Scientists Warn of Perilous Climate Shift Within Decades, Not Centuries [Archive]

Ultralight

3-23-16, 1:38pm

The sky is falling .....and Y2K and all that there. Could, may, likely, ......the retired climate scientist from NASA needs to get a new set of golf clubs and get out on the links.

Why must you parade through my rain?

razz

3-23-16, 1:58pm

It does no one any good to get hysterical about whatever might happen. We have had many threads on SLN about what we can do about the climate, and other environmental conditions. We do what we can and will cope with whatever happens.

I am very interested in the world and issues that have impacted mankind since forever. I tune out hysteria as that accomplishes nothing. It becomes tiresome very quickly.

catherine

3-23-16, 1:58pm

Why must you parade through my rain?

haha.. good one!

My permaculture teacher talks about how the climate change controversy subverts the real environmental issues, which is that without respect for the planet, we all suffer. It doesn't matter if it's climate change, deforestation, overfishing, overpopulating, soil erosion, breakdown of tribes, species habitat destruction, air, land and water pollution.. it all goes back to biting the hand that feeds us.

Ultralight

3-23-16, 1:59pm

Rogar

3-23-16, 3:41pm

I don't know if the article is hysterical, but Hansen along with his cohort, McKibben, have lost credibility in some circles because of their activism. I personally don't have a problem with that, but there are many that think he has become an alarmist. It does probably shade his scientific credibility by mixing in some things that might be considered a conflict of interest. I was in a discussion with a friend and "denier" and mentioned Hansen, and he pretty much discounted everything Hansen said as being bad science and extremism. With what, something like 40% of Americans that think climate change doesn't exist, isn't caused by man, or is overstated, it's important to get reliable information out to the mainstream, and I don't think they are quite ready for Hansen...yet.

catherine

3-23-16, 4:05pm

How is this article hysterical?

I agree with razz.. I've read a few of Bill McKibben's books and I think it's very difficult to get his "sky is falling" message out in a way that people will a) listen to him and b) change their behavior to prevent a disaster that's inching towards us (even if people agree that disaster MIGHT come, hey, eat, drink and be merry because it's not coming for hundreds of years. "I care about my grandkids, but not my great-great-great-great grandkids."). Not that I don't believe in anthropogenic climate change--I marched in the People's March in NY last fall, but people tend to tune this type of thing out. They also tend to cherry pick data to suit their confirmation bias.

We need to give people a reason to care about the earth in general They need to see more immediate consequences to their actions. They need to love the earth. Right now, people see the earth as a big disposable resource made up of commodities they can trade for soul-sucking crap. This isn't going to change until it's all taken away from them, or, as Derrick Jensen says, when civilization crumbles away.

oldhat

3-23-16, 4:11pm

...Hansen along with his cohort, McKibben, have lost credibility in some circles because of their activism.... It does probably shade his scientific credibility by mixing in some things that might be considered a conflict of interest.

I'm curious. You're a scientist and you've discovered something that you believe poses a grave threat to humanity. Should you sit back and say nothing to the general public lest you be accused of "activism"?

Ultralight

3-23-16, 4:14pm

I'm curious. You're a scientist and you've discovered something that you believe poses a grave threat to humanity. Should you sit back and say nothing to the general public lest you be accused of "activism"?

Yes, if you are emotional about the discovery and its threat to humanity then that makes your discovery not scientifically sound and you should be dismissed as a quack.

bae

3-23-16, 4:19pm

We need to give people a reason to care about the earth in general They need to see more immediate consequences to their actions.

People won't even change their own behaviour when it comes to blood pressure, exercise, diet, weight, smoking, drinking, ... - where the consequences are quite clear and painful and result in direct personal impact.

Ultralight

3-23-16, 4:26pm

People won't even change their own behaviour when it comes to blood pressure, exercise, diet, weight, smoking, drinking, ... - where the consequences are quite clear and painful and result in direct personal impact.

Oh yeah, very few people change their behavior under these scenarios. I doubt people will change their behavior "for the Earth" either.

When Ol' Sawbones told me to eat more veggies, drop some elbeez, and get more active I decided: "I will be the exception to the rule."

I feel the same way about the coming ecological nightmares. I will be the exception to the rule and find a way to adapt to the mayhem.

ApatheticNoMore

3-23-16, 4:27pm

Maybe it's because I have actually read alarmist things, but that article was SURPRISINGLY un-alarmist.

Now Hansen may be right or wrong on speed of climate change, but the whole idea of his being an activist discrediting him is unreal to me. If you actually do climate science and feel the threat is grave and do nothing, well either you are a nihilist or just unable to stand up for your beliefs and that's discrediting to you as well maybe not a scientist (which can be judged on it's own merit) but as a human being.

People won't even change their own behaviour when it comes to blood pressure, exercise, diet, weight, smoking, drinking, ... - where the consequences are quite clear and painful and result in direct personal impact.

sometimes I care more about my impact on the larger world than myself though. Always? oh um, I'm not going for sainthood here (I have no self!), but very much sometimes.

Ultralight

3-23-16, 4:28pm

Maybe it's because I have actually read alarmist things, but that article was SURPRISINGLY un-alarmist.

Now Hansen may be right or wrong on speed of climate change, but the whole idea of his being an activist discrediting him is unreal to me. If you actually do climate science and feel the threat is grave and do nothing, well either you are a nihilist or just unable to stand up for your beliefs and that's discrediting to you as well maybe not a scientist (which can be judged on it's own merit) but as a human being.

I think a huge issue is the ubiquitous scientific illiteracy in this nation.

And god help us -- I am a liberal arts guy making this lament!

JaneV2.0

3-23-16, 4:39pm

There really should be little consensus in science; it's the nature of the discipline that questions will be asked, numbers will be fudged, people will have agendas...I think it's likely that human activities can affect climate, and moving away from fossil fuels seems prudent, but I'd be hard-pressed to defend my opinion on the matter without using the craven "appeal to authority" gambit, which is the only one I've got.

Tammy

3-23-16, 6:21pm

Rogar

3-23-16, 6:24pm

I'm curious. You're a scientist and you've discovered something that you believe poses a grave threat to humanity. Should you sit back and say nothing to the general public lest you be accused of "activism"?

I don't have a problem with it, but objectively, by presenting scientific data or publications the scientist is already beyond "sitting by and saying nothing". Climate change has become very politicized. By protesting political hotbeds like the Keystone XL, skeptics can speculate that the scientist motives are more than presenting unbiased data and are being swayed by the whole ideology of a particular political or ideological persuasion. My understanding is that the deniers have claims that science has presented a possibility and then has molded the data to fit the hypothesis in order to achieve selfish goals other than presenting unbiased analysis. I'm not in that mindset, but can definitely see certain politicians spinning things that direction and are looking for more fuel to feed to fire.

ApatheticNoMore

3-23-16, 6:38pm

One problem is what exactly should individual people do? It's already been shown by various studies that climate change is real, it's already begun, and it is probably not possible to turn it around.

In this scenario it doesn't matter what an individual does - the outcome is still the same.

Is the claim actually that there is nothing humankind collectively could do to change anything? Short of geo-engineering?* That if all carbon use was halted tomorrow and carbon sinks created it would make no difference? That's an extreme claim, but could be true I suppose if by now it's all methane feedback loops etc.. I'm just not so convinced that the science is actually certain on that point.

If there is something that could be done collectively than the individual should do what they can to bring it about.

*whether there is anything that could be done with geo-engineering is I suppose a topic of debate. It's really something that has never been tried before with all the potential of not working an unintended consequences you can imagine, it's a crazed gamble to stop solar radiation reaching the planet etc., but maybe it's all that's left to try.

catherine

3-23-16, 6:49pm

If there is something that could be done collectively than the individual should do what they can to bring it about.

And I do believe in the power of one individual to "be the change." When enough individuals do that, it eventually reaches a critical mass. "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." --Margaret Mead

I realize that you're talking scientific plausibility and not cultural attitudinal shifts, but I think a good response to "it's going to happen anyway" is to act as if the world depends on what you are doing right now and let go of the outcome.

Tammy

3-23-16, 9:11pm

I've read extensively on climate change for several years now. To clarify - My statement about us being beyond the point of turning it around is a summary of my reading - not a summary of this particular article.

Gardenarian

3-23-16, 10:08pm

I think it's about time for some hysteria. We have total climate chaos.
We need something like the space race, or Manhattan Project, and we need it yesterday.

What can individuals do?
Write to your representatives and let them know this is an issue to you.
Encourage others to contact their reps.
Subscribe to a reputable organization to keep informed, so you know what to write your reps about.
Research the transition town movement. These are towns that are transitioning away from petroleum.
Support activists, in any way you can.
Act locally: you can't stop China from burning coal, but you have a voice in your community. Speak up about water waste, trees being removed, energy use at public buildings. My county is GMO free, due to grassroots activism. We've also banned plastic bags (I'm working on banning plastic bottles next.)

As for your personal behavior...it probably doesn't matter at this point. Giving up red meat would probably be the best you could do.

Ultralight

3-23-16, 10:23pm

There really should be little consensus in science

Lack of science literacy there.

JaneV2.0

3-23-16, 10:49pm

Lack of science literacy there.

I don't pretend to be a scientist, but I'm very wary of lock-step consensus in any context. It is particularly dangerous in science, as it shuts down inquiry, shuts off funding, and closes minds. Question everything is a good general policy. IMO.

Rogar

3-24-16, 8:31am

I have trouble being optimistic. At least by American standards I have a climate friendly life, but it seems like most people aren't getting the message. I volunteer on some projects that have some involvement from birders. The Audubon Society has made a strong statement about climate change and how it will affect bird populations, but it seems fully acceptable for a birder to drive a big SUV a couple hundred miles just to see an unusual bird to add to their life list and not make any connection to the climate. As soon as gas prices were down, big car sales were up and McMansions seem to have become the standard for people who can afford them. I understand that most European countries accept global warming as a fact of life, but here we have major branches of government who think it isn't even real and a major presidential contender who has said the whole idea may have been invented by the Chinese.

I try to do my part just because it is the right thing to do and might make for a good example to others, but I really don't see anything significant happening until either it hits people's wallets or we have a HUGE mindset change.

oldhat

3-24-16, 10:29am

... The Audubon Society has made a strong statement about climate change and how it will affect bird populations, but it seems fully acceptable for a birder to drive a big SUV a couple hundred miles just to see an unusual bird to add to their life list and not make any connection to the climate.
This is an excellent point. It illustrates the truth of one of my favorite quotes, from Pogo: "We have met the enemy, and he is us." Furthermore, this kind of behavior seems to be agnostic across the political spectrum; for example, the absurdity of climate scientists flying to a conference on global warming.

I'm (almost) as guilty as anyone on this. This is why I admire people like Jim Merkel, who lives on $5,000 a year and bikes everywhere. He doesn't just talk the talk, he walks the walk (or in this case, rides the bike).

catherine

3-24-16, 10:44am

This is an excellent point. It illustrates the truth of one of my favorite quotes, from Pogo: "We have met the enemy, and he is us." Furthermore, this kind of behavior seems to be agnostic across the political spectrum; for example, the absurdity of climate scientists flying to a conference on global warming.

I'm (almost) as guilty as anyone on this. This is why I admire people like Jim Merkel, who lives on $5,000 a year and bikes everywhere. He doesn't just talk the talk, he walks the walk (or in this case, rides the bike).

+1