Will You Still Be Here in 2050? (Just Old?) Looks Like Climate Can't Be Fixed - Buy Property in Northern Canada?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2015 4:08 PM GMT
    Paris negotiations are all about keeping the increase in average global temperature below 2 degrees C. The assumption being that real disaster for life on the planet occurs with an increase above that 2 degrees. China, India, and Indonesia, each with about 1 billion inhabitants and each still growing, although giving lip service to reducing CO2 and methane emissions, are insistent on continuing their economic growth, which is dependent on burning a lot of fossil fuels, so they are resistant to decreasing their use. (Incidentally, India is planning to triple its coal production in the next 10 years.)

    The New Climate Institute in Germany, reports that there are now 2,400 new coal-burning power-plants planned to open (mostly in China and India). The institute's studies conclude that if these power plants are built, even if all currently hoped for reductions in CO2 emissions actually take place, the result will be an increase in global temperatures of 3.6 (and possibly 4) degrees centigrade. So either the disaster predicted for exceeding the 2 degree limit is just a bit of hot air, or life as we know it will cease to exist.

    I think the situation is dreadful, but I won't be around to see it. Hopefully a few polar bears will survive - most likely in refrigerated zoos.

    And I think the fools who run India ought to be just a bit more worried - do they really think all those Bangladeshis will just learn to survive underwater? Or might they just possibly prefer to storm into India?


    http://newclimate.org/2015/12/01/climate-action-tracker-coal-plant-plans-could-wipe-out-hope-of-holding-warming-below-2c-and-threaten-achievement-of-indcs/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2015 4:16 PM GMT
    Seattle is becoming Southern California, weather-wise.
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Dec 06, 2015 5:03 PM GMT
    More than likely I'll be dead by 2050 ... good luck to you that will still be here .... you're going to need it icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2015 5:11 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    HikerSkier saidParis negotiations are all about keeping the increase in average global temperature below 2 degrees C. The assumption being that real disaster for life on the planet occurs with an increase above that 2 degrees. China, India, and Indonesia, each with about 1 billion inhabitants and each still growing, although giving lip service to reducing CO2 and methane emissions, are insistent on continuing their economic growth, which is dependent on burning a lot of fossil fuels, so they are resistant to decreasing their use.


    Hmmmm... We were told by one of the RJ libs here (I think it was in that ridiculous topic "Obama's List Of Achievements") that one of The Great Obama's "achievements" was that he got China to agree to reduce CO2 emissions.


    The planet is overpopulated in relationship to current technologies.

    Now that China has repealed its 1 child only law, they will consume any emissions savings they might gain even if their current pollution problems were resolved.

    Liberal attempts to reduce the US population of elderly through euthanasia under Obamacare will fail.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2015 5:18 PM GMT
    Hmm, just to throw a wrench into all this... but, temperatures on earth have fluctuated a lot over it's existence. Creating a margin of 2 degrees seems pretty small considering the ice age and thaw happened before humans ever had an impact on the climate.

    How long have we been tracking the climate for with accurate year to year measurements across the entire globe? Do we have enough data to even establish that this (controlling temperatures to within a few degrees) is even a possibility?
  • interestingch...

    Posts: 694

    Dec 06, 2015 5:45 PM GMT
    It is common knowledge in the UK after a leak to the press from a top university that global warming data has been falsified to get more taxes out of the people, yes the climate is changing in certain areas depending on geography, having lived in the same country all my life it is definitely warmer and wetter, however I think the real reason for the change in weather is because of magnetic north moving slowly towards Russia and away from the UK further every year, by a few miles, also large volcanic and earthquake activity seems to speed up the movement temporarily, Which is caused by the motions of the planets, the UK is slowly but surely heading towards the equator because the poles are shifting, so too is the equator hence the UK getting a little nearer every year. That is the reason for climate change in my opinion. It is having an effect on every country because the poles are moving nearer or further from them also.
    Would be interested in anyones opinion on this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2015 6:46 PM GMT
    Southeast Alaska. Buy now while it's still cheap. The land that is going to be beachfront is probably a great deal... for your kids.
  • aax_aax_aax

    Posts: 80

    Dec 06, 2015 7:02 PM GMT
    M_Leatherman saidHmm, just to throw a wrench into all this... but, temperatures on earth have fluctuated a lot over it's existence. Creating a margin of 2 degrees seems pretty small considering the ice age and thaw happened before humans ever had an impact on the climate.

    How long have we been tracking the climate for with accurate year to year measurements across the entire globe? Do we have enough data to even establish that this (controlling temperatures to within a few degrees) is even a possibility?


    Yep, temperatures have fluctuated before and after the arrival of humans, but most scientist do agree that we are the ones causing the fluctuations now, that not all of it is natural.
    There were mass extinctions of species before our time, but way lesser change is also very dangerous (for humans, not for the life on planet)... So they set margin of 2°C (some say 1.5°C), after which they believe climate will greatly change! I'm sure you are aware how dependent agriculture is on stable conditions, whether it's warm or cold, dry or humid, there are plants that grow everywhere. And the cities are also constructed on presuming stable conditions, hurricanes will destroy cities that aren't prepared for them.

    Just to give you Canadian example- Calgary- last year it snowed few weeks earlier than normal (start of September), so most deciduous trees within a city collapsed, causing also a loss of electricity for 2 days. Year before the city was flooded. Now imagine stuff like that happening on weekly basis!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2015 7:43 PM GMT
    It's all relative. Black holes continue to consume entire galaxies which changes the climate drastically and fatally ( lol) for millions of Suns and planets. I used to dig up tropical type fossils in north Pennsylvania when I was a kid and wish the climate had not changed there. I welcome some warmth here in San Francisco; 52 degree Julys suck .
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2015 8:43 PM GMT
    I can't help but wonder about these young couples who believe global warming is an issue who then go on and have kids.

    In my opinion all this hand wringing about being green and greenhouse gases is worrying about the wrong thing; the real problem is the population. No matter how green we become at some point the population is going to grow and reach yet another tipping point where what we do is damaging the environment.

    But getting a good hand on population control, globally, I would guess will be nearly impossible. So in the long run I think it's hopeless.

    Unlike the rest of the animals on this planet we don't have any natural predators that are keeping our population at a reasonable level.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2015 9:19 PM GMT
    mx5guynj said
    Liberal attempts to reduce the US population of elderly through euthanasia under Obamacare will fail.



    I wonder what it's like to have a mind that is so wedded to simple binaries.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2015 9:40 PM GMT
    Lumpyoatmeal saidI can't help but wonder about these young couples who believe global warming is an issue who then go on and have kids.

    In my opinion all this hand wringing about being green and greenhouse gases is worrying about the wrong thing; the real problem is the population. No matter how green we become at some point the population is going to grow and reach yet another tipping point where what we do is damaging the environment.

    But getting a good hand on population control, globally, I would guess will be nearly impossible. So in the long run I think it's hopeless.

    Unlike the rest of the animals on this planet we don't have any natural predators that are keeping our population at a reasonable level.



    Population control was a big issue in 1974. It was considered politically incorrect to even think of having kids. Today that is the furthest thing from the liberal mind which thinks overpopulation problems are solved by moving everyone to the states.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2015 10:46 PM GMT
    M_Leatherman saidHmm, just to throw a wrench into all this... but, temperatures on earth have fluctuated a lot over it's existence. Creating a margin of 2 degrees seems pretty small considering the ice age and thaw happened before humans ever had an impact on the climate.

    How long have we been tracking the climate for with accurate year to year measurements across the entire globe? Do we have enough data to even establish that this (controlling temperatures to within a few degrees) is even a possibility?


    The figures quoted are global average temperature changes. 2 or 4 degrees is not a small amount. It is a lot. The difference between the last ice age and the present is about 6 degrees. Climate fluctuations during the Holocene have been on the order of 1 degree.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4864

    Dec 07, 2015 12:30 AM GMT
    Realistic CO2 free methods to generate adequate power are now tabu; they cannot be discussed and are not even mentioned by politicians. Unless that changes, we will be in serious trouble.
  • JackNNJ

    Posts: 1051

    Dec 07, 2015 4:10 AM GMT
    Yeah, aight.
  • badbug

    Posts: 800

    Dec 07, 2015 6:43 AM GMT


    Sigh.

    "the earth has always heated and cooled"


    Why the hell didn't all those climate scientists think of that? Are they aware? You should really email someone. Think of all the years of study you could have saved everyone from wasting...all the debates, all the worry.








  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 07, 2015 2:25 PM GMT
    mx5guynj said
    southbeach1500 said
    HikerSkier saidParis negotiations are all about keeping the increase in average global temperature below 2 degrees C. The assumption being that real disaster for life on the planet occurs with an increase above that 2 degrees. China, India, and Indonesia, each with about 1 billion inhabitants and each still growing, although giving lip service to reducing CO2 and methane emissions, are insistent on continuing their economic growth, which is dependent on burning a lot of fossil fuels, so they are resistant to decreasing their use.


    Hmmmm... We were told by one of the RJ libs here (I think it was in that ridiculous topic "Obama's List Of Achievements") that one of The Great Obama's "achievements" was that he got China to agree to reduce CO2 emissions.


    The planet is overpopulated in relationship to current technologies.

    Now that China has repealed its 1 child only law, they will consume any emissions savings they might gain even if their current pollution problems were resolved.

    Liberal attempts to reduce the US population of elderly through euthanasia under Obamacare will fail.
    Don't worry, ISIL already has a plan in progress to help decrease population.
  • buddycat

    Posts: 1874

    Dec 07, 2015 8:34 PM GMT
    More than likely I will be here in 2050 due to my health right now.
  • Lincsbear

    Posts: 2605

    Jan 03, 2016 11:32 PM GMT
    Probably not.
    But civilization, humans and the earth will be. The latter doesn`t need 'fixing'. It can look after itself.
    Humans need 'fixing'.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 25, 2016 3:52 AM GMT
    I'll be 88 in 2050 and I'm betting I'll still be hitting the gym then. Fortunately, I live on a mountain in BC. Nice view of the ocean now but tropical beachfront property would be nice when it comes.

    :-)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 25, 2016 4:17 AM GMT
    In 2050 I would be 101. So my chances of being alive then are not promising. Funny, my doctor just a couple of weeks ago, after reviewing my latest lab work which was somewhat improved from my last, said I would live to be 100. If only he had given me 1 more year! LOL!

    Whereas my older husband might make it, at 116. Because during one of his own visits to that same doctor, he was told he'd live to 120, having better lab results than I've got. So I was sitting there, as we both do during our exams, sometimes combining the visit itself for the 2 of us at once, to save time. No medical secrets between US!

    Well, anyway, I asked the doctor for confirmation. "Doctor, you say he's going to live to be 120?" "Yes."

    "Can I have a second opinion?" The doctor cracked up, and of course I got my customary ***SMACK*** for my "smart" mouth.

    But even if I don't make it to 2050, I think even before then I may be disheartened by conditions in the world and the US. No doubt there'd be some scientific advances I'd enjoy seeing happen, but I fear an internal political deterioration in the US, that might make life less pleasant in other ways. And especially for gay people, if the current Right Wing gets its way, and reverses what I view as somewhat fragile gains.

    And there seems no practical way to curb international terrorism, all the irresponsible talk about more wars and carpet bombing aside. I certainly hope I don't have to live my last decades (if any) in a country that's in a permanent state of war.

    In view of all that upheaval, by comparison the ongoing climate change, which I know is real and accelerating, may actually seem a lesser matter to me. One of its affects being an uncertain impact on the world's economy, including US food production. Gawd help us if we can no longer feed ourselves. Maybe Canada will sell us food.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2016 3:43 PM GMT
    governments dont react to issues in real time. Yes; we are phucked. err at least who ever lives to that time and date.

    Current global warming doom theory predicts the weather patterns will become unstable. For example:
    -frequent tornadoes in Florida
    -freak record setting snow storms in NYC.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2016 4:07 PM GMT
    pellaz said
    governments dont react to issues in real time. Yes; we are phucked. err at least who ever lives to that time and date.

    Current global warming doom theory predicts the weather patterns will become unstable. For example:
    -frequent tornadoes in Florida
    -freak record setting snow storms in NYC.

    Hmmm... we had tornadoes in South Florida yesterday morning, a few miles from us, not very common. I already called my golf driving range this morning, because they're located right next to where some of the touchdowns were. But they're OK and functioning, electricity's back on. And of course we know about the record snowfall that just hit NYC.

    Some of the earliest computer weather projections from decades ago, not as advanced as we have today, were already predicting unstable weather patterns as a consequence of climate change. Which was just beginning to be observed. The very things we're seeing today were already being anticipated.