Your Extinction.

[Toddsterpatriot]

I did with the graphs I posted. And if you don't believe what I said in the thread, look it up yourself.

Which graph showed that we're extinct by 2050?

 

[James California]

I just looked outside.
There is zero sun shining on local solar panels.

~ Oh N0 ... !️

 

[frigidweirdo]

Look at the graphs I posted.

Look at the graph I POSTED.
Literally shows that the Earth was as warm, if not warmer, 100,000 years ago, 200,000 years ago, 300,000 years ago.

Why? Human industrialization?

If not, then what?

 

[Crick]

Look at the graph I POSTED.
Literally shows that the Earth was as warm, if not warmer, 100,000 years ago, 200,000 years ago, 300,000 years ago.

Why? Human industrialization?

If not, then what?

High carbon dioxide from volcanoes and less processes to sequester it (low rainfall so little erosion so little carbonate fixing.) So, once again, it was CO2.

 

[frigidweirdo]

High carbon dioxide from volcanoes and less processes to sequester it (low rainfall so little erosion so little carbonate fixing.) So, once again, it was CO2.

So, there were more volcanoes exploding 100,000, 200,000, 300,000 years ago than at other times?

Any evidence for this?

 

[Crick]

So, there were more volcanoes exploding 100,000, 200,000, 300,000 years ago than at other times?

Any evidence for this?

This

Ancient climate change triggered warming that lasted thousands of years

A rapid rise in temperature on ancient Earth triggered a climate response that may have prolonged the warming for many thousands of years, according to scientists.

www.sciencedaily.com

and this

Why Ancient Earth Was So Warm

A new 3-D model sheds light on why early Earth was so toasty even with a much dimmer sun.

www.nationalgeographic.com

and this

Earth's Earliest Climate

What was Earth like in its youth? Explosive, hot, and unstable? Or cool and in control? Sedimentary rocks from the Archean Eon hint at something in between.

www.nature.com

 

[westwall]

They aren't as toxic as nuclear waste. They certainly aren't as toxic as C02 and methane are towards global temperatures.

CO2 is the basic building block of life. It is NOT a pollutant. Only an anti science religious nutjob would think that.

 

[westwall]

You might be happier. But if you are planning on being alive past the year 2050, you will be in for an unhappy surprise. My living in a cave wouldn't solve that.

I'm 75. If I make it to 2050 I will have done something Hella right!

 

[Dogmaphobe]

You know, there are times when I can't sort out which is more important to me -- the tl or the dr.

 

[Oddball]

You love that line, don't you. Trouble is, you are never specific and you never show your math.

Risks in the near term (2021–2040)

B.3 Global warming, reaching 1.5°C in the near-term, would cause unavoidable increases in multiple climate hazards and present multiple risks to ecosystems and humans (very high confidence). The level of risk will depend on concurrent nearterm trends in vulnerability, exposure, level of socioeconomic development and adaptation (high confidence). Near-term actions that limit global warming to close to 1.5°C would substantially reduce projected losses and damages related to climate change in human systems and ecosystems, compared to higher warming levels, but cannot eliminate them all (very high confidence). (Figure SPM.3, Box SPM.1) {16.4, 16.5, 16.6, CCP1.2, CCP5.3, CCB SLR, WGI AR6 SPM B1.3, WGI AR6 Table SPM.1}

B.3.1 Near-term warming and increased frequency, severity and duration of extreme events will place many terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and marine ecosystems at high or very high risks of biodiversity loss (medium to very high confidence, depending on ecosystem). Near-term risks for biodiversity loss are moderate to high in forest ecosystems (medium confidence), kelp and seagrass ecosystems (high to very high confidence), and high to very high in Arctic sea-ice and terrestrial ecosystems (high confidence) and warm-water coral reefs (very high confidence). Continued and accelerating sea level rise will encroach on coastal settlements and infrastructure (high confidence) and commit low-lying coastal ecosystems to submergence and loss (medium confidence). If trends in urbanisation in exposed areas continue, this will exacerbate the impacts, with more challenges where energy, water and other services are constrained (medium confidence). The number of people at risk from climate change and associated loss of biodiversity will progressively increase (medium confidence). Violent conflict and, separately, migration patterns, in the near-term will be driven by socioeconomic conditions and governance more than by climate change (medium confidence). (Figure SPM.3) {2.5, 3.4, 4.6, 6.2, 7.3, 8.7, 9.2, 9.9, 11.6, 12.5, 13.6, 13.10, 14.6, 15.3, 16.5, 16.6, CCP1.2, CCP2.1, CCP2.2, CCP5.3, CCP6.2, CCP6.3, CCB MIGRATE, CCB SLR}

B.3.2 In the near term, climate-associated risks to natural and human systems depend more strongly on changes in their vulnerability and exposure than on differences in climate hazards between emissions scenarios (high confidence). Regional differences exist, and risks are highest where species and people exist close to their upper thermal limits, along coastlines, in close association with ice or seasonal rivers (high confidence). Risks are also high where multiple non-climate drivers persist or where vulnerability is otherwise elevated (high confidence). Many of these risks are unavoidable in the near-term, irrespective of emissions scenario (high confidence). Several risks can be moderated with adaptation (high confidence). (Figure SPM.3, Section C) {2.5, 3.3, 3.4, 4.5, 6.2, 7.1, 7.3, 8.2, 11.6, 12.4, 13.6, 13.7, 13.10, 14.5, 16.4, 16.5, CCP2.2, CCP4.3, CCP5.3, CCB SLR, WGI AR6 Table SPM.1}

B.3.3 Levels of risk for all Reasons for Concern (RFC) are assessed to become high to very high at lower global warming levels than in AR5 (high confidence). Between 1.2°C and 4.5°C global warming level very high risks emerge in all five RFCs compared to just two RFCs in AR5 (high confidence). Two of these transitions from high to very high risk are associated with near-term warming: risks to unique and threatened systems at a median value of 1.5 [1.2 to 2.0] °C (high confidence) and risks associated with extreme weather events at a median value of 2.0 [1.8 to 2.5] °C (medium confidence). Some key risks contributing to the RFCs are projected to lead to widespread, pervasive, and potentially irreversible impacts at global warming levels of 1.5–2°C if exposure and vulnerability are high and adaptation is low (medium confidence). Near-term actions that limit global warming to close to 1.5°C would substantially reduce projected losses and damages related to climate change in human systems and ecosystems, compared to higher warming levels, but cannot eliminate them all (very high confidence). (Figure SPM.3b) {16.5, 16.6, CCB SLR}

Mid to Long-term Risks (2041–2100)

B.4 Beyond 2040 and depending on the level of global warming, climate change will lead to numerous risks to natural and human systems (high confidence). For 127 identified key risks, assessed mid- and long-term impacts are up to multiple times higher than currently observed (high confidence). The magnitude and rate of climate change and associated risks depend strongly on near-term mitigation and adaptation actions, and projected adverse impacts and related losses and damages escalate with every increment of global warming (very high confidence). (Figure SPM.3) {2.5, 3.4, 4.4, 5.2, 6.2, 7.3, 8.4, 9.2, 10.2, 11.6, 12.4, 13.2, 13.3, 13.4, 13.5, 13.6, 13.7, 13.8, 14.6, 15.3, 16.5, 16.6, CCP1.2, CCP2.2, CCP3.3, CCP4.3, CCP5.3, CCP6.3, CCP7.3}

B.4.1 Biodiversity loss and degradation, damages to and transformation of ecosystems are already key risks for every region due to past global warming and will continue to escalate with every increment of global warming (very high confidence). In terrestrial ecosystems, 3 to 14% of species assessed33 will likely face very high risk of extinction34 at global warming levels of 1.5°C, increasing up to 3 to 18% at 2°C, 3 to 29% at 3°C, 3 to 39% at 4°C, and 3 to 48% at 5°C. In ocean and coastal ecosystems, risk of biodiversity loss ranges between moderate and very high by 1.5°C global warming level and is moderate to very high by 2°C but with more ecosystems at high and very high risk (high confidence), and increases to high to very high across most ocean and coastal ecosystems by 3°C (medium to high confidence, depending on ecosystem). Very high extinction risk for endemic species in biodiversity hotspots is projected to at least double from 2% between 1.5°C and 2°C global warming levels and to increase at least tenfold if warming rises from 1.5°C to 3°C (medium confidence). (Figure SPM.3c, d, f) {2.4, 2.5, 3.4, 3.5,12.3, 12.5, Table 12.6, 13.4, 13.10, 16.4, 16.6, CCP1.2, Figure CCP1.6, Figure CCP1.7, CCP5.3, CCP6.3, CCB PALEO}

B.4.2 Risks in physical water availability and water-related hazards will continue to increase by the mid- to long-term in all assessed regions, with greater risk at higher global warming levels (high confidence). At approximately 2°C global warming, snowmelt water availability for irrigation is projected to decline in some snowmelt dependent river basins by up to 20%, and global glacier mass loss of 18 ± 13% is projected to diminish water availability for agriculture, hydropower, and human settlements in the mid- to long-term, with these changes projected to double with 4°C global warming (medium confidence). In Small Islands, groundwater availability is threatened by climate change (high confidence). Changes to streamflow magnitude, timing and associated extremes are projected to adversely impact freshwater ecosystems in many watersheds by the mid- to long-term across all assessed scenarios (medium confidence). Projected increases in direct flood damages are higher by 1.4 to 2 times at 2°C and 2.5 to 3.9 times at 3°C compared to 1.5°C global warming without adaptation (medium confidence). At global warming of 4°C, approximately 10% of the global land area is projected to face increases in both extreme high and low river flows in the same location, with implications for planning for all water use sectors (medium confidence). Challenges for water management will be exacerbated in the near, mid and long term, depending on the magnitude, rate and regional details of future climate change and will be particularly challenging for regions with constrained resources for water management (high confidence). {2.3, 4.4, 4.5, Box 4.2, Figure 4.20, 15.3, CCP5.3, CCB DISASTER, SROCC 2.3}

B.4.3 Climate change will increasingly put pressure on food production and access, especially in vulnerable regions, undermining food security and nutrition (high confidence). Increases in frequency, intensity and severity of droughts, floods and heatwaves, and continued sea level rise will increase risks to food security (high confidence) in vulnerable regions from moderate to high between 1.5°C and 2°C global warming level, with no or low levels of adaptation (medium confidence). At 2°C or higher global warming level in the mid-term, food security risks due to climate change will be more severe, leading to malnutrition and micro-nutrient deficiencies, concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, Central and South America and Small Islands (high confidence). Global warming will progressively weaken soil health and ecosystem services such as pollination, increase pressure from pests and diseases, and reduce marine animal biomass, undermining food productivity in many regions on land and in the ocean (medium confidence). At 3°C or higher global warming level in the long term, areas exposed to climate-related hazards will expand substantially compared with 2°C or lower global warming level (high confidence), exacerbating regional disparity in food security risks (high confidence). (Figure SPM.3) {1.1, 3.3, 4.5, 5.2, 5.4, 5.5, 5.8, 5.9, 5.12, 7.3, 8.3, 9.11, 13.5, 15.3, 16.5, 16.6, CCB MOVING PLATE, CCB SLR}

B.4.4 Climate change and related extreme events will significantly increase ill health and premature deaths from the near- to long-term (high confidence). Globally, population exposure to heatwaves will continue to increase with additional warming, with strong geographical differences in heat-related mortality without additional adaptation (very high confidence). Climate-sensitive food-borne, water-borne, and vector-borne disease risks are projected to increase under all levels of warming without additional adaptation (high confidence). In particular, dengue risk will increase with longer seasons and a wider geographic distribution in Asia, Europe, Central and South America and sub-Saharan Africa, potentially putting additional billions of people at risk by the end of the century (high confidence). Mental health challenges, including anxiety and stress, are expected to increase under further global warming in all assessed regions, particularly for children, adolescents, elderly, and those with underlying health conditions (very high confidence). {4.5, 5.12, Box 5.10, 7.3, Figure 7.9, 8.4, 9.10, Figure 9.32, Figure 9.35, 10.4, Figure 10.11, 11.3, 12.3, Figure 12.5, Figure 12.6, 13.7, Figure 13.23, Figure 13.24, 14.5, 15.3, CCP6.2}

B.4.5 Climate change risks to cities, settlements and key infrastructure will rise rapidly in the mid- and long-term with further global warming, especially in places already exposed to high temperatures, along coastlines, or with high vulnerabilities (high confidence). Globally, population change in low-lying cities and settlements will lead to approximately a billion people projected to be at risk from coastal-specific climate hazards in the mid-term under all scenarios, including in Small Islands (high confidence). The population potentially exposed to a 100-year coastal flood is projected to increase by about 20% if global mean sea level rises by 0.15 m relative to 2020 levels; this exposed population doubles at a 0.75 m rise in mean sea level and triples at 1.4 m without population change and additional adaptation (medium confidence). Sea level rise poses an existential threat for some Small Islands and some low-lying coasts (medium confidence). By 2100 the value of global assets within the future 1-in-100 year coastal floodplains is projected to be between US$7.9 and US$12.7 trillion (2011 value) under RCP4.5, rising to between US$8.8 and US$14.2 trillion under RCP8.5 (medium confidence). Costs for maintenance and reconstruction of urban infrastructure, including building, transportation, and energy will increase with global warming level (medium confidence), the associated functional disruptions are projected to be substantial particularly for cities, settlements and infrastructure located on permafrost in cold regions and on coasts (high confidence). {6.2, 9.9, 10.4, 13.6, 13.10, 15.3, 16.5, CCP2.1, CCP2.2, CCP5.3, CCP6.2, CCB SLR, SROCC 2.3, SROCC CCB9}

B.4.6 Projected estimates of global aggregate net economic damages generally increase non-linearly with global warming levels (high confidence).35 The wide range of global estimates, and the lack of comparability between methodologies, does not allow for identification of a robust range of estimates (high confidence). The existence of higher estimates than assessed in AR5 indicates that global aggregate economic impacts could be higher than previous estimates (low confidence).36 Significant regional variation in aggregate economic damages from climate change is projected (high confidence) with estimated economic damages per capita for developing countries often higher as a fraction of income (high confidence). Economic damages, including both those represented and those not represented in economic markets, are projected to be lower at 1.5°C than at 3°C or higher global warming levels (high confidence). {4.4, 9.11, 11.5, 13.10, Box 14.6, 16.5, CWGB ECONOMIC}

B.4.7 In the mid- to long-term, displacement will increase with intensification of heavy precipitation and associated flooding, tropical cyclones, drought and, increasingly, sea level rise (high confidence). At progressive levels of warming, involuntary migration from regions with high exposure and low adaptive capacity would occur (medium confidence). Compared to other socioeconomic factors the influence of climate on conflict is assessed as relatively weak (high confidence). Along long-term socioeconomic pathways that reduce non-climatic drivers, risk of violent conflict would decline (medium confidence). At higher global warming levels, impacts of weather and climate extremes, particularly drought, by increasing vulnerability will increasingly affect violent intrastate conflict (medium confidence). {TS B.7.4, 7.3, 16.5, CCB MIGRATE }

33 Numbers of species assessed are in the tens of thousands globally.
34 The term ‘very high risks of extinction’ is used here consistently with the IUCN categories and criteria and equates with ‘critically endangered’.
35 The assessment found estimated rates of increase in projected global economic damages that were both greater than linear and less than linear as global warming level increases. There is evidence that some regions could benefit from low levels of warming (high confidence). {CWGB ECONOMIC}
36 Low confidence assigned due to the assessed lack of comparability and robustness of global aggregate economic damage estimates. {CWGB ECONOMIC}

From IPCC's AR6, Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Summary for Policy Makers

IPCC is an international scam....Fucking sucker.

 

[Oddball]

3. Left unattended, solar panels won't blow up and poison the surrounding countryside with dangerous radiation for centuries.

They're still a major toxic waste mitigation problem at both the manufacturing and the disposal stages.

TANSTAFL

 

[Dogmaphobe]

...Fucking sucker.

He sounds very flexible.

 

[frigidweirdo]

This

Ancient climate change triggered warming that lasted thousands of years

A rapid rise in temperature on ancient Earth triggered a climate response that may have prolonged the warming for many thousands of years, according to scientists.

www.sciencedaily.com

and this

Why Ancient Earth Was So Warm

A new 3-D model sheds light on why early Earth was so toasty even with a much dimmer sun.

www.nationalgeographic.com

and this

Earth's Earliest Climate

What was Earth like in its youth? Explosive, hot, and unstable? Or cool and in control? Sedimentary rocks from the Archean Eon hint at something in between.

www.nature.com

Then let's have a look.

Number 1:
Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.

Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The exact age and duration of the event is uncertain but it is estimated to have occurred around 55.5 million years ago (Ma).[4]"
Right, we're talking the last 400,000 years. There has been a distinct cycle within those 400,000 years that were vastly different to what happened before.

So, I don't see the point of this article.

Number 2:

"Some three to four billion years ago"
Even further back. What does this have to do with the last 400,000 years?

Number 3:

"from 3.9 to 2.5 billion years ago"
Well, all in all you've managed to post three articles which, as far as I can tell, have NOTHING to do with the topic at hand.

I congratulate you.

 

[Crick]

Then let's have a look.

Number 1:
Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.

Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The exact age and duration of the event is uncertain but it is estimated to have occurred around 55.5 million years ago (Ma).[4]"
Right, we're talking the last 400,000 years. There has been a distinct cycle within those 400,000 years that were vastly different to what happened before.

So, I don't see the point of this article.

Number 2:

"Some three to four billion years ago"
Even further back. What does this have to do with the last 400,000 years?

Number 3:

"from 3.9 to 2.5 billion years ago"
Well, all in all you've managed to post three articles which, as far as I can tell, have NOTHING to do with the topic at hand.

I congratulate you.

You failed to note that all three provide the same cause for higher temperatures: CO2

 

[frigidweirdo]

You failed to note that all three provide the same cause for higher temperatures: CO2

Did I?
You need to explain this. This is your argument. I don't know what your argument is other than "I have some webpages"

 

[San Souci]

"science says".... science doesn't talk. Scientists talk.

You can't even discuss the topic, let alone try and figure out what scientists say.
I've brought up the Milankovich cycles and all you can say is "nope, not what OTHER PEOPLE say".
Well, some say some things, others say other things, I'm discussing with people on here, not with scientists who wouldn't bother coming on here.

Is Biology a Science?

 

[James California]

Look at the graph I POSTED.
Literally shows that the Earth was as warm, if not warmer, 100,000 years ago, 200,000 years ago, 300,000 years ago.

Why? Human industrialization?

If not, then what?

~ POLITICS. That's what determines the "official " global temperature .
The only "science " involved in global warming catastrophe is POLITICAL SCIENCE ...

 

[frigidweirdo]

View attachment 766239 ~ POLITICS. That's what determines the "official " global temperature .
The only "science " involved in global warming catastrophe is POLITICAL SCIENCE ...

Look, I am trying to have a proper conversation, and then you pop up with complete and utter crap. Unless you've got something to say, don't say anything. Hmmmkay?

 

[westwall]

You failed to note that all three provide the same cause for higher temperatures: CO2

No, they don't. Quite the opposite in point of fact.

 

[James California]

Look, I am trying to have a proper conversation, and then you pop up with complete and utter crap. Unless you've got something to say, don't say anything. Hmmmkay?

~ Take your own advice. Your "conversation " is no more important than any other.
Now be a good boy/girl/person and use the MUTE function on me and we will both be better off — Hmmmkay ..?

Elsewhere, I have been seeing some crap about global warming. Global warming is a reality.

~ You sure have. Global warming catastrophe is "crap" — fake science.
Climate has always been changing. The only reason some people think that this is dangerous is because government tells them it is. Anyone who is paying attention knows that the entire Co2 narrative is false. Governments depend on gradually dumbing-down and misleading society in order to pass their agenda — which is always less power/freedom for citizens and more authority and control by totalitarian government policies.
There are two types of people : the ignorant and the informed. Who you choose to be is a matter of your own free will.