Global warming is, in my view, symptomatic of the real issue that is oh so difficult to touch. The issues facing life on this planet are abundant and manifest - and I believe can all be traced back to our ever growing population and the ever increasing global middle class of consumers. Yes, global warming may be the most dire and urgent of the conditions, but it is only one among many.
28
CNN ran a similar headline as this one. I do agree the climate may be in a change cycle, though these cycles run for a lot longer than a few decades. I do not agree that the Gore proclamation that 'the debate is over' is true. With science, the debate is never over. That said, I don't reject anthropogenic cause out of hand. However, to make hay out of the fact that 2018 is the fourth hottest on record, when it is actually cooler than the three prior years is a political sleight of hand. I certainly wouldn't conclude that we're now in a cooling period, but to drive home the political agenda and religion of man-made global warming based on a cooler year than the three prior years is a bit of a stretch.
6
@fairtax
Please look at the graph of global surface temperatures since 1880 provided by NOAA:
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-chan...
Please look at the Arctic sea Ice extent:
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/WorldOfChange/SeaIce
This is not about fluctuations in the last three years.
12
@Jonathan from DC Jonathan -- please look at the details of the global temp collection. Essentially there were no temp collection stations on most land masses except a handful on the coasts until the 1950's. Even now the US has more temp stations than ROW combined. The temp data was not rigorously collected. Most stations were not put in place to measure global temps but to help local ag. In short, the global temp record is nothing but an estimate based on data that wasn't rigorously collected. Even now if you pick a location on the globe you'll find most temp stations are in cities close to the coasts. The US -- which has a much better data record does not show the same pattern as ROW.
1
FairTax, when we cpntinue to sit on our hands, reversing laws put into place to reverse global warming, just so the greedy citizens can line their pockets with more money, we are at spitting distance to the point of no return. Stop deluding yourself. Your thinking is part of the problem!
3
Not only are we not prepared, we are not preparing; moreover, our "leaders" (in the United States) deny that there is a problem and are eliminating efforts to slow down the warming. The idiocy of this greed-induced denial is beyond description...
56
At this point, it’s too late to stop a global disaster. Even if we stopped burning fossil fuels today, there is so much CO2 in the atmosphere that further warming is inevitable. The world as we know it is going to be a very different and hostile place within our lifetimes. In a matter of decades, coastal cities will become uninhabitable, there will be major food and water shortages, tropical diseases will become global problems and wars will be fought as nations scramble to survive. As Th Times pointed out in Sunday’s magazine section, the world came close to agreeing on a coordinated plan to reduce the inevitable rise of 2 degrees but ultimately failed to complete an agreement. Thirty + years later and we’re pumping out more CO2 every day. The end of civilization as we know it is in sight and it’s too late to stop it. Even though Trump is making things worse, he can’t be blamed for the failure to deal with the problem 30 years ago. Enjoy this golden era while you can, knowing it’s going to end all too soon.
54
I'm not a scientist. Fooling me with data and stats would be no great chore. But I'm going with the odds and some common sense. The overwhelming majority of people who are scientists seem to be saying that humans are contributing to global warming. And if they don't have it exactly right, there is little downside to reducing pollution and a huge upside for public health and for the long term economic outlook. Maybe 30 years ago when we should have acted, we had limited choices. With the knowledge and technology we have today in the field of renewables, it's sheer stupidity for us not to lead the world in reducing carbon in the atmosphere.
86
As a young military adviser in Vietnam, I can remember the Vietnamese soldiers I was with catching water rats in the rice paddies and tying then in pairs over the ends of their rifle barrels as we marched, to keep them alive and fresh until suppertime. I was particularly conscious of how the rats, hanging by their hind legs, constantly fought each other as if blaming the other rats. I am reminded of this as we humans turn on each other, blaming the "others" for their problems.
Global warming and the resultant climate change are already over stressing agriculture in many parts of the world, driving mass migration. We are responding much like the water rats and becoming hostile to our fellow human beings as we scramble to protect ourselves. We are electing self-serving politicians who fan our fears, rather than working together to solve our problems. We are ignoring things like compassion, reason, and intelligence which could help us share resources and overcome obstacles --- and we are becoming water rats.
127
Wilding weather is a reality of our time and civilization's dependence on fossil fuels is also a reality. Another reality, not often reported, is the continued use of fossil fuels increases the risk that global warming will eventually thaw the Arctic permafrost and release the billions of tons of greenhouse gasses stored there. Triggering this big thaw will release enormous quantities of greenhouse gases that it will become self-accelerating leading to warming levels that will not sustain human life.
So, our species is in a race to slow our use of fossil fuels before the runaway global warming trigger is pulled.
Scientist James Powell, his son Jesse, and I have accepted the human behavioral preference for the benefits of fossil fuel combustion, which created modern life by exploring concepts for technologies that could replace fossil fuels and win the global market's preference for fossil fuel technologies, in "Silent Earth, Will Humans Give Up Fossil Fuel?"
Central to the solution is very low-cost electricity. We believe that cheap electricity can be captured in space and beamed to Earth with Maglev launch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0-npDJlxCA
With cheap electricity, we can capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, at scale, and bury it and we can synthesize jet fuel from air and water so we can keep flying.
The Powell's and I, also think we should use ocean thermal energy technology to desalinate billions of gallons of water for agriculture.
8
the focus of Climate Change Deniers on this topic, to state it simply, is to stay ignorant of their own footprints of this accelerated warming.
4
I call myself a climate change expert even though I don’t work in the field. I’ve been studying the issue intensely since 2009, have communicated with several climate scientists, and just completed a 2nd class on the topic.
We’re like deer in the headlights now, but if you would like to act instead of being paralyzed by fear, among and perhaps the two most effective actions an individual can take is to drive a more fuel efficient vehicle, and stop eating red meat.
That describes personal habits, and to be effective on a larger scale please work to get a carbon tax passed (fee and dividend).
Thank you
13
FAST replacement of fossil fuels will soon be possible. Water, fresh or salt, will easily and inexpensively substitute for gas, diesel or jet fuel. Hard to believe, demonstrable, new technology has made it possible to convert any combustion engine to run on water. Cars, trucks, boats, ships, aircraft and power plants can rapid substitute water for fossil fuels.
Other new technology can extract the water from the air, even in regions of low humidity. This can end the need to refuel. See MOVING BEYOND OIL at aesopinstitute.org to learn more.
Abrupt Global Warming requires new science to give humanity a fighting chance for survival. However, the handful of bold new inventions that can truly help are dismissed as impossible. Climate change has made that sad reality unacceptably dangerous.
Vicious anonymous Troll attacks discourage urgently needed support with rants featuring lies and distortions.
Capital in the wings can dramatically impact the climate problem worldwide - by investment in little known technical progress. Surprising breakthroughs will change the world even faster than Apple did with hand-held devices.
Bold individuals are needed to support surprising new approaches to seemingly intractable problems. At present, the inventors and small firms doing this urgent work lack sorely needed support. Assistance will make an enormous difference and may save a great many lives.
6
Anyone else find it a little annoying that many folks can’t distinguish between putting the entire planet at risk, from merely risking our current tech and agriculture based civilization? The latter is bad enough without overstating the case- this is counterproductive. In 50 million years, Antarctica will be a rainforest teeming with life irrespective of our actions today. We probably won’t be around. Risking immense human suffering in the next few hundred years is more than enough reason to act...
12
With this catastophe facing the world, the writer advises reducing food waste and painting roofs white. Commenter MKKW wants to demonstrate against Donald Trump. Instead, how about undertaking a worldwide Manhattan Project to open thousands and thousands of late generation nuclear plants within 5 years across the globe. That'll do it.
2
@john Then we can all be poisoned instead if baked? Nuclear is way too unforgiving of human mistakes.
3
I try so hard, I recycle, I use reusable grocery bags everywhere, I conserve water at home, I walk when I can instead of driving, I avoid single use items such as cutlery, cups, plates, etc, I am teaching my children to conserve and yet the minute I walk out my door it is a totally different story. NOBODY cares except when it affects them directly. All the local grocery stores in my town use plastic bags, if you can't even get people to use reusable grocery bags how in the world are we going to change our consumer planet. My favorite line from the movie Avatar, "let's see if we can cure your insanity."
20
Stay calm and relax. The next Ice Age is coming right on schedule.
1
@Nreb - in 10,000 years. You best worry about the next 200. It is all about rate of change and we are putting our wonderful agrotech society at great risk with our current actions. Is the planet at risk? No, I don’t believe so, but personally risking society is bad enough to demand action.
2
A good time to give up your gas car and put solar panels on your home. Also turn off all the street lights. And quit eating meat. That should take care of a big part of the problem. And don't fly when you can work remote. As a matter of fact, medical cost and expensive remedies' costs will trend downward.
3
It has been hotter in the Puget Sound region of Western Washington than it has been in the a Great Lakes this summer. All my Seattle area relatives have parched yellow grass, and everyone is worried about fires again this summer.
House insurance rates already are exorbitant in the far West states because of earhpthauake risk. Now it looks like increasingly massive fires will be a routine problem in the summers, too. And once an area has lost trees to fires, there is nothing to hold the soil when heavy rains come, which means landslides are more severe.
We have decided not to relocate back to the West Coast, where property costs 4 to 5 times as much per square foot, traffic is u bearable and the property risks are growing. The West Coast is under too much strain. The quality of life is much higher in the best communities of the Great Lakes.
10
March on Washington to prevent Trump from changing the car emission standards. Other Trump related anti-climate change policies - tariffs on solar panels, coal policy, methane flares from gas wells, fracking, fossil fuel drilling leases on public lands. challenges to park land policy, subsidies to oil and gas companies, tax policies, Paris accord and TPP cancelled, endangered species act, offshore drilling and Alaska wildlife refuge drilling, right to sue companies that pollute, policies around plastics and testing, clean air policies, water policies, Great Lakes policies, federal funding of research, cutting NASA global warming tracking satellites and related research and the list goes on.
23
Headline: "4th Hottest Year EVER!"
5th Paragraph of the article: "...since modern record-keeping began have occurred since 2001"
And the NYT wonders why there are people who don't believe climate change is real. Please stop the sensational headlines.
4
@Tony I think you misread that sentence. Modern record-keeping did not start in 2001. 17 of the 18 hottest years have been since 2001. Records have been kept for something like 150 years.
13
@Tony - levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are the highest in nearly a million years. How do we know this? Analysis of gas bubbles trapped in ice from multiple locations. Global temperatures and CO2 correlate and again there are multiple techniques that support this. There is a reason that scientists are nearly unanimous on the risk we are taking with our civilization. It is because they are better informed that the general public....
9
Try actually reading the article correctly or just go outside — in summer — pretty obvious what 99% are saying is true. The other option is fall in with GOP (paid off by oil companies) and say they ‘are not scientist’ or better yet, Trump who says the whole thing is Chinese Hoax. Both equally untrue and folder for the dumb
6
Please. Hottest year EVER? Try in the last 150 years, since that that is when record keeping began. On a planet that is 6 million+ years old, and has seen wild temperature swings including ice ages and hot periods, looking at a single 150y period and trying to conclude anything is like reading one page of a 800 page book and then writing a synopsis of the entire tome.
5
So we are rapidly driving the climate to a state that human civilization has never had to cope with. And your response is to say don’t worry, because those conditions often prevailed back before humans existed. Ostrich, meet sand.
The history of climate variability over four billion years should concern you more, not less, precisely because it shows there is plenty of scope to drive our climate into a very different state.
24
@DanielMarcMD - actually the earth is 4.5 Billion years old. In the big picture, nothing we are doing will affect the planets long term ability to support life. But that is measured in geological time. It is also true that 99.9% of all species to have ever lived are extinct. At the rate we are changing the climate we put our species at risk, as well as many others. At a minimum we are risking vast amounts of human suffering- is that not bad enough??
12
@DanielMarcMD I did not live 150 years ago and and won't live that long to know whether to believe you or not but I do care about the next 40 years I am likely to stay alive if I am not dead by climate-induced fire, drought, floods, wars and what have you. Understood with my simple logic?
7
It’s sad, humans are eating their host, planet earth- to their own detriment, like so many parallel things in nature.
6
Where, oh where is James Inhofe? Have you gone away? Please Senator, we need you. We are desperate for more senate snowballs. You are needed now more than ever!
1
So happy I don’t have kids or grandkids. I’m genuinely not happy when folks tell me they’re having a new baby or grand. Who would bring a child into a world where Ohio will look like Arizona soon enough and most of the wildlife is gone & there’s not enough food or water? Birth control, people!
18
@Commenter My sister is about to have Baby #4 and I am having a hard time pretending this is a good thing. There, I said !
7
With all the evedence staring us in the face How can so many elected officials denying this. Is it really about the money that comes from Oil,gas and Fossil fuel donators? When some future generations look back and see the what remains of the earth they will know greed,and Money it waht did this. We all are to blame. we buit things that people love and runs on Power. Are any of us willing to cut back? Man has created a situation that is shrinking the Earth we all learned about in text books. I dont believe we can change course. For all the liitle things each of us can do. Man is building Cities were there was once nothing today skyscrapers. Jets flying in and out of New destinations. So you change to solar in your home these expanstions that man is doing offsets that to miniscule.
Man has been out smarted but his brain and greed.
2
Facts don’t matter. Trump supporters don’t believe in science. And they are loud, aggressive and have the backing of the trillion dollar fossil fuel industry.
12
I'm a Trump supporter except for this. I hate Scott Pruitt and people who believe that climate scientists are lying--why would they lie?!? There are liberal conspiracies that make sense but this one makes no sense--all the scientists are saying is that mankind is polluting the air and dumping too many chemicals because of our billions of factories and cars. Everybody knows the greenhouse effect, who hasn't expirienced that? So I think what we expirience on the ground the same goes for up in the atmosphere.
3
@F1Trump
A Trump supporter except for this!??? Except he and his cronies are burning up the planet to wring one last dime out of a dying industry!!
For crying out loud!! What's it going to take for you people?? You can't continue to support this immoral administration. Where is your soul?? Your brain? The planet is where we live. You're going to suffer the affects of climate change in Ohio, too, you know?
15
Hope you are just trying to reel in some trump supporters, but the very people who are climate deniers are the same who think up all the other conspiracy theories about liberals.
2
@F1Trump Let me guess. You once though organic food was silly and dishonest, but now you are buying it! Live and learn. Good job. Now vote the irrational out.
All so very true but it shows scientific ignorance to attem[pt to explain temperature as a percentage! Can't be done meaningfully!!
MDS, Ph.D. Meteorology
Here's to the climate change deniers who have preferred wishful thinking to scientific method --- and have convinced a sitting President and the leadership of the GOP that the moon is made of blue cheese. It's just another example of the triumph of ideology over facts. It's time to wake up and realize that what you don't want to know can really hurt you, as well as the rest of us.
10
Unfortunately, thousands of years ago, when we entered fixed societies, we created belief systems that cause us to trick the human mind into "believing" that many things are more important than our own survival. This is why humans fly planes into World Trade Centers and deny our contribution to climate change - if not climate change itself. Only after we have programmed the human abstract thought process in a computer will we have sufficient proof of how we trick the mind about exactly what is supposed to survive, will be begin to stop doing it. As it now stands, it's a race among blowing ourselves up, burning ourselves up, or coming to our senses.
See: RevolutionOfReason.com
4
I weep for my grandchild.
11
How anyone can deny climate change as they witness it is beyond belief. I guess there are those who think they will be magically wisked away as everyone else suffers. They call this planet "mother" but they do nothing to help "her".
Well we certainly need "mother" but she doesn't need us. And once we're gone she'll have whatever time it takes to recover.
12
There are those who either don't understand what they're talking about, slavishly repeat what they're told by right-wing denier types, or actively lie and try to confuse.
Here's a link to simple graphs that show realities.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-chan...
Note the short-term spike in temps around 1938 (which, by the way, are being cited as gospel disproof by the same people who then tell you that the data sets are useless); note that none of those temps come up to later highs, despite the braying claim that they do; note the trend--I repeat, the trend--after about 1990.
And note that the denier types ALWAYS pump out a cloud of squid ink, to try and hide what's pretty simple in terms of results.
1
In a completely predictable turn of events, two degrees Celsius sounds a lot less significant when you’re used to hearing the temperature in Fahrenheit. Thank God for those giant ice cubes breaking off into the arctic, otherwise the ocean might really be in trouble.
I had a chat with an older friend about sea temperatures off the Massachusetts and Rhode Island coast, and he was shocked at the difference. The normal sea temperature is somewhere around 10-15 degrees warmer on average than it was when he was young, off both Boston and New Bedford.
This is not a short-term problem. It has been growing and is now noticeable. You could even say there is no new normal, because the normal is moving up ... and up ... and UP!
Here's one of the best on the subject:
Stefan Rahmstorf: "There is no new normal as we are in the midst of ongoing climate change. Things will keep changing until we reach zero emissions. Then a new, hotter “normal” climate will eventually become established." response to:
Esko Pettay Retweeted Stefan Rahmstorf "Never liked this "new normal" phrase. As long as the average keeps moving like this there's no new normal (unless normal means more extreme year after year)"
Here's more, based on the best science available: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2018/08/are-the-heatwaves-...
"The bottom line is whether we now are observing the first glimpse of a new normal, or if the world will return to its old state. ... the question should be whether the recent heatwave is a signs of a new type of weather patterns we can expect for the future. I think the answer to this question is “yes”, based on current information and knowledge."
https://twitter.com/EPettay/status/1024189803401801728
4
We are like the frog in the proverbial pot of water put on to boil. We have been oblivious to the gradual warming around us, not perceiving the growing danger, and now it may be too late to escape. Although immediate, extreme and united action (a global environmental Marshall Plan) by the countries of the world might stave off catastrophe for humans and other mammals, the fractious human race is so busy squabbling among themselves that there is little doubt of our future doom. Meanwhile, the man in the Oval Office, who is supposed to be the leader of a superpower, plays golf and counts his riches.
12
Solutions also lie in decentralization, which is why we never hear about them. Roof top solar feeding back into the grid. Local, regenerative agriculture, which captures CO2 in the soil. And growing locally eliminates the transportation of agricultural products, which is also fresher and healthier. I live in New Mexico and understand the state was not really touched by the Great Depression. Why? The people were self sufficient, already growing most of that they ate. Bringing life back to a local level would also bring money back to the people. In some ways, it seems to me, back is the way forward.
12
@Bette Andresen
I strongly agree that decentralization would be beneficial.
Another characteristic of people living in New Mexico before the American takeover in 1846 was sharing of resources as in community grazing areas and annual participation in clearing acequias -- water ditches -- to irrigate farm fields and orchards. I think of this as I consider that each of the 53 houses in my small neighbourhood probably contains a washing machine and/or dryer (a dryer in New Mexico?), a lawn mower, one or more cars in driveways sitting unused, and so on.
Our American myth of "rugged individualism" and our insatiable material consumerism are not beneficial.
3
@Mary Yes!! My dear friend, Cipriano Vigil, the musician, tells of his time growing up in this incredible state! Beautiful! The common lands, shared, and the acequias. His goal in life, and with his music, is to keep these incredible traditions alive. I dry my clothes on a clothesline, and love it. They smell so good. In the winter I have a passive solar porch and dry clothes on a line there. The acequia runs behind my house, and I love the sound of the ditch running as I go to sleep on a summer night. And we still have crickets with their summer music. I love the simplicity of my life. Love my neighbors. I feel over the moon fortunate. We've lost so much in our modern, consumer driven world, and we are destroying what is of real value.
This has been in our face for a long time. We,as humans, have chosen to ignore the consequences. Focused on the short term (greed and it's consequences) and ignoring the long term ( tremendous disruption of the natural order.)
I have little faith in humanity as a whole, when faced with a choice we choose our own self interest. It will be our downfall and it already is.
The 6th extinction will come and we can slow it down but we can not stop it at this point.
Slowing it down is worth the effort for a chance for future generations.
Lower your carbon footprint. Stop using plastic straws, get a electric hybrid, consume less etc. and hope that we can have a little more time. We are all in this together whether we like it or not.
9
We humans have a fatal flaw in our evolution. Part of our brains has evolved to be able to create "Wrath of God" technology. That part of our brains that controls emotional intelligence has not kept pace. We are tribal, irrational, superstitious (what is religious belief, after all, but commonly-held superstition?) and fearful.
In a few hundred or a few thousand years (the timeline is irrelevant in cosmic history), humans will cease to exist...but the cosmic experiment will proceed. Hundreds of millions of years are but the blink of an eye...
10
Patriachy has destroyed our beautiful planet. Our survival lays in the hands of women pushing back.
3
@banba
Too late, but yes, you are correct.
Women would have slowed the inevitable, likely significantly, but at this late point in time, nothing short of a massive extinction event, such as the elimination of fully one third to half of the human population can start the rejuvenation of the planet.
Perhaps its begun; climate change may be natures way of purging itself of the excess load.
Nothing any of us can do now, except move to higher ground, defensible higher ground.
2
Plant more trees. Everywhere. Right now, today. The lungs of our planet, the Amazon, has cancer.
4
Can you somehow get this all on Fox and Friends so Trump will see it and maybe start taking it somewhat seriously? So sad.
2
some counter facts mostly from NOAA climate at a glance:
1) Yes, the may-jul period in the contiguous US had the highest avg temps. But in 2nd and 3rd place are 1934 and 1936.
2) If you look at temp maxes -- the hottest may-jul was 1934 for the contig US. In fact 5 of 9 hottest may - jul max temps were in the 1930s.
3) April of this year was 18th coolest on record for contig US. Did you read about that?
4) For jan-april it was the # 84 warmest (out of 124) on your hit list for contig US with temps just about avg.
5) I've just looked through the contig US by state and for only 2 states was 2018 the hottest avg temp on record. It was above avg for all, but for some states the hottest may-jul was 100 years ago, or in the 30's or the 60's. But all states show a lot of variability -- with a range of about 8-10 F.
6) This articles gives the impression there has been a steady march upward in temps for the US. NOT TRUE. It varies a great from year to year. 2018 was warm for these 3 months -- but not some dot on an ever increasing map of temps.
7) The US avg temp for jul is 67 F. Not scorching.
8) The sea level has been rising steadily for -- centuries. A slight increase in rate -- if true -- is hardly cause for alarm.
9) The global temp record is not worth the paper it's printed on. It's based on estimates. Not rigorous measurement.
10) The Times should quit trying to fit every weather event into its warming narrative.
6
@Ralphie
Of course you have heard of Solar Minimums and Maximums, we are now in a minimum and there is all this speil about us entering a grand Solar Minimum.
So bear that fact in mind, we have been entering a Solar minimum for the last two Solar Cycle.
WE had a Solar Maximum from early 20th century up to approx 1980's
The Solar cycles are usually approx 60 years in duration.
So as you can see there is a major discrepancy, we should be far far colder than during the Solar Maximum even if it was masked somewhat by the high pollution levels and smog mid 20th Century.
So an explanation for this discrepancy would be appreciated.
Allso being an avid reader I never did read about commercial Tourist cruises let alone commercial shipping through the Arctic during the 20th Century - it would be great if you could link to evidence of that
1
@Abel Adamski Abel -- according to NASA the solar cycle is every 11 years or so. The range in variation is small.
If we had a solar max from early 20th to 1980, of interest, in the US avg temps showed a significant decline.
But yes, over the grand scheme there should be a correlation between surface temps and solar output. Wow. And I thought only CO2 counted. Then there are other things going on? Like el nino and la nina. Might there be other things as well?
1
I see you're still pulling the tricks, Ralphie: confuse spot temps with averages, ignore trends, misrepresent how the data got collected, lie when you feel the need--and never, ever, give a specific reference that would allow anybody to track down exactly how you phonied up what you pretend to have read.
Way this works, dude, give author, title, publisher's info, so anybody can backcheck. For example, I guarantee that generally Ralphie isn't citing NOAA at all--he's citng some denier website. Where he is citing NOAA, he just cherry-picks the number he wants, and pretends the rest doesn't exist.
It's nonsense, dude. Only question is why you throw it out there.
Hey, Ralphie: do the one about the LIA. I love that one, a true Komedy Klassic.
1
Trump makes himself and his administration more and more irrelevant every day.
start by turning off your a/c. i didn't have it put into my home, and as miserable as i am i'm not complaining. many, many people don't have it. if you are lucky enough to have a washing machine and dryer, use them when there are full loads, and only late at night. leave the stuff hanging to dry and then you'll only fluff for a few minutes in the dryer. cook batches of the food you're lucky to have all at once, also late at night, portion it up and freeze it. don't cut/have the lawn cut more than every 2 weeks or so. don't take the car out to go get 1 thing at the store - that's bad for the car and stupid on you: plan.
4
Linh, admirable, but many of us have health and aging issues, and we must have AC. I paid my dues for many years, living in VERY HOT apartments. The solution is finding more efficient appliance designs and energy sources; but this won't happen before we can get the current administration out.
Is this article a joke? The future we have bought is not about heatstroke....its about drowning, for most people and for sure new yorkers.
@Rens
The drowning comes later, along with the starving.
Before that we face biological issues relating to humans and most mammals.
Namely cooking internally
Wet bulb 36C a fit male caucasian in the prime of life will survive approx 6 hours, too close to that there is permanent organ and neurological damage.
Elderly, unfit, pregnant, children, obese, sick - won't last as long
Re climate warming, climate change, the hottest years the world has seen since recorded time. Abnormal heat, parched earth and fires abound on our planet today. Water is precious.
BODIES OF WATER
Aeons past
before the plates
became continents
when this Earth
was young
bodies of water
encircled
Pangaea.
Now our
blue planet
is a dying zone
a waking
nightmare
pillaged and
plundered,
its watery
places ravaged
by mankind.
Detritus dumped
debris dreck
bottles jars
and enough
plastic to gyre and
gimble and
strangle the
Pacific wabe.
Bizarre fish
Asian snakehead carps
sea lamprey eels
with round
sucking mouths
and razor sharp
teeth encroach
in the freshwater
Great Lakes and
mghty Mississippi.
Lionfish
from the Indian
and South
Pacific oceans
loosed from
American aquaria
gauzily dressed
to kill in
fetching saris
swirl en masse
in the Caribbean Sea.
Pythons, boas,
gators lurk in the
swampy sawgrass
of the Everglades,
eyes aslit for innocent
passers-by to squeeze,
choke and swallow.
The five continents
that were once one
Pangaea, connected
jigsaw puzzle pieces
like the carapace on
a Hawksbill's shell
are now apart
and prisoned by
waste waters.
Billions of people
dying for a sip of
their birthright
of potable water.
Global warming
climate change
inconvenient truths
of our lives on earth,
truth denied by
some who buy
and chugalug
clean birthright water
in billions of little
plastic bottles
that will remain
on Earth
long after
we've gone.
3
This is reality yet the men who are elected, or in other less
democratic ways achieve power, lead the world which in fact belongs to all who are born in a way which benefits the physically strong. We might as well live in air conditioned caves
It isn't as though the world's citizenry lets them so much as it is these men control through the use of force thanks to laws which are purposely crafted to permit this reign.
I am an old man and will not suffer the worst effects of this change, but my kids and theirs will.
There is however a step we in the United States can do and that is to vote the knuckle dragging leaders presently in office out. It is a small but important step and one which may be among the last civilized people can take.
Vote the rulers out in November as though the lives of your children and grandchildren depend on it, because it does.
Vote November 6, 2018
3
I love when people say this is the greatest country in the world.
"We saved the world twice, we gave our lives in Europe and in the Pacific"
And this country turned our back on climate change.
Sorry Donald its not a hoax that the Chinese are behind.
Al Gore where are you now.......
4
Sadly , too little too late ; the hot temps will accelerate even more now that our glorious leader has not only taken the U.S. out of the Paris accord but also ensured the EPA does not have much of a say . The energy companies got all they wanted ; no regulation for their emissions and pollutants . The Earth is a living organism that coexists with every living thing and we have finally managed to destroy the whole . It is an environmental plague we have created and we are the pests that have infected it . Our destiny is a die-off .
4
We are like crack addicts who know our habits are killing us, but yet we are unable or wunwilling to do anything about it. Our addiction to fossil fuels inevitably will turn this planet into a wasteland, uninhabitable for our children and grandchildren. The usual denials and argument against making changes is that they will cost too much money and it will kill jobs. Maybe. (Although there wil be huge benefits of a shift to a green economy.) But the economic losses resulting from climate change are already clear -- droughts, firestorms, floods, rising sea levels, plagues, pestilence, etc.. The human toll -- mass migration of starving, thirsty, desperate people is only just starting to become evident. Having a job, a car, and all the money in the world won't make a difference if we don't make some radical changes in our lifestyles before it's too late. And it may already ne too late. So sad . .. and so very scary.
3
"2018 Is Shaping Up to Be the Fourth-Hottest Year Ever"
Ever? Well — hardly ever!
1
@polymath
As far as Human Civilization is concerned, that really is all that matters to us isn't it
Disclaimer :I am not a global warming denier. Anytime I read journalistic coverage on my area of expertise (medicine) I feel surprised at how much the focus is on sensationalism without much attempt at understanding the nuances. Most of the times the reporting lacks scientific merit. This has made me skeptical about taking their word about any science related matter without a grain of salt. Would just like to encourage people to analyze the scientific data beyond what this paper reports.
4
@Surabhi
So do some research, it actually is far later than we had hoped and the consequences rather than being sensationalized have been too conservative. Do your homework.
We have far less time than we like to think and history shows that humans react badly to very bad situations when they believe they have been misled
2
look over the rest of the paper...fury and rancor, accusation, insinuation, no matter the matter, its all just temper and none of it matters, none of it, if the planet dies.
the alarm has been sounded and some are diligent in efforts to rescue but the lack of real widespread interest in reversing the decline may not be so much disinterest as desperation, we know we've made a mess, a terrible mess, so bad that repression offers the only escape and, so, we strut and fret, insult and defame, creating a sense of urgency, a resistance if you will, to anything, but actually, deep down, we've given up.
2
We don’t seem to be stopping this. I’m glad I don’t have kids to worry about, although I worry about yours. All you folks who do have kids or grand-kids, I don’t know how you live with yourselves.
4
There is one and only one hope for our planet, other then a devastating plague wiping out 90% of humans.
It’s Nuclear fusion, which, according to MIT scientists is on brink of being realised.
(Nuclear fusion is different from nuclear fission, you know )
Cheer up, the really smart physicists are on it.
@New WorldThgat is the still radiation intense Tokomak model.
There bis also the Hydrogen /Boron model that does not use radioactive fuel, has no radioactive byproducts and the only radiation given off is electrons which a harvested to provide the electricity, as it is not a thermal source it does not drive turbines and as it has to be initiated there is no risk at all of a runaway reaction. so very safe.
A Company (spin off from the University of NSW in Aust) is working on prototypes and the engineering right now. Works in the lab, knowing how long these things take expect 20 years and the big bulky Tokomak ones will not be much sooner in commercial use
Why why! Why always show the poorest image of India even for a temperature related article! When a hot day is shown in other countries it is a fountain, in India its people on the street! I am sure Indians have better ways to beat the heat.
1
Why Don’t We Use What We Know?
Have you ever marveled at the intelligence of a one-year old child? If so, you know that in their short lives they have learned a huge amount. They recognize the adults who know what they are talking about and who have their best interests at heart. As great explorers, they quickly learn to believe the one who tells them “hot, hot” as they reach for the stovetop or to open their hands before slamming a drawer or to walk backwards down the stairs while hanging onto the railing instead of launching themselves wildly out into space. In short, they are discovering what it takes to survive.
The question is: Are the rest of us?
It is totally irresponsible not to believe the evidence we see and feel. We see that spring comes earlier to our own back yards; planting seasons are shifting. We feel the temperature rising. Disasters from fires to hurricanes to rising seas and melting glaciers are occurring and having consequences, and air pollution be it from auto or industry emissions or the personal choices we make (e.g. smoking) added to those fires is making breathing more difficult for all of us, especially our children.
Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.The question is: Are we the adults our children and grandchildren can trust?
“Hot! Hot!”
5
Ten years ago it was already too late to avoid disaster, for 12 reasons. The effects are now more obvious to non-scientists.
1. Biggest greenhouse gas is water vapor. As termps rise, air gains more water vapor! Bad feedback loop (BFL).
2. A big greenhouse gas is methane. As ocean temps rise, solid methane in polar seafloor melts, releases more methane. BFL
3. Permaforst has huge amounts of organic carbon. As temps rise, permafrost releases more CO2, thus more warming. BFL
4. As icecaps melt, they reflect less sunlight back to space. BFL
5. Arctic warming --> more vegetation --> reflects less sunlight back to space. BFL
6. China puts a new coal powerplant online every few weeks; LOTS of new CO2.
7. Chinese & other coal plants release sulfate aerosols, which mask global warming for a few years. CO2 lasts DECADES. As the aerosols decline, CO2 effect is unmasked.
8. Methane from fracking & other fossil fuel extraction is HUGE, will continue.
9. Soot from vehicles, planes, forest/wood/coal burning falls onto polar snow and ice, which then absorbs more heat from the sun.
10. Hot, dry air boosts forest fires, releasing more CO2 and soot. BFL
11. Sea rise is increased by sea warming --> larger volume; sea levels rise even more.
12. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation masks global warming for about 25 out of every 50 years. We are now emerging from a cooling cycle, which has masked long-term warming!
Sorry for all this bad news -- please don't blame the messenger.
5
I have a crazy idea to raise global awareness and the impulse to action. What about a climate change dance video contest? These dance videos can go viral very quickly. And getting people up off the couch is the first step towards getting them to take action of some kind.
As Funkadelic said, free your mind and your [behind] will follow. But the opposite works too. In fact the two kinda go together!
1
This article is cherry picking or reporting inaccurate information:
1) May through July the hottest ever for the contig US -- true but the 2nd and 3rd hottest -- 1934 & 36. In fact 5 of the hottest 24 may - jul's in the 30's.
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/national/time-series/110/tavg/3/7/1895-201...
2) For max temps -- the hottest year ever was 1934 for may-jul. 5 of the top 9 hottest max years were in the 30's.
3) Last April -- 18th coolest on record. the Jan-Apr temp -- just above avg with just about 40 years warmer.
4) Sea level has been rising for centuries. A slight change in rate over 25 years -- hardly anything to get excited about, if accurate.
5) The US emission levels have fallen since 2007 and have been flat with 1990. Almost all of the additional emissions over the 1990 baseline are due to ROW -- not the US.
6) The Paris Accord was a joke. The US allowed emerging economies to keep emitting until some time in the future when they might slow down. And no one is adhering to their goals. It was a photo op.
7) The global temp data set is a joke. Period. It is based on estimates and has many other problems. Anyone who says otherwise is misrepresenting the facts.
8) More wildfires --- because of more people, poor forest mgmt. We've had bigger fires in the US and Canada in the 19th century that killed more people (see Peshtigo fire).
I could go on.
@Ralphie.
Solar maximums and minimums, so how come in a solar minimum we are warmer than during a solar maximum.
Could you please provide links to the commercial shipping and tourism cruise liners traversing the Arctic at that time in the 20th Century, I can't seem to find any reference to them
@Ralphie
I disagree with your interpretations of the data you cited. The temperature maximums you cited are records of the weather. Climate is a factor in the weather, but the two are not the same.
A better interpretation would take into account long-term trends in temperature. Those trends indicate rising temperatures since the dawn of the Idustrial Revolution.
@Ralphie
Ralphie, either your ability to reason, or your ethics, are severely compromised. Maybe it's the heat.
Breakthrough Heat Pumps have been invented that need no refrigerant.
They will have extremely high efficiency - a Coefficient of Performance (COP) of 10. Twice that of existing units. The cost will be modest.
Although the science behind them has been proven, they need to be prototyped. See CHEAP GREEN A/C at aesopinstitute.org
Revolutionary science is viciously attacked by Trolls to deter urgently need support.
The technology will be licensed worldwide.
Moving this into the market is urgent.
Bold souls can make a real difference just now.
1
Republicans should have their air-conditioning rationed until they get real again.
3
"God is working his purpose out as year succeeds to year; time is drawing nearer." What we're witnessing is prophecy in action....
@Happyfeet
Revelations 11:18.
Jesus told us God cares about his creation, even the sparrow, and in the reference I gave God promises to destroy those that destroy the Earth a clear statement we can and do, and that includes those that facilitate and turn a blind eye, being "Saved" is not an excuse, that just wipes the slate clean up to that time and you start again from there knowing what is right and not
It must being doing wonders for Oklahoma. When Senator Inhofe asks for relief, we should just say no.
6
Maybe then the People of Oklahoma will realize they elected the wrong guy.
1
At the time of writing there have only been 185 comments on this story. Are we so inured to the seeming inevitability of worldwide devastation? Or has our attention been lured elsewhere by the puppet show of political theatre that will mean nothing in 50 years whilst our current inaction seals the fate of billions yet unborn?
4
This terrifying reality should be on the cover of all newspapers everyday. There is no bigger story. Please.
3
The equation is becoming pretty simple and pretty stark.
If the earth can kill enough of us, fast enough, emissions will be greatly reduced and we might survive. Civilization will likely be gone but the species may not go extinct.
If the earth can't kill enough of us, fast enough, our own stupidity will destroy us and lead to our extinction.
4
Dear Climate Change people - quit making comments on the internet and act like you believe a word you are saying.
Bill Gates flies around in a private jet telling school kids to turn the heat down and wear a hoody indoors - then he jets back to his 24-bathroom mansion for two people. Al Gore flies around warning about global warming when he could just Skype in his speech and save the carbon emissions.
I have not bought a gallon of gas in ten years now and have not been on a plane since 1991. I do not even believe in global warming:)
But everyone else just hops back into their SUV's to go to the store for a gallon of milk when a bike would be better for their health and the health of the planet.
So, I challenge ALL of you global warming types to get serious about your own carbon footprint and quit waiting for someone else to solve the problem. But don't wait for Gates or Gore to do something because they want the "deplorables" to conserve so they can waste resources on private indoor pools that are heated year round for two people who don't even spend much time at home.
2
It’s been a heckuva party (for some of us) folks, but, sadly, the bill has come due.
Everyone is going to have to pay up. And by everyone, I mean all creatures on Earth, not just humans.
Maybe we’ll catch a break and a global pandemic will thin the global human population, slowing the acceleration towards catastrophe.
Whatever happens, you can be sure it’s going to be horrific and terribly painful beyond comprehension (mammary glands up, as they say).
By the time the gold record on Voyager is discovered, we’ll be a thin layer in the geologic record and life on the 3rd planet from the Sun will be...
On to the next one.
4
Hogwash. Read the article.
It’s the 4th hottest year! that means it’s getting COLDER!
The sea continues to rise! It’s 3 inches higher than it was 25 YEARS AGO!
But that statement is true even though the ocean has receded in the past year.
And here’s a news flash: A warmer Earth means more food for people to eat and less harsh climate with fewer people dying.
COME TO AVALON NJ. IT’S COOLER BY A MILE.
@Rocco
Duhh it is also always cooler during and just after a La Nina which we had last year, looks like an el Nino coming up
Funny to read about farmers worrying about this. In the US they voted for this. Now they’re worried? Give me a break. Where we you when all those deniers we’re voted into office?
5
@Doug K That is indeed cynical: vote against your own nature.
1
Nature always wins - More people --> more heat production
--> rising temperatures --> rising mortality rates --> lower population --> less heat production. (See Cromer comment)
3
Remember the ozone layer and acid rain? Problems caused by the human race. Why are so many unwilling to acknowledge global warming as yet another effect which has the potential/already visited devastation on this planet and its inhabitants?
3
This global warming business reminds me of the scary “coming ice age” in the 1970s. I had a very thoughtful science teacher then who laughed at that concept and warned us to be very wary of anyone who felt they could predict long-term climate trends.
1
@M "..But while it’s fair to say there were real questions about aerosol pollution in the 1970s, it’s simply not true that climate scientists are a bunch of know-nothings (or worse) who prophesied death by ice when the temperatures were dropping, then switched to death by fire when temperatures started rising. Regardless of what someone may remember hearing about at the time, global warming had been a topic of scientific concern for decades already"
https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/06/that-70s-myth-did-climate-scienc...
3
The politicians will pay lip service to Climate Change, say how horrible it is for us and for our planet, and then do everything they can to block any real legislation to change our polluting behavior. I just Red the masterful NT Times Magazine issue on how we were so close to turning back the clock on Climate Change in the 1980’s until the politicians and lobbyists pulled the plug. Hopefully, it’s not too late to avoid the worst of it, but, if history is any guide, we’ll blow it anyway.
1
@Glevine
The sad thing is that article did a Whitewash on the Fossil Fuel industry and their millions spent on the denial campaign and on the GOP who did a backflip when the Campaign Dollars started being on offer
3
As a member of the grassroots, nonpartisan Citizens' Climate Lobby (citizensclimatelobby.org) I urge those concerned to check our market based approach to mitigating climate change by putting a fee on all fossil fuels at the source of production and returning all proceeds equally to consumers. Such a plan, endorsed by both conservative and liberal economists, would spur sustainable energy (solar, wind, etc.) by leveling the playing field wihtout the government picking winners and losers. Currently, the US taxpayer gets the bill for all of the health and environmental costs of burning fossil fuels because the polluters don't pay the societal costs of these "externalities'. Obviously, fossil fuel companies would pass on their fee to the consumer by raising the price of using fossil fuels on which most of our current economy depends. But models have shown that the average US household would come out ahead (its share of the proceeds would more than cover those price increases). And a border tax adjustment on goods imported from countries without a price on carbon would spur other countries to charge their own price on carbon. The beauty of a carbon fee and dividend is that it will spur our transition to sustainable energy while offering customers many more choices than we have currently. A carbon fee and dividend passed by Congress would deliver that future to consumers much more quickly than current market trends. We have run out of time.
4
The 400 year half-life of carbon dioxide (CO2) in our atmosphere suggests the duration of our global warming disaster.
Even if the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and of the more damaging methane stopped increasing, surface temperatures would continue to rise for decades. And, these concentrations are clearly going to keep on increasing.
The rate at which we are releasing CO2 is increasing, and methane is being cooked out of formerly frozen soils.
Phytoplankton, grasses, crops and trees suck CO2 out of the atmosphere, producing sugars and releasing oxygen. But, ocean acidification is killing the phytoplankton, crops are failing, and grasses and trees are burning (adding more CO2 to our atmosphere). And, due to the heat, other long-established trees are dropping heavy limbs onto our power and communication lines.
Ice is good at reflecting sunlight back into space. But, our glaciers are melting, as are our polar ice caps (flooding our coasts). And, the heating of our polar caps is increasing the persistence of our hurricanes and typhoons.
We had better get busy mitigating the effects of the impending global warming catastrophes, some of which are already upon us. And, we had better begin right away.
55
@Joel A. Levitt
Seems unstoppable in our generation. So by all means reduce CO2 emissions, but more importantly, we had better learn to adapt.
NYTimes:
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU for keeping climate change front and center of the news!
There is no issue that should frighten people than the very FACT that global warming due to HUMAN ACTIVITIES is going to threaten the very SURVIVAL of our human species.
Trump and his idiot base will not be convinced no matter what we say, and sadly it is too late for us to educate these morons, who don’t accept SCIENTIFIC TRUTHS but yet are willing to spout off on their cellular phones. But for the 70% of the American populace that does NOT SUPPORT Trump, this issue should be front and center of any policy discussion moving forward. A litmus test for ALL politicians should be what they plan to do to help humanity combat climate change.
We start by changing our own lives, but that will not be enough without a responsible GOVERNMENT guiding our economy to a GREEN REVOLUTION.
Earth will go one with or without us. It has done so with various life forms time and time again. It’s time we stop with the fool’s statement of “saving our planet” start worrying about SAVING OUR SPECIES!
7
If we had rational leaders, they would realize that the only way to stop climate change making Earth uninhabitable is to stop using fossil fuels immediately and maximizing nuclear and alternative energy production.
Moreover, we would need to produce substantially more energy than we consume to suck out the Earth killing CO2 from the atmosphere for burial underground and for conversion to hydrocarbon based fuels that are still required to enable planes to fly long distances.
If anyone sees another solution, please let me know. Letting trees suck out the CO2 and refossilize it takes too long for mankind to be practical.
1
Folks: What the human species hasn't yet inculcated into its behavior and state of mind is one very simple fact. We live in a terrarium. It's a big one, but as big as it is it is still a closed loop system with all sorts of dynamic forces that continually strive for one thing, balance.
In our numbers and voracious "plague of locust" manner of living we have created an unstable situation that those dynamic forces are beginning to redress. Everything we do, everything we have ever done, comes back to us in one fashion or another.
It is too late to stop the redressing of the balance by those forces we have set in motion; but we must do our best to mitigate it by learning, as every child does, that our growth and development has its natural limits. Limits we have now reached.
We must learn to control ourselves, our numbers and our habits less we turn this planet, our one true Paradise, into a hell not only for our progeny but for most other life as well. One from which they cannot escape.
John~
American Net'Zen
6
There have been a few comments in this thread about Bret Stephens. To get an idea of just how bad Stephens' writing on climate change is, check out this article by David Roberts: https://www.vox.com/2017/5/1/15482698/new-york-times-bret-stephens
In case you don't read the full well-argued, well-documented article, here's a quote from near the end: "Stephens just doesn’t seem to have thought much about climate change. He’s enacting the rote conservative ritual of groping around for some reason, any reason, to a) justify inaction and b) blame liberals, in the process saying false things and making terrible arguments."
2
The only difference between us and the proverbial boiling frogs is the size of the pot. Theirs was a kitchen skillet and ours is the Earth.
Search for Guy McPherson videos for background info and instructionsn on how to proceed.
2
Don‘t stop to make clear how deadly wrong the current federal US climate policy is, and how much it affects us globally that one of the largest environmental polluter does nothing to protect the planet. And all that just to play a silly America First game in a world that is home of other nations and people as well, if you like it or not.
Trump and the GOP say that there is no such thing as global warming, right? I am surprised the Donald hasn't been Tweeting about this false news. Or do they really believe there is global warming and simply don't care as the sit in their air conditioned offices (adding to the problem) and with their wealth jet off to cooler climates whenever they desire?
When are we going to actually change how we live instead of talking about the urgent need to do it?
1
It has begun.
But we can still decide how it will end.
In a far future in a World finally beginning to recover from the ravages of Earth's 6th Major Extinction known as The Anthropocene Extinction and found to be the 2nd most destructive extinction after Permian Extinction wiped out 96% of all species of life...research confirmed Earth had lost 83% of all species since mankind's first cut is made as the last Ice Age released our species from its icy grip.
83% of all species.
This shattered World in fragile recovery is a pale ghost of what was and will never be again.
Our technology saved us from our man made end but the cost was so high, we may never recover and ask ourselves if we even should.
THEY knew what was happening, seen the figures and research confirmed what would Become unless things done, changes made...showed a willingness to act in concert, consensus and concern and unite all parties to save a mutually shared future for their children by their actions if taken NOW.
"Now" was in 1979 and could have succeeded if begun by 1989, still possible if a flurry of determined, concerted actions were taken in 2000 , even 2010!
But no.
In 2020 America officially left the Paris Accords but was already gone by 2017 when it said it was leaving.
The U.S adds more CO2 than ever before as other nation's will wanes as crops wilt in days growing hotter.
In 2035 Global panic as Ecosystems first falter before the horror of...
There is still time if we act NOW.
We Must!
2
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.
5
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.
3
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.
7
@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.
1
@NYHUGUENOT
Actually, though it may not be enough, most of the developed world is trying to get it right. Only the U.S. actively wallows in its ignorance. We are all on this planet together. Your attitude is both ignorant and counter to our own best interests. The rest of the world is not the problem, our top economic 1% are the ones redirecting the money into their own pockets --- just as Adam Smith warned against.
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.
3
@ 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 .
1
@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.
2
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!
3
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.
11
@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!
1
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!
11
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.
4
@CMD - please keep living frugally. That leaves more for the rest of us.
2
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.
3
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?
6
@LC87
Droughts happen in this area about once every 11 years. My data are based in real life experiences. If, you're wondering. The sun experiences severe magnetic storms once every eleven years. If, there is a link. I think its more in line with that of the sun's cycles.
@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.
3
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.
7
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”
9
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.
7
@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?")
2
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.
13
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
9
@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
1
"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.
14
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.
27
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.
18
«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
17
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.
2
@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.
1
@RjW @CMD As I noted above, the consensus does seem to be that we have indeed passed a tipping point and that our planet will be warmed far beyond the 2° limit concerning which so much talking - but so little effective action - has been done these last decades. From what I am given to understand as a layman - albeit with mathematical and scientific training - our destiny will hardly include a human population of 7½ thousand millions - if, indeed, as does not seem unlikely, extinction does not await our species in the near future. Perhaps a run of some 300000 years is as good as it gets for us, with our impressive intelligence, but our abysmal lack of wisdom....
Henri
1
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.
16
As serious as this is, there is recent research that suggests worse is yet to come with the crossing of tipping points
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/06/domino-effect-of-cli...?
The actual paper
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/08/07/1810141115
Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene
10
@Abel Adamski
Thanks!
We’re also due an ice age, which naturally occurs every 10,000 year’s. Maybe each will offset the other.
3
@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
10
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,
You need to account or the past 30,000 years without an ice age....
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.
14
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.
13
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.
14
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
27
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.
3
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.
7
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.
29
@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).
1
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.
78
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.
8
@Christian
It's not just red states. I live in NY and lease my solar panels. I get only 25% back on excess energy my panels produce.
1
@Christian
You really don't want a "home battery" in your house, trust me...
Expensive, short lived, and dangerous if IN the home.
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.
18
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.
52
@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.
5
@Robert F,
The closer we get to that point of no return the harder and more extreme the actions to reverse course.
Consider
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/06/domino-effect-of-cli...?
The rate at which tipping points are being reached we have less time than we think
Scientifics know.
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?
4
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.
10
@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
1
Thank you for quoting so many female climate scientists in your article!
18
@Shermie
They have a policy of using at least 50% female names in print and pictures.
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?
1
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.
21
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.
12
@Scott Werden
So far with little success.
Strangely our best hope is with perennials rather than the crops we now grow
3
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!"
11
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.
18
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.
21
@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.
8
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.
9
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?
12
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
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.
3
@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
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.
53
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
@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
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.
37
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.
37
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.
32
@Shanala
It depends on the time frame, several million years OK by you
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.
14
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?
7
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!!!
7
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.
14
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.
11
Unfortunately, I'm pretty convinced that as a result of greed, selfishness, myopia and shortsightedness, we humans will never adequately address this crisis.
16
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.
4
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.
7
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.
18
@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
2
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."
9
@MyThreeCents, As if signing pieces of papers or agreements fixes this problem.
2
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.
8
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.
7
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.
7
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.
12
@Steve, Like the Bush family purchasing ten or 100's of thousand of acres in South America for future water rights.
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...
20
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.
4
@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.
5
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.
7
@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.
3
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.
32
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.
1
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!
46
@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.
1
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.
1
@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.
2
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.
11
@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.
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.
1
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.
37
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.
17
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.
21
@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.
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.
2
@Patricia, This has also occurred here in the US at both Pilgrim Nuclear plant in Plymouth, MA and in Connecticut at Millstone. How was it remedied? The NRC increased the maximum water temperature allowed to cool the cores. Not too smart.
1
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.
1
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?
19
@LJB, If the Kardashians or whoever did not post it on Instragram or Twitter it, it's like a tree falling in the forest.
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.
47
@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.
@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.
2
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.
47
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.
19
@Yuri Pelham Forget Noah! We can and will reduce carbon--we have no choice.
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.
60
@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.
1
@SBA The rich like to ski. They also like to own homes on the coast or in the mountains. Nobody who likes to ski is feeling okay with this. Skiers stand to lose their whole lifestyle and self-identification and culture. People who own mountain or coastal property stand to lose a lot of money. Please open up your mind and treat people like people. We are all in this together.
@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.
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.
175
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
315
@Marco
Howard and Elizabeth Odum argued in "A Prosperous Way Down" in 2001 that humanity could downsize while avoiding human-made catastrophes. Maybe they were right at the time, but humanity has proceeded in the wrong direction for so long now, that catastrophic events are unavoidable, and we will not be able to maintain our current levels of civilizations (science, technology, arts, liberties). Brace for another Middle Age (or worse).
10
@Dietmar Logoz Perhaps in some other country, not here.
@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.
1
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?
26
@Rudy Ludeke Our electric tandem bicycle is charged by our solar panels. We do not own a car & rarely use ZipCar
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.
10
@Matt Donnolly reducing emissions is a big part of the solution. But it has to actually occur. It does not help things when the US is the only country other than Syria who is not part of the Paris accord. We should be leading by example, not loosening emission restrictions.
7
@Matt DonnollyReducing emissions hasn't worked because they haven't been reduced in the last 30 years, they've been increased.
@Matt Donnolly, are you confusing pollution emissions with carbon emissions? The US has not done much more than stabilise carbon emissions in past decades. Global carbon emissions must go to nearly zero very quickly for us to survive.
5
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.
66
@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!
1
" 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.
42
@Patricia, it was to protect fish as far as I'm aware.
@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...
1
@Patricia also, doesn't radioactive nuclear waste last for tens of thousands of years?
1
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.
57
@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.
@JBB
AMEN!
If I were Trudeau, I would be giving serious thought to building a wall. A wall with gun emplacements, landmines, and lots of guards.
43
If Trump is elected in 2020 I will definitely be moving to Canada with my family.
2
"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.
70
@Phil The climate crisis might be the real reason he wants a wall...
@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!
We will take definitive action on this. But only after it is too late.
17
“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.
34
@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.
2
The poles are warming faster than the middle part of the earth. Don't count on the poles as a refuge.
13
@joyce
Um, yes, but who was counting on the poles as a refuge??
1
Just like the NYT has an "International" and "National" section/bureau, they should have regular, daily, front-page columns on "Global Climate Change".
87
@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.
2
@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!!!
If I lived in Arizona, New Mexico or Texas, I would start making plans to move.
13
@Tom J To where??? And what about California, part of it has been a desert in the past.
1
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.
3
@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...
13
@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.
1
@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?
3
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.
18
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.
24
Only liberal elites care about science.
7
@Srinivu Only liberal elites believe "consensus" is actual science.
3
A consensus of scientists basing their judgments on science done by scientists, you mean.
2
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.
25
@joyce
Gardens do no grow well in shade.
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.
165
@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.
2
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.
24
@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...
"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.
24
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.
67
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.
23
@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.
7
That's exactly why Trump is trying to bring in nuclear winter.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a22550758/us-submarine...
1
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.
20
@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.
14
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.
82
@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.
1
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.
17
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.
86
Very concise and succinct analysis. Thank you.
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.
27
@Ed A Great only progressives read those things, at least most of them.
1
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.
31
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...
92
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.
2
@True Norwegian Just who would be so stupid to start a global nuclear war? Your Russians??
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
9
@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.
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.
2
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.
36
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.
34
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.
31
@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.
6
@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?
1
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.
30
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?
35
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.
315
@Ian And why should you live there in the future, surely fires will occur again, move somewhere safer.
1
@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!!
1
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.
83
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.
118
@Scott D yes I am sorry we will take so many animal species, fellow inhabitants of our earth, with us when we go.
14
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.
278
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.
12
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.
190
@Mark
It’s not an either or thing.
We need to decarbonise quickly because if we don’t the future impacts of climate change will be much, much worse.
Even if we do this, some changes are baked in from all the prior emissions and we will need to manage or adapt to them.
Furthermore, we are going to need to find ways to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere to eliminate the Earth’s energy imbalance.
Unfortunately, the best way to do this is burning in California and Europe right now.
8
@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.
1
Adds real world excitement. Maybe people will look less at their phones.
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.
96
The human species can go extinct. When the overall average temp gets to certain point the planet can’t sustain life. Water, food, disease d social problems yes deeply magnified problems in humans as we freak out. The future is doomsday on the horizon. Accelerating faster than anyone thought. Kids, grandkids, history, mankind all going into a spiral....
19
@Dan Stackhouse
Spoken like someone who's completely sure that he'll be fine.
5
@Dan Stackhouse Honestly, Dan, I have to violently disagree. The loss of human life is devastatingly unfortunate, particularly since most of the victims are not among the perpetrators.
It is unfortunate that we were not able to control our population growth to a level supportable by the planet. It is unfortunate that we didn't respond appropriately when we learned the danger of global warming. It is unfortunate that CERTAIN humans chose personal profits over planetary survival--even when they knew what was at stake.
But if we still have a chance, we must do all that we can to preserve the planet, to reduce the impact of global warming and get the planet to a point where it can heal itself.
It is also unfortunate that, as of now, we're still going in the wrong direction.
122
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.
56
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?
196
I agree with this. I saw a mom with four young children the other day and thought to myself that while she appeared to do a very impressive job handling them all, "That is about 100% too many kids." Have one or two at most, pour all the resources you can into raising them well, and make this world better by it. When it comes to family structure, quality over quantity is clearly the gold standard in this day and age.
160
Too many
1
2 is too high in West and we would be doing Great if it was only 2 in Africa. That will be most populous continent by 2080!!!!
5
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.
176
Really? Can you provide a link to ANY column written by Bret Stephens where he denies climate change?
Right, I didn’t think so.
2
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!
1
@David G. here you go. In the past he was somewhat in denial, but has now changed his view.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/04/bret-stephens-climat...
And Trump and his Republican patsies still question whether it’s even happening. Humanity may just be too stupid to survive this.
252
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.
5
@Moe perhaps the unfortunate and deadly fires in California may convince them otherwise. But probably not, alas.
@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.
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?
2
@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.
16
@SHerman: Just look out of your window. Climate Change is happening. And then look at the sky. We have 5miles Atmosphere to live in, then come millions of lightyears of nothing. There is no Planet B.
1
The earth's temperature has not plateaued over the last 20 years, it has been rising. Few scientists in 1975 were certain that the earth was cooling, nearly all are certain now that it's warming. You're in denial, I get it, but your facts are way off base and your credibility is about the same as Alex Jones.
But it doesn't matter if you want to deny it or not, the earth is warming, and it will kill many hundreds of millions of people. Your opinions will not change that in the slightest.
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.
80