Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 10:33:39 UTC No. 16202291

what's the big deal about 1.5C? climate fags really be acting like if temp increases by 1.5C by 2100 that Earth will become Venus by 2200

Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 10:39:11 UTC No. 16202296

>>16202291
The world has autism and is afraid of change, they will sperg out at the most minor of differences.

Farmers are too lazy to research and plant better crops, so they will demand government do something. House dwellers will be too lazy to work an extra shift or two to afford running aircon 24/7, so they demand the government do something. Lazy animals will refuse to adapt and will go extinct, forcing environmentalists to force the government to do something. The list just goes on and on.

Our World in Data at Fri, 31 May 2024 10:49:06 UTC No. 16202316

>>16202291 There's also a chart about 2°C and the issue with those are risks for climate system tipping points getting crossed that leads to an upward spiral as well as these things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_climate_change

Since Americans seem to have so little problems with these impacts I suggest we just ship the possibly billion of refugees from Africa and Asian countries the US. Have fun becoming the 5% there.

Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 11:34:25 UTC No. 16202394

>>16202316
China produces more raw waste though. Even if USA went to zero emissions like an African shithole, China would still send earth over the alleged tipping point. So why single out America, chang?

Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 16:09:16 UTC No. 16202668

>>16202291
1.5C is the political tipping point. The costs of not drifting to the physical tipping point becomes too painful for any politician who wants to win the next election.

2.0C is the physical tipping point. At that point the seas start emitting CO2 into the atmosphere instead of removing it. The CO2 increases, and the heating up with it, even if humans would disappear overnight.
It's like the steering wheel coming off of a car - you lose control. Nothing happens immediately but a crash becomes unavoidable.
The heating will go on till about 6C, after which the heat increase is so big that the radiation to space prevents further warming.
Note that the 6C is the global average, over the 75% area of waters it will be less and consequently the land areas will warm a *lot* more.

Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 16:28:01 UTC No. 16202684

>>16202291
1.5C is considered significant because it's the first temperature threshold beyond the "normal" climactic variation we've had for the past millions of years. So for instance in a static climate there will always be years which the temperature oscillates.

Why exactly people care is that once we get outside of the preindustrial temperature range entirely it's practically guaranteed we'll reach some nasty tipping points which cause a persistent change in the Earth's climactic regime. So think of Europe transitioning to a siberian like climate, or most of the world's rainforests transitioning into hot savanna, etc.

Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 16:42:27 UTC No. 16202697

>>16202291
>>16202684
I should add that we're still inside "normal" temperature ranges. A year as hot at 2023 was still technically possible in the preindustrial climate, for instance, albeit it's the top 99.99% of hottest years or some massive percentile. The Earth has had years that hot in the (relatively recent) past without tipping over into a new climate. Past 1.5C of warming you go back further and further until you get years which are hotter than 100% of any possible natural oscillation you can find, and that's where the tipping points begin.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 00:56:12 UTC No. 16203337

>>16202394 I just don't think there's any Chinese here. Also I wasn't alleging any one particular tipping point.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 01:04:42 UTC No. 16203345

>>16202697
>>16202684
>>16202668
Not buying into your death cult doomer retard. How about you drink the kool-aid yourself, turn off your computer, and eat the bugs. Fuck your preaching.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 01:47:51 UTC No. 16203396

>>16203345
>I don't care about this!
>go into a thread specifically about this

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 01:55:29 UTC No. 16203404

>>16203396
Sorry, your poison is no good doomerkin. The world doesn't end from climate jeebus.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 01:59:01 UTC No. 16203410

>>16203404
>This is so silly! Look how little I care about it! Stop trying to convince me!
>That's why I keep posting in a thread specifically about it!
very womanish behaviour desu

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 02:10:04 UTC No. 16203422

>>16202668
I don't think the car crash analogy quite works as there's an inevitability implicit in the scenario. With global warming though, even with 2 degrees higher and oceans becoming a net carbon source into the atmosphere - there are still ways around it. Spraying sulfur particles in the upper atmosphere, finding ways to increase albedo of earth, carbon sequestration, highly increased plant growth rates, etc. It's like every climate change scenario just assumes that humans will sit there and do nothing

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 02:11:14 UTC No. 16203424

>>16203410
You have no argument because you are effectively the retard screeching about doomsday. Even now, you have nothing substantive to say, absolutely reeling. Read five chapters out of the origin of species and give three hail dawkins to cleanse ye of this sin.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 02:18:13 UTC No. 16203427

>>16203424
For someone who says that they don't care about this at all, you sure seem to want to talk about it a lot. Again, woman behaviour. You'll do really well when you transition

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 02:25:31 UTC No. 16203437

>>16203427
I never said I don't care. Unsurprising for a doomer to be unable to read, probably jabbed too lmfao. Quit fabricating sentiment. I said you are a retarded doomer. You have no substance, no brain. Just pure indoctrination guiding your every action and putting you on the first time internet rage. Quick, say nigger a couple of times. It will make you real cool all of the sudden and nobody will ever find out.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 02:29:11 UTC No. 16203442

>>16202668
>Note that the 6C is the global average, over the 75% area of waters it will be less and consequently the land areas will warm a *lot* more.

this is so fucking retarded.

7000 years ago the area around the persian gulf was fertile marshes and grasslands. Climate alarmists say that the fertile crescent was wiped out in the last 30 years when saddam hussein built dams and shit, but it's been a desert for quite a while now.

The climate used to be a lot colder. The agricultural zone used to be south of the Mediterranean, now it's north of the Mediterranean.

End of the pleistocene and younger dryas was around 10 to 15 degrees colder than now. if we go up 6 degrees and it stabilizes, we might see wider desertification zones than we have now in a couple hundred years; stuff is just gonna move further north (in the north).

I really don't see how this is a "crash".

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 02:32:31 UTC No. 16203445

>>16203437
You mass replied to ppl just to say how much you don't care/aren't buying into it, even though it's a thread with a topic that doesn't interest you, and even though no one spoke to you. You're like an actual attention-starved child lmao. I hope I helped bro. Also, don't post Tooker when you're a newfag, nigger

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 09:57:17 UTC No. 16203918

>>16202286
That chart makes no sense. Why would it be far faster to reduce co2 from 40 billion tons to zero than it would be from 30 billion tons? Is it trying to say that 40 billion tons results in immediate exticiton of human life, wheras 30 billion tons kills us all only in 50 years?

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 10:10:33 UTC No. 16203928

>>16203445
>Tagging three posts is a mass reply
Holy retard

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 10:11:48 UTC No. 16203929

>>16203918 It's not suggesting that. It's showing what is needed.
Co2 in the atmosphere has a warming effect not the day it is emitted but the decades afterward so if you start to reduce it earlier, the reduction doesn't need to be so steep, which doesn't mean you can't partly mitigate faster than what is needed.
It's the carbon budget - it would be a vertical line of we'd keep current emission levels in about 8 years.

>>16202286
I think the issue with OWID is that they show data without properly contextualizing it in the image when needed. For example, some charts showing net deforestation rates or reforestation vs deforestation suggest we can just reforest anywhere else instead of stopping tropical deforestation.