The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Life Sciences
  3. The Environment
  4. Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?

  • 74 Replies
  • 5037 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 16272
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 373 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #40 on: 09/08/2019 23:49:02 »
Quote from: jeffreyH on 09/08/2019 22:27:06
Well now what about agreeing on answering the original question? Lol.
Again?
OK.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/08/2019 21:13:01
Meanwhile, back at the topic, it's difficult to say how long we have to save the planet.
The true answer is we missed the chance.
Some things will already have died out because of our behaviour.

But it's reasonable to make claims about how long we have before we lose some defined level of quality of life.
If we continue the policy of doing little or nothing then Alan's policies on reducing population will be moot.

The planet will do that for us.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8025
  • Activity:
    35.5%
  • Thanked: 486 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #41 on: 10/08/2019 00:02:42 »
I'd prefer to reduce the population smoothly, painlessly and voluntarily, but not making babies, rather than wait for drought and starvation to do it the hard way. I think it is in chapter 1 of all the driving, sailing and flying manuals: exercise control while you have it, because the laws of physics are indifferent to your comfort and preservation.
Logged
helping to stem the tide of ignorance
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 6682
  • Activity:
    14%
  • Thanked: 173 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #42 on: 22/08/2019 18:56:23 »
Wow! The Greenland melt is accelerating, species are being wiped out and THIS is what you want to argue over.  Citation not needed.
Logged
Even the most obstinately ignorant cannot avoid learning when in an environment that educates.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 16272
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 373 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #43 on: 22/08/2019 19:11:48 »
Quote from: jeffreyH on 22/08/2019 18:56:23
Wow! The Greenland melt is accelerating, species are being wiped out and THIS is what you want to argue over.  Citation not needed.
Yes, in both cases I want to try to convince people that facts are important.

You do realise this is a science site, don't you?
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 7664
  • Activity:
    28%
  • Thanked: 751 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #44 on: 23/08/2019 09:25:08 »
Back to the original topic - the environment...
Quote from: OP
Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
Well, the leaders of Denmark and Greenland say "Hands off Greenland!"
- I think that these leaders are more concerned about the environment (and the people) than is shown by Trump's environmental record (eg banning NOAA scientists from publishing scientific papers, declaring that NASA should only look outwards, and censoring "climate change" from scientific reports).

The leader of Brazil declares open season on the Amazon, then fires the director of space science for pointing out that deforestation has accelerated.
- Now there are numerous fires around the Amazon (I saw a figure of 70,000?), and a lot of finger-pointing about who started them, complete with conspiracy theories that it was disappointed NGOs that lit them...

In the end, the science comes back to politics and money...
Logged
 



Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8025
  • Activity:
    35.5%
  • Thanked: 486 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #45 on: 23/08/2019 10:37:13 »
It does at least prove that Herr Trumpf has a longterm vision for his thousand-year Reich. When the ice melts, it will be a superb golf course and grouse moor. Like Scotland, but cheaper.

The neat trick is that setting fire to the rain forest to graze cattle may accelerate the melting of Greenland ice, so whilst millions may starve, everyone who matters, benefits.

Capitalism is so much more efficient on the other side of the Atlantic.
Logged
helping to stem the tide of ignorance
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 16272
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 373 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #46 on: 23/08/2019 11:27:04 »
Quote from: evan_au on 23/08/2019 09:25:08
In the end, the science comes back to politics and money.
No
Science comes back to evidence.
The politicians ignore  the truth, but that doesn't affect science per se.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 7664
  • Activity:
    28%
  • Thanked: 751 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #47 on: 24/08/2019 03:52:20 »
Another environmental impact: The one that introduced the term "Banana Republic".

In the 1950s, the banana trade was dominated by one clone of bananas: The "Gros Michel".
- But, being a clone, one strain of fungus wiped out the entire industry, worldwide
- This fungus could live in the soil for years, so once this fungus invaded a banana plantation, that plantation was useless
- The big businesses that had the Central American governments "in their pocket" demanded large swathes of land to replace the now-useless plantations - only to have these succumb in a year or so
- This led to large-scale deforestation (and a large amount of human exploitation)

Now, the banana trade is dominated by one clone of seedless bananas: The "Cavendish".
- And again, they are all susceptible to the same disease: a new fungus which is spreading around the world, and has recently appeared in central America
- Will this (again) lead to the mass clearing of large swathes of tropical rainforest?

This is an inherent problem with the current agricultural practice of monocropping, which risks disease
- and also harms pollinators, as there is not enough variety in food sources when the primary crop isn't flowering

One potential "technology fix" is to transfer disease resistance (and genetic diversity) into the monoculture by genetic engineering techniques
- Unfortunately, I think that some environmental groups would rather see mass poverty and habitat destruction than risk eating a crossbreed of two seedless bananas.
- At least their fears that these genetically-modified bananas will take over wild populations are unfounded, as being seedless, they can't spread very quickly, and they require active cultivation.
- The main risk is from destroying the habitat of wild bananas (and their ecosystems), and this is most likely to occur if we try to stay with the current (non-GMO) strain of Cavendish - and tolerate corrupt governments & businesses with no environmental conscience.
See: https://www.economist.com/feast-and-famine/2014/02/27/we-have-no-bananas-today
Logged
 

Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 7664
  • Activity:
    28%
  • Thanked: 751 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #48 on: 24/08/2019 04:13:52 »
Hi... Moderator intervention here, to split this topic into:
- The original topic: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?, which is all about the environment
- And the much longer (and heated) side-topic on "What impact will BREXIT have on Science & Society?"
To comply with site guidelines, this is now available in "Just Chat" at: https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=77611.msg580167#msg580167

Please keep comments on BREXIT in the "Just Chat" section.
Logged
 



Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 7664
  • Activity:
    28%
  • Thanked: 751 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #49 on: 24/08/2019 10:06:35 »
I wonder how many of the old-growth forest fires currently burning in Brazil are clearing land for doomed short-lifetime Cavendish plantations?
Logged
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8025
  • Activity:
    35.5%
  • Thanked: 486 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #50 on: 24/08/2019 10:54:47 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 23/08/2019 11:27:04
Quote from: evan_au on 23/08/2019 09:25:08
In the end, the science comes back to politics and money.
No
Science comes back to evidence.
The politicians ignore  the truth, but that doesn't affect science per se.
Historic and current evidence is that carbon dioxide levels are driven by temperature. With the exception of the USA, where (in the name of freedom and democracy) government-funded scientists are not allowed to mention climate change, the publicly-funded IPCC consensus is that temperature is driven by carbon dioxide. Just as well, as the truth is even more politically inconvenient than the lie!

The only oddity is that the Mauna Loa data keeps showing the opposite. How long before the laboratory is closed down?
Logged
helping to stem the tide of ignorance
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 16272
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 373 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #51 on: 24/08/2019 12:08:46 »
Quote from: alancalverd on 24/08/2019 10:54:47
Historic and current evidence is that carbon dioxide levels are driven by temperature.
Which would be important if anyone was saying that anthropogenic CO2 was the only reason the temperature changes.

The important thing to remember about (pre) historical data s that (obviously) it isn't anthropogenic.

Something else clearly caused the ends of the ice ages.
So, in circumstances where man wasn't there the rise in temperature preceded the rise in CO2.
Again, that's not news- among other effects, CO2 is less soluble  when the water is warmer.

However, it's important to recognise that, even then, the temperature rise was amplified by the CO2.
Most of the warming happened after the CO2 rose
https://skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8025
  • Activity:
    35.5%
  • Thanked: 486 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #52 on: 24/08/2019 18:56:01 »
But what's interesting about current evidence is
(a) seasonal variations show CO2 maxima in summer, when anthropogenic emission is least
(b) discovery of 500-year-old bryophytes under retreating glaciers shows that temperatures were higher within recorded history but before industrialisation.
 
Logged
helping to stem the tide of ignorance
 



Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 16272
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 373 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #53 on: 24/08/2019 19:16:45 »
Quote from: alancalverd on 24/08/2019 18:56:01
seasonal variations show CO2 maxima in summer, when anthropogenic emission is least
Tim Lueker, research scientist in the Scripps CO2 Research Group, only needs one sentence to explain why atmospheric CO2 peaks in May.

“Springtime comes in May in Siberia,” he says.
from
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/2013/06/04/why-does-atmospheric-co2-peak-in-may/
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8025
  • Activity:
    35.5%
  • Thanked: 486 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #54 on: 24/08/2019 22:37:27 »
A statement of the bloody obvious, if ever I saw one. Does the entire human population of the northern hemisphere rush to Siberia and burn coal in May? Non ducitur.

Indeed
Quote
Thus over the course of the winter, there is a steady increase in CO2 in the atmosphere.  In the spring, leaves return to the trees and photosynthesis increases dramatically, drawing down the CO2 in the atmosphere.  This shift between the fall and winter months to the spring and summer results in the sawtooth pattern of the Keeling Curve measurement of atmospheric CO2 such that every year there is a decline in CO2 during months of terrestrial plant photosynthesis and an increase in CO2 in months without large amounts of photosynthesis and with significant decomposition.
which is exactly the opposite of what actually happens.

Simple observed correlation: as the temperature rises, so does the CO2 concentration, whereas anthropogenic output increases with decreasing temperature. So there is something bigger andnonanthropic going on, driven by temperature, just as it has for millions of years.
« Last Edit: 24/08/2019 22:48:14 by alancalverd »
Logged
helping to stem the tide of ignorance
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 16272
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 373 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #55 on: 24/08/2019 22:53:11 »
Quote from: alancalverd on 24/08/2019 22:37:27
Does the entire human population of the northern hemisphere rush to Siberia and burn coal in May?
No,
But nobody said they did.
Why did you ask?
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 16272
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 373 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #56 on: 24/08/2019 22:55:24 »
Quote from: alancalverd on 24/08/2019 22:37:27
So there is something bigger andnonanthropic going on, driven by temperature, just as it has for millions of years.
Nobody said that there wasn't.
It's like saying "we can't have global warming because it still gets cold in Winter."
The warming is superimposed on the seasonal variation- like the CO2 level.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 7664
  • Activity:
    28%
  • Thanked: 751 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #57 on: 25/08/2019 10:53:42 »
Quote
Simple observed correlation: as the temperature rises, so does the CO2 concentration
As a resident of the antipodes, I assert that my seasonal temperature trend is the inverse of yours.

The implication here is that Northern hemisphere forests which lose their leaves are the major CO2 sinks and sources.
- What about tropical and temperate trees that don't lose their leaves?
- What about arctic pine trees which retain their leaves all winter?
- What about Southern Hemisphere oceans which experience more daylight as the northern hemisphere receives less sunlight?

Quote
anthropogenic output increases with decreasing temperature.
In the hotter parts of the world, peak power consumption occurs in the hotter months, to drive air-conditioning.
- But I think that this argument is a strawman, because the steadily increasing human CO2 output is driving up CO2 year on year, and temperature is increasing year-on-year (when you look over the past 10 years, a suspiciously high percentage of the worlds hottest years occur in the past decade).
Logged
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8025
  • Activity:
    35.5%
  • Thanked: 486 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #58 on: 25/08/2019 14:10:26 »
Quote from: evan_au on 25/08/2019 10:53:42
Quote
Simple observed correlation: as the temperature rises, so does the CO2 concentration
As a resident of the antipodes, I assert that my seasonal temperature trend is the inverse of yours.

The implication here is that Northern hemisphere forests which lose their leaves are the major CO2 sinks and sources.
- What about tropical and temperate trees that don't lose their leaves?
- What about arctic pine trees which retain their leaves all winter?
i.e. the Siberian forest.


Quote
anthropogenic output increases with decreasing temperature.
In the hotter parts of the world, peak power consumption occurs in the hotter months, to drive air-conditioning.[/quote] per capita in the richer areas, yes, but over the entire population, the majority of whom live between the tropics where there is very little seasonal variation in temperature, no. And north of the tropic of cancer the maximum temperature occurs in July, not May.
Quote
- But I think that this argument is a strawman, because the steadily increasing human CO2 output is driving up CO2 year on year, and temperature is increasing year-on-year (when you look over the past 10 years, a suspiciously high percentage of the worlds hottest years occur in the past decade).
correlation, yes. causation- not proven. It was demonstrably hotter 500 years ago when anthropogenic CO2 was negligible. But AFAIK there were no airfields providing accurate daily measurements. Indeed accurate air temperature measurement is only of importance to aviators taking off over inhabited land, so we have very little historic record for about 95% of the earth's surface, and a significant decrease between 1945 and 1970 (the beginning of satellite measurements).

The reason I quoted Mauna Loa is that there is strong evidence that carbon dioxide is not much transported across the equator, and most of the anthropogenic emissions occur between 10 and 60 deg latitude.
 
« Last Edit: 25/08/2019 14:16:34 by alancalverd »
Logged
helping to stem the tide of ignorance
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 16272
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 373 times
    • View Profile
Re: Which scientists say we've just 18 months to "save planet from climate change"?
« Reply #59 on: 25/08/2019 14:40:31 »
Quote from: alancalverd on 25/08/2019 14:10:26
It was demonstrably hotter 500 years ago when anthropogenic CO2 was negligible
So, the "little ice age"  was demonstrably hotter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age


If that's the quality of your argument, perhaps it's time to stop.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



  • Print
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 

Similar topics (5)

When the excitation frequency changes at the fixed end of a cantilever beam, will the natural frequency of the cantilever beam change?

Started by thedocBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 2
Views: 2498
Last post 04/12/2016 00:08:18
by Colin2B
Would the magnetic field change if geographic north is not magnetic north?

Started by Azwan Faez Board Geology, Palaeontology & Archaeology

Replies: 1
Views: 5866
Last post 06/02/2011 23:30:37
by CliffordK
Will quantum security change online security?

Started by thedocBoard Geek Speak

Replies: 12
Views: 7511
Last post 07/11/2018 00:36:24
by guest46746
How can a change in a length of light affect the length of space?

Started by guest39538Board Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 16
Views: 5603
Last post 02/04/2016 11:31:37
by PmbNEP
Can em waves that traverse solid materials, change to become em waves that get a

Started by Nicholas LeeBoard Chemistry

Replies: 1
Views: 2821
Last post 01/05/2016 12:04:20
by puppypower
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.218 seconds with 78 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.