THE PEOPLE CHEERING FOR HUMANITY'S END

2,435 Views | 41 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by Zippergate
bearister
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:58p, 12/1/22
The People Cheering for Humanity's End - The Atlantic


https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/01/anthropocene-anti-humanism-transhumanism-apocalypse-predictions/672230/
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Reply Quote
dimitrig
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bearister • 11:50p, 12/1/22
bearister said:
The People Cheering for Humanity's End - The Atlantic


https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/01/anthropocene-anti-humanism-transhumanism-apocalypse-predictions/672230/


Interesting article. I think my generation and younger is starting to turn more and more in this direction of realizing that the planet will go on just fine - probably even better - without any human beings on it.

50 or 100 years ago most people viewed the Earth and the Universe as a resource to be exploited by humans. This was enforced by a Judeo-Christian worldview in which God created the universe for the pleasure of human beings. More people are starting to realize that paving over paradise to put up a parking lot isn't progress, isn't sustainable, and does not make for a desirable world to live in.

The problem is that there is a still a lot of the world living hand to mouth and they can't afford the luxury of high-minded ideals. The West has exported unadulterated capitalism to the rest of the world and it may be the end of all of us. So be it.

"If the choice that confronts us is between a world without nature and a world without humanity, today's most radical anti-humanist thinkers don't hesitate to choose the latter. In his 2006 book, Better Never to Have Been, the celebrated "antinatalist" philosopher David Benatar argues that the disappearance of humanity would not deprive the universe of anything unique or valuable: "The concern that humans will not exist at some future time is either a symptom of the human arrogance … or is some misplaced sentimentalism."
Reply Quote
3
bearister
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dimitrig • 8:21a, 12/2/22
Nice post….and Joni Mitchell reference.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Reply Quote
1
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dimitrig • 8:40a, 12/2/22
Quote:
I think my generation and younger is starting to turn more and more in this direction of realizing that the planet will go on just fine - probably even better - without any human beings on it.



I had a serious internal conversation before engaging in parenthood.

Should I bring children into this world knowing that there is
War murder rape hunger destruction of environment mass extinction of species toxic poisoning
…all caused by man?

I asked myself how I could possibly subject my dear children to such a horrific ending such as Anne Frank experienced.
Or
I asked how I could subject them to a world that would be ever changing and difficult, the likes we are beginning to see now with climate change, hurricanes, fires, environmental refugees…
This would be no Eden I'd be bringing them into, it was Eden Lost.

Then I asked myself… what if all those horrible things I imagined were to happen to me, right now? Drafted into war in the jungle, rolling in the mud in a knife fight with the enemy, my guts cut open to die in agony …. withered in a desert starvation death march … forced to watch my children be raped and executed … atomic bombs murdering billions … no more lions, chimpanzees or whales (okay, mosquitoes could go extinct, no problem!)

And I asked myself if I would rather have not lived so as to avoid that horrible ending. Erase my existence so as to avoid the end. All the love and laughter, song and dance, the wonder of looking at the stars, or an ant colony in motion… would I have rather had none of that just to avoid the end?

I thought, no, of course not. My life has been pretty damn good, and I can face the ugly finish line!!

So, I thought, my kids would probably see it the same way.
And with that, I jumped in the sack, took off my clothes, and starting doing what comes naturally!!

My having kids or not having kids is not going to alter the trajectory of this planet one bit.
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
dimitrig
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to concordtom • 12:02p, 12/2/22
concordtom said:
Quote:
I think my generation and younger is starting to turn more and more in this direction of realizing that the planet will go on just fine - probably even better - without any human beings on it.



I had a serious internal conversation before engaging in parenthood.

Should I bring children into this world knowing that there is
War murder rape hunger destruction of environment mass extinction of species toxic poisoning
…all caused by man?

I asked myself how I could possibly subject my dear children to such a horrific ending such as Anne Frank experienced.
Or
I asked how I could subject them to a world that would be ever changing and difficult, the likes we are beginning to see now with climate change, hurricanes, fires, environmental refugees…
This would be no Eden I'd be bringing them into, it was Eden Lost.

Then I asked myself… what if all those horrible things I imagined were to happen to me, right now? Drafted into war in the jungle, rolling in the mud in a knife fight with the enemy, my guts cut open to die in agony …. withered in a desert starvation death march … forced to watch my children be raped and executed … atomic bombs murdering billions … no more lions, chimpanzees or whales (okay, mosquitoes could go extinct, no problem!)

And I asked myself if I would rather have not lived so as to avoid that horrible ending. Erase my existence so as to avoid the end. All the love and laughter, song and dance, the wonder of looking at the stars, or an ant colony in motion… would I have rather had none of that just to avoid the end?

I thought, no, of course not. My life has been pretty damn good, and I can face the ugly finish line!!

So, I thought, my kids would probably see it the same way.
And with that, I jumped in the sack, took off my clothes, and starting doing what comes naturally!!

My having kids or not having kids is not going to alter the trajectory of this planet one bit.


Two comments:

1. People like yourself are optimizing locally but not enough are optimizing globally. People often talk about falling birth rates like it is some sort of problem to be corrected.

2. One person can make a world of difference for good or for bad. Hopefully, your kids will be the former. Unfortunately, while you can influence how that turns out you can't control it.


Reply Quote
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:20p, 11/30/24
This old tab popped up. Maybe it'll be interesting to revisit?
Reply Quote
1
Chapman_is_Gone
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:26p, 11/30/24

I, too, had a serious conversation when contemplating children. My wife and I would love to start a family, but I'm not allowed to be within 100 yards of a minor.
Reply Quote
1
Cal88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dimitrig • 6:59a, 12/1/24
dimitrig said:
bearister said:
The People Cheering for Humanity's End - The Atlantic


https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/01/anthropocene-anti-humanism-transhumanism-apocalypse-predictions/672230/


Interesting article. I think my generation and younger is starting to turn more and more in this direction of realizing that the planet will go on just fine - probably even better - without any human beings on it.

50 or 100 years ago most people viewed the Earth and the Universe as a resource to be exploited by humans. This was enforced by a Judeo-Christian worldview in which God created the universe for the pleasure of human beings. More people are starting to realize that paving over paradise to put up a parking lot isn't progress, isn't sustainable, and does not make for a desirable world to live in.

The problem is that there is a still a lot of the world living hand to mouth and they can't afford the luxury of high-minded ideals. The West has exported unadulterated capitalism to the rest of the world and it may be the end of all of us. So be it.

"If the choice that confronts us is between a world without nature and a world without humanity, today's most radical anti-humanist thinkers don't hesitate to choose the latter. In his 2006 book, Better Never to Have Been, the celebrated "antinatalist" philosopher David Benatar argues that the disappearance of humanity would not deprive the universe of anything unique or valuable: "The concern that humans will not exist at some future time is either a symptom of the human arrogance … or is some misplaced sentimentalism."


The planet has been greening the last few decades, deserts like the Sahara have been receding, mostly due to higher CO2 concentrations. CO2 is a powerful plant fertilizer, increased concentrations in the ambient air result in more plant photosynthesis and more plant (and food) growth. This phenomenon is even more pronounced in drier climates, as with higher CO2 levels, plants will conserve more water as they need fewer stomata to absorb CO2 and will lose less water in the process of photosynthesis. So the notion that we're paving over paradise to build parking lots is not a representative metaphor, it only applies to American urban landscapes.



If you don't want to watch the entire 17min video, click below for timestamped segment:

World agriculture is experiencing a great boom, with countries like India and China contributing to record levels of food production.

Other than sub-Saharan Africa, the world population is declining, or set to decline. The population of China alone will decline by half a billion this century, and India's current fertility rate of 2.0 is now below replacement rate.

Quote:
The problem is that there is a still a lot of the world living hand to mouth and they can't afford the luxury of high-minded ideals. The West has exported unadulterated capitalism to the rest of the world and it may be the end of all of us. So be it.

It's not so much that capitalism is bad and not adapted to the developing world, it's more that the economic policies set by the West there often tend to be predatory, by design. Outfits like Blackrock, the IMF or World Bank don't have the best interests of local populations in mind. When Ukraine was awarded a $17 billion loan from the IMF after the NATO-backed Maidan Coup, they had to remove restrictions on land ownership by foreigners, which has resulted in vast swaths of that country's very rich soil now being owned by entities like Blackrock, Vanguard, Monsanto or Cargill.

https://reliefweb.int/report/ukraine/war-and-theft-takeover-ukraines-agricultural-land

Reply Quote
4
1 edit
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Chapman_is_Gone • 8:11a, 12/1/24
Chapman_is_Gone said:

I, too, had a serious conversation when contemplating children. My wife and I would love to start a family, but I'm not allowed to be within 100 yards of a minor.

Why? Did you and Matt Gaetz used to hang out together?
Reply Quote
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cal88 • 8:17a, 12/1/24
I'd venture to guess increases in agriculture production have 100,000x more to do with technology rather than CO2 levels.

Something as simple as constructing an aqueduct or bringing in a well drilling rig to tap an aquifer. Then, tractors to flatten fields with ditches for flooding, tills for plowing, pumps and sprinklers.

Reply Quote
Cal88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to concordtom • 9:34a, 12/1/24
concordtom said:
I'd venture to guess increases in agriculture production have 100,000x more to do with technology rather than CO2 levels.

Something as simple as constructing an aqueduct or bringing in a well drilling rig to tap an aquifer. Then, tractors to flatten fields with ditches for flooding, tills for plowing, pumps and sprinklers.

Modern irrigation techniques have been in place since the Roman times and even before that, and tractors and pumps for a century.

The relationship between CO2 concentration and plant growth is well-established. It is the reason every commercial greenhouse operation pumps in CO2 to double or triple its concentration, which increases food production by up to 50%.




The Sahara desert, world's largest, has lost an area the size of Texas in the last few decades, and this is not due to irrigation or tractors, it is due to the facts that plants grow more with higher concentrations of CO2, especially in arid regions.
https://www.thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/mueller-sahel.pdf
https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/goddard/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth-study-finds/



Reply Quote
3
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cal88 • 10:49a, 12/1/24
Were india and china able to afford tractors?

I have seen many Africans still cannot.
Reply Quote
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cal88 • 10:51a, 12/1/24
I'm aware that plants breathe co2.
But co2 increases global temps, melting ice, raising sea levels, flooding, storms, fires.

Take your pick. Are you advocating something here?
Reply Quote
1
Cal88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to concordtom • 11:24a, 12/1/24
concordtom said:
Were india and china able to afford tractors?

I have seen many Africans still cannot.

China mechanized its agriculture very early under Mao.



They were still starving mostly due to the communist system but that wasn't because they didn't have tractors, it was because of the collectivist approach. They boosted their production once they implemented market approaches under Deng. But that was over 30 years ago. The main factor in the increase of agricultural output over the last 3 decades has been the rise in CO2.

Quote:
I'm aware that plants breathe co2.
But co2 increases global temps, melting ice, raising sea levels, flooding, storms, fires.

Take your pick. Are you advocating something here?

No evidence of a change in the rate of rising sea levels over the last century, none whatsoever, plenty of data to support this. Same with floods, severe storms and fires.

Increases in global temps have been well within the recent range of fluctuations, to the extent that the climate has been warmer, it has been beneficial to world agriculture, with longer growing seasons in temperate and northern regions. As well, tropical regions like most of Africa have also benefitted:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/10/25/contrary-to-what-you-hear-global-warming-has-been-good-to-africa/
Reply Quote
3
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cal88 • 11:30a, 12/1/24
Cal88 said:
concordtom said:
Were india and china able to afford tractors?

I have seen many Africans still cannot.

China mechanized its agriculture very early under Mao.



They were still starving mostly due to the communist system but that wasn't because they didn't have tractors, it was because of the collectivist approach. They boosted their production once they implemented market approaches under Deng. But that was over 30 years ago. The main factor in the increase of agricultural output over the last 3 decades has been the rise in CO2.

Quote:
I'm aware that plants breathe co2.
But co2 increases global temps, melting ice, raising sea levels, flooding, storms, fires.

Take your pick. Are you advocating something here?

No evidence of a change in the rate of rising sea levels over the last century, none whatsoever, plenty of data to support this. Same with floods, severe storms and fires.

Increases in global temps have been well within the recent range of fluctuations, to the extent that the climate has been warmer, it has been beneficial to world agriculture, with longer growing seasons in temperate and northern regions. As well, tropical regions like most of Africa have also benefitted:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/10/25/contrary-to-what-you-hear-global-warming-has-been-good-to-africa/


So, are you a climate change denier?
I think so.
Reply Quote
1
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cal88 • 11:38a, 12/1/24
Cal88 said:

No evidence of a change in the rate of rising sea levels over the last century, none whatsoever, plenty of data to support this.


I asked Mr Computer to provide me with evidence of rising sea levels. Next I'll ask it for evidence of No rising sea levels.


Evidence for rising sea levels comes from a combination of direct measurements, historical records, and scientific analysis. Here are key points demonstrating the phenomenon:

1. **Long-Term Measurements**:
- Tide gauge records from coastal stations have shown a steady increase in global sea levels since the late 19th century. Over the past century, global sea levels have risen approximately 1.6 millimeters per year, accelerating in recent decades41.
- Satellite observations since the 1990s provide precise data, confirming a faster rate of rise in recent years compared to earlier in the 20th century42.

2. **Contributing Factors**:
- Melting ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are the largest contributors, along with the retreat of mountain glaciers. Together, they account for the majority of sea level rise.
- Thermal expansion of seawater due to warming temperatures also plays a significant role4142.

3. **Recent Trends**:
- In 2023, global average sea level rose by 0.3 inches (about 0.76 centimeters) in just one year, influenced by natural events like El Niño, which causes ocean water to expand due to heat42.

4. **Impact Evidence**:
- Increased flooding events in coastal areas, such as the U.S., have been directly linked to rising sea levels. These events are growing in frequency and severity, indicating how rising oceans are already affecting communities41.

These findings emphasize that sea levels are rising at an unprecedented rate, driven by human activities and natural climate variability. Scientists use this data to predict future impacts and plan mitigation strategies. For more details, you can explore the studies by NASA and NOAA4142.


The links are:


Here are the links to the sources I used for the information about rising sea levels:

1. **Tide gauge records and long-term trends**: NOAA's detailed analysis of historical and modern sea-level data, including insights into contributions from ice melt and thermal expansion.
[NOAA Sea Level Data](https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/sealevel.html) [oai_citation:1,NASA-led Study Reveals the Causes of Sea Level Rise Since 1900 - NASA](https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/jpl/nasa-led-study-reveals-the-causes-of-sea-level-rise-since-1900/).

2. **Recent trends, including the impact of El Niño in 2023**: NASA's report on the spike in global sea levels due to a combination of natural and human factors.
[NASA Analysis of Global Sea Levels](https://sealevel.nasa.gov/news/309/nasa-analysis-sees-spike-in-2023-global-sea-level-due-to-el-nio) [oai_citation:2,NASA Analysis Sees Spike in 2023 Global Sea Level Due to El Niño - NASA](https://www.nasa.gov/earth/oceans/nasa-analysis-sees-spike-in-2023-global-sea-level-due-to-el-nino/).

Let me know if you'd like additional resources or more context on specific aspects!
Reply Quote
1
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:40a, 12/1/24
Evidence of No rising sea levels


Sea level rise is a well-documented phenomenon supported by extensive scientific research, although some claims attempt to challenge its extent or interpretation. Here are key points based on current understanding:

1. **Rising Trends**: Global sea levels have risen approximately 20 cm since 1900, with the rate of increase accelerating due to factors like thermal expansion of seawater and melting ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. Satellite data confirm a current average rise of 3.7 mm per year [oai_citation:1,Is sea-level rise exaggerated? Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution](https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/is-sea-level-rise-exaggerated-ocean-fact-check/) [oai_citation:2,Sea level rise - Our World in Data](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/sea-level).

2. **Regional Variations**: Sea level rise is not uniform across the globe. For example, areas like the Pacific islands have experienced rates higher than the global average due to local factors such as ocean currents and land subsidence [oai_citation:3,Sea level rise is a global threat here's why | World Economic Forum](https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/09/rising-sea-levels-global-threat/) [oai_citation:4,RealClimate: Sea level in the IPCC 6th assessment report (AR6)](https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2021/08/sea-level-in-the-ipcc-6th-assessment-report-ar6/).

3. **Adaptation Strategies**: Some nations and communities are investing in measures to mitigate the impacts of rising seas, such as constructing seawalls and relocating vulnerable populations. However, these efforts face challenges due to financial and logistical limitations [oai_citation:5,Sea level rise is a global threat here's why | World Economic Forum](https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/09/rising-sea-levels-global-threat/) [oai_citation:6,RealClimate: Sea level in the IPCC 6th assessment report (AR6)](https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2021/08/sea-level-in-the-ipcc-6th-assessment-report-ar6/).

4. **Counterclaims**: While some sources argue that evidence of significant sea-level rise is overstated, the vast majority of peer-reviewed studies and climate assessments support the observed increases. Contrarian arguments often emphasize localized effects, such as land uplift, which can obscure broader trends [oai_citation:7,Overview | Understanding Sea Level NASA Sea Level Change Portal](https://sealevel.nasa.gov/understanding-sea-level/overview) [oai_citation:8,Sea level rise is a global threat here's why | World Economic Forum](https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/09/rising-sea-levels-global-threat/).

If you'd like a deeper dive into specific data or methodologies, I can explore particular aspects further.


It appears ChatGPT has read the internet and disagrees with you.
Reply Quote
2
Cal88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to concordtom • 12:08p, 12/1/24
concordtom said:
Evidence of No rising sea levels


Sea level rise is a well-documented phenomenon supported by extensive scientific research, although some claims attempt to challenge its extent or interpretation. Here are key points based on current understanding:

1. **Rising Trends**: Global sea levels have risen approximately 20 cm since 1900, with the rate of increase accelerating due to factors like thermal expansion of seawater and melting ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. Satellite data confirm a current average rise of 3.7 mm per year [oai_citation:1,Is sea-level rise exaggerated? Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution](https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/is-sea-level-rise-exaggerated-ocean-fact-check/) [oai_citation:2,Sea level rise - Our World in Data](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/sea-level).

2. **Regional Variations**: Sea level rise is not uniform across the globe. For example, areas like the Pacific islands have experienced rates higher than the global average due to local factors such as ocean currents and land subsidence [oai_citation:3,Sea level rise is a global threat here's why | World Economic Forum](https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/09/rising-sea-levels-global-threat/) [oai_citation:4,RealClimate: Sea level in the IPCC 6th assessment report (AR6)](https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2021/08/sea-level-in-the-ipcc-6th-assessment-report-ar6/).

3. **Adaptation Strategies**: Some nations and communities are investing in measures to mitigate the impacts of rising seas, such as constructing seawalls and relocating vulnerable populations. However, these efforts face challenges due to financial and logistical limitations [oai_citation:5,Sea level rise is a global threat here's why | World Economic Forum](https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/09/rising-sea-levels-global-threat/) [oai_citation:6,RealClimate: Sea level in the IPCC 6th assessment report (AR6)](https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2021/08/sea-level-in-the-ipcc-6th-assessment-report-ar6/).

4. **Counterclaims**: While some sources argue that evidence of significant sea-level rise is overstated, the vast majority of peer-reviewed studies and climate assessments support the observed increases. Contrarian arguments often emphasize localized effects, such as land uplift, which can obscure broader trends [oai_citation:7,Overview | Understanding Sea Level NASA Sea Level Change Portal](https://sealevel.nasa.gov/understanding-sea-level/overview) [oai_citation:8,Sea level rise is a global threat here's why | World Economic Forum](https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/09/rising-sea-levels-global-threat/).

If you'd like a deeper dive into specific data or methodologies, I can explore particular aspects further.


It appears ChatGPT has read the internet and disagrees with you.

You're misusing ChatGPT, classic case of garbage in, garbage out. It's a glorified search engine that patches up content without critical evaluation of said content.

There are hundreds of tidal gage measurements out there from across the world, some dating back to the end of the 17th century.

None of them show a significant change in the rate of increase of sea level rise.



Reply Quote
3
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cal88 • 12:20p, 12/1/24
May I ask, what line of work, or industry, are you in?
Reply Quote
1
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:49p, 12/1/24
That's really cool that agriculture production will increase to assure that everyone has enough to eat.




Reply Quote
Cal88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to concordtom • 2:05p, 12/1/24
concordtom said:
That's really cool that agriculture production will increase to assure that everyone has enough to eat.



His whole premise for alarmism is based on projections (at 10:25 in video above), the notion that sea level rise, which has been steady at 1ft per century for the past 200 years, is going to rise to 2-3ft per century and by 20ft in the 22nd century, not on recorded history from the last two centuries, but on future forecasts.

Nearly very alarmist projection since the 1990s has proven to be wrong.

It's pretty clear from his presentation that he has a near-religious belief in his mission as savior of humanity with anthropogenic global warming as the existential threat. That is the culture he grew up with, and upon which his entire livelihood and reputation/self-worth is based. It is also the dogma that has prevailed in academia for the past several decades, if you are a grad student who deviates from that, you will not be funded and will be pushed out, and if you work "along the grain" you will be rewarded, with billions in global warming research funding available.

The 97% consensus is false, there is a much larger minority within the scientific community that disagrees. These scientists, like Judith Curry, foremerly the Dean of School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, was pushed out of academia because she disagreed with the alarmist narrative. Here's her detailed take on sea level rise:

Quote:
The primary concern over future sea level rise is related to the potential collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which could cause global mean sea level to rise substantially above the IPCC's likely range in the 21st century. The IPCC AR5 has medium confidence that this additional contribution from the West Antarctic ice sheet would not exceed several tenths of a meter [less than a foot] of sea level rise during the 21st century.

Subsequent to the 2013 IPCC AR5, there has been a focus on the possible worst-case scenario for global sea level rise. Estimates of the maximum possible global sea level rise by the end of the 21st century range from 1.6 to 3 meters [5-10 feet], and even higher. These extreme values of possible sea level rise are regarded as extremely unlikely or so unlikely that we cannot even assign a probability. Nevertheless, these extreme, barely possible values of sea level rise are now becoming anchored as outcomes that are driving local adaptation plans [link].
https://judithcurry.com/2018/11/27/special-report-on-sea-level-rise/

Quote:
Here are my conclusions:

Mean global sea level has risen at a slow creep for more than 150 years; since 1900, global mean sea level has risen about 7-8 inches. The implications of the highest values of projected sea-level rise under future climate change scenarios are profound, with far reaching socioeconomic and environmental implications. However, these projections are regarded as deeply uncertain and the highest of these projections strain credulity.

The IPCC and other assessment reports are framed around providing support for the hypothesis of human-caused climate change. As a result, natural processes of climate variability have been relatively neglected in these assessments. Arguments have been presented here supporting the important and even dominant role that natural processes play in global and regional sea level variations and change.

As far as my personal qualifications, I have at least 6 upper division and grad level classes on data analysis, forecasting, stochastic processes and Bayesian statistics.

As well I have done research on the topic, the more interesting research there has been done by paleoclimate researcher like Ladurie whose research based on extensive data from the last millenium plus shows that the current climate variations are ell within historical norms.

https://www.environmentandsociety.org/mml/le-roy-ladurie-emmanuel-histoire-et-climat
Reply Quote
2
Zippergate
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:35p, 12/1/24
I've never met a person with mainstream (apocalyptic) climate views who has done a deep dive on the arguments of legitimate skeptics. (It is very easy to straw man the skeptical position by trotting out some random anti-scientific right wing skeptic but what does that prove?) The vast majority of serious skeptics attribute some increase in temperature to increased carbon dioxide levels but believe it is trivial relative to other factors, namely the sun.

Sadly, everything is about money and power today and climate change is no different. There are hundreds of billions up for grabs in the climate sweepstakes and all of it depends on maintaining the narrative that it's "worse than we thought." But for those who refuse to believe that climate science has been captured by special interests, at least read Steven Koonin's book Unsettled. Koonin is a MIT PhD physicist who served in the Obama administration and analyzed the climate outlook based on actual IPCC reports. His conclusion? There is no crisis.
Reply Quote
2
Cal88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Zippergate • 5:46p, 12/1/24
Zippergate said:
I've never met a person with mainstream (apocalyptic) climate views who has done a deep dive on the arguments of legitimate skeptics. (It is very easy to straw man the skeptical position by trotting out some random anti-scientific right wing skeptic but what does that prove?) The vast majority of serious skeptics attribute some increase in temperature to increased carbon dioxide levels but believe it is trivial relative to other factors, namely the sun.

Sadly, everything is about money and power today and climate change is no different. There are hundreds of billions up for grabs in the climate sweepstakes and all of it depends on maintaining the narrative that it's "worse than we thought." But for those who refuse to believe that climate science has been captured by special interests, at least read Steven Koonin's book Unsettled. Koonin is a MIT PhD physicist who served in the Obama administration and analyzed the climate outlook based on actual IPCC reports. His conclusion? There is no crisis.

It's more like tens of trillions. Nearly every human/industrial activity metered, financialized, traded, taxed.

Quote:
The global carbon credit market was valued at $480.11 billion in 2023. It is expected to grow to $13,322.68 billion by 2033, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 39.42% from 2024 to 2033.

One of the biggest misconceptions about the global warming narrative is that big business (esp. Wall Street) and government are against it.
Reply Quote
3
bearister
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:57p, 12/1/24
Meet the Money Behind The Climate Denial Movement | Smithsonian


https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/meet-the-money-behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/

How the oil industry has spent billions to control the climate change conversation | Oil | The Guardian


https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/08/oil-companies-climate-crisis-pr-spending


Oil companies discourage climate action, study says Harvard Gazette


https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/09/oil-companies-discourage-climate-action-study-says/

The funders of climate disinformation | Campaign against Climate Change


https://www.campaigncc.org/climate_change/sceptics/funders
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Reply Quote
4
Zippergate
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bearister • 6:05p, 12/1/24
Hilarious. There is near zero funding for climate science skepticism from industry and there hasn't been for many, many years. In contrast, everyone in the new climate "science" owes their entire career to government grants which are overwhelmingly directed to the "worse than we thought" narrative.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
Cal88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bearister • 6:26p, 12/1/24
bearister said:
Meet the Money Behind The Climate Denial Movement | Smithsonian


https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/meet-the-money-behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/

How the oil industry has spent billions to control the climate change conversation | Oil | The Guardian


https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/08/oil-companies-climate-crisis-pr-spending


Oil companies discourage climate action, study says Harvard Gazette


https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/09/oil-companies-discourage-climate-action-study-says/

The funders of climate disinformation | Campaign against Climate Change


https://www.campaigncc.org/climate_change/sceptics/funders

Some of the foundations listed in that Smithonian articles aren't involved in climate change "denial", that chart below they are using makes it look like they are spending their budget on that.



Here is the portfolio of the Annenberg Foundation for example:

https://annenberg.org/initiatives/

Also, a lot of the big oil oligarchs are all in on the climate change business, like the Rockefellers, the original oil robber barons. Their foundation spending is 100% to push the global warming and its budget dwarfs all others pictured in that chart above:

The Rockefeller Foundation Commits Over USD 1 Billion To Advance Climate Solutions
https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/news/the-rockefeller-foundation-commits-over-usd-1-billion-to-advance-climate-solutions/

Look again at the numbers I've posted, the carbon trade market alone is set to reach $13 trillion per year within a decade, orders of magnitude larger than the figures on the other side. Most of this is going to go to Wall Street, hedge funds, and a large class of executives and bureaucrats making six or seven figures.
Reply Quote
3
bearister
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cal88 • 6:32p, 12/1/24
If I had you in a Jeet Kune Do neck crank you wouldn't tap out.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Reply Quote
3
bear2034
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:10p, 12/1/24
Reply Quote
3
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:19p, 12/1/24
Glacier National Park has nearly no glaciers left. But BIDEN!!!!!!
Reply Quote
2
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:23p, 12/1/24
When I was managing funds, I recall Exxon Mobil was the #1 mcap stock.

Ohhhh, but there's NO money in climate denialism!

Ohhhhh, suuuuuuure!!!
Reply Quote
1
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:26p, 12/1/24
"No, I have not taken 50 trips to the Arctic, but I have taken classes on statistical analysis, AND I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night!"
Reply Quote
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cal88 • 7:29p, 12/1/24
I guess you're right!
Because the carbon credit is not the ideal solution that must mean that there are not massive rivers on Greenland.
Reply Quote
bearister
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to concordtom • 7:53p, 12/1/24
concordtom said:
"No, I have not taken 50 trips to the Arctic, but I have taken classes on statistical analysis, AND I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night!"




Starring…,




…..but I digress.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Reply Quote
1 edit
Cal88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bearister • 8:11p, 12/1/24
bearister said:
If I had you in a Jeet Kune Do neck crank you wouldn't tap out.


Reply Quote
2
Zippergate
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to concordtom • 8:16p, 12/1/24
Many glaciers have been retreating since the 1800s or before. All documented with photographic evidence. Funny you should mention "nearly." Up until a few years ago, there was a sign the park warning that the glaciers would be gone by such and such a date. The date of course passed with the glaciers still there and the sign had to be taken down.
Reply Quote
3
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.