this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
112 points (95.2% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35696 readers
1334 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SamC@lemmy.nz 87 points 1 year ago

It's a difficult question to answer precisely, because of:

  • Scientific uncertainty in exactly what the climate effects will be. It will be "bad" regardless, but exactly how bad and exactly what will go wrong is not 100% clear
  • Uncertainty over how much warming will happen over the next few decades - this is highly dependent on how much action is taken to reduce emissions
  • Interactions between multiple highly complex systems, including climate, the biosphere, and human societies
  • The difficulty in imagining what life will be like when there are significant changes in parts of the world. One of the things people really struggled with in the early days of COVID was: "what the hell is this going to be like?!". No one really had anything to compare it to. It is similar with climate change, but on a much larger scale.
  • Timescales. Even if we limit it to this century, that's another ~77 years (but the effects will probably go on for multiple centuries). It's really difficult to predict the future with a high degree of confidence.

So limiting it to the end of this century, there's a few things we can say. This is taking a somewhat pessimistic view, i.e. there won't be a substantial change in emissions trajectories over the next couple of decades.

  • Climate change itself is highly unlikely to wipe out humans on this time scale. We are a highly adaptable species, spread across the planet and the temperature / climate changes won't be enough to kill us all.
  • That said, there will be human suffering on a scale that is difficult to imagine. Millions will die in heat waves, droughts, floods, fires and other extreme weather events. Some regions, including heavily populated ones will become uninhabitable.
  • There will also be suffering due to food and water shortages, and the spread of diseases
  • Social instability (including war) will increase, due to competition over resources, migration on an unprecedented scale, and general fear/uncertainty among the population. It's possible that instability could become bad enough to wipe out humans (and possible all life) through nuclear war.
  • Parts of advanced society could begin to break down, e.g. we may no longer be able to maintain reliable electricity grids
  • Other species will be hugely impacted too. The rate of extinctions will accelerate, although some species will probably benefit (not necessarily species that humans get on well with).

It is pretty hard to overstate the scale of what will happen this century. It may take a while before we see the worst of it, but we're already seeing the effects, and I think within 20-30 years it will be hard to deny that climate change is affecting everything. At that point, there probably will be substantial action to reduce emissions.

As bad as all this sounds, it's important to remember that it is the "pessimistic" view in terms of our emissions trajectories. i.e. it is not written in stone. There is still time to bring emissions down to avoid the worst of it. There is also no point where it's "too late" for action. Every 0.1 of a degree that we can limit warming will reduce the impacts. So it's important to avoid "doomerism", which often just ends up being an excuse for inaction.

Even if we do restrict warming to 1.5-2C, the world will look very different to what it does today. To get to that point, there will have to be fundamental changes to global society and the economy, which will make the world unrecognisable from today. There are no moderate solutions left, it's either the nightmare described above, or a complete transformation of society. So in that sense, the apocalypse (going by the dictionary definition) is guaranteed.

[–] Cevilia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's already making things hard. Unless you live in a cave (and even if you do, quite probably, IDK) you'll have noticed an increase in the frequency of what's euphemistically called "extreme weather events". These things are bad for us, but even worse for crops, and they're going to keep on getting worse.

[–] Mistymtn421@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

The world has lost /is losing a lot of food this past year alone. Saw an article that Georgia (US) lost 90% of it's peaches this season, folks/farms from the Midwest and Canada either couldn't plant at all due to lack of rain or what was planted has died already.

The dam that was blown up in Ukraine ruined a huge area of farming that has global significance as they exported a lot of grains and oil seeds.

Spain is facing over 60% crop failures and the third year without honey.

Cotton crops from Texas and Spain also at a huge loss.

I am sure there's more, this is just off the top of my head. It'll take a little bit for it all to show up, but we are definitely going to be feeling the effects of this by next year I'm sure.

[–] wet_squid@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

Well, it highly depends on how hard we try to stop climate change.

If you want a serious answer, read the IPCC report.

[–] arcrust@lemmy.fmhy.ml 21 points 1 year ago

“The apocalypse is not something which is coming. The apocalypse has arrived in major portions of the planet and it’s only because we live within a bubble of incredible privilege and social insulation that we still have the luxury of anticipating the apocalypse.” by Terence McKenna

Zen Enso https://bit.ly/InstallZenEnso

[–] TheButtonJustSpins@infosec.pub 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, eventually, a runaway greenhouse effect would be the end of life on the planet.

[–] CitizenKong@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

End of most life. We are already in the sixth mass extinction event, the Holocene extinction, which is characterized by an extinction rate that is 100 to 1000 times higher than the normal background extinction rate and is also 10 to 100 times higher than the extinction rate of any prior major extinction event in the history of this planet. (Source) It is, however, unlikely that all life will cease to exist since there will always remain habitable zones on the planet. A true runaway greenhouse effect like the one that likely happened to Venus is (very very probably) not possible, because there is literally not enough CO2 on this planet to push Earth into complete inhabitability (Source) It will happen to the Earth naturally in about a billion years though since the sun will have become ten percent brighter by then, which will first turn the oceans into water vapor (accelerating warming via runaway greenhouse effect) and finally turn the entire planet into one big desert with surface temperatures of over 900 degrees Celsius.

[–] zephr_c@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

Depends on what you mean by apocalypse. That term didn't originally mean the end of the world, just an event so massive that the world was forever changed by it. It won't be the end of humanity, but we're running out of time to prevent it from being the death of billions. Pick your definition.

[–] Der@discuss.online 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Everything will get harder and more expensive

[–] cantthinkofusern@lemmynsfw.com 10 points 1 year ago

That is going to happen regardless. The things that are causing climate change are the same things that make life harder and more expensive (governments and corporations striving for maximum profit).

[–] Curious_Canid@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago

I think it very unlikely that it will end life on Earth. There are organisms that live in volcanic vents in deep ocean water. Something will evolve to fill whatever niches are available as the environment changes.

I also think that humanity will survive, but even that is not certain. How many individuals die is going to depend a lot on how well we deal with the underlying problems and what technology we are able to develop for surviving under the new conditions.

Hard life. Followed by Shit life. Then Extreme shit/hard life. Then Apocalyptic life where resources are scarce because of extreme climate. Followed by extinction? I mean eventually it's coming.

[–] tymon@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

c/InclusiveOr

[–] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago

It's not an existential threat to humanity nor is it even a bad thing for everyone. It highly depends where you live. For many countries the climate refugees are probably going to be a bigger problem than climate change itself. It's a net-negative for the earth as a whole though I believe.

[–] qeqpep@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Is it motivating to imagine what exactly you are trying hard to avoid? Thanks for the thread

[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Humans are highly adaptable and the lifeforms we require to survive will. It is those species we do not protect that will experience an apocalypse.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm worried that we won't be able to support the population we have. Lower quality of life I can handle. Famine and starvation is frightening. I hate to say it, but we'll probably be ok in North America. The rest of the world, fuck.

[–] ScotinDub@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I wonder what will happen when we have 200-300 million refugees roaming the globe due to climate change...

[–] someguy3@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bangladesh alone is 170 million.

I'm surprised my comment above was downvoted. If people aren't worried about food they are missing the most important thing we need.

[–] ScotinDub@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What do you reckon the time-scale is for things to start kicking off? 10-20 years?

[–] someguy3@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Crop failures could happen at any moment, we're already seeing it to some extent. We pushed the global population to the point where a single event (Ukraine) is bad for global supply.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Por Que no los dos

load more comments
view more: next ›