Comments by "Brandon" (@gravoc857) on "New climate data shows global temperatures continuing to rise sharply | DW News" video.

@williammeek4078 EV isn’t a solution, though. For example: The EV revolution has made rare earth metals valuable enough that it’s now financially viable to dredge the ocean floor for rare earth nodules. This will cause catastrophic damage to ocean ecosystems, particularly coral reefs. EV’s will be responsible for global destruction and collapse of aquatic environments.
3
No. It’s correct. Climate change is just as much of a threat to humanity as global thermonuclear war is. The earth and life will be fine in the long run. The question is can humanity adapt to thrive and excel in a hot house climate, or will we allow it to drive us to obscurity.
2
Or coastal cities will retrofit to make climate-resistant urban infrastructure. New York has an interesting proposal to ocean-proof its most vulnerable zip codes.
2
Nah not really. Humanity is screwed. Earth will be fine. This ain’t the first time a drastic warming event occurred.
2
? Scientists have been screaming about climate change since literally the start of the Industrial Revolution.
1
The vaults are for people who don’t have faith that humanity can have a systemic shift before it’s too late for us.
1
@angelmujahid2233 That’s climate change doomerism. We aren’t approaching some hot house global apocalypse. We are merely approaching a hot house. People in underground or mountain bunkers won’t be baked alive, nor will they die if they exit their bunkers. The bunkers are intended to shield them from societal collapse. They aren’t protecting themselves from the environment. They’re protecting themselves from other people. If humanity refuses to adapt, it WILL be a civilizational apocalypse of our own doing. We’re beyond the point of stopping climate change. We’re at a point where humanity needs to be focusing its efforts on adapting to the new reality that humanity will exist for the first time ever in a hot house climate.
1
@Jc-ms5vv The planet won’t be lifeless. It’s survived many cataclysms worse than what humanity is doing to earth. If life can survive a 300 million year ice age that saw 99.999% of surface water on earth existing only as ice, then it can survive humans making an artificial hot house environment. You need to stop climate fear mongering and start learning about the historic tenacity of life. Look into the great oxygenation event to learn about the longest global cataclysm, second only after the planetary collision with Thea when our planet was a proto planetary embryo.
1
Nice job putting your head in the sand.
1
@That.Lady.withtheYarn That’s good and all, but a friendly reminder that the US military is the biggest polluter on the planet. Pretend for a moment that the ENTIRE world went carbon neutral, except the US military. The US military alone is enough to contribute to runaway climate change. This problem is beyond recycling food scraps. It helps, but it’s not THE solution.
1
There are a lot of variables involved. So many that humanity still doesn’t know them all. The most impactful variables we know of are celestial orbit patterns, the wobble and rotation of our planet, sun cycles, and geologic activity on earth. Zoom out far enough and watch for long enough, and the weather patterns on earth start to resemble a heartbeat. Cycles on top of cycles on top of cycles on top of cycles. Our global climate is unfathomably complex and beautiful.
1
Bud, 1.5 degrees global average temperature increase means that earths atmosphere holds an additional 75,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy. Those 7.5 exajoules (18 zeroes) lead to more severe and frequent storms. Do you carry ANY kind of insurance? If the answer is yes, then you are impacted. Congrats, your insurance already is more expensive than it needs to be due to the surge in storms & the fact that humans keep building cities on climate & geologic hot spots for severe activity. Are you being taxed? Congrats, you are being taxed a higher amount because the government needs additional funds to support relief efforts for the increased frequency and severity of storms nationally. A nuclear winter would reverse climate change & return us to a cold house global climate. Also, a global thermonuclear war is not guaranteed. What IS guaranteed is you are already financially paying for the consequences of climate change, and those financial burdens will only compound with time. Maybe you should be concerned about the thing raiding your pocket, and stop worrying about global thermonuclear war.
1
Milankovitch cycles & other celestial phenomena affecting our climate is well over the heads of the laymen.
1
Nah not really. Cows release methane. Methane causes a greater greenhouse effect, but only has a lifespan of 7 to 10 years in the atmosphere. Carbon has a smaller greenhouse effect than methane, but carbon lasts 300 to 1000 years in the atmosphere. Fossil fuels are contributing to prolonged climate change. Methane and cow consumption is a short term contributor.
1
@Auronomi Rampant use of fertilizers that lead to bacteria producing nitrous oxides is a problem of short-sighted capitalism. Not an inherent issue with animal agriculture. Sustainable wide-scale operations are possible, should the meat, veggie, fruit, and dairy industries decide they care more about the environment than their stock shareholders. I’d say I agree with you on the reducing meat consumption, except the government will just subsidize these industries to keep production levels the same or higher if you stop eating their product. Case and point: Look at how the US government spent decades on a highly successful milk campaign to raise demand for milk, when milk production outpaced milk demand in the US.
1
Yes they used to… This isn’t the first time earth has been in a hot house phase. What you mean to say is this is here for the long haul & geologic timescales will need to pass for it to organically revert to a cold house environment on its own.
1
@r.1599 We need fusion as soon as possible :(. All fossil fuel alternatives aren’t a solution. They require too much destruction of environments. Like EV’s will see the full scale dredging of ocean floors on a global level to supply enough rare earth metals for the EV revolution. Fusion is pretty much the only scenario where we don’t destroy our planet.
1