It's not just that we're stupid. We're also selfish.

Huge difference between raw intellectual capacity and exercised utility.

You can have a 10 gallon bucket, but it'll only carry that much water if you fill it.

We think we are smart enough to get away with it.

Not the worst geoengineering idea.

Not a good idea, but I've heard worse

This will also fix the wind turbines using up the all the wind!

That's a bit like the investigation into whether lethal bear attacks are because of their teeth or their claws - probably really interesting, but not critical to the question of avoiding the bear.

I was led to believe it's both. Global warming causes ice loss which contributes to global warming which causes more ice loss which contributes to global warming which causes more ice loss ...

Interesting. I would love to work on that kind of data model, as there is an interesting thing to point out with the movement of the polar vortex:
It dips further south to follow along land mass.

I wonder if the wind currents have an easier time maintaining speed along flat surfaces or if the water being warmer causes pockets of higher pressure further north than usual pushing the vortex to be more unstable looking.

It feels like it makes sense that the current would be much more stable along a surface that is more consistent and thus loss of ice smoothing the surface would cause it to wobble but inertia still remains the same meaning it needs to push down elsewhere where there is less resistance.

So I would lean towards ice loss as a cause of changing polar vortex stability but I kinda gave up that ability to do anything about this or study such things a while ago.

deleted

We should also pour cranberry juice into the ocean.

The thing I keep thinking about, and I feel like I've never been able to properly communicate, is that the machines our society runs on are built to run in a certain temperature range.

The 2021 texas winter fiasco was a perfect demonstration of what happens when we try to run a society's machinery outside of it's expected temperature range. Yes, the ERCOT goofballs were trying to save money by narrowing that expected operating range because "It never gets that cold" and "It never gets that hot", but my badly articulated point still stands - a system was made to operate in a temperature range outside of it's capability, and it started to fail. They were minutes away from losing very expensive and hard to replace equipment. What we don't want is for one of the more competently-run power grids in the world to start to buckle due to temperatures, because the same thing that happened in texas could happen on a larger scale.

And that's just talking about the power grid. Anything with a heat exchanger in it, including your car and air conditioner and all the refrigeration that is needed to keep everyone fed, is designed to run in a certain temperature range, and will stop working if you run it outside of that range for too long.

But wait, we can just design stuff to run in a wider temperature range! We certainly can. But we would have to redesign everything that moves heat around.

When you stop and actually think about our situation you realise how thin our operating margins are, we are at the mercy of whatever the planet does and our safety is subject to immediate dismissal should the conditions change. Worse of course are the random cosmic whims which could wipe us out instantly at any time e.g. comets, the sun going weird, etc.

The Day After Tomorrow.

What, are you saying a website called X where I can easily share both amateur porn, shitpost, and fight with other keyboard warriors isn't a solid source for factual information? smh what are you talking about

Next you're going to tell me that drinking diesel fuel is bad for my longevity or something.

I'll start writing that play. We won't even have to splurge on the stage as the wasteland will provide a natural setting.