I'd like some citations on that if you have them. Because the story I heard is that there's no going back. Rather a new equilibrium will be established (assuming no substantial reduction in global emissions) 5 - 8 degrees warmer; no ice on Antarctica or Greenland and that means a sea level rise of about 70 metres. — unenlightened

The Long Thaw by David Archer, one of the few who's done long range climate modeling.

No, it's not permanent. CO2 is water soluble.

It's likely that humanity will take more active measures against climate change in terms of removing CO2 emissions from the atmosphere. — Shawn

With a global government and maybe a new global religion, with China as host, yes.

I don't believe anyone would object to dumping scrap iron into the oceans for algae to sequester CO2 from the atmosphere.

And, that's just one idea out of 100's others.

The Long Thaw by David Archer, one of the few who's done long range climate modeling.

No, it's not permanent. CO2 is water soluble. — frank

Dude, the book is called "The Long Thaw: How Humans Are Changing the Next 100,000 Years of Earth's Climate ". Not 10,000 years. I'm not sure I'll be around that long.

That's quite optimistic you know. At least with us gone, the world has less worries. :joke:

frank

Dude, the book is called "The Long Thaw: How Humans Are Changing the Next 100,000 Years of Earth's Climate ". Not 10,000 years. I'm not sure I'll be around that long — unenlightened

We'll be back to close to baseline in 10,000 years. In 100,000, all the CO2 humans pumped out will be absorbed.

There's a long tail. That book is a little out of date on some things, but it's an easy, fascinating read and you'd understand the future a little better if you read it. It goes into details about the pending glacial period, which is why I read it.

don't believe anyone would object to dumping scrap iron into the oceans for algae to sequester CO2 from the atmosphere. — Shawn

True. There are several ginormous chunks of coal on the planet that are left to be burned. If we could avoid doing that, it would make it easier to scrub CO2 and limit the volatility of the change.

Volatility is the thing that will challenge us, not the heat.

Archer shows how just a few centuries of fossil-fuel use will cause not only a climate storm that will last a few hundred years, but dramatic climate changes that will last thousands. Carbon dioxide emitted today will be a problem for millennia. For the first time, humans have become major players in shaping the long-term climate. In fact, a planetwide thaw driven by humans has already begun. But despite the seriousness of the situation, Archer argues that it is still not too late to avert dangerous climate change--if humans can find a way to cooperate as never before.

So great news! Maybe we survive, and in a few thousand years maybe things get back to normal. So no need to panic, folks. Get a grip.

I read a book once talking about various ways we may survive a nuclear fallout and emerge from underground in a few thousand years. Since then I've stopped advocating for nuclear weapons reductions.

About 10% of the CO2 from coal will still be affecting the climate in one hundred thousand years. — David Archer

You are misrepresenting your source, I'm afraid.

You are misrepresenting your source, I'm afraid. — unenlightened

Oh, sorry. 90%, not 100%.

And you're welcome for turning you in to the reliable shit.

:roll:

I've had a realization. David Archer is wrong. It's a permanent change and it will positive feedback until the Earth's surface becomes pretty similar to that of Venus.

This will transpire in the next 15 years because we didn't do anything new at the conference.

It's just so endlessly fucking poignant, isn't it?

Oh, sorry. 90%, not 100%. — frank

No dude, 10 % after 100,000 years, not 10% after 10,000 years, You're missing a zero again.

No dude, 10 % after 100,000 years, not 10% after 10,000 years, You're missing a zero again. — unenlightened

If you will bother to read the book: we will be close to baseline in 10,000 years.

No wait, you're right! It's a permanent change and it will escalate quickly in the next 3 years, so you will actually get to see the Atlantic Ocean boil!

It's gruesome. Your skin will fry like bacon.

That's the thing, it still is not set in stone that we will miss the target yet.

If we do, it's very bad news. I don't have children, nor plan to, but they will not be living a good life or even get a sliver of a chance of a decent life due to this disaster.

but they will not be living a good life or even get a sliver of a chance of a decent life due to this disaster. — Manuel

Why do you think that?

Mass migration, serious food shortages, increased natural disasters, job scarcity, not being able to be outside a building for much time at all. If you live in a coastal city or on an island, like I do, you're going to have to move to a place that's already over populated.

The outcomes of climate change are worse than the initial predictions, due to how interconnected the climate is with everything that goes on in Earth. So the announced problems will likely be worse, not better, than what is predicted now.

So all that and likely more.

Mass migration, serious food shortages, increased natural disasters, job scarcity, not being able to be outside a building for much time at all. — Manuel

We already get mass migrations, serious food shortages and lots of natural disasters. We're still capable of living high tech, pretty decent lives.

How did you get the idea people wouldn't be able to be outside a building for much of the time?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/freylindsay/2021/09/13/world-bank-predicts-massive-internal-migration-from-climate-change-by-2050/?sh=49b8333510e4

The report is notable for focussing on internally displaced people, or IDPs - a class of migrants who don't leave their own country and are therefore excluded from many of the protections at least nominally afforded those that cross a border. There were more than 50 million IDPs around the world at the end of 2020, most of them forced from their home regions by violence and conflict, but many of them by natural disasters as well.

The number of IDPs referenced above was the highest on record, but if the World Bank is correct in its predictions, it will be dwarfed in the coming decades. According to the report, by 2050 there could be up to 86 million internal climate migrants in Sub-Saharan Africa, as well as 49 million in the East Asia and Pacific region, 40 million in South Asia, 19 million in North Africa, 17 million in Latin America, and 5 million in Eastern Europe and Central Asia.

As for the heat info, this article is interesting:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/interactive/2021/climate-change-humidity/

Scientists have found that Mexico and Central America, the Persian Gulf, India, Pakistan and Southeast Asia are all careening toward this threshold before the end of the century.

I understand what you're saying.

I don't doubt that dramatic change is before us. I just think that the level of misery in the world won't actually increase much for the simple reason that a portion of our species loves upheaval and sees peace and security as deathly.

I expect mass migrations northward. I expect famines that kill millions. I expect world war.

I was thinking about this recently: destruction is creative. Creation is destructive. Something will arise from the human potential as a result of climate change that will be unique and beautiful.

I can't say that it shouldn't come into being. I bless life either way.

As for equatorial communities, yes, sooner or later they'll have to move north. But north is where primates originally evolved during the PETM, speaking of the creativity in climate change.

At one point or other, it would seem normal to think we would disappear as a species.

To have it be of our own conscious decision making, is sad.

To have it be of our own conscious decision making, is sad. — Manuel

Sad isnt the word I would use, but yes, we have the power to end our species in a number of ways.

Yeah, but you're still utterly doomed. That's the important take away.

Yeah, but you're still utterly doomed. — frank

Not doomed— provided we act now. But hopefully we can convince enough people not to, since a book says things will maybe get back to normal in ten thousand years.

Something will arise from the human potential as a result of climate change that will be unique and beautiful. — frank

:rofl:

Not doomed— provided we act now. — Xtrix

I just don't see that happening.

If you followed the PETM reference, you'd see that we are the result of climate change. Too philosophical?

I just don't see that happening. — frank

Neither do I, thanks in part to efforts from geniuses like you.

Can’t wait for things to calm down again in ten thousand years though. Look forward to it.

Neither do I, thanks in part to efforts from geniuses like you. — Xtrix

That's really not true. You're just bitter.

I expect mass migrations northward. I expect famines that kill millions. I expect world war. — frank

Heh.

That's true. Nature is powerful enough that in thousands of years, we should predict for some kind of intelligent life to return.

Of course, since I have some doubts as to my longevity and that of my family and friends, I'd prefer if it weren't that long...

Well, you could be a "libertarian" and want the ice to melt, better for shipping and commerce and stuff.

Notice how you have to get more and more aggressive to get the same satisfaction? It's dopamine withdrawal.