2018 Is Shaping Up to Be the Fourth-Hottest Year. Yet We’re Still Not Prepared for Global Warming.

It’s hot. But it may not be the new normal yet. Temperatures are still rising.


Comments: 239

  1. I miss the old climate. It felt safe except for the odd calamity.

    The weather now seems like a dangerous force working against food security, water security, flood security, and economic security. All day, every day.

    And of course, when humans lose their security, the next concern is physical safety. Someone will start conflict and it will escalate.

    We should probably stop focusing on the disease to convince unlearned politicians and start focusing on the symptoms.

  2. Fake news. Junk science. Why has the earth's temperature plateaued over the last twenty years at the same time that 80% of all carbon emissions in history have been spewed into the air? How can scientists be certain in 1975 that the earth is cooling and just as certain in 1995 that it's warming? Why is climate change called "settled science" when the scientific fact that a male will be genetically a male for life disregarded? Why is it that the only solution to climate change is to give up on capitalism?

  3. @SHerman

    You apparently haven't read the article, nor looked at the temperature plot. Please take at least a look at it and observe the drastic rise in global temperatures since the 1950's. That is accurate data from NASA and NOAA and agrees with that of the Japan, Australian and EU meteorological observation. There is no hiatus!

    Also ask yourself from where did you obtain your views that global warming is not occurring It can't be from scientific observations, because they all agree. So it must be from sources that benefit from polluting the environment with fossil fuels. The few "scientist" that this industry employs get paid to dismiss the impact of greenhouse gases on the environment, sadly a view that the Trump administration agrees with.

  4. @SHerman

    I can't believe anyone is still trotting out "the earth is cooling" confusion anymore. It was clear at the time that the earth was warming; Time Magazine, to sell magazines, rounded up a few contrarians to create a splashy cover and get a bump in attention.

    It wasn't thought to be happening by the majority if scientists.

    Any, the earth's temperature hasn't plateaued over the last 20 years; the "pause" ended 4 years ago.

  5. Climate change is caused by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere causing the Earth to retain more of the energy it receives from the Sun than it used to.

    The plateau in temperature is happening because the energy imbalance is being invested in heating the oceans and melting ice.

    There is a high school experiment where you put ice in a beaker of water over a Bunsen burner and measure the temperature of the water.

    The temperature of the water does not increase despite the Bunsen burner pumping energy into the beaker because it takes a lot of energy to break the molecular bonds in the ice and turn it into water.

    Once the ice is gone the temperature plateau ends and the water boils.

    Climate change denialists are not telling the truth.

    Their lies and political influence will cause immense destruction and suffering.

    “I told you so” will not feel like much comfort once the avoidable impacts really start to hit.

    The thing humanity needs to be very afraid of is that we are on the precipice of triggering the release of enormous natural reservoirs of methane locked up in Arctic permafrost and in undersea deposits. When this happens, climate change will be wrested out of our control and there will be nothing more we can do but ride the rollercoaster to our deaths.

    We need to act now with urgency.

    Climate change denying politicians who fail to heed the facts should be removed from office and prosecuted as terrorists peddling an evil and false ideology.

  6. And Trump and his Republican patsies still question whether it’s even happening. Humanity may just be too stupid to survive this.

  7. OBAMA,

    “If we don’t get this climate thing right ALL bets are off.....”

    Scary but it’s True.... shows ya how bad it is if Leader of Free World said that as main concern after 8 years. He’s so educated for a politician on the issue.

  8. @Moe perhaps the unfortunate and deadly fires in California may convince them otherwise. But probably not, alas.

  9. @Moe the plight of California and its fires is staring them in the face, though. Will the slap be hard enough to make them wake up? Probably not, alas.

  10. Wow, great reporting. Too bad it's totally undercut by climate-denier Bret Stephen's presence in the editorial section. And too bad the story is incomplete without mention of the coordinated misinformation campaign perpetrated by the world's worst polluters over the past four decades.

  11. Brett is NOT anti Climate.... only said in that OP-ED!!! Only nbd , opinion to the climate activists how to better win over doubters.... to be more skillful politically when talking about it!!!! We should learn and adept to more effectively win over voters, policy & action!

  12. @L I am hoping the NYT adds a writer representing the flat earth perspective, it would make as much sense as Bret Stephen. Global warming is not an "opinion", it's a fact.

  13. Thank-you for this observation and comment. It is so deeply troubling that along with Bret Stephens, there are many other reporters and even at least one editor - James Bennet - using the NYTs as a platform to undermine any government action to mitigate climate change and protect the environment.

  14. There are too many of us, too many people on this planet. China's "one child" policy may have been too draconian, but they had the right idea. A "two child" policy, worldwide, would be ideal. I can dream, right?

  15. @Juliet
    A two child policy would help but I fear it is not enough. There are many more people today than the earth will be able to support above a mere subsistence level as climate change continues. The problem is that the energy needed just to support the population is a major source of climate change.
    It may be that the crucial point has already been reached as world-wide fires remove the vegetation which absorbs CO2. Rising temperatures release methane from permafrost and peat so creating a feedback loop which may be uncontrollable.

  16. @Juliet. Yes, there are too many people and that fact exacerbates almost every problem, but that is not the primary cause. The cause is burning fossil fuels with abandon and pumping ever more green house gases into the atmosphere. The primary culprits are not the most overpopulated countries. They are countries like the USA, which has pumped out more CO2. Admittedly, China has now caught up with us in total emissions, but not per person.

  17. @Juliet
    There's a simple fix here, which Republicans are exactly backwards (and mean with it) about.

    Provide easy affordable access to birth control worldwide.

    Since Republicans have confused their egos and their profit centers (from the pulpit, no less) with god, they think babies are only important before they're born. They don't like mothers or families unless they're well to do and/or powerful.

  18. The first step to slow down this trend is for citizens and politicians to acknowledge that excess carbon dioxide is ushering in calamity.

    Until then, we’re just riding toward the cliff.

  19. It is highly unfortunate how many environments will be devastated by global warming, and how many species will go extinct.

    It is not at all unfortunate that millions of humans will die from global warming. It is a necessary pushback from reality; humans caused these changes, less humans will mean less destruction.

    So yes, we're not prepared for the coming changes, but neither is any species on earth. Of all the species on earth, we are the only one that deserves the punishment that's coming. All of my sympathy is with all the non-humans that will suffer, none is left over for humanity.

  20. @Dan Stackhouse
    The average middle/upper middle class white child uses up about 60 x the resources or a poor child of color in a lifetime. Rich kids--the waste is far more severe.

    Less rich people will mean less destruction.

  21. @Dan Stackhouse Unfortunately, the humans most vulnerable are the ones who have had the least to do with causing climate change. In a clear sign that neither God nor justice really exist, it's that the climate change deniers living in the US will fare better than billions of people who contribute much less to the problem.

  22. Thanks for the replies guys, and dear Justin, I totally understand your point of view. I agree completely that most of the millions of humans who will die due to global warming were not the primary cause of that global warming.

    But all humanity is what I was talking about, and taken as a whole, humanity is guilty. Overpopulation has been indulged in by the rich and poor alike. I wish that the impoverished humans wouldn't be the ones mowed down, that the oil barons would instead, but life is rarely fair. Nonetheless, if humanity still has a chance, that chance is reliant on our numbers being reduced considerably and permanently. I hope we learn from the cataclysm that is coming.

  23. What people don’t realize is that a global climate disaster is now a foregone conclusion. Even if we stopped pumping CO2 into the air today, the climate would continue to warm for decades. In my opinion, reducing CO2 emissions caused by people is important but preparing for a much hotter with rising sea levels is essential. Within the lifetimes of many people living today, coastal cities including New York could be under water. The list of disasters is very long. Enjoy the golden age we’re living in now. Things are already getting bad with fires and the like, and it’s only going to get much, much worse. Don’t forget about serious diseases and medical conditions that will become more prevalent.

  24. Adds real world excitement. Maybe people will look less at their phones.

  25. @Mark is correct except that I believe sea level rise will not be a particularly significant factor compared with those other issues in the approximately 50 years we have left.

  26. @Mark
    That’s why avoiding deforestation is so critical. The uptake of carbon into forests and their soils is what lowered existing atmospheric carbon levels to their current levels.
    It takes discipline and will to protect forests but none the less, that’s how our existing ecosystem might be maintained.

  27. Rapid adoption and government-led sponsorship of solar, wind, geothermal, tidal and other alternative green energy technology is the only way out of this greedy manmade, fossil-fuel-based carbon energy global climate nightmare.

    The only thing holding up American progress on this critical issue is the party of Gas Oil Pollution.

    Vote on November 6 2018,,,, for thoughtful environmentally-rational adults....and vote against the party of Stupid, Denial and Death.

  28. Too late, Socrates. Now doing that would ironically just make things worse. You are suggesting massive outlays of new infrastructure which means exploitation of massive resources and largely fossil-based fuels to get it built. And it’s now decades too late anyway. Refer to the “Losing Earth” recently published here.

    The carbon released and the huge dynamics in play cannot be clawed back. Arctic sea ice is now largely heat-absorbing water, methane releases from permafrost are poised to be devastating. Ecosystems are beginning to break down. And the world’s population is still increasing, with each new one of us placing another burden.

    The die is cast. The horse is out of the barn. We have crossed the Rubicon. The genie is out of the bottle. There is no putting Humpty Dumpty back together again. Scientists are clearly signaling that now.

  29. The only encouraging news in all of this is that, over time, the earth will correct itself after we’re gone. The sad news is that we’ll lose lots of animal species, too. Maybe one day, in millions of years, another civilization will dig up some of our relics and learn from our mistakes.

  30. @Scott D yes I am sorry we will take so many animal species, fellow inhabitants of our earth, with us when we go.

  31. Yes. This message is all well and good. But what difference can it make when you have the #1 country on the planet guilty of emitting Greenhouse Gases taking no notice, because its president is in scientific denial about Climate Change?
    Temperatures are not only rising here in the U.S. but everywhere else, resulting in droughts, floods, and death.
    It may already be too late, but it's definitely time to wake-up.

  32. I lost my home along with hundreds of other friends and family members in the Redwood Valley fire in Mendocino County last October, and 9 of our neighbors lost their lives. It will take decades for our community to recover, and the surrounding forests may never be the same, as ecosystems are altered by unprecedented climate extremes. The new fires in our backyard are yet another example that climate change is already destroying lands, livelihoods, and lives. I teach climate science at Stanford, and the scientific consensus is clear that our climate pollution not only magnifies destruction from wildfires and other disasters, but it's already also endangering food production and amplifying crime rates, violent conflict, and even suicide. Every journalist has a duty to inform the public about how climate change is now making nearly every new "natural" disaster and violent conflict worse. The NY Times does some of the country's best climate reporting, but many of your journalists still miss important climate links in their stories. The world is already filled with millions of climate refugees and untold climate-linked deaths, and my family are just a few of the most recent victims. Climate victims need a #metoo movement to push for both political and cultural solutions, but many won't even know they're victims until the media consistently integrates climate science into every related story. Most US journalists and meteorologists are still failing to convey climate realities.

  33. @Ian
    The meteorologists on TV are forbidden to talk about climate change by the likes of Sinclair. They use meteorological buzz words but are no longer allowed to think like scientists. SHAME!!

  34. @Ian And why should you live there in the future, surely fires will occur again, move somewhere safer.

  35. But our Republican dominated federal government has a very simple solution: deny anything is happening at all. Just call it a 'hoax.'

    And, as a corollary, implement policies that will inevitably exacerbate climate change and its life-threatening consequences.

    See how easy that is?

  36. We haven’t even calculated in all the frozen methane under high pressure deep in the oceans, if that let’s go humans will be lucky to have the poles to be the only habitat they can survive. This can go much more quickly. I fear for my descendants.

  37. If you care and have the means don't wait for political leadership to solve this issue, do it yourself. Stop buying oil at the pumps, buy renewable energy for your home, lower your intake of carbon intensive products. I continually seem to find people who say they care but they want their urban SUV instead of a bike, they want to cook what they always have without compromise and they can't be bothered with something like solar or even renewable energy credits.

  38. @Will

    Seems like commendable things to do, but not very effective on the grand scale. Biking is not a solution except for a few people. Electric cars are not a solution either, as their efficiency is comparable to gas or diesel powered vehicles. Moreover, only 11% of US electricity is presently generated from renewable energy sources, consequently the energy of charging ones car batteries comes 90% from fossil fuels, with a negligible reduction of greenhouse gases. Although the portion of renewable energy will increase in the coming decades, its proportion in the total energy supply picture will not drastically increase, as the anticipated vast demand of increasing power over these same decades will only be satisfied by conventional technologies. Among these, an increase in nuclear energy will ameliorate the CO2 emission, albeit at a price of additional nuclear waste material.
    One of the mot effective means of reducing transportation related emissions is through a vast public transportation network. But that has so far been opposed primarily by republican politicians and their fossil fuel sponsors.

  39. @Will

    Yes! And severely curtail use of airplanes and animal products. Does your enjoyment of that 5-day trip to Spain or that hamburger justify irreparably damaging our only home in the universe?

  40. Bad results are already cooked in anybody who denies it is whistling in the coal mine. The bird is dead and we will be too.This was figured out in the 1800s the math is pretty settled it’s just a matter of how much worse it’s going to be then we actually think.

  41. Well, you certainly can't say we weren't warned. We've known this was coming for decades, we just liked being told reassuring stories about how far off it was.

  42. Unlikely, given who is in charge in Washington, but we need and an all out "Manhattan Project" carbon free production and carbon sequestration. And if we are looking at an extinction level event, we better start start looking seriously at geoengineering

  43. @Jonathan Swift Good points but even the worst people don't predict an extinction level event for humans. And geoengineering is too complex and dangerous. What you don't understand you should not meddle in.

  44. Painting roofs white to increase the Earth's albedo is hardly dangerous or unpredictable. Geoengineering sounds scary but it's a broad subject that is very interesting. Many things can be tried. It's not all about sulfur dioxide.

  45. Well, there is a self correcting mechanism in place that’s not being taken into account. A global nuclear conflict may eventually become inevitable, resulting in a nuclear winter and a mass reduction in population.

    Speaking of nuclear, it is the most efficient source
    of clean energy today, that the so-called environmentalists don’t want to hear about. Just like they don’t want to hear about population control.

  46. @True Norwegian Just who would be so stupid to start a global nuclear war? Your Russians??

  47. Considering how an important issue climate change is, you can't be anything but extremely disappointed with media coverage of the issue. And it is just amazing that the media hasn't cruxified every leading republican politican who question climate change when there is a scientific consensus that climate change is real and caused mainly by human activity. Regarding the republican party and its denial of climate change, I agree with Chomsky that the party is "the most dangerous organisation on earth.". We all know that US leadership is crucial on this issue, but Trump and his party chooses to withdraw from the Paris accord instead. Just incredible and an example of total moral bankruptcy.

    One of the worst cases where the media failed was the presidential debates. During the three debates between Trump and Clinton, climate change came up once. Once! You would think that the gravity of an issue would correlate with how much focus it is on it...

  48. The key word in this whole article is "accelerating." Acceleration is a difficult concept to visualize, but we all understand it on an abstract level--it means that not only will the temperature increase year over year, but the amount by which it increases will increase year over year.

    Part of the reason for acceleration is the increased carbon in the air. Part of it is attributable to feedbacks: The decimation of carbon sinks--forests burning and the ocean becoming acidified -- reduces their ability to absorb carbon. Loss of albedo (reflectivity) due to melting glaciers and ice caps. Release of methane from melting permafrost and from oceans.

    I don't know whether it matters or not (we have to fix it no matter what the cause), but we are primarily to blame.

  49. What people forget is that the heatwaves get hotter and hotter as time goes on and storms and fires and floods grow in strength and in frequency. Our food and clean water is threatened along with our homes and businesses. This is the biggest threat this world has EVER faced and our leaders are acting like the problem is nonexistent. Please stop voting for people who don't care about this issue. If you can't do it for yourself, do it for your kids and grandkids. We can slow it down if we had leadership that understood what is at stake and how to slow it down.

  50. @kay Well not my home, or food, perhaps some undeveloped folks. We can't slow it down that would be China, India and the undeveloped world. They need to stay undeveloped and reduce their population by say half. Even the US is over populated by about 250 million people, yet we want immigrants. How stupid.

  51. Somini Sengupta’s reporting on climate change is consistently excellent. I am happy to see major American news outlets like the New York Times, Washington Post, and LA Times more prominently feature climate change reporting.

  52. @Ed A Great only progressives read those things, at least most of them.

  53. And by the current comment count for this article (7) and the Uber driver cap article (over 800) most people are not taking this issue as seriously as they should.

  54. @vsan23 And Uber is terrible for climate change. It's taking away from public transportation. Uber drivers drive their own personal cars. A taxi company with fleet cars could replace their taxis with electric vehicles or hybrids. How would Uber manage that with Uber drivers? Not going to happen.

  55. This article is like a pastor giving a lecture to the choir about virtue. If we really care about climate change go over to The Wall Street Journal and raise their consciousness about this issue. Also Russ Roberts is an economist at Stanford’s Hoover Institute that has been offering excuses for years on his podcast EconTalk not to do anything about climate change.

  56. Global warming will only matter when Mar-a-Lago's lawns are under water. Until then, fire up your 8-cylinder gas guzzling behemoths and go for a drag race on the nearest highway. That's what being Ummurican is all about.

  57. Please start living simply with less. Grow and compost your own food. Walk or bike. Buy less junk and avoid plastic. Conserve water. Ride share. And demand that government stop the military destruction of everything everywhere.

  58. Very concise and succinct analysis. Thank you.

  59. The inertia of global warming is accelerating. With this President,GOP, NRA its a bad prognosis. A dismal future for the planet. The warming and the ocean has been ignored for 50 years when the alarm sounded. It’s like an individual with credit out of control and uses it to the end. We have pretty. Much used up the planet.
    US temps in Death Valley are the hottest in the world. Death and destruction loom. It’s that bad.
    More plastic particles in the ocean than plankton. “This ship is sinking”.
    A very nice 24 year old woman said “oh well we’ll be able to go to Mars”.
    Oxygen, food and fresh water are gonna fast. Our off season vegetable and fruit will be more scarce and even disappear quickly. Oh yeah coffee is in peril. I’d say 40 dollars a pound in 3 years. Disease spreads from this inertia too. West Nile, Zika etc. No we can’t just desalinate the ocean. It’s a huge process and the waste is the salt which we will dump back into the ocean or god knows where. Yes it’s that bad. We need to be united with our allies and approach all counties. The over populated planet and impoverished starving nations want to be rescued but its impossible. Population growth is insane. Scared? Yup. We have no time for this right wing nationalist psychos or Trump GOP NRA amd for Gods sake get them and the Trump family dynasty out of our sight.

  60. @Neil

    If you want to make science-related analogies to describe a positive pace of change of global warming, don't use the term inertia. Inertia connotes a resistance to change. Pace or rate are more appropriate. You may also use speed.

  61. We in Oklahoma do not worry about global warming. Our Congressional delegation, all Republicans, tell us global warming is a hoax. We must believe them because we keep re-electing them. Besides, if the consequences of global warming are not fake news, then all these problems were caused by the Clinton/Obama cabal that is out to destroy our country. Fox propaganda tells us that, and we must believe it because Fox and right-wing talk radio is where most of us continue to get information. We have faith that Mr. Trump and the GOP leadership are telling the truth, as Fox sees fit to allow. The only thing we have to fear is Hillary Clinton, and maybe Nancy Pelosi.

  62. "The new normal"? The "new normal" suggests that we've settled into a stable paradigm, and that's not going to happen until our species is long, long gone. We've screwed the pooch, kids, so enjoy your lives well while it's still moderately livable, because soon enough there's going to be hell to pay.

  63. Crime is rising with the heat. The murder rate I’ve heard goes up with the heat. Young people are oblivious to the warning problems I find when I travel on business. Car ads showing gas guzzling muscle cars and risky driving are our enemy. Our society is in a literal decline while the wealthy think “money money money”. Young people I see in California drive fast and reckless and have no plates on the cars and don’t put the real plates on and illegal dark tinted windows. Sn oblivious self centered life because the problems are not interesting and music and social media come first. The world needs to unite. There’s no environmental solace, no conscience and no leadership! My god we need intelligence and a voice like Obama
    We are spinning out of control. We are past the get out and vote because they are electing the inept.

  64. @Jack Darn kids these days! Back in my day we respected the climate and only drove cars fueled by free love and rainbows!

    Get real. The time to act was back in the 70s. Back when those kid's parents were too busy creating America's post-war consumerist society.

    Maybe instead of passing judgement on youth you could find some humility in the failings of past generations. Climate change is inter-generational. And at this point current and future generations are just along for the ride...

  65. This is not rocket science people, Mother Earth has been talking loudly to us for over five decades, and the recent New York Times amazing & highly detailed piece clearly outlined that we had an opportunity to stop where we are headed now between the late 70s in the late 80s... Our planet, and more importantly our oceans, are yelling loud and clear that we best change our ways... Once we get to the 9 billion to 10 billion people on Earth tipping point, 2050 and on most scientists say, Mother Earth is going to begin screaming at the top of her lungs... I'm 55, and logically understand the science of where we are heading, but my heart goes out to my daughter, and any kids she may have (and I'm doing my best to talk her out of having said children, as the mess and disaster they'll inherit will be horrifying) .... how did we get here?... That's very simple: sheer stupidity, blind ignorance and Capitalism

  66. Same age, also with kids, and agree with everything u say here.

  67. @Marco
    Your daughter should have children, because ultimately we are about Survival of the Species. Chances are her children will be well educated people who can do what needs to be done to reverse this mess. Think how close we are to electric cars world wide, solar and wind energy, etc. Just need smart, caring people with political power in charge.

  68. It's not capitalism that's the problem ( the scandiavian countries have been evironmentally responsible) patriarchy is. For at least 10,000
    years women have been prevented from counter balancing men's negative tendencies.

  69. If you care about national security, you should care about solving climate change. If you care about the economy, you should care about solving climate change. If you care about immigration, you should care about solving climate change. If you care about the cost of healthcare, you should care about solving climate change. If you care about the cost of insurance, you should care about solving climate change. If you care about your children and your grandchildren, solving climate change should be pretty much the most important issue you care about.

  70. @Climate Controlled Environment

    Problem is it's no longer solvable. It's a done deal. Game over. "Solving" was something we shoulda done decades ago.

  71. Buy solar panels, insulate the house, catch water off the roof to water plants, plant a garden in the shade, ride a bike, walk, help your neighbors. We will all need neighbors. Plant trees because they have a cool oasis under them in shade. Plant tough water saving trees. They cool the earth and they will cool your bit of land. Build more outside shade and grow a garden there.

  72. @joyce

    Gardens do no grow well in shade.

  73. Only liberal elites care about science.

  74. @Srinivu Only liberal elites believe "consensus" is actual science.

  75. A consensus of scientists basing their judgments on science done by scientists, you mean.

  76. Very good article. Thank you for highlighting that this is not the “new normal” for our dynamic Earth, but a phase that could change exponentially. This is a cause for action, not fear or despair. Vote with your $$ (go solar, wind, renewables and oh yes, birth control) and at the polls.

  77. Republicans will call it a hoax when all the ice at the poles melts and the climate circulation stalls and we all slowly roast. It will be a hoax generated by the democrats.

  78. Typical Ecofreak propaganda

    Challenge... name one so called model that accurately relates both forward and backward modelling for 50 to 100 years. Quite simply there isn't one. So called Global warming has always been about political power... climate is just the smoke screen.

    Before I trigger all the liberals look at two of the largest so called studies from Reading University and NSF 2000 survey... both discredited and withdrawn ...now it's your turn.

  79. @obummer I just searched on "climate change over time" and there is a lot of information out there from several reputable sources that shows that global warming has accelerated in the 20th century big-time. I went to the Reading University web site and there is lots of good data there that shows the same. The NSF data looks good as well. I searched on "Reading Climate Survey Withdrawn" and NSF Climate Survey withdrawn. No hits. Perhaps I am in the wrong. Can you provide links to your sources?

  80. @obummer
    From NASA:
    Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources."

    Of course, NASA is the organization that kidnaps people who make it to the edge of the world to prevent them from telling the rest of us that the earth is flat, so not the most trustworthy source I guess.

  81. @obummer - funny! You present no evidence, but explain all the melting for us, it's not a model.

    I'll name a model - the one written up by Manabe and Wetherald in 1975. The report the model predicts the following, all since measured:
    1 - warms lower atmosphere (troposphere)
    2 - cools stratosphere
    3 - increased warming near poles - observed and confirmed as due to greenhouse effect plus feedback effects reducing reflection of sunlight back to space.
    4 - intensity of hydrologic - yes, especially in the Northeast, but Houston just had 500-year flooding three years in a row. Warmer air lifts more moisture but not for long.

    "The Effects of Doubling the CO2 Concentration on the climate of a General Circulation Model
    Syukuro Manabe and Richard T. Wetherald

    It is shown that the CO2 increase raises the temperature of the model troposphere, whereas it lowers that of the model stratosphere. The tropospheric warming is somewhat larger than that expected from a radiative-convective equilibrium model. In particular, the increase of surface temperature in higher latitudes is magnified due to the recession of the snow boundary and the thermal stability of the lower troposphere which limits convective beating to the lowest layer. It is also shown that the doubling of carbon dioxide significantly increases the intensity of the hydrologic cycle of the model."

    https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0469(1975)032%3C0003:T...

  82. If I lived in Arizona, New Mexico or Texas, I would start making plans to move.

  83. @Tom J To where??? And what about California, part of it has been a desert in the past.

  84. Just like the NYT has an "International" and "National" section/bureau, they should have regular, daily, front-page columns on "Global Climate Change".

  85. @Louis Anthes

    The NYT was among the top climate skeptics from the late 70s until the early oughts when it became impossible to deny what was happening. The media and the NYT in particular are partly to blame for the mess we are in. The Washington Post still rarely reports about climate change on the front page of its digital edition. The Rose Tracker is more important than the destruction of human civilization.

  86. @Louis Anthes
    Great idea! Plus a posting of daily temps around the globe with comparison temp chart for the past 10/20yrs! This truly merits the NYTimes Front Page!!!

  87. The poles are warming faster than the middle part of the earth. Don't count on the poles as a refuge.

  88. @joyce

    Um, yes, but who was counting on the poles as a refuge??

  89. “It’s the end of the world as we know it”. I wish we had an Obama leadership and intelligence. Trump and the GOP add to the hopelessness.

  90. @Samuel I guess I missed his leadership and intelligence. If he had tried for a treaty I might have seen some. If he made it a priority from day one, I might have seen some. If he strongly supported nuclear power I might have seen some. At least this president is consistent, the price of a carbon tax is way too high and we can't afford bribes to make other countries better competitors. China and India should reduce their emissions as we are. Not to mention the rest of the developing world.

  91. We will take definitive action on this. But only after it is too late.

  92. "In El Salvador, a country reeling from gang violence, farmers in the east of the country stared at a failed corn harvest this summer" If you care about illegal immigration, you should care about climate change. Illegals are largely from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras: and if you've seen what climate change has in store for that area (drought), what is now a trickle could well become a flood. If Trump cares about illegal immigration, his gas mileage standards are in exactly the wrong direction.

  93. @Phil The climate crisis might be the real reason he wants a wall...

  94. @Phil
    Astute observation! It's not rocket science! djt & the GOP care only for the 'bottom line'. Quality of life & the environment? Not so much!

  95. If I were Trudeau, I would be giving serious thought to building a wall. A wall with gun emplacements, landmines, and lots of guards.

  96. If Trump is elected in 2020 I will definitely be moving to Canada with my family.

  97. It is too obvious. Flooding, droughts, heat waves, wildfires attack our way of living and our lives. However, a huge part of the US population, made of Trump and the Republicans, want to increase the revenue of the Oil and Gas industries by all means.
    We have to vote all of them out.
    I don’t want to destroy the Planet of my grandchildren.
    Face your duty and don’t vote Republican, no matter what else you like in their program.

  98. @JBB I would say the same but never vote Dem, they are for nothing good for anybody. And the planet will be just fine for your grandchildren, not in some desert however.

  99. @JBB
    AMEN!

  100. " In Europe, nuclear power plants have had to shut down because the river water that cools the reactors was too warm."

    I must confess I had completely neglected to think about this issue while debating nuclear power as a way to cope with climate change. But that is an excellent point. Nuclear power plants have to be cooled. That is a big weakness in a warming world.

  101. @Patricia, it was to protect fish as far as I'm aware.

  102. @Patricia also, doesn't radioactive nuclear waste last for tens of thousands of years?

  103. @Patricia Ya I had never though about it that way either! It reminds me of a different article that spoke about how hydroelectric will have serious problems as droughts and shifting river ways will be more frequent due to the heat.

    There really are just too many 2nd-order effects to consider...

  104. Each of us needs to take action. It is become increasingly clear the planet is warming, causing terrible and tragic stresses on natural ecosystems, and to an increasing degree, on our social and economic systems. It is also clear that many political actors are unwilling to take meaningful action for a host of reasons; by and large corporate capitalism and big money donors oppose change, as do many authoritarian states, and the current GOP led US administration seems to have come from another world. The fact is that we need to make different life choices. We cant and don't need to wait for leaders. Make the choice to use less. Buy less. Eat less. Grow more. Live with less. Walk more. Drive less. Learn to live a sustainable life again. Travel less. Buy smaller homes. Reuse. Until we make individual choices to change, change will not come. It will be too late if we wait for politicians, corporate business leaders, or those in the 1 percent world to make change. Vote differently. Boycott those who do not live this way. Organize. I challenge everyone to do 1 thing, however small, today, that places less demands on the world that sustains us. The time is now.

  105. @Mntrunner And to your list I would add, have no more than two kids, maximum, one or none would be better. It is the large mass of humanity that is driving this. If we could drastically cut the birth rate in the nations with high fertility rates, we could all live good lives. Get birth control into the hands of all women, worldwide. It could be done, but there is no political will, and our religious "leaders" are a major part of the problem. In a sense the pope is partly to blame for climate change!

  106. I wish we would all stop pretending that reducing emissions is a possible solution. This approach has been tried many times over the past 30 years, and we are now further away than we were in 1988.

    Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

    It's time to think about Plan B, which in my mind is geoengineering. I wish one of these climate change articles would introduce the topic into the discussion, since it seems to be the only realistic way to avoid more severe climate change.

  107. @Matt Donnolly

    I wonder how massive geoengineering will be done without emitting massive amounts of GHGs.

  108. @Matt Donnolly

    Geoengineering has enormous potential for unintended consequences. for example, a recent study concluded that putting aerosols in the atmosphere would cool the earth but also wipe out most of agriculture.

    Major plan to deal with climate change by geoengineering the Earth ...
    https://www.independent.co.uk › News › Science

  109. @Matt Donnolly Geo engineering is even more dangerous, and where it has been tried in limited ways it has not produced the results expected. Adapt there is no other solution.

  110. We have abdicated leading the world in facing and correcting the most threatening consequences of human industrialization by officially renouncing the existence of climate change. The headwinds were already there decades ago, instigated by the fossil fuel industry opposed to regulation of greenhouse gas emission. They bought the politicians, mostly GOP, because of their intrinsic opposition to regulations, the fewer the better. Nevertheless, Congress, under mostly democratic administrations, supported climate research and efforts to clean up the environment (Nixon was a rare exception with founding the EPA). But republicans in congress since then began to oppose further efforts. The disdain for a clean environment reached historic heights by the election of Trump with the appointment of Pruitt as head of the EPA, the US withdrawal from the Paris agreement and attempts to slash federal support for R&D in all sciences, but especially for NOAA and climate studies. But it is going to get worse in the coming years. Trump just released the FY 2020 science and technology R&D priorities (FY 2020 starts October 1, 2019) in which no allocation for climate research is mentioned. Apparently that is not viewed as a national security issue, the dominant theme in this report.

    We will limp along. Now the only bright spot are the climate control issues addressed by many states. But those efforts don't provide the necessary world leadership. Will China or EU step in?

  111. @Rudy Ludeke Our electric tandem bicycle is charged by our solar panels. We do not own a car & rarely use ZipCar

  112. We should keep in mind that the rich live in a controlled climate, all the time, no matter where they are. Their homes, offices, and cars are all set at about 72 degrees F, perpetually. If they have to do something highly uncomfortable like waiting for a cab or limo in sweltering heat in front of a hotel, a fine water mist is sprayed on them from above.
    They may wonder what we're all griping about. They definitely won't comprehend the riots that will inevitably come. But then again, perhaps they don't have to worry--heat prostration does make it hard to march.

  113. @SBA when the Russians shut off our electricity they will understand how hot it is very quick.

  114. @SBA They do? Perhaps in NYC, here we work outside even when it is hot, we sweat and are uncomfortable. Riots?? Once again perhaps in some foolish large city run by progressives. Or in foreign countries.

  115. @SBA
    The rich, along with their flunkies and bootlickers, will be able to move underground, along with guards and needed technicians and experts. They will get electricity from solar or wind sources on the surface, grow plants under lights, and live well. The rest of us will be hot, hungry, and threatened by extreme climate events.

  116. To prepare I will
    Watch the Twilight Zone episode where the earth heats up because the sun is too close. Then I'll know what to do.
    By the way it's too late to take any effective action. Will read again the Noah story to gain some insight. The similarity is that we brought it on ourselves. We should have been nurturing the earth not abusing it.

  117. @Yuri Pelham Forget Noah! We can and will reduce carbon--we have no choice.

  118. Humans are just not hard-wired for threats like this. We know how to deal with visual, linear threats that are avoided by running away, but not the invisible, non-linear, irreversible and cumulative effects of climate change.
    The time for planning the move off fossil fuels without disrupting the economy was 1970. We are in a global emergency now and the most sensible thing to do is for us to make major changes like doubling the prices of fossil-based fuels each year. And that revenue is not ours to spend, it must be 'sequestered' for use by the ongoing generations that we have knowingly dropped into this mess.

  119. Overpopulation is the root of this problem, at least in my opinion. I fear that it may be too late to curb global warming because global population has gone beyond the tipping point. There was a still a chance of avoiding climate catastrophe during the 1960s and early 1970s, when the threat of overpopulation was widely acknowledged in the United States and throughout much of the world. Since then, the subject has been taboo in both the Republican and Democratic parties and among Americans generally. Each party has had its own particular reasons for denying or ignoring overpopulation, and Americans as a whole have not wanted to promote population control measures that might have curtailed short-term economic growth. Meanwhile, overpopulation became easier to ignore until recently because scientific advances in agriculture during the late twentieth century enabled the planet to feed more people. How tragic that the United States and the rest of the world squandered precious opportunities to avert what now seems like a collision course to disaster.

  120. @Cromer, you might consider that resource use is mostly linear with population. The problem is the top 10% who ridiculously-wasteful lives, not the other 90% who don't.

  121. @Cromer
    It is amazing but Nixon was way ahead on this issue. The religious right took over the Republican party and political correctness took over the Democratic party, which can't stop falling over itself to promote unlimited immigration and make both our population problems (and boy do we have them -- most of the west can not sustain its present population due to water scarcity) and our excess use of resources (do they intend to deny every immigrant the right to squander resources at the same obscene rate our citizens do? When an immigrant comes to the United States, their energy use and pollution generation sky rockets like the people already living here, causing even more problems for the globe) far worse.

    We need to go back to Eisenhower tax rates and Nixon population policy. I have not voted Republican for a presidential candidate since John Anderson lost the Republican primary, but the Democrats are awful on this issue.

  122. It’s interesting to note that the majority of people take no action on events that may happen in the future ( retirement savings, climate change, recessions or downturns) until the effects are hitting them.
    Interesting that esteemed scientists are seeing the effects of projections that their colleagues warned about many decades ago.
    When will our citizenry finally “ get the message” and stop believing what we are seeing is not a cyclical change in the weather patterns?

  123. @LJB, If the Kardashians or whoever did not post it on Instragram or Twitter it, it's like a tree falling in the forest.

  124. For years I have argued with detractors that the Carbon Dioxide and Methane emissions are increasing. The only question is what we are going to do about. It seems that the only thing we are going to do is to posture and hope to increase a politiation's power somehow.

  125. The human specie’s evolutionary psychology has ill prepared us to come together and reject the use of fossil fuels as an energy source to slow climate change. We still have the instincts, that once were beneficial to us in terms of surviving in a very harsh environment—tribal, nomadic, living day by day, suspicious of other tribes, and maximizing our reproductive output. Only with the advent of agriculture ~10,000 years ago did humans begin to shed their nomadic lifestyle and live in large groups such as cities.

    On an evolutionary timeline, that is just not enough time for our basic instincts to evolve to adapt to different type of threats. Sure, we are adapt of recognizing immediate threats, such as animal predators, many of which we drove to extinction. But insanely, we have learned to live with thousands of nuclear weapons on a hair trigger alert for more than 60 years which is a greater threat than predators and would likely cause our extinction if used.

    Climate change is also a different type threat and not considered to be an immediate threat by most which, ironically, demands a massive world response to lower fossil fuel consumption before it will be widely recognized as an immediate threat. Just look at past human civilizations and their collapses; many of which were because of environmental factors. I am not optimistic that our species will respond to this ever growing threat in time to avoid a worldwide catastrophe and maybe our extinction too.

  126. @Tallydon Since that won't work it is irrelevant. Do you support say 300 new nuclear power plants in the US? I bet you don't and are afraid of nuclear power.

  127. Extinction is but a part of Life's rich pageantry.

  128. Nuclear power plants need to be cooled by water. The water has to be cold enough for that to work. But in Europe plants have had to be shut down because the water is becoming too warm to cool them. When a nuclear power plant isn't cooled right, catastrophe can result. So it's not so simple as it sounds.

  129. Too many people, too few resrouces. The growing ferocity of hostile human interaction is not surprising and befitting of the 1960s experiments demonstrating the effects of overcrowding and deprivation on animal behavior. And I would't rush to believe solar power is our salvation. Covering used-to-be farmland ad woodlands with solar panels will bring new problems.

  130. I highly recommend Amitav Ghosh's book, "The Great Derangement: Climate Change and the Unthinkable," for an explanation of why humans are unable to adequately comprehend and deal with climate change. It should be required reading for our era...if only the people largely responsible for our failure to move on climate change (e.g., Trump and his ilk) actually read books.

  131. Anything short of putting a fee on all CO2 energy sources does nothing to solve the problem. Join Citizens Climate Lobby to enact a national carbon fee and dividend program.

  132. @Ariane Sure forget say Methane, Particles in the atmosphere, deforestation, and many other factors. Your ignorance is a result of the propaganda that CO2 is the principal factor and the one we need to address first. Some of the other issues are easier to change.

  133. Vulcnalex, CO2 is the principal factor for climate change which is emitted by many different process, net-net. Methane is certainly a worse greenhouse gas but currently in significantly smaller proportion. This is not propaganda, it’s a fact. In the future as the permafrost thaws, there will be significantly more methane emitted, not to mention increase in human population and livestock.

  134. I wish the climate articles would discuss the impact of all the methane that is being released into the atmosphere by meat animals such as cattle. Vegetarianism seems like a possible step to help. I finally was able to go that route, after trying for several years. There are a lot of good meat substituted now, and many restaurants offer at least a few vegetarian meals. I became vegetarian in response to cruel and inhumane meat producing and slaughtering, but I'm satisfied now with the vegetarian lifestyle. One good result is that my cholesterol went down. If you are interested but finding it difficult to commit, try Meatless Mondays (or any day of the week). Paul McCartney and his family are great proponents of vegetarianism. I found inspiration on his web cite, including cookbooks by his late wife Linda. Thanks, Sir Paul!

  135. @Nova yos Galan Yes all the poop could be converted into natural gas and make electricity, no subsidy for that. Now people are not giving up eating meat, that is just foolish.

  136. Vulcanalex, it’s not foolish. There could be a concerted effort to reduce the reliance on meat, starting with raising animals/birds that have the lowest carbon footprint, for example, chickens.

  137. @Nova yos Galan

    We are facing a lot more problems with the methane that will be released by the tundra and polar ocean floor, plus that released by fracking and leaky carbon fuel collection.

  138. It wouldn't hurt to make a list of the kinds of housing that cool naturally...Adobe, earth-bermed, below ground, middleEastern thick walls and inverted windows, breezeways for cross ventilation, etc. In the ancient past people built for their climates, unlike today.

  139. Clint Eastwood always wore a poncho in his western movies. I wondered how he could tolerate the heat. The bad guys were always sweaty and filthy, but mostly sweaty. To learn how to adapt, I think we should ask Clint Eastwood. It may be his natural "cool", but if we could figure that out, we'd have this climate thing licked, for sure.

  140. Of course we are not "prepared" almost nobody thinks of adaptation, they just want say a carbon tax or cap and trade. We need to identify areas that are in danger of flooding since they are very expensive and take action. If Europe is so badly effective they should make their carbon footprint negative, and insist other countries do as we do reduce their emissions, plant trees, and adapt.

  141. @vulcanalex ? "almost nobody thinks of adaptation"?

    Here are the titles of the downloadable reports from the IPCC's Working Group II:
    2014 - "Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability"
    2007 - "Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability"
    2001 - "Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability"
    1997 - "Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Analyses"
    1990 - "Impacts Assessment of Climate Change"
    link here:
    http://ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml

    Google Scholar returns over 2.5 million hits when I searched "climate adaptation". So there's a lot of thinking going on.

    But you never heard about an ounce of prevention?

    We're going to be adapting while we take steps to reduce emissions (to lessen the scale of adaptation).

    In the Miami area, they're raising half a billion dollars to install pumps because high tides now flood streets even when it is sunny. It won't stop the flooding from getting higher as there is more ocean, it's just reacting.

    That's $500,000,000 worth of temporary "adaptation" for four smallish counties. It's a down payment, not a productive expenditure.

    Raising a road due to more coastal or river flooding is adaptation, and really expensive. It's far cheaper if you raise it and don't force the odds that you'll have to raise it again 30 years from now.

  142. I didn't realize 'we' are reducing emissions and planting trees. My impression is we are switching back to coal and increasing emissions from cars by reducing required MPG - and are supposed to cut trees to prevent forest fires. We are helping with the final push over the cliff to planetary disaster.

  143. @vulcanalex

    Nobody thinks of people dying in weather disasters as adaptation either. Humanity is already 'adapting' to anthropogenic climate change: those who have the economic wherewithal adapt by elevating their beachfront houses, or installing air conditioning; those who lack the resources must 'adapt' at the cost of their homes, livelihoods and lives.

    Adaptation, IOW, is what some people have to do because others are happy to socialize their marginal climate-change costs out their private tailpipes, rather than paying for them at the pump. Absent collective intervention in the form of carbon taxes or regulations, involuntary third parties have to pay for them instead. A carbon tax, OTOH, such as revenue-neutral Carbon Fee and Dividend with Border Adjustment Tax (citizensclimatelobby.org/basics-carbon-fee-dividend), would keep you, vulcanalex, from 'adapting' by riding free on other people's emissions reductions. Requiring fossil fuel producers to account for climate change in the price of their products, meanwhile, would nudge the 'invisible hand' of the energy market to build out the carbon-neutral economy at the lowest net cost, until nobody wants to burn fossil fuels any more!

    The AGW-deniers' "adaptation" meme is thus transparently self-serving, especially for fossil fuel producers and their investors. IMHO, consumers can effectively adapt by paying a few bucks more for a tank of gasoline.

  144. People reading this may have the ability to select what company provides their electricity (then the local utility delivers it).

    If you have a choice, buy from providers that generate using all renewables, or use renewables and nuclear, with natural gas being a less-desirable option. Northeast, might be mostly hydro and solar. Out where I live, wind (and nuclear in Illinois). Mixes elsewhere. But that's a signal that companies notice.

    And tell your elected officials you want a price on carbon emissions, however it's figured out. Southern Florida has Republicans who realize their party leadership doesn't care about their homes. In the Plains, lots of deep-red areas are finding their rural areas are getting a boost in tax revenues from all the wind farms - Iowa gets >37% of their electricity from wind. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas are also in the top five, with Texas producing more than anywhere else.

    So if you're a Republican and plan to stay that way, you don't need to keep supporting owners of coal companies or oil companies that pollute and cost you money. Find Republicans who care about that instead of what the guys in Washington tell them to do.

    Something to read - as gas prices go up, Trump wants drivers spending billions more each year to benefit the oil industry.
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/ct-oil-industry-fuel...

  145. This has a lot to do with the huge wealth and power disparity that we live in. If you own an asset that is quickly becoming more rare and more expensive, you don’t regard this as something bad. As a matter of fact, it’s great!

    If you possess something like significant water rights or future vineyard lands in Siberia you’ll think its all well worth the cost.

    Of course most of us are just stuck with the costs. But, numerous as we may be, we don’t have much say in the matter. Your power and influence are roughly proportional to your wealth. That’s a big problem for almost all of us in the near future.

  146. @Steve, Like the Bush family purchasing ten or 100's of thousand of acres in South America for future water rights.

  147. The article that stood out to me the most this week is called “The Message of a Scorching 2018: We’re Not Prepared for Global Warming” by Somini Sengupta. We were warned about the consequences of global warming. Everyday, those consequences inch closer. Carbon emissions from industrial factories have caused this problem. Where we live, it may feel a little hotter than usually, but other places are affected more. People always complain about what they have, while others are grateful for the small things they have. Do people not know how our planet is changing? In some places, it no longer rains. Farmers can no longer grow crops and feed their cattle. To prevent this to worsen there are things we can do. We can do simple things, like reducing food.

  148. This article interested me most in the Times this week. I was so pulled in by this article because of the seriousness of the situation that it talks about. Our Earth is rapidly heating and this is causing many problems. People are not only uncomfortable but some have even died from this extreme heat. I found this problem to be really interesting because there are ways in which we could be slowing or even stopping the global warming but yet, we chose not to solve the problem.

  149. This article highlights that human activity has begun to destroy our earth. It is unfortunate really, that the human race is so divided on global warming. Especially because the heat is not just felt in the summer, it is just highlighted during this season. For many skiers in the four corners region, finding a suitable ski area was difficult because of the lack of adequate snow. It makes tons of people wonder how our earth will change in the years to come. Will the next generation have a lack of fresh water, miles of new beaches, and a new wave of heat-related deaths? The unfortunate answer is that this situation could easily become a new reality.

    I visit Switzerland almost every year and I find it absolutely insane that the Swiss are currently experiencing a massive drought. In contrast, northern New Mexico, a desert, gets a decent rush of monsoons. Of course, there are efforts to hinder the eventual heat overtake. The United States, a leading country, is unable to agree with other leading countries to aid this effort, symbolizing that this issue will most likely not be dealt with and it will become a very prominent factor in our new lives. Yet, the heat wave is much heavier than expected in Europe, demonstrating that scientists and government officials are already losing a rigged battle.

    The heat is felt everywhere and something effective and strong needs to be done by dozens of nations, including work ordinary citizens can do in their own home.

  150. I was surprised to learn that most observers are not aware of the promise -- much less the fact that no country has kept it:

    "Nor have the world’s rich countries ponied up money, as promised under the Paris accord, to help the poor countries cope with the calamities of climate change."

  151. @MyThreeCents, As if signing pieces of papers or agreements fixes this problem.

  152. It’s beyond time to face up to the fact that we need very serious measures to avert global catastrophe, including the collapse of food systems. We and our politicians have failed with Paris and several accords prior to it. We have proved hopeless. We must —must — seriously and urgently explore solar radiation management to deflect heat and iron fertilization to promote phytoplankton and algae in order to sink carbon. The UN needs to bring together the most populous and wealthy nations, in the manner of the Security Council, in order to achieve consensus to bring these measures about. We are now entering a phase of feedback loops where wildfires across the globe are themselves causing more wildfires, and where ocean ice melt is causing more ice melt. We’re on a very steep, slippery slope. We can’t restore the polar ice caps or turn deserts back into forests or arable land — when they’re gone, they’re gone.

  153. @Larry McCallum
    Larry , Solar radiation management will have unpleasant side effects, Fe fertilisation of the oceans leads to chemo stratification which leads to a toxic poisonous ocean and atmospheric H2S which is a very toxic gas, especially if they are stupid enough to inject Sulphates into the upper atmosphere.
    See Canfield Ocean

  154. I live in Long Beach, California. Right now, at this very moment, I am looking out my bedroom window. The evening sun is still lighting the sky, but through a reddish haze of clouds -- very unusual. My husband who has lived here for over 50 years says it's the wildfires -- they may be dozens of miles away in Orange County, but they appear to be having an effect on the skies in Los Angeles County where we live.

    That should give you a clear sense of what is going on.

  155. Another article people should take the time to read is about something that has to become more common - in an orderly way while we can. Give some places back to the sea or river that keeps flooding them.

    It describes obstacles and the considerable work that went into designing a plan to remove homes in areas of NJ that are flood-prone and getting more so.

    Kudos to Fawn McGee and all those working with her to implement NJ's "Blue Acres" program.
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/surrendering-to-rising-seas/

    Others have to get behind programs that stop misusing disaster funds for rebuilding homes time after time, only to ruin the new wallboard a year or five later. Use more of that money to buy people out of the worst areas, and turn that land into open space with plantings that can absorb and reduce flood impacts on the surrounding areas.

    Even states that just hate regulations, like Texas, are going to have to start doing smarter development instead of anything goes.

    Zoning isn't evil, it saves lives, either in flood-prone areas where developers do things like build new homes in a Houston flood reservoir area, or out West where homeowners plop a wooden house into a brushy, dry forest area and then expect people to come risk life and limb when said house inevitably is threatened by wildfire.

    We haven't doubled CO2 levels yet, so what's happening already is the mild lead-up to the future.

  156. Unfortunately, I'm pretty convinced that as a result of greed, selfishness, myopia and shortsightedness, we humans will never adequately address this crisis.

  157. We need a Marshall Plan to deal with climate change. Humans (especially when it benefits them) frequently underestimate the effects and suffering climate change will bring. It’s entirely possible it will lead to very disruptive mass migrations. Look at the problems caused by the Syrian refugees, which might have started as a result of climate issues from deforestation.

  158. It isn’t the new normal because it won’t be normal. It is only a transition to a phase with even hotter weather, even bigger fires, and more destructive hurricanes. There won’t be any normal because by the time any pattern is established it will turn into something different.

  159. No, we're not prepared for global warming... especially mentally. The NYTimes will, almost certainly soon, summer after summer, post headlines and photos of increasing horror, showing vast fields of dying humans succumbing to heat exhaustion and stroke - millions and millions dying. It will likely happen. And soon. It will make you gasp and cry in horror at our specie's real-time apocalyptic fate unfolding.

    Get ready. And get ready to see fleets of rockets and jets making a last-ditch effort to spray our upper atmosphere with elements and chemicals that may, hopefully, block the sun a little and keep us all from becoming extinct.

    Trump actually should build the wall. All the drug cartels below us and millions of starving others are going to make a run to the North in less than 15 years I predict. Only a wall will "help" slow this down.

    We're not prepared. A horror movie awaits.

    It sounds crazy... but I honestly think we need to reach out to the other intelligent species that visit us regularly from other planets. They have the answer, hopefully, of how we can save ourselves. Don't laugh. I seriously think it's our best solution. And yes, ufos are real. It's not a big deal. Accept it.

    We're not ready. So let's start looking ahead to the best solutions.

  160. @M. B., Canada also needs to start building a wall to keep the desperate Americans out, maybe also a wall across mid US to keep the refugees from the Southern and Western States out of the North

  161. Unfortunately, all the people with even half a brain have realized this would be a dire problem many, many years ago. And everyone knows that the only way to address an issue on this scale is to get the government behind any effort, but alas, as with all things that are important, the people in representative government operate with no brains. I know from personal experience you can try to hammer on your representatives/senators about important issues, and they'll just ignore you, unless you have sway over large sums of money they could get access to, in which case it then becomes another story.

    The only thing government's understand is money, so my approach to get action would be to hit them where it counts. On a planned day in the near future, everyone in this country, including corporations/businesses, should refuse to pay anymore income or payroll taxes until an adequate near term solution to significantly reduce emissions is written into law.

    We just stop funding their idiocy until we can get the action that we demand. Without money they'll have no power and things will come to a screeching halt. They'd be powerless to refuse, because what could they do, try to come after everyone in the America? They couldn't and they'd be rendered powerless.

    Of course people's lives would be greatly affected by such an action, but the time for inaction has long since passed. If we don't do something extreme now, we'll all parish anyway so what do we have to lose?

  162. In a time sooner than we think, Earth may be sufficiently uninhabitable that humans may also disappear. Possibly except for those who can escape to some other, sort-of inhabitable planet!!!

    We may still have time to preserve human (or most other) life—albeit not on continental coasts. That, however, means that GOP climate change deniers must be expected to begin to take science seriously, and to get rid of the current administration officials who are adding to the problems, not trying to devise steps to mitigate the coming catastrophe

    But, with the Trump crew, we should not hold our breath that the near-inevitable can be avoided in time to preserve homo sapiens!!!

  163. We might be a smart species but we need to act smart to survive.

    Climate change denialism is not smart because it is based on lies and falsehoods.

  164. My God, get Trump out and elect someone who believes in, and wants to combat, HUMAN-INDUCED climate change. Forget about your children's children, think about extreme weather in our own lifetimes--I hate the heat and the cost to cool down! Not to mention the dangers it poses to our civilization. We don't need to begin shouting, "Soylent Green is people!"

  165. Ladies and gentlemen of the Times:

    I understand your wanting to hear directly from Californians regarding their personal experiences having to flee our wildfires.

    However, if you have seen the NASA pictures showing *smoke from the wildfires* blanketing ALL our state, we are all suffering, esp. if we have breathing issues.

    I've lived in CA since 1987; the majority in the greater LA area, then northern CA since March 2018. God save us all from trump, wilbur ross, & the rest of the gang of know-nothings.

  166. @CathyH
    I've lived in S. California all my life, since the 50s. This is the first time I've had the smell of smoke in my house. It hurts my lungs and eyes. And I live about 30 or so miles from the closest fire. Why do the Koch brothers and other people in the oil business get to roll back environmental regulations that are designed to help people? Vote as many Republicans out as possible.

  167. I thought is was a Chinese Hoax - that’s what the GOP and Trump told me. Of course, they also told me Democrats we’re trying to grant citizenship to known gang members, that Obama was not born in the US, and deficits were bad - but then they were good, or maybe...it was more guns were good and smoking was good too - no,no Pence said that smoking wasn’t good but wasn’t bad either.

  168. Will the non- believers have a plan for when the planet gets so hot that where most of the people live will be uninhabitable? Remember, fires, drought, lack of arable land, floods, catastrophic weather events, and food scarcity are just a few ramification we can expect due to our lack of action.

  169. @DSS
    The wars and conflicts are going to be something else as the US tries to invade Canada, already the US is trying to do a water grab on the Great Lakes which are shared with Canada.
    We are going to see the calibre of the people and judging from comments and media it will be ugly and brutal

  170. Absolutely. The root cause is the greed of the developed world that has justified the mindless exploit of the resources. It is continuing to this date, from the roots in the colonialism. The poison is spreading faster to other places. We need to have every square inch of this earth be carbon neutral. Underground living quarters! any one for zero foot print living?

  171. We are in no way ready for climate changes and the refugees that will come along with it. Part of the Syrian war can directly be related to drought and lack of food. This problem will continue to exasperate the earth. Just add a few more billion people to it.

  172. I listened and watched James Hansen on Ted Koppel’s “Nightline”. His message was quite clear. People believe that Earth’s warming is Reversible. It is Not!

    Scary. Very scary.

  173. @Shanala
    It depends on the time frame, several million years OK by you

  174. Thank you for quoting so many female climate scientists in your article!

  175. @Shermie
    They have a policy of using at least 50% female names in print and pictures.

  176. It was Britain and Europe that destroyed the world forests pushed the animals to extinction in the name of trade and greed for the last two centuries. The industrial revolution continued the mindless onslaught on environment. United states of america took up the batton continued the destruction of environment (american mainland) in the name of trade (gas guzzling SUV's) and greed (the rise of China and destruction of the land of China) accelerating the trend of global warming. As shown in the picture the developing countries are now paying the price. Developed countries please pay up your share of the damage. What are you doing to correct the damage and stop the spread of the poison in the name of development?

  177. Enough of words. Time for action
    - promote “living-with less is more”
    - stop advertising large SUV’s
    - promote vegetarian diet
    - promote tiny houses
    - stop subsidizing large scale agriculture

  178. I haven't tracked the arguments of the denio-sphere recently; I assume they have dropped the "pause" attack by now. I believe they are back to attacking station siting; can someone tell me their latest line of attack?

  179. The article says:
    "Agronomists are trying to develop seeds that have a better shot at surviving heat and drought. "

    This makes me nervous, as it sounds like a way to live within a destroyed ecosystem via a technical fix, rather than trying to correct the root problem, which is too many people and too much hubris.

  180. @Scott Werden
    So far with little success.
    Strangely our best hope is with perennials rather than the crops we now grow

  181. The sad thing is that we as a society are not even close to doing anything about it. Only if the big polluters like China, US, India... implement policies with teeth to reduce our carbon emissions will we have a chance.

    It is also apparent that we will need more population control.

    Unfortunately we'll need 9/11 types of disasters before there is the political will to tackle this. Right now society is more consumed whether football players need to participate in the National Anthem than tackling global warming.

  182. Please keep reporting on climate change and our government’s action, or lack thereof. The story seems to take backseat, but it’s the most important story for our planet.

  183. Dear NYT reporters. Please point out clean energy as the solution to climate change. Not minor handwringing like not throwing away food. (Many landfills capture methane and sell it)

    1. The biggest difference you can make is voting in midterms.
    State Public Utility Commissioners (PUC) decide what % of clean energy utilities must buy.

    So vote a Democratic PUC, Democratic Gov, Democratic legislature, Democratic AG to fight clean energy rollbacks and fossil energy Federal policies. Oh, and Democratic school boards to prevent future ignorant voters.

    2. If you will need to get a new car in the future; make it an EV. There's lots of cheap second hand EVs around.

    3. If you own a roof, get a solar estimate. You could pay the same monthly for clean energy as you are now paying to rent energy that creates climate change.

  184. Our planet is overpopulated - and we refuse to recognize the fact - that’s why we are dealing with global warming. Wait until the effectof higher food prices kick in - especially in the Middle East, Africa, India amd Pakistan. We should have been encouraging family planning both in the US and throughout the world. We did the opposite. We will surely harvest the grapes of wrath.

  185. @Maureen, Talking Grapes of Wrath
    Revelation 11:18
    “The nations raged, but your wrath came, and the time for the dead to be judged, and for rewarding your servants, the prophets and saints, and those who fear your name, both small and great, and for destroying the destroyers of the earth.”

    "and for destroying the destroyers of the earth.”

    A clear statement we can and will destroy the earth and those responsible for that will be held to account along with the facilitators and those that looked the other way

  186. Most of the energy production and consumption falls to the industrialized countries. The so called developing countries barely produce and consume. There is rather overproduction and consumption in the traditionally industrialized part of the world.

    We can live without the waste and superfluous production and consumption. Without addressing this, we won’t go too far

  187. The time for a human solution to this problem is past. Now the Earth will figure it out by reducing the human population to a manageable level. It won't be pretty, but I'll bet that it will be efficient and happen much more swiftly than most imagine.

  188. @RCH

    Those who savor the impending destruction due to climate change, whose unspoken message is "I told you so", give me the creeps.

  189. @RCH

    You can't predict the future and neither can anyone else. The only solution to this problem is to change our ways and no one has the knowledge to say that we've reached a point of no return.

  190. Scientifics know.

  191. Global warming is, essentially, a pollution problem. And its effects can be reasonably estimated. According to DARA international, there will be 600,000 deaths per year related to warming as of 2030.

    You may be surprised to learn that the consensus view is that air, water, and soil pollution cause 9 million deaths per year. These sorts of pollution have been killing millions for decades and the problem is inadequately addressed worldwide. (It may have reached its peak when Julia Roberts won the Oscar for Erin Brokavich.)

    Logic says to concentrate attention on the "old fashioned" pollution. If we can address old fashioned pollution and climate change, that would be ideal. But if we have to prioritize one over the other, old fashioned pollution obviously comes first because it is presently far more destructive.

    Sadly, most of us know too little about old fashioned pollution. For example, few are aware that the worst air quality in the US is in central California, while the worst water quality is in Nevada. Climate change tends to be front page news. Old fashioned pollution is a matter of far less "visibility." Climate change is fashionable and political. Old fashioned pollution is far deadlier, has been around a lot longer, but lacks sex appeal.

    We poison our environment daily. And we talk almost exclusively about carbon emissions. But the bigger problem includes nitrogen oxides, ammonia, hydrocarbons, organic compounds, toxic chemicals, and on and on.

  192. I wish I could easily get solar panels on my roof. Arizona Public Service (APS) has discouraged residents from purchasing solar. When I looked into getting solar panels, it would take months. In addition, APS also tried to penalize residents by charging them for their own solar energy. Welcome to the Valley of the sun. Every owner in Arizona should have solar panels and APS should be leading the change, not discouraging us.

  193. The same thing is happening in (red) states around the country- Laws being passed that will only pay back individual owners for energy at the wholesale rate. I think the only thing we can do is wait for home battery systems to fill in the gap.

  194. Maybe it's time to forget the Paris accord and go much more ambitious in cutting emissions. And yes a not too difficult thing would be for each of us to plant a few trees and water them till they grow. Humanity could also revise the share of forests at more than 33% of land area. And yes let's cut all non-essential use of fossil fuels. We should not wait for governments to act. People can do a better job themselves.

  195. @MS

    And where is the west going to get the water for this scheme? They are already overdrawn, wiping out and contaminating their aquifers (here in the east we are just contaminating them with fracking).

  196. We should send exploratory expeditions to Venus like we do to Mars. We can then show people the effects of excessive greenhouse gases accumulating in the atmosphere, temps of like 400 degrees and atmospheric pressure about 20 times that of earth.

  197. Dear Pat,
    It's an interesting idea, but so far we don't have the technology to produce anything that would survive surface conditions on Venus.

  198. This article was really an eye opener to me. Before reading this I thought that we had years to right our wrongs in global warming. I had never imagined the about of deaths that could result from global warming. I had never thought about how poorer countries would cope with global warming. But now I realize how dire global warming really is for animals, plants, and people alike. The fact that this year is about to be the fourth hottest year on record is terrifying. It goes to show how minimal are efforts have been how much more we have to do. The statistics stated in this article regarding greenhouse gasses and carbon dioxide levels should be a wake up call for us. If we continue to ignore global warming like we are right now I would hate to imagine what the future holds for our earth. Its time to start fixing our habits and start paying attention put out into the environment

  199. Articles like these, while valuable, almost always fail to point out that the US produces a greater rate of greenhouse gases compared to other countries.

  200. We can survive the present situation. It is a matter of scientific and intellectual community governing this world and we the people awakening to parallel and multiple world design. Earth works on two vital ratios; one is energy to matter ratio and other is of O2 to CO2 ratio. The ecosphere is designed to balance the heat and temperature within a limit, by two opposing forces; unwinding and winding. With industrial era, humanity has been
    1. Exponentially increasing the heat being released to the environment
    2. Reduced the time being given to earth to absorb the heat and transform it.
    3. He has been recklessly felling forest and now losing it to uncontrolled forest fire and thus losing the base that converts light and heat into biological mass and sustains O2 to CO2 balance.
    Consequently, the ecosphere is unstable and species are dying out. The environment is peaking and falling as never before. I had predicted long back huge destruction coming. There are two ways we can relate this
    1. To the breath of a dying heart
    2. To the breath of a pregnant woman trying to deliver.
    Earth is stressing us to awaken and make quantum shift in our understanidng of nature from material to living.

  201. The fires in the West and the floods in the East get coverage on the nightly news, but global warming is never mentioned. The stories are never supplemented by comparisons with previous years or decades.

    We need better information on what is coming and how to prepare for it, which means that research budgets should be increased as quickly as possible.

    A large proportion of our population is convinced that global warming is a hoax and sees any mention of it as attempted brainwashing and taking sides politically.

    The result of our reaction to global warming will be a population crash, largely in other countries, and increased attempts by people in these countries to emigrate legally or illegally. Things will get very ugly.

  202. We’re also due an ice age, which naturally occurs every 10,000 year’s. Maybe each will offset the other.

  203. You need to account or the past 30,000 years without an ice age....

  204. @Greg
    Relative forcings, we should have been slowly and steadily cooling, even the effect of Pinatubo was less and of shorter duration due too higher CO2 than the 1812 year without a summer.
    So even with a grand Solar Minimum, that will only slow the rate of rise, not lead to a cooling trend

  205. That’s what climate change deniers always say. We need to treat this like the crisis it is and listen to what the scientists have been saying till at least 1985. This is not going to get better on it’s own,

  206. @Abel Adamski
    Thanks!

  207. Sad to say, the United States bears considerable blame for this increasing dire situation. It's partly because we produce greenhouse gases at such a great per capita rate. But even more sadly, it's because our government is fighting efforts to combat climate change.

  208. «Still, scientists point out that with significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and changes to the way we live — things like reducing food waste, for example — warming can be slowed enough to avoid the worst consequences of climate change.» I note that the New York Times here fails cite any scientists making such a point. The consensus, as other posters here have noted, seems rather to be that we have passed a tipping point and most likely will be unable to stop global warming at 2° over pre-industiral levels and thus are heading into uncharted - and very dangerous territory. I very much hope that I shall be proved wrong....

    Henri

  209. Hope? No way you’re wrong on this. The only bright side is in accepting that once upon a time the whole world was warm, including the arctic regions. CO2 levels were even higher. Readapting to this return of the tropics will be our test, our struggle, and our destiny.

  210. @mhenriday
    The tipping point may already have been reached. Thawing permafrost is releasing methane, drying wetlands are doing the same as to carbon dioxide,
    warming ocean waters may well be destablizing the fine balance that is keeping methane hydrates along the continental shelves sequestered. Read up on the Permian-Triassic extinctions for a hint of what we may be facing. And no, it was NOT an asteroid that did in 95% of all life then.

  211. Think this is difficult?? Accepting the reality of climate change is the easy part. Now we need to change our behavior, which will involve making sacrifices. Unfortunately, we are much better at sacrificing others than we are at making sacrifices ourselves. Good luck everyone.

  212. Everyone needs to change how they live—particularly in countries like the US, where we act as if we can do whatever we want: eat meat daily, turn on the ac when it’s hot, buy single use plastic, drive everywhere, etc etc etc. In this article it would’ve been a good idea to mention the roll backs this administration is implementing. You don’t want to appear political, I suppose? We are in dire and dangerous times, the time for being polite is over. Say what needs saying: the oil and gas industries need to move to clean energy. The government needs to STOP subsidizing them. But we all need to do our part.

  213. "Waiting for an ecological crisis?" How bad must everything get before people realize that we are in a crisis. People and other life are dying. Crops are dying thus lessening the chance of getting food not only to nourish our own bodies, but to ensure prosperity and good health for other countries.
    It is also a fact that future generations will not have a place to live comfortably, if they are able to live at all.

  214. I believe in global warming but I think the global warming activists have played themselves into the hands of the deniers by using some short term phenomena to describe a long process. Remember the deniers used the polar vortex to dispute the case?

    To begin with, while global warming is the underlying cause, it actually causes climate extremes, including both hot and cold, draughts and persistent storms and even hurricanes. By altering the world's temperature profile via excessive greenhouse gas and other global warming contributing forces, it increases weather dislocations. So it is not just localized warmer weather but also colder weather too. And it is not just one or two seasons but multiyear and multi-decade phenomena.

    Therefore, global warming activists need to deny the deniers' use of clever rhetoric to dodge the real science of calamity

  215. @Bos
    The Polar Vortex's (both of them) are driven by temperature differentials between the equator and the Pole, as that reduces the vortex slows and becomes wavier and tends to stall. It has been increasingly so as the Arctic ice melts

  216. Greed drives the denial of climate change. Yet the growing concentration of power and wealth will make it increasingly difficult to alter the trajectory. It is unclear if the people will ever be able to seize control over the levers of power and move rapidly towards the sensible, but life-altering, changes that are needed to prevent unimaginable eco-disaster.

  217. I don't believe that rational people could deny climate change and the burning of fossil fuels as making the process go faster. Those in industries in which it would cause the expenditure of large amounts of money to take slow the process down do not want to put up the cash. As a result they publicly deny that any steps can be taken. Now that they have a friend in the White House the problem is not being attended to on a national basis. With a huge chunk of the public either misinformed or in denial of science the government has allies in not dealing with this serious problem.

  218. @David . . . . Sadly, those who stand to gain the most from continuing on the path to oblivion -- well-heeled fossil fuel producers who spend their days ensconced in glass-and-steel corporate towers and big homes in gated communities -- will be the last people to be affected by climate change. ("What, me worry?")

  219. If this record of hot climates doesn’t rally us to stop emitting greenhouse gases, or plant trees, or save forests, or support electric cars, wind and solar products, then nothing will. We will then receive what we deserve as a people unable or unwilling to work together to solve a common problem. It’s like a modern parable of past misdeeds, to which one might cry, “ let them eat hotcakes”

  220. But taking action would threaten profits for the Koch brothers. That is unacceptable, so millions of people will have to die. Indeed, humanity will have to risk extinction to protect those short-term profits.

  221. Summers for this area since the last drought have been normal. I don't believe the scientists that state there is global warming.

    I remember the reports on the radio about another ice age is coming. Never happen.

    About climate change. Well that's happening all the time.

  222. I wonder: do you typically base your reactions to clear global scientific data on local anecdotes? Or is it just global warming? Do you believe cigarettes cause cancer even though you may know someone who smoked and didn’t get it?

    I don’t know; if a doctor told me that I would have a heart attack in the near future unless I lowered my intake of cholesterol even though I feel perfectly healthy right now, I would lower my intake of cholesterol. What’s the worst that could happen if I followed the advice, compared with the worst that could happen if I didn’t?

  223. @Richard please don't conflate two entirely different hypotheses. The Ice Age hypothesis was put forward by a few people without a lot of evidence.

    Global warming on the other hand caused by CO2 emissions has been substantiated by hundreds if not thousands of research studies. It was basically validated 30 years ago.

    One was a fringe idea, the other the work of hundreds of scientists working over the past three or four decades.

  224. What gets to me is the fact that those of us who take climate change seriously and try to reduce our respective carbon footprints or recycle our waste or save water are the targets of jokes and derisive comments, even told that we have been fooled by purveyors of Fake News.

    I, for one, plan to keep on living the way I do, very frugally, contribute as much as I can to honest conservancy groups, and pray (maybe praying is all we can do at this point - my apologies to the more aggressive atheists out there, some of whom are marvellous friends, honestly - ) Disney sentimentalism won't help now, but decisive action may.

  225. @CMD - please keep living frugally. That leaves more for the rest of us.

  226. I live in the northeast, in the woods in a small off the grid house, with solar and compost toilet. i have lived here like this for 23 years. i made the conscious decision to not have children and I am thankful for that decision every day.

    I have watched my surroundings drastically change over the course of that time and it has terrified me. I am 50 and am fearful of what it will be like to be an elderly person 30 years from now trying to survive on this planet. I am awe struck at the rapidness at which climate change is taking place and I fear that the science is far behind. It definitely feels like we are on the titantic shifting deck chairs and telling everyone it will be alright. Guess what its not!

  227. It's hard for me to make a good judgement about global warming based on articles like this because they're so one-sided. How can I say I'm against warmer days when I love warmer days? Every year, I dread the cold and pray for warmer days.

    If temps never went below 40 here in the NE, I wouldn't complain. I have no use for snow here. I can't speak for any other place as I've lived in the NYC area my whole life. I can say that I see many, many more people out running, biking, or just strolling when it's warmer than when it's colder- and that's a good thing.

    Every really hot day, I'm out exercising. If not, I'll be working, and I work in a warehouse without air conditioning. It doesn't bother me. Sure, with the hotter weather, I'm more at risk for dehydration, heat exhaustion, and skin cancer but what's more likely is that I'll work myself up into the best shape ever!

  228. You exemplify the problem Ron. What you don't get is that it's really not about you. It's about future generations who will bear the brunt of the decisions that we're making now. That's because the CO2 were dumping into the atmosphere now takes decades to have it's full effect.

  229. @Ron A
    Unfortunately it’s not all about your comfortable life in the NE USA. Farmers crops failing, low lying Pacific nations disappearing, wild fires, coastal erosion, stronger hurricanes...I’m moving to where you live!

  230. We need to do a better job of identifying real solutions to climate warming. Most of the articles in this space shout or lecture that the planet is warming and we’re all doomed unless fossil fuels are quickly replaced with ... what? Renewables? Can’t be scaled up to supply the world’s energy demands, not even close. We know this. And where are our efforts best focused for achievable, meaningful results? The US, a colossal carbon-belching machine, is nonetheless reducing its carbon emissions. Not enough, but it means something. Do we focus on rising third-world economies or established economies? Both of course but we should pick something and go at it like the Apollo program. To constantly show scenes of drought and storms and say we must act today, everywhere, or else, is either ignored (like the old fried egg anti-drug ads) or politicized as extreme. Maybe it’s the human condition to ignore looming disaster when the scale is too much to grasp or the signs aren’t locally observable. We need a dialogue, joint action, starting with achievable - not just politically expedient- goals. I’m not seeing that, but surely we can find it. But we’re not even trying. Instead we’re just shouting.

  231. @ MDR
    Yes. Stop shouting and plant trees or more importantly, avoid deforestation. That might sound prosaic, but it’s the best climate stabilizer we have. The most natural of cures we currently possess .

  232. @MWR I agree, and suggest that all solutions that each one of us can do to help our situation as world citizens. Stop adding to the problems and find ideas that we all can do to help. Drive electric cars, plant trees, elect politicians locally that want to help us acheive these goals in our communities. What about building aqua duct systems all across the continent to help transfer water where it is too much to where it is needed, build houses underground to save on cooling energy needed to cool living spaces for families, etc. etc. we need to all conserve on energy usage so that solar and wind can generate the energy needed to survive. Most of all, we all should agree to less populations in all countries should be the goal so the need for food could also be decreased. How about 50% less People as the goal by 2050? Just that would also help everything become easier to achieve some kind of balance for the world.

  233. This is just the tip of the (melting) iceberg. We are all to blame but future generations will in particular look back and rage at the short-sightedness of President Trump and the Republicans. The history books will not be kind.

  234. @cortI

    If they are going to rail they can do so at the rest of the world none of which met their own preset goals. Nor did any of them contribute the funds they said they would to help the poorer countries.
    The only honest country was the US which knew that any efforts on its part were useless without the cooperation of the rest of the group. We would have been sacrificing jobs for our own citizens and giving away $3 Billion to accomplish little or nothing.
    The Paris Accord is no different than any other program countries agree to implement. They talk a great deed but do nothing to accomplish it. And as usual they expected the US to carry them all along.
    I'm sure we can use the money for something else where we don't have to depend on others.

  235. This headline caught my attention as it is seemingly similar to ones which I have seen in previous years stating that global warming is becoming increasingly dangerous.

    Over the past several years, global warming has repeatedly been brought up as a significant issue. However, each year minimal effort is put into providing a solution. We see these new recording breaking high temperatures and are briefly shocked and outraged before merely returning to our routines which are the very cause of this problem. We all wait for other people to find a solution and are too uninterested to help until the consequences arrive and it is too late.

    I have become increasingly interested in environmental issues such as global warming as I have worked with clubs in my school which aim to help in relation to these causes. Articles like these serve as a wake-up call as a reminder of the reality we live and motivation for us to do work harder. Hopefully people worldwide will recognize the true dangers of this dilemma and will work together to form a solution before it reaches its fallout.

  236. Back up just a bit folks, examine ones own life experience insofar as seasonal weather has been, during the last, say 68 years, which is how old I am, along with tens of millions of other intelligent observers on the planet.

    I've lived in Ireland, England, several states in the United States, coast to coast, and several states between, traveled and spent time throughout Central America, several periods in Spain, several periods in Canada, and as tens of millions also have, spent decades watching the effect of weather throughout the world.

    I conclude, as I know most reasonable people do, that our planet has crossed the Rubicon, so to speak, and started down the increasingly slippery slope of climate change, a slope that was inevitable given the factors at work, first, the all-consuming ever-growing human population, second, the innate need of each human to acquire the comforts of modern life, regardless the effect such may have on the environment, third, the obvious that providing for even the basic needs of our always increasing numbers of consuming humans requires an always increasing level of industrialisation, still firmly rooted in old slow-changing technology, and to cut to the chase, governing authorities owned and operated by predatory capitalist individuals and corporations, all of whom see the planet as a capital resource to be taken advantage of, and used for their economic benefit, during their existence

    In summation, our planet, our home, is toast, burnt toast.

  237. When are we going to actually change how we live instead of talking about the urgent need to do it?