“Scientific Community” is kind of a broad term. It is composed of a lot of smarty-pants types who are unlikely to take “no” for an answer, and will keep trying to fix the problem.
In the end, you may be right, and there’s no way to stop the runaway train, and all these folks will accomplish is getting our hopes raised while they earn their PhD’s and present papers in worldwide conferences they all burned jet fuel to get to.
But, what if you turn out to be wrong, and one of those poindexters actually figures out how to scrub CO2 from the atmosphere in an economical fashion, and they manage to stop the train? That person will be instantly famous, and the Nobel Prize might be the least of their accolades. They will be remembered as one of humanity’s greatest minds. If they happen to be British, they will be buried in that cathedral next to Newton and Darwin and Hawking, that’s how important it will be.
So, they will keep trying, because it’s as close as you can get in this life to immortality.
Now understand that, just from excess emissions alone, we are adding at least four of those nuclear explosions worth of energy into the atmosphere.
Per second.
That’s right, per second.
There is no solving this without technology that would be indistinguishable from magic, so not happening. We had our chance, capitalism won, and those at the top are hoarding and preparing for what’s coming next.
Technology will keep developing in ways we can’t predict yet. I think it’s unlikely we can save all our even most of humanity, but you never know what will happen. There is already research being done into options for geo engineering and the way things are going they will probably end up being tried. Even though that’s already technically possible to most people that would still be like magic.
Respectfully, this is the sort of thinking and arguing that got us into this mess in the first place.
Even a cursory exploration of climate geoengineering leads to the conclusion that it’s impractical and inadequate.
The world really is dying. It will correct itself. We are just along for the ride now. This year will be the panic year (look at the arctic ice extent right now, look at the average sea temp, look at the average air temp, now realize we’re just exiting la nina and heading to el nino this year)
Sorry if I’m being blunt, but there really is no way to save ourselves other than using way less energy, and that’s not going to happen at this point.
They said your statement was incorrect; either there’s a way to salvage the planet in a habitable form, or there isn’t — but “indistinguishable from magic” doesn’t come into it.
Personally, I think energy is only a portion of the problem space; we need to slow climate change enough that humanity can continue to adapt with it.
After all, we survived multiple ice ages; will the climate destroy our technological advances, or will those advances enable us to adapt to a changing world?
The world is likely highly overpopulated at the present, but we can lose a significant chunk of humanity and still preserve the body of knowledge and many of the technologies that we currently enjoy.
Collapses are inevitable, but total collapse is still avoidable.
“Scientific Community” is kind of a broad term. It is composed of a lot of smarty-pants types who are unlikely to take “no” for an answer, and will keep trying to fix the problem.
In the end, you may be right, and there’s no way to stop the runaway train, and all these folks will accomplish is getting our hopes raised while they earn their PhD’s and present papers in worldwide conferences they all burned jet fuel to get to.
But, what if you turn out to be wrong, and one of those poindexters actually figures out how to scrub CO2 from the atmosphere in an economical fashion, and they manage to stop the train? That person will be instantly famous, and the Nobel Prize might be the least of their accolades. They will be remembered as one of humanity’s greatest minds. If they happen to be British, they will be buried in that cathedral next to Newton and Darwin and Hawking, that’s how important it will be.
So, they will keep trying, because it’s as close as you can get in this life to immortality.
It’s an energy problem, not a smarts problem.
Imagine the Hiroshima bomb.
How much energy that contains.
Now understand that, just from excess emissions alone, we are adding at least four of those nuclear explosions worth of energy into the atmosphere.
Per second.
That’s right, per second.
There is no solving this without technology that would be indistinguishable from magic, so not happening. We had our chance, capitalism won, and those at the top are hoarding and preparing for what’s coming next.
looks at a solar panels
Yep, magic right there.
Sees nuclear power plants
What sorcery is this?!
Observes EVs, heat pumps, biofuels…
Mysteries beyond the comprehension of man!
Remember that we have technology that 100 years ago would have been indistinguishable from magic.
That’s an assumption that math and physics doesn’t support.
There is no infinite well of technology and efficiency for us to draw from.
That’s not to say we can’t find things that will help a lot, we should, but they won’t save us.
I made a statement about the past. No assumptions we made.
You weren’t implying by saying that, that we could possibly have the magic technology to save ourselves 100 years from now? Sorry if I misunderstood.
Technology will keep developing in ways we can’t predict yet. I think it’s unlikely we can save all our even most of humanity, but you never know what will happen. There is already research being done into options for geo engineering and the way things are going they will probably end up being tried. Even though that’s already technically possible to most people that would still be like magic.
Respectfully, this is the sort of thinking and arguing that got us into this mess in the first place.
Even a cursory exploration of climate geoengineering leads to the conclusion that it’s impractical and inadequate.
The world really is dying. It will correct itself. We are just along for the ride now. This year will be the panic year (look at the arctic ice extent right now, look at the average sea temp, look at the average air temp, now realize we’re just exiting la nina and heading to el nino this year)
Sorry if I’m being blunt, but there really is no way to save ourselves other than using way less energy, and that’s not going to happen at this point.
Good luck out there! Live for today!
They said your statement was incorrect; either there’s a way to salvage the planet in a habitable form, or there isn’t — but “indistinguishable from magic” doesn’t come into it.
Personally, I think energy is only a portion of the problem space; we need to slow climate change enough that humanity can continue to adapt with it.
After all, we survived multiple ice ages; will the climate destroy our technological advances, or will those advances enable us to adapt to a changing world?
The world is likely highly overpopulated at the present, but we can lose a significant chunk of humanity and still preserve the body of knowledge and many of the technologies that we currently enjoy.
Collapses are inevitable, but total collapse is still avoidable.