So yes, we are fucked and no one who isn't being highly disingenuous and monstrous can say "We'll have to adapt" as a response to that. — MindForged

We will have to adapt.

OMG foreign 'invaders'! Gotta kill them — MindForged

Never mind foreign invaders. Does the staid midwest really want all those interesting people back who left for sunny and liberated California or the sophisticated culture of the northeast? Better start blowing up the freeway bridges so they can't just pack up and drive back here.

So yes, we are fucked and no one who isn't being highly disingenuous and monstrous can say "We'll have to adapt" as a response to that. — MindForged

What, pray tell, is the alternative to adapting? One can throw one's self off a bridge, take poison, or blow one's brains out OR ADAPT. Resistance is futile. You will adapt.

The point is it's used as a euphemism to disguise the reality of the situation. As an example, the GOP has been using that phrase in recent years because as far as they're concerned warmer temperatures just means warmer regions they can make more profit in. Death on an unprecedented scale is coming because perpetuated inaction has left us with a near certain catastrophe on our hands. There's no adapting out of that, we might barely have enough time (maybe 12-20 years) to mitigate it a little.

Of course those who survive will have to adapt, that's not the point. The point is that mindset is a large reason we're stuck in a worsening situation. The powers that be have decided in word and in deed (especially in the U.S.) that we're not really doing anything substantial to overcome it. And to the extent that it's even acknowledged at a federal level (need I mention the "It's a Chinese hoax" crap?), we end up with tepid remarks like "We'll just adapt to it", as if it weren't a global state of affairs that will kill shocking numbers of people, damage to environment to an unprecedented degree and destroy lots of species.

What, pray tell, is the alternative to adapting? — Bitter Crank

What makes you think there must be some happy alternative? If you are told that you've got an untreatable cancer, you will, of course, have to "adapt" to that fact, but that doesn't take away the fact that you've got cancer.

It's going to be unusually hot for about 10,000 years (assuming we burn all the coal). Most if the CO2 will have dissolved into the oceans by then and the climate will return to something a little warmer than today.

We dont really know how much warmer because there are things we dont know how to model.

We're presently nearing the point in the Milankovitch cycle when reglaciation could be triggered. We don't know what's going to happen at that point, but scientists are attempting to model it. What the average reputable climatologist believes is that the climate is headed for change one way or another.

And I'm not aware of any Republican proclaiming that we're going to have to adapt. Where did you hear that?

I have not used "adaptation" as a casual concept or trivial matter. Adaptation to global warming is more like moving heaven and earth: very difficult.

All of the adaptations that have been talked about by those who take global warming as a fact involve wretched choices. For instance, Bangladeshis will be among the first very large populations to be inundated by rising oceans. Where will a few million Bangladeshi's go? Who will welcome them? How stiff will the resistance to their migrations be?

Where will the small, scattered island populations go? Which nation is eagerly looking for a few hundred thousand climate refugees?

What happens in tropical and sub-tropical areas when it becomes too hot to spend more than a few hours outside? How will those areas feed themselves? (This will include some parts of the southern US, where high humidity and high temperatures will place a hard limit on outdoor work. If the humidity and heat are too high, outdoor workers die of heat stroke.)

Adaptation will not be like rearranging the deck chairs on a sinking ship. It will be more like a fight for the available lifeboats and then a fight over where to go, what to do, for those in the lifeboats.

Here's one from just a week ago from Marco Rubio:

Marco Rubio tried to sound like a reasonable voice on climate change despite his science denial by pointing to legislation he’s helped advance on sea level rise adaptation. But as renowned glaciologist Lonnie Thompson put it, “the only question is how much we will mitigate, adapt, and suffer.”

That's the context in which I usually come across this. An admission that the thing is real but only insofar as to continue putting off any means by which to mitigate its severity.

Apologies for my assumption, it's how I'm used to seeing that response play out.

That's the context in which I usually come across this. — MindForged

I wasn't talking about a short-term adaptation to sea level rise. I was talking about long-term adaption to a warmer climate for the next 10,000 years or longer. The fact that you focus on Republicans, sea-level rise, mitigation, etc. indicates that you and I aren't on the same page, nor even in the same book. I don't see us being able to communicate about this issue. Best wishes.

None of the above matters, because in my secret basement workshop I'm on the verge of successfully harnessing the hot air on forums to power the entire universe. Once my device is attached to the exhaust pipe of over a million internet forums we'll be entering an utopian era fueled by the inexhaustible, renewable and totally free power of hot air.