Climate change could mean the extinction of our species

[filghy2]

in the 50's we did boycotts and sit in's try that today.. don't buy those products .fossil fuels and coal have been used for how many years? and we still use them

I guess according to this logic we should still allow asbestos to be used in building materials, DDT in pesticides, lead in paints, pipes and gasoline, smoking to be promoted as healthy etc. There are numerous other examples where we've moved away from things that were in common use after scientific evidence that they had harmful side-effects. I'm pretty sure in all those cases there was resistance from people in the industry claiming that the evidence wasn't clear, it would be too costly and jobs would be lost. Are you seriously suggesting that it should have been left to the market and peoples' individual choices?

[Skandalismo]

Hello .. i try 2 answer but my english is not very well ok... sorry.
this world exist maybe 4,5 billions years in this time the world had extrem temperatur that we know but interresting is about the time we dont know.
The world had o very very long rise and we human exist maybe 100000-300000 years ..ok...the weather was extrem in the past not in our human history in the WORLD HISTORY.. i think was actually is is normal , only that WE live now and see that everything change 4 the planet is this NOT NEW .
BUT what our fucking mistake our FAULT is that we destroy our nature the see everythig THAT IS TRUE .

WAR GREED ENVY is what the humanity go to DESTROY...thx 4 reading ...i hope u can understand what i mean

[Stavros]

A compelling documentary on the attempt to discredit climate change science. It is more about the human angle than the science but is a salutory lesson in the impact of social media on real science. I hope this is available outside the UK.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episod...e-of-a-scandal

[AlexisDVyne]

Well.. If we don't become an interplanetary species we will become extinct..

Will we cause our own extinction? Probably not as we can adapt and our tech will help us to adapt other species that can't deal with the rapid changes to the biosphere..

What we really need to be careful of is damaging the microbiome on the planet. The microbiome is the foundation and the stuff of life, the base of the food chain.. If we damage this too much it will have catastrophic effects on the entire biosphere..

Trying to get away from fossil fuels is a big challenge.. It is definitely possible as we have endless FREE energy on this planet in a few forms that is just waiting to be utilized.. The problem though is this thing called human greed..

Watch Blade Runner 1 & 2 for a possible idea of where we are heading..

The good days are gone.. We have micro-plastics and nano-plastics in the rain now..

[filghy2]

It looks like the Arctic permafrost may be starting to melt, releasing CO2 into the atmosphere, which is one of the tipping points scientists have been worried about regarding climate change.
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-envir...port-card-noaa

[Ben]

Global Apathy Toward the Fires in Australia Is a Scary Portent for the Future:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...-response.html

[filghy2]

Is the premise of the article correct? I live in Australia, but I had the impression that the fires here (and the link to climate change) were getting a lot of attention overseas.

I think that most Australians perceive that something different has been happening this year. There have been severe fires before (with even more deaths), but these have been more localised and limited in duration, so for most people things have returned to normal fairly quickly. What's different this time is the geographical extent and duration of the fires, with places like Sydney affected by smoke haze for weeks on end. This could be a game-changer in terms of how people think about the issue, especially if there is another bad fire season in the next year or two.

The big worry is this issue is subject to the same tribalistic political polarisation as most others. The right-wing media and many politicians are going all out to gaslight people with disinformation seeking to direct the focus away from climate change onto other factors.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/08/w...formation.html
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...lian-bushfires
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...zard-reduction

[Laphroaig]

Is the premise of the article correct? I live in Australia, but I had the impression that the fires here (and the link to climate change) were getting a lot of attention overseas.

I think that most Australians perceive that something different has been happening this year. There have been severe fires before (with even more deaths), but these have been more localised and limited in duration, so for most people things have returned to normal fairly quickly. What's different this time is the geographical extent and duration of the fires, with places like Sydney affected by smoke haze for weeks on end. This could be a game-changer in terms of how people think about the issue, especially if there is another bad fire season in the next year or two.

The big worry is this issue is subject to the same tribalistic political polarisation as most others. The right-wing media and many politicians are going all out to gaslight people with disinformation seeking to direct the focus away from climate change onto other factors.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/08/w...formation.html
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...lian-bushfires
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...zard-reduction

I see the link to climate change being made more on Twitter than the mainstream UK news services. Even there it's being countered by announcements that that this phenomenon is a regular occurrence (though not on this scale) and that arson is the cause of a lot of the fires starting in the first place.
To be honest, the UK media is more concerned with Brexit, Iran and now Meghan/Harry than it is with Australia,

[broncofan]

Is the premise of the article correct? I live in Australia, but I had the impression that the fires here (and the link to climate change) were getting a lot of attention overseas.

It's all over the news here as it should be. It's also all over my twitter feed. This sort of premise about whether something is getting the coverage it warrants is a hard thing to disprove but makes for a good opening to an opinion piece.

[trish]

Here in the U.S. I’ve heard public discussions as to whether climate change is to blame for the outbreak of thousands of uncontrollable fires in Australia, poor forest management, arson or just the old “sometimes shit happens” argument.

The latter is hardly an explanation and falls flat in the face of contrary evidence; i.e. periodic breakouts (which happen more than just ‘sometimes’) of unmanageable fires in other parts of the world (e.g., California).

To be sure a lot of forest fires are lit by humans (usually unintentionally), but we’re talking about thousands of fire in Australia and the theory that they’re being purposely lit by a couple of hundred arsonists is unsubstantiated rubbish.

I cannot speak to the question of whether the Australian forests have been poorly managed. It takes a lot of money to clear brush, run controlled burns and decide where and when it should be done. There is also political opposition to these sorts of environmental controls. Do we even know how to properly manage a forest? The forests of California probably are fairly well managed as far as modern standards go, but in recent years they too have been plagued with seasonal fires.

We are living in the Anthropocene. There are more than seven billion of us on the planet now! Humans are dumping over 37 billion of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere on a yearly basis, not to mention other greenhouse gasses. The rising temperature is releasing methane from the permafrost setting the stage for a runaway feedback loop. Even a slightly hotter atmosphere holds lots more water. So there are longer periods of drought between rains and more rain when it does rain. Our future is one of fire and flood. We’re already seeing just a little bit of what possibly lies ahead.