bullshit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_California_wildfires#Largest_wildfires

>>12190993

>>12189967
>How much time do we have left?
A few hundred million years. A few billion years maybe.

.

>>12189967
Most estimates say we'll be completely fucked by 2050. I'm just glad my parents will probably be dead by then

>>12189967
>How much time do we have left?

800 years from now NYC times square will look almost identical.

>>12190026
>In the 70s it was 10 years
>In the 80s it was 10 years
>In the 90s it was 10 years
Source?

>>12190039
>I dunno, I'm inclined to believe the professionals but they have been constantly wrong in their predictions and models.

>>12190837
>Until 1999
Source?

>>12189967
I kinda wish extinction rebellion niggers were right and it was only like 20 years than I could witness the apocalypse. That would be so dope and then just end it before it gets too miserable

>>12190963
It already ended, our climate is no longer being controlled by the Milankovich cycle. We are not in a glacial or interglacial period, we are in an anthropic period.

>>12189967
10000 years

>>12193573
>Source?
First-hand experience. Turn 18 then come back. Let the adults speak, since we actually understand what the fuck we're discussing.

>>12190026

>>12194051
This. It won't be just climate change, but a combination of system failures.

>>12193581

>>12194298
what is tipping point
lrn2read

>>12191082
SPARC is even better than ITER, we are basically gonna have net gain commercial fusion reactors in the next 10 years, its finally here despite what the average person thinks

>>12193581
OH WOW A LINEAR REGRESSION WAS A GOOD PREDICTOR OF LOCAL CHANGES?! SO GOOD!!

Does this also mean that facebook will reach a trillion users in a few years?!?? :0

Plants changed the atmospere just by moving on land. Humans have been pumping out "unnatural" gases into the atmosphere at an insane rate. Is it really that hard to accept that what we do will affect the environment?

>>12194600
>SPARC
I hope so.

>>12190026
Based MAGA

>>12194608
>OH WOW A LINEAR REGRESSION
Where do you a linear regression?

>>12194067
>First-hand experience
So no source. Should be easy to provide since every denier claims this but mysteriously cannot provide anything actually saying it.

>>12194298
>if not reversed by 2000
Learn how to read.

>>12194376

Climate change via green house gasses isn’t the problem, but the death of Oxygen producing life is.

We are living in the Holocene extinction. Think outside the box, save the world.

>>12190014
>it is gradual
not true for a critical systems change such as say the gulf stream switching though we'd have to agree on what constitutes "gradual"

>>12190877
Please don't tell me /sci is as infected as /tv.

>>12195522
>throwing out primary sources
Well, anon, while we're at it, were going to discard all historical documents from the 1400s and earlier.

>>12189967
0 time left. We're going to see sea levels rise over the century. The longer we delay transition, the faster we're going to see sea level rise. Faster change = drastic change in disruption of climate.

We now have to move towards mitigation. Don't buy property near low sea level. If you have it, sell it and move towards higher grounds.

>>12189967
>How much time do we have left?
Time was running up 2 years ago now poles are melting faster and faster and there is no way to stop it. All we can do is slowing it down. Even for this we have to stop emissions now.

>>12190014
>feedback loop
proof you have no idea what youre talking about, fuck off with unsubstatiated theories

>>12191106
wow im so scared!! fuck off

>>12193317
>most estimates
you wont provide them cause youre full of shit

>>12196084
>0 time left
bullshit fear mongering. we have carbon capture and geoengineering and we've been planting millions and millions of trees. stop lying or fuck off and let people actually do the work.

>>12197243
>time was running up
bullshit we are not on track for worst case scenario

>>12191091
>>12191106
>>12191178
Not necessarily trying to downplay what could possibly be climate change, but most of California’s wildfires are due to poor forest management because of heavy restrictions on shit like logging

>>12198457
>millions and millions
while cutting down billions and billions, so 'millions and millions' is nothing

>>12189967
Not long before governments use it as an excuse to import millions of climate rapefugees to counter muh declining demographics.

>>12193573
>In the 80s it was 10 years
See the AQ-9 report. https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/AQ-9%20Task%20Force%20Meeting%20%281980%29.pdf
Oil companies predicted temperature rises quite nicely back in the 80s.

>>12190026
>In the 80s it was 10 years
See the AQ-9 report. https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/AQ-9%20Task%20Force%20Meeting%20%281980%29.pdf
Oil companies predicted temperature rises quite nicely back in the 80s.