this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
1403 points (95.2% liked)

Memes

45622 readers
1280 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MrFagtron9000@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago (11 children)

Spoiler alert: The civilization disrupting aspects of climate change are still decades out and the rich countries will probably be fine.

They'll be fine because they can afford the infrastructure projects and increased costs of energy and food.

Now Africa, South America, the poorer Asian countries, tiny Pacific Island nations... Oh boy. I would not want to be a citizen there in 20 or 30 years.

Eventually sea level rise will become a really big fucking problem, like for every single coastal city in the world, even the rich ones. Luckily none of us will be around to see that unless some sort of miraculous life extension technology becomes available.

On the one hand I don't like mentioning this because it gives the right wing ammunition to ignore climate change. But on the other hand some people have such existential dread about it that it's damaging their mental health, they are really overestimating how damaging it will be in their lifetime in their rich country they live in.

[–] Knusper@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I mean, I feel like this year in particular illustrates quite well that there are already very real impacts of climate change in rich countries, with Canada, Greece, Hawaii etc. burning. Which makes it worth to delay climate change as much as possible, even if we can't or don't want to stop it at livable levels.

[–] MrFagtron9000@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

You can't have this both ways.

When a magat in the Senate brings in a snowball and says that global warming isn't happening because it's snowing...

"That's weather not climate!"

When there's a wildfire somewhere...

"That's global warming!"

We can definitively say that this year is the hottest year on record, but we can't attribute individual forest fires or tornadoes or hurricanes to climate change.

[–] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 year ago

You're right, we need to look at global tends rather than individual events.

Global trends are showing that the forest fires are getting worse every year.

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

No, but we can point at increasing number of forest fires, hurricanes, and other disasters. That's not local, that's global.

[–] Knusper@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

The others already pointed out that there's a global, rising trend of climate disasters. I would like to qualify:

  • This year did exceed everyone's expectations. It's the first year of El Niño after years of increasing temperatures, so while it didn't come as a complete surprise, it could still be an anomaly.

  • If you ask climate scientists, they'll tell you lots of climate change effects that could contribute to these wildfires, but yeah, ultimately, they'll say they won't know for sure until they've seen the following years.

However, these are raging wildfires all around the globe, in regions that don't normally have them and that aren't linked to each other. At some point, it stops being "a wildfire somewhere" and starts to become a statistic.

Surface-level ocean temperatures are significantly higher this year, globally, than in previous years. We can't explain such a global increase without climate change. And obviously, warm water evaporates differently, leading to unusual weather patterns, leading to droughts, which increases the likelihood of wildfires.

So, yeah, while the snowball is simply irrelevant to the topic, the wildfire statistic correlates with all our other statistics. You'd have to ignore a ton of evidence to not attribute the wildfires to climate change until proven differently.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)