By Donna April 9, 2022 11:35 am Category: Science & Nature (5.0 from 1 vote) Rules of the Post Write A New Article How To Post Here Rate this article (5=best, 0=poor)

Earlier this week, a bunch of scientists announced we are “on track toward an unlivable world.”

I missed the news initially because a passing fire tornado knocked out my internet service. But once I learned about it, I had what I assume is a common reaction: “WOOO-HOOOOO! WE DID IT!!!”

That’s right, folks, after decades of doing our level best to destroy the planet we inhabit, we’re finally on the cusp of success!

A new report by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says it’s now impossible to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius – the point at which scientists believe extreme weather events will dramatically alter life on Earth – without “immediate and deep emissions reductions across all sectors.”

HAH! Has the intergovernmental panel ever met any humans? People who won’t make the effort to wear a face mask during a deadly pandemic aren’t likely to engage in immediate or deep reductions of anything.

Tipping point, shmipping point

U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres said: “It is a file of shame, cataloguing the empty pledges that put us firmly on track toward an unlivable world. ... We are already perilously close to tipping points that could lead to cascading and irreversible climate impacts.”

Meh, what are you gonna do? If I’m honest, I’m kind of bored with this world. The oceans are dull (tide comes in, tide goes out, tide comes in, tide goes out … MIX IT UP ALREADY!), the forests are lame (“Oh, hi, I’m a mighty pine tree who will live forever … OH NO, it’s a tiny beetle, now I’m going to die!”) and the animals are far too extinct-able (“I’m a maned wolf in Brazil and now I may soon be endangered because roads crisscross my natural habitat and I keep getting run over, WHAAAAA!!”)

Seems high time we find a place more interesting and robust, a planet that doesn’t have such petroleum-sensitive pelicans or rainforests that fall apart over a harmless bit of deforestation and whatnot.

Could we fix it? Sure, but...

Could we take broad, sensible measures to protect the planet that gave us life and ensure there’s a future for our children that involves an inhabitable earth? Yeah, I suppose.

But first I’d have to go out to the driveway and turn off the Hummer I leave on all night to drown out the sounds of birds. Then I’d have to stop dumping half-empty cans of paint in a corner of the backyard AND cancel my weekend tire-burning. (I invited the neighbors and already bought burgers, Styrofoam plates and cases of plastic water bottles. I don’t want to waste all that!)

Nah, it’s a lot easier to just admit we’ve pretty well partied this planet out...

***

Rest at the link below.

Cited and related links:

1. msn.com

Comments Start Below

by HatetheSwamp on April 9, 2022 12:19 pm There are many reasons that I'm happy to be old. To be truthful, though, the first time I heard that, if humanity doesn't change its ways, NOW, that the planet will be unlivable in ten [effin] years was some time in the mid 1980s. So far, so good. You can't really blame those who are cynical for taking this with a grain of salt. If there's a scintilla of truth in this report, your progressive friends in China and Russia and the good people of India are to be blamed more than the West... ...and, of course, John Kerry, who insists on flying his private jet to every climate conference he hears about. by Donna on April 9, 2022 12:40 pm Oh, it's real. Despite worldwide efforts to mitigate global warming, carbon dioxide and methane levels continue to rise astronomically. I was going to say "We're fighting a losing battle", but that's not accurate because we haven't put up much of a fight, which is why we're losing the battle, which is actually a war in which the continuation of human civilization is at stake... which IMO is why the aliens are here. We're probably the greatest show in this sector of the Milky Way. They're coming from light years around. Check out the CO2 and methane graphs at the link below. The release of methane was predicted years ago, and we're seeing it happen now. Much of it is coming from the arctic tundra where the permafrost is melting. msn.com by HatetheSwamp on April 9, 2022 1:01 pm As I noted, I'm happy to be enough of a geezer that I won't have to experience this, if it's true. I'll add that I'll be happy to compare my carbon footprint over the course of my life to anyone's...not because I'm a true believer in the doctrines of environmentalism...but because, living in a capitalist economy, I've always made frugal choices and have been rewarded. The contribution Rush Limbaugh made to our lexicon that has, perhaps, the greatest staying power, is his expression, "environmentalist wacko." For three decades, Rush repeated the catalog of environmentalists' doomsday predictions that, of course, didn't materialize. One compelling reality that we're dealing with now is the fact that large numbers of people concerned about the future of the planet turned their concern into a silly form of popular pantheism that has been easily mocked by people who are too pragmatic to adopt the environmentalist religion. So much of the sort of data you're presenting has been attended with "sky is falling" predictions and, also, a mountain of hypocrisy by leading figures in your movement, e.g., John Kerry and Al Gore, who make you all, to many, a laughingstock. It's a sad reality, but it's true. by Donna on April 9, 2022 1:19 pm Atmospheric CO2 levels are now at 414 ppm (parts per million) and are continuing to rise. If you remember, 350 ppm was the point of no return. That's from where the global warming website 350.org derived its name. The rate of increase is also rising, along with the global mean temperature. See the CO2 graph below. This isn't difficult science to wrap ones head around. Think of greenhouse gases like methane and CO2 as insulation that's trapping more and more solar heat. The warming at the earth's poles is increasing at a rate greater than the rest of the earth, which is the worst place for that to happen because that's where almost all of the ice is. This happened a couple of weeks ago. It was totally unexpected: Antarctic ice shelf nearly the size of Los Angeles collapsed as temperatures soared to 40 above normal An ice shelf in Antarctica nearly the size of Los Angeles disintegrated in mid-March within days of extraordinary warmth on the continent, scientists say. The Conger Ice Shelf, spanning approximately 460 square miles, collapsed around March 15. It was around the time temperatures soared to minus-12 degrees Celsius, more than 40 degrees warmer than normal, at the Concordia research station. assets.climatecentral.org cnn.com by Curt_Anderson on April 9, 2022 10:52 pm 😟 by HatetheSwamp on April 10, 2022 3:15 am Donna, Here's why integrity matters. Watch a Trump speech, in the section where he explains why you should believe that the election was fixed. He really will give actual, true, honest to goodness, accounts of ballot harvesting and mail-in ballot shenanigans. Truly. Why don't most people believe that the election was stolen? In the same way, you can site all the data there is but the truth is people have learned to be cynical when, um, environmental wackos make dire predictions about the future. The planet has a more immediate problem than climate change: Many people have good reason not even to listen when environmentalists speak. by islander on April 10, 2022 5:11 am Hate asks: “Why don't most people believe that the election was stolen?” Well, because it wasn’t. Even among those who “claim” the election was stolen or support the false ‘idea’ that it was stolen know that it wasn’t it. Why would someone try to keep The Big Lie from dying? For obvious political reasons. Listen carefully to what Mitch McConnell said “after he made sure Trump wouldn’t be impeached” for his role in the Jan 6 violence. View Video by islander on April 10, 2022 5:24 am Hate says: “”In the same way, you can site all the data there is but the truth is people have learned to be cynical when, um, environmental wackos make dire predictions about the future.” “Some people” don’t believe what the data is telling them and “some people” for political and $$ reasons know it’s true but try to keep people from believing it. The climate change deniers are by and large the same ones who think the election was stolen. pewresearch.org by HatetheSwamp on April 10, 2022 6:33 am isle, You, of course, are one of the people to whom Rush would have referred as an "environmentalist wacko" who has turned concern for the future of the planet into a silly form of popular pantheism. When, back in the 80s, climate deniers scoffed at predictions that the planet would be destroyed in 10 years if humanity didn't change NOW, they were correct. Same with the 90s, etc. You're going to have to splain how the 020s are any different. What you don't UNDERSTAND, bahahahahahahahahahaha, is your side's problem is not your data, it's your sky is falling pantheistic doomsday...FALSE...interpretation of the data. You must repent. And, of course, LET'S GO BRANDON! by islander on April 10, 2022 6:49 am The fact that you claim scientists in the 80’s predicted the destruction of the planet in ten years tells me that you really have no idea what you are talking about. But then, you are also one of the ones who claims the election was fraudulent…Whether you believe your own bullsh!t I really don’t know. However, if you do it wouldn’t surprise me. by HatetheSwamp on April 10, 2022 6:59 am It surprises me how much you don't UNDERSTAND! What's a scientist? 40 years ago there were people with degrees screaming that the environmental sky was falling. Your side's problem is one of history. You've been lying through your misinterpretation of the data. People have been conditioned to assume that y'nes are lying and that you're wrong. People who are 40 years old today have known nuthin but your lies! And, it doesn't help you that so many of you have made your concern for the environment into that silly popular pantheism that disturbs so many. by Donna on April 10, 2022 11:50 am I stand by your Constitutional right to wallow in your ignorance. by islander on April 10, 2022 12:45 pm Donna, I too support Hate’s Constitutional right to wallow in his ignorance! 🍻 Hate, here is a very informative article on the history climate change, there’s a good section what they thought in the 80s. I hope it's not too long or complicated for you. I honestly think it will help you immensely to better understand what this is all about. history.aip.org by Donna on April 10, 2022 1:01 pm The first paragraph is a nice synopsis. I doubt if he'll even tead that, though. Interesting that Exxon-Mobil's own scientists concluded, I think back in the 80s, that burning fossil fuels into our atmosphere was a major contributor to global warming. Of course E-M didn't publish those findings. People like Hts seem to be totally oblivious that they're parroting oil industry propaganda. by Donna on April 10, 2022 1:01 pm The first paragraph is a nice synopsis. I doubt if he'll even tead that, though. Interesting that Exxon-Mobil's own scientists concluded, I think back in the 80s, that burning fossil fuels into our atmosphere was a major contributor to global warming. Of course E-M didn't publish those findings. People like Hts seem to be totally oblivious that they're parroting oil industry propaganda. by HatetheSwamp on April 10, 2022 1:34 pm Y'know what I love about this? You environmentalists are in exactly the same position that Trump's in when he beat his "the election was fixed" schtick. You can preach as fervently as you like? Crickets. I have expressed no opinion about climate change. What I'm doing is making it clear that, as I've already said, the planet has a bigger problem than climate change. People don't believe you now because of the false preaching of environmentalists in the past. I do know that all of the predictions of the past have come to nuthin. So, what do you have now? BUT, THIS TIME, REALLY. BEFORE? WE WERE JOKING. But, of course, you weren't, now we're you!!!!!? Just think people 40 years old and younger know nuthin other than environmentalist lies and exaggerations... by Donna on April 10, 2022 3:23 pm I'll let someone else explain it to you, Hts. From the article islander posted: Since antiquity, people believed that human activity might alter a local climate, but could scarcely affect the grand balances that governed the planet overall. Gradually scientists, aided by science journalists, informed the minority of educated people that modern civilization might cause global warming, sometime far in the future. In the early 1970s, the question began to concern a wider public. By then most people had come to fear planet-wide harm from technology in general. Now an onslaught of droughts suggested we were already damaging the climate. The issue was confused, however, when experts debated whether pollution would bring global warming or, instead, an appalling new ice age. By the end of the 1970s, scientific opinion had settled on warming as most likely, probably becoming evident around the year 2000 — that is, in a remote and uncertain future. By the end of the 1970s, scientific opinion had settled on warming as most likely, probably becoming evident around the year 2000 — which at that point lay in a remote and uncertain future. Some scientists nevertheless went directly to the public to demand action to avert the warming, and a few politicians took up the issue. During the hot summer of 1988, a few outspoken scientists, convinced by new evidence that rapid climate change might be imminent, made the public fully aware of the problem. Scientific discussions now became entangled with fierce political debates over the costs of regulating greenhouse gas emissions. Corporations and conservatives spent large sums to sow uncertainty and denial that emissions could bring serious harm. It was not until around 2005 that American media reported clearly that scientists had resolved the controversy, while films and ominous weather events gave citizens a better idea of what global warming might mean. The majority of Americans moved gradually to feeling that some kind of action should be taken. But the issue increasingly divided them along partisan lines; denial became fundamental in right-wing thinking. Stronger worries meanwhile grew among people in most other countries. Go To Top

Find old posts & articles

Show Most Recent Articles Articles by category: Politics+ Religion+ Law & Crime Military News Media History Health Sports+ Humor Entertainment Misc.

Report spam & abuse SelectSmart.com home page