Scientists Suggest Earth Could Be Uninhabitable In 300 Years

[konradv]

In the 1970s they said parts of the earth would be uninhabitable do by the year 2000.

Key word: 'Suggest'.

LOL!!! The keywords here are actually "No Cite"! You haven't actually proved that what "they said" the 70s isn't true!!! Are you saying that ALL parts of the world that were inhabitable in the 70s are inhabitable now? You better get busy, if you expect to prove that.

 

[konradv]

Freakin' ignorant is your trademark, Suckee.... The climate has been changed several times in the past by a rapid infusion of GHGs. The laws of physics do not care whether the GHGs are the result of Trapp volcanics, or the result of a specie burning fossil fuels, the result is the same.

Well then you can explain how we can get between 13,000 and 43,000 gigatons of CO2 from only enough fossil fuels to create 5,000 gigatons? Thats what it took in the past according to your scientists... Been waiting on you to show that is possible for a while now and all you have done is either avoid it or post more of the same drivel....

Sounds like a gross underestimation of the amount of fossil fuels. Besides, it wouldn't have to get to the peak of past concentrations to have an effect on climate.

 

[konradv]

Ho-hum - more global warming stuff......wonder how many people are going to jump from buildings or drink the kool-aid just before 2012????????

I'm wondering how to make money off those who do. Missed the Y2K opportunity to fleece the idiots. Don't want to miss this one!

 

[Oddball]

Algore already figured it out....Scam people with gullible warming doomsday prophecies.

 

[syrenn]

Algore already figured it out....Scam people with gullible warming doomsday prophecies.

You forgot the part about making millions doing it.

 

[Skull Pilot]

[youtube]sP-4KemxrPk[/youtube]

The Sky is fallin, human race that we are
Has left me crawlin, staring straight at the sun
All in a moment, I notice
Every dog has his day
I paid attention cost me so much to hate

Bridge:
For so long I saw only wrong
But now to remind its a waste of time.

CH:
Close your eyes and see the sky is fallin.

VS2:
I wanted something, nothin, blank, I dont know
Its hard deflecting, stones are easy to throw
All in a moment I noticed
Hours days left behind
One wasted, useless, selfless
None of a kind

Bridge 2:
For so long I saw only wrong
Now to remind not to go back
To the low that has drained
My life so long

CH:
Close your eyes and see the sky is fallin.

 

[Skull Pilot]

 

[Skull Pilot]

 

[boedicca]

Algore already figured it out....Scam people with gullible warming doomsday prophecies.

You forgot the part about making millions doing it.

Correction: Billions.

That's why Goldman Sachs is one of his partners.

 

[boedicca]

As to the OP, I'm of the mind that we should encourage the elite political class to believe it's true.

With a hat tip to "Hitchhiker's Guide":

Knowing the craven attitude of our political class, if they really believe the earth will become inhabitable, they will manipulate their power to ensure that any space colonization programs benefit them and their cronies. Let's hope they leave, taking their looting cronies with them. Actually, let's actively recruit them for the effort!

Then the rest of us can reform things to prevent such a class from developing ever again.

 

[gslack]

Scientists HATE being wrong and LOVE being right. Making predictions that are based on a scientific fact are great for pats on the back for being right.

Shall I publish my findings?

The earth like a pendulum will swing from one extreme to the other. Furnace to frozen back to furnace.The magnetic polls will flip. The oceans will rise and fall. Europe and Africa will some day be touching the east coast of the Americas.

Do I get my degree now, huh do I, huh, huh. huh?

Anyone take anatomy? See the resemblance of the geriatric skull to an infant skull? The earth is not much different, it is only aging in geologic time.

Well, the Truth is that humanity will render Earth uninhabitable. It is likely to occur within the next 100 years, not 300.

Global warming is real, but only the tip of the iceberg.

Sure, science is not always right, but it gets better, especially with modern computing. You cannot dismiss science because it was wrong before. For example, are we to dismiss the telegraph or the improved light-globe because Edison made so many failures? Do we suggest that modern electronics wont work because of a previous electrical device that didn't? Of course not. We can only judge each case by its own merit, NOT by the successes and failures of other scientific endeavours.

For more information, visit the most rebellious website on the 'net at Forbidden Truth Media

Oh well then mr. first post can enlighten us all as to how that is when even the scientists from the warmers say 300 years.....

we growing weary of this sock army attack. And do not send me to free server and expect me to take it seriously.... 8k.com sites are free...Also those free server/hosting sites are know to carry malware...

 

[editec]

Uh huh....

The problem with their hypothesis is, we don't have enough fossil fuels to burn for more than a hundred years.... So.... What will be the problem once we stop burning fossil fuels? its just silly...... Seriously.

Assuming that we haven't kicked off something untoward, like for example, the reintroduction of the enormous amounts of CO2 currently trapped in the permafrost.

Face it, nobody can predict what the climate will be in 300 years.

NObody.

 

[gslack]

Uh huh....

The problem with their hypothesis is, we don't have enough fossil fuels to burn for more than a hundred years.... So.... What will be the problem once we stop burning fossil fuels? its just silly...... Seriously.

Assuming that we haven't kicked off something untoward, like for example, the reintroduction of the enormous amounts of CO2 currently trapped in the permafrost.

Face it, nobody can predict what the climate will be in 300 years.

NObody.

But the warmer scientists in the OP article did just that.....Better tell them that.....

 

[syrenn]

Scientists HATE being wrong and LOVE being right. Making predictions that are based on a scientific fact are great for pats on the back for being right.

Shall I publish my findings?

The earth like a pendulum will swing from one extreme to the other. Furnace to frozen back to furnace.The magnetic polls will flip. The oceans will rise and fall. Europe and Africa will some day be touching the east coast of the Americas.

Do I get my degree now, huh do I, huh, huh. huh?

Anyone take anatomy? See the resemblance of the geriatric skull to an infant skull? The earth is not much different, it is only aging in geologic time.

Well, the Truth is that humanity will render Earth uninhabitable. It is likely to occur within the next 100 years, not 300.

Very possibly true, but that does not negate the FACT the the earth warms and cools all of its own accord, regardless if it kills everything or not. What you are really saying is your worried that humans will not survive.

Global warming is real, but only the tip of the iceberg.

I cant help myself If global warming is real then there wont be a tip of the iceberg.

Sure, science is not always right, but it gets better, especially with modern computing. You cannot dismiss science because it was wrong before. For example, are we to dismiss the telegraph or the improved light-globe because Edison made so many failures? Do we suggest that modern electronics wont work because of a previous electrical device that didn't? Of course not. We can only judge each case by its own merit, NOT by the successes and failures of other scientific endeavours.

I am not suggesting the models are wrong. I am suggesting that global warming and cooling are a geologic fact that has nothing to so with the poor humans that inhabit it for a mere breath of time.

 

[syrenn]

Algore already figured it out....Scam people with gullible warming doomsday prophecies.

You forgot the part about making millions doing it.

Correction: Billions.
That's why Goldman Sachs is one of his partners.

correction noted, thank you

 

[westwall]

Scientists HATE being wrong and LOVE being right. Making predictions that are based on a scientific fact are great for pats on the back for being right.

Shall I publish my findings?

The earth like a pendulum will swing from one extreme to the other. Furnace to frozen back to furnace.The magnetic polls will flip. The oceans will rise and fall. Europe and Africa will some day be touching the east coast of the Americas.

Do I get my degree now, huh do I, huh, huh. huh?

Anyone take anatomy? See the resemblance of the geriatric skull to an infant skull? The earth is not much different, it is only aging in geologic time.

Well, the Truth is that humanity will render Earth uninhabitable. It is likely to occur within the next 100 years, not 300.

Global warming is real, but only the tip of the iceberg.

Sure, science is not always right, but it gets better, especially with modern computing. You cannot dismiss science because it was wrong before. For example, are we to dismiss the telegraph or the improved light-globe because Edison made so many failures? Do we suggest that modern electronics wont work because of a previous electrical device that didn't? Of course not. We can only judge each case by its own merit, NOT by the successes and failures of other scientific endeavours.

Of course global warming is real..just as global cooling is real. Man hasn't the power to destroy the planet yet. We can sure screw it the hell up and make it uncumfortable for humanity that is true but destruction is far, far from our ability.

 

[RollingThunder]

There is quite a collection of denier cult retards on this forum. Too bad you dingbats are so freaking ignorant and clueless about all this. Maybe if you all weren't as dumb as a bag of retarded rocks and had some education beyond the fourth grade, you wouldn't be such foolish dupes of the fossil fuel industry. Your denial of reality and scientific evidence is really pathetic.

Scientists are starting to look more closely at the long range effects of rising CO2 levels/global warming/climate change beyond just the end of the 21st century. If we continue with a 'business-as-usual' course, the results are extremely disastrous for mankind and all of the other life forms sharing this planet with us.


Climate change could make half the world uninhabitable

Climate change could make half of the world uninhabitable for humans as a rise in temperature makes it too hot to survive, scientists have warned.

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
The Telegraph
Published: 7:30AM BST 12 May 2010
(excerpts)

Researchers from the University of New South Wales in Australia and Purdue University in the US said global warming will not stop after 2100, the point where most previous projections have ended. In fact temperatures may rise by up to 12C (21.6F) within just three centuries making many countries into deserts.

The study, published in the prestigious journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, said humans will not be able to adapt or survive in such conditions. Professor Tony McMichael, one of the authors, said if the world continues to pump out greenhouse gases at the current rate it will cause catastrophic warming.

"Under realistic scenarios out to 2300, we may be faced with temperature increases of 12 degrees or even more," he said. "If this happens, our current worries about sea level rise, occasional heatwaves and bushfires, biodiversity loss and agricultural difficulties will pale into insignificance beside a major threat - as much as half the currently inhabited globe may simply become too hot for people to live there."

***

But he said there was a good chance temperatures could rise by at least 7C (12.6F) by 2300, that would also make much of the world inhabitable.

***

"It needs to be looked at," he said. "There's not much we can do about climate change over the next two decades but there's still a lot we can do about the longer term changes."

***

They urge instead the use of carbon tax revenue to develop technologies that can supply clean energy to everyone and provide 'human dignity'.

© Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2010

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)
*****

An adaptability limit to climate change due to heat stress

Steven C. Sherwood and Matthew Huber
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciencies
Published online before print May 3, 2010, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0913352107

Abstract

Despite the uncertainty in future climate-change impacts, it is often assumed that humans would be able to adapt to any possible warming. Here we argue that heat stress imposes a robust upper limit to such adaptation. Peak heat stress, quantified by the wet-bulb temperature TW, is surprisingly similar across diverse climates today. TW never exceeds 31 °C. Any exceedence of 35 °C for extended periods should induce hyperthermia in humans and other mammals, as dissipation of metabolic heat becomes impossible. While this never happens now, it would begin to occur with global-mean warming of about 7 °C, calling the habitability of some regions into question. With 11–12 °C warming, such regions would spread to encompass the majority of the human population as currently distributed. Eventual warmings of 12 °C are possible from fossil fuel burning. One implication is that recent estimates of the costs of unmitigated climate change are too low unless the range of possible warming can somehow be narrowed. Heat stress also may help explain trends in the mammalian fossil record.

Full Text (PDF)

Copyright ©2010 by the National Academy of Sciences

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)

 

[Old Rocks]

Uh huh....

The problem with their hypothesis is, we don't have enough fossil fuels to burn for more than a hundred years.... So.... What will be the problem once we stop burning fossil fuels? its just silly...... Seriously.

Assuming that we haven't kicked off something untoward, like for example, the reintroduction of the enormous amounts of CO2 currently trapped in the permafrost.

Face it, nobody can predict what the climate will be in 300 years.

NObody.

You have that right. Not even thirty years.

Look at the predictions from the Alarmists ten years ago. They spoke of the Arctic Ice disappearing at that time. We will be lucky if there is any ice in the summer by 2050, considering to current rate of thinning. They spoke of the glaciers gone in Glacier National Park by 2030. Now there are only 25 left that qualify by being a patch of ice larger than 23 acres.

All the reports from the Arctic speak of methane bubbling out of the lakes, vast changes in the vegitation in the tundra and tiaga. Changes that are strong positive feedback loops. And, thus far, no negative loops in sight.

Now some seem to take solace from the fact that we cannot accurately predict the speed of the climatic changes, nor what it will do to specific areas. A rather pollyanna attitude at best.

 

[Old Rocks]

Rolling Thunder, your second article is from the National Academy of Sciences. That automatically excludes it from considerations from the drooling baboons on this board.

 

[Old Rocks]

Scientists HATE being wrong and LOVE being right. Making predictions that are based on a scientific fact are great for pats on the back for being right.

Shall I publish my findings?

The earth like a pendulum will swing from one extreme to the other. Furnace to frozen back to furnace.The magnetic polls will flip. The oceans will rise and fall. Europe and Africa will some day be touching the east coast of the Americas.

Do I get my degree now, huh do I, huh, huh. huh?

Anyone take anatomy? See the resemblance of the geriatric skull to an infant skull? The earth is not much different, it is only aging in geologic time.

Well, the Truth is that humanity will render Earth uninhabitable. It is likely to occur within the next 100 years, not 300.

Very possibly true, but that does not negate the FACT the the earth warms and cools all of its own accord, regardless if it kills everything or not. What you are really saying is your worried that humans will not survive.

Global warming is real, but only the tip of the iceberg.

I cant help myself If global warming is real then there wont be a tip of the iceberg.

Sure, science is not always right, but it gets better, especially with modern computing. You cannot dismiss science because it was wrong before. For example, are we to dismiss the telegraph or the improved light-globe because Edison made so many failures? Do we suggest that modern electronics wont work because of a previous electrical device that didn't? Of course not. We can only judge each case by its own merit, NOT by the successes and failures of other scientific endeavours.

I am not suggesting the models are wrong. I am suggesting that global warming and cooling are a geologic fact that has nothing to so with the poor humans that inhabit it for a mere breath of time.

Would you care to back you suggestions with some real science? From real peer reviewed journals?