Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Smolenski t1_j4pk0mb wrote

Professor Eric Steig from the University of Washington in Seattle:

>"It depends on how climate changes over the next few decades, which we could influence in a positive way by reducing greenhouse gas emissions."

tl;dr it's only inevitable if we don't do anything to combat climate change.

363

sledgehammer_77 t1_j4pqb11 wrote

So it's inevitable.

251

johnn48 t1_j4psi3d wrote

>Other suggestions have included constructing Eiffel Tower-sized columns on the seabed to prop it up from below, and a 100m-tall, 100-kilometre-long berm to block warm water flowing underneath.

Not really look at these great ideas, in addition how about the snow cannon one. I’m sure we can get started on constructing the Eiffel tower column’s right away. It’s "super easy, barely an inconvenience".

85

2005HondaCivic245 t1_j4qqa54 wrote

We'd rather waste millions on eiffel tower sized support columns than lose a tiny bit of profit to save the fucking world. We are fucked and we deserve it

39

KadeTheTrickster t1_j4r7sll wrote

>we deserve it

Non human animals and people who would rather save the planet over their wallet. "What's this we shit?"

25

IamMe90 t1_j4qqj1r wrote

>It’s "super easy, barely an inconvenience".

Is this a reference to Pitch Meeting? If so love it lol

6

johnn48 t1_j4qv2v9 wrote

Runaway W. Antarctic Ice Sheet Pitch Meeting 🤦🏻‍♂️

2

Lets_Kick_Some_Ice t1_j4qrfw5 wrote

How ironic that we would prop it up with jack stands.

2

agolec t1_j4vdwwl wrote

Someone needs to retroactively change the futurama "dunk a giant ice cube into the arctic" joke to this.

1

nickeypants t1_j4sfhr0 wrote

I just leave my air conditioner on and pointed outside. I'm doing my part!

1

agolec t1_j4vdz48 wrote

RIP you b/c fumes. Thank you for your service.

1

SilverNicktail t1_j4r5cmz wrote

Given that emissions are set to peak in the next few years and are in fact decreasing in most developed areas (at admittedly very differing rates), not necessarily.

11

sledgehammer_77 t1_j4rc849 wrote

I wish I had your optimism

3

agolec t1_j4veeyt wrote

Same. The fact that this is all operating under geological timescales is what messes with my head and makes me kind of pessimistic.

2

[deleted] t1_j4qyyeg wrote

No.

Look at the ridiculously good progress in renewable energy over the past decade. It's only accelerating.

We will hit peak fossil-fuel use globally during this decade, because renewables are becoming cheaper than burning coal/oil/gas.

9

universepower t1_j4rnryz wrote

Thank you. So many people are all “nothing is being done, life sucks” but the reality is heckloads is being/has been done

10

PhiloPhys t1_j4rskwd wrote

Those many people are absolutely correct. We are essentially taking 0 action at the present moment. Atmospheric CO2 represents only one of 7 planetary boundaries that spell our destruction. We’ve arguably crossed 4-6 of them already and nothing is being done about most of them.

More deforestation, habitat loss, resource use, and energy use are happening than ever before. We’re still building new car and fossil infrastructure which will cement use of those institutions for 40+ more years.

There is hope and we can do something. But, presently we are essentially doing nothing.

We will not green technology our way out of this. We need system level change.

4

universepower t1_j4rwlwn wrote

Pretty much everywhere has systemic changes in place, and CO2 growth has slowed dramatically in the last decade. I’m not saying do nothing, but having a huge sad about how nothing has changed is wrong.

6

PhiloPhys t1_j4rrwwi wrote

Wrong. Decoupling is not happening. Production is increasing with the new energy sources which is extremely bad. We’re using more fuel and more renewable energy simultaneously. That means we’re stripping more raw resources from the earth than ever, deforesting more, displacing more creatures, and driving our planet to the brink.

Renewables are not a silver bullet. They are only a tiny piece of an actual solution. We are not doing anything that needs to be done.

Putting all our belief in renewables as a solution is just capitalism reskinned as green.

Edit: that’s not to say all hope is lost. There are still beautiful futures.

0

garry4321 t1_j4qmpzv wrote

Didnt you hear? We got rid of plastic straws, that fixed things.

We also got rid of those thin grocery bags that you could re-use as garbage bags. Now we have THICC grocery bags that have hundreds of times more plastic, but break down in a few dozen uses, and truly single use purchasable small garbage bags instead. THAT FIXED THINGS

2

stayzuplate t1_j4r6udj wrote

I don't think you're using your re-usable shopping bags correctly.

I have a grocery store bag made from recycled plastic bottles that I've been using for over 10 years and it's still going strong.

4

garry4321 t1_j4sflph wrote

Im sure that is the majority of the people then, because you have a single anecdote. The need to buy single use, overbuilt small garbage bags alone is more plastic. The reusable bags are really shit and more than double the plastic use. Ask Glad (plastic bag manufacturers) if they support the grocery bag ban. I would put money on them actually lobbying for it.

Not only was it not even close to 1% of the issue, it doesnt solve anything.

For those downvoting me, how about disputing these facts rather than getting upset that you believed the lie that you were a earth saviour by using thick garbage bags for 2 purposes instead of the thinnest possible garbage bags for both.

−2

stayzuplate t1_j4shyct wrote

Your single anecdote that reusable bags only last a dozen uses is total bullshit, and their use actual decreases the demand and usage of single use plastic bags. Are you too cheap to buy a good one?

Also, there are many reusable shopping bag options that aren't made of plastic.

2

garry4321 t1_j4tpt7c wrote

None of which are Better for the environment. Paper bags have been found to be worse for the environment.

Face it, the thinnest possible plastic bags that can be re-used are the best option at this time.

−1

stayzuplate t1_j4tszma wrote

Says who? Please site your evidence that durable re-usable bags are not better for the environment.

So a reusable canvas bag is worse than the environment than single use plastic bags? Right.

So are you one of those people who just can't be bothered to own a reusable bag? The convenience of that sweet single use plastic is just so vital for you?

2

Hensot t1_j6b0rri wrote

No, It's not. There is a difference between physical inevitability and politically unlikely. Your reply seems harmful and unhelpful at best.

1

sledgehammer_77 t1_j6bbvfp wrote

Politics have nothing to do with it, its more economical & societal aspects.

Capitalism over everything else.

1

Hensot t1_j6crdrd wrote

"Politics have nothing to do with it" I'm not an expert, but the last time I checked, Politics was an essential pillar of climate progress & without it, We wouldn't see any progress. Current policies leads to about ~2.6-2.7C & Current pledges may limit warming below 2C. But, I'm far more interested in your statement "So, It's inevitable"

1

grunkage t1_j4seva0 wrote

I've gone full cynic. This quote made me laugh so fucking hard.

1

Cognoggin t1_j4qgdf9 wrote

The problem was solved many years ago ONCE AND FOR ALL!

29

Poogwoogs t1_j4srb8z wrote

I really don't understand why so many people go to this sub just to go "yeah but..."

13

Enlightened-Beaver t1_j4qjzhi wrote

The real question is how long until Florida is all under water though?

8

TastyCartographer630 t1_j4ri54s wrote

Let’s be real, that one might be for the best

13

Enlightened-Beaver t1_j4rilce wrote

Yes and no. Have you seen what happens to rats and cockroaches when it floods? They come into your house.

2

InternetWilliams t1_j4s02bx wrote

My wife is from Florida so fuck you buddy.

0

Enlightened-Beaver t1_j4s0hyr wrote

I’m sorry to hear that

2

InternetWilliams t1_j4s2j96 wrote

It's always the self-professed "good guys" who refer to other humans as rats and cockroaches.

−1

TastyCartographer630 t1_j4sh3l1 wrote

I think you’re taking a joke a little too seriously

3

apparissus t1_j4vj0ji wrote

But his precious feelings! Evidently he gets triggered by people disrespecting Florida.

2

Azure_Crystals t1_j4qx620 wrote

Never, because it is not possible, sea level is projected to rise only 30 to 50 cm until 2050, and around 1.5 meters until 2100, Florida will not be underwater, but low-lying islands, cities and islets will most probably be.

3

Enlightened-Beaver t1_j4qzjqk wrote

I mean it’s definitely not never. It clearly was underwater at some point in the past. In fact for most of earth’s history Florida was under water.

7

Azure_Crystals t1_j4r1ix9 wrote

That's true but with current trends of sea level rise, very highly unlikely that Florida will sink completely or even partially unless some cataclysmic event happens that will melt all the ice which seems very improbable by scientists.

3

Dhiox t1_j4rey5x wrote

Even if it isn't fully submerged, it will flood constantly.

1

[deleted] t1_j4pts65 wrote

[deleted]

2

danteheehaw t1_j4pykr1 wrote

Basically it says it is inevitable, because to prevent it we must start taking huge action on climate change

5

AutoModerator t1_j4pbqt3 wrote

Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here.

All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

RDO_Desmond t1_j4sn61u wrote

Oil company report or actual scientists?

1

Lo8000 t1_j4ptg3e wrote

[Please don't] Colapse already or the clima sceptics will forever call us liars and deny that our efforts against global warming had anything to do with it [if it doesn't colapse].

0

Eat_the_Path t1_j4t2x2j wrote

It just requires immediate global change from our capitalist overlords who are currently busy consolidating wealth and power likes we're in a dystopian novel.

0

NotaContributi0n t1_j4qpx7p wrote

I can’t understand why so many people are afraid of the earth just doing it’s thing and evolving/changing like it always has

−14

Lordgeorge16 t1_j4qrc9i wrote

Because a "change" like this would influence (and probably end) millions upon millions of lives.

I live maybe 45 minutes away from the Atlantic Ocean by car. A mega-tsunami or other catastrophic flooding event, whether manmade or otherwise, would probably kill me, my friends, my family and everyone I know if we couldn't evacuate in time. It's perfectly reasonable to be afraid of something like that.

Expand your worldview. People generally don't like it when other people die or when the status quo gets interrupted.

6

Odisher7 t1_j4qscrx wrote

Because the earth should be getting colder at this point. We broke the natural evolution/change, which puts life as we know it in danger

5

Altruistic_Price7572 t1_j4rlff5 wrote

Nobody is afraid of the earth. People are afraid of what we are unnaturally doing to it. And the potential wars, famine, and nation state collapses that it will drive in our lifetimes.

No big deal, really. /s

0

erichw23 t1_j4q4p7h wrote

Yes yes but in another week there will be one that says it is. Same shit every week. It's all background noise at this point to people no one cares anymore because you can't distinguish anything legit.

−15

gwynnegr t1_j4qhrt5 wrote

Isn't the point of this subreddit to be for uplifting news specifically? I'm not sure why you'd complain about uplifting news.. in the uplifting news subreddit.

12

LittleKittyLove t1_j4ql99s wrote

The ice is melting. It’s not a reasonable debate that should leave you confused. Go look at a graph of annual ice thickness. Go look at a graph of CO2 or methane levels. The ice is melting.

3

Dengareedo t1_j4s1lfu wrote

That’s what happens at the end of an ice age

0