If we don’t save the earth by 2020 does that mean sure death by 2050?
2019-08-08 11:24 am
I’ve read the studies that state we only have 18 months left before irreversible damage is done to the earth. After the time limit is up, the earth’s temperature will continue to rise 2 degrees until its impossible for humans to survive in the heat by 2050. but, if we don’t meet the time requirement, is it reasonable to believe that someone will come up with a way to save humanity? like cooling suits or a big bubble for everyone to live in? (those both sound silly, but you get what i mean)
回答 (19)
2019-08-08 8:11 pm
Where are the references to these studies? You must of been in the science fiction area of the library you were visiting.
2019-08-08 11:32 am
In the year 999 it was forecast that the world was going to end in the year 1000, Enough people believed this in Europe that it generated a depression, with nobody bothering to maintain their properties and nobody saving for the future.
2019-08-08 11:40 am
i am a government bootlicker.
Is global warming belief right for me?
Is global warming belief right for me?
2019-08-08 11:35 pm
Stop reading the right wingnut troll posts and you won't be so confused.
2019-08-08 11:28 am
No, but it DOES mean that flora and fauna will find it VERY hard to survive.
2019-08-08 3:22 pm
I doubt that it will get to the point where everyone dies, but the longer we wait to act, the worse it will get.
Your question is right in that the consequences of failing to act will be many years after we fail to act. It will take decades to end the use of fossil fuels even after we do act.
Your question is right in that the consequences of failing to act will be many years after we fail to act. It will take decades to end the use of fossil fuels even after we do act.
2019-08-09 5:19 pm
Odd that you don’t offer the source of this reading, denier comic books perhaps. UN IPCC estimates have temp rise as 2-5c by the end of the century, a lot further in the future than your unsupported claim.
2019-08-08 2:08 pm
Unlikely however old/frail people will find it harder to survive in warmer places and some animal species, a lot of crops will fail too.
2019-08-08 9:37 pm
I agree with Solar Wind (never thought I'd say that). Anyone can say they read something from a "study". Backing it up with references is a different matter.
Claims of "sure death" are exaggerations, often by those who wish to make the issue political. Scientists are not saying that humanity isn't going to survive global warming.
Claims of "sure death" are exaggerations, often by those who wish to make the issue political. Scientists are not saying that humanity isn't going to survive global warming.
2019-08-10 3:13 am
Sadly, climate alarmists are famous for their predictions and rightly so.
However, it is for all the wrong reasons. Here is one: “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”
Does that sound like the one you heard? Does it matter that it was made in 1970!
However, it is for all the wrong reasons. Here is one: “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”
Does that sound like the one you heard? Does it matter that it was made in 1970!
2019-08-09 8:20 pm
"Scientists: 'Arctic Is Screaming,' Global Warming May Have Passed Tipping Point"
This was originally published back in 2005.
https://www.foxnews.com/story/scientists-arctic-is-screaming-global-warming-may-have-passed-tipping-point
And how many other calamities have you heard about the Earth's destruction in the last few years? Aren't you a little tired of all the 'Chicken Little' warnings that never come true but some people get rich and powerful by presenting these potential disasters as real?
This was originally published back in 2005.
https://www.foxnews.com/story/scientists-arctic-is-screaming-global-warming-may-have-passed-tipping-point
And how many other calamities have you heard about the Earth's destruction in the last few years? Aren't you a little tired of all the 'Chicken Little' warnings that never come true but some people get rich and powerful by presenting these potential disasters as real?
2019-08-08 11:36 pm
Most deniers will be surely dead by 2050, because the majority of them are quite old now. Who are the most prominent deniers? Fred Singer and Ivar Giaever will almost certainly be dead, they'd be over 120, Richard Lindzen would be 110, Patrick Michaels could still be around at 100, although doubtful. Christopher Monckton would be pushing 100. Sagebrush would be well over 100. John Christy and Roy Spencer would be well into their 90s.
I bring up the ages of these people, because by and large you don't see very many young people--especially young scientists--that reject global warming It's very hard to ignore the overwhelming amount of evidence.
As for sure death for humanity, I wouldn't think so. We have sent people to the moon and they survived, and even a much warmer world does not compare to the harsh environment of the moon. There very well could be large famines and major species die-offs. Things like forests and the things that live in them can't just pack their bags and leave. The ocean is the biggest question. If CO2 keeps rising then the pH of the ocean will keep falling and their could be major problems there, because shell-building organisms (not just coral, as some people think) rely on supersaturation of calcium carbonate, and that goes down as the pH falls.
Without all the Luddite deniers, though, action can be taken. Unfortunately by that time it may have to be something very risky, such as injecting reflective aerosols into the stratosphere. This is essentially trading one type of climate change for another, and may bring about unintended consequences.
I bring up the ages of these people, because by and large you don't see very many young people--especially young scientists--that reject global warming It's very hard to ignore the overwhelming amount of evidence.
As for sure death for humanity, I wouldn't think so. We have sent people to the moon and they survived, and even a much warmer world does not compare to the harsh environment of the moon. There very well could be large famines and major species die-offs. Things like forests and the things that live in them can't just pack their bags and leave. The ocean is the biggest question. If CO2 keeps rising then the pH of the ocean will keep falling and their could be major problems there, because shell-building organisms (not just coral, as some people think) rely on supersaturation of calcium carbonate, and that goes down as the pH falls.
Without all the Luddite deniers, though, action can be taken. Unfortunately by that time it may have to be something very risky, such as injecting reflective aerosols into the stratosphere. This is essentially trading one type of climate change for another, and may bring about unintended consequences.
2019-08-09 6:15 am
"If we don’t save the earth"
The earth does not need saving, it will be around long after humans have disappeared.
The earth does not need saving, it will be around long after humans have disappeared.
2019-08-10 12:10 am
Obviously not. We have been hearing about the doom from doomsday cults for thousands of years yet we continue to have these thrown out there like they are something new. AGW is just the latest doomsday cult. It will go away like all rest and they will dream up others to replace them.
2019-08-08 11:42 am
Friend a 2 degree rise in the global temperature is going to result in a little more water melting in the polar ice caps and in as humans having to spend more money on our air conditioning bill. But as far as the bee is concerned that's an absolute catastrophe! A bee does its breeding in the cool autumn and winter months. And if the bee does not sense cooling off to the temperature when it's supposed to breed there aren't going to be any bee colonies! That spells absolute catastrophe for the human race! No fruits no vegetables no grasses that depend on pollenization.
That of course means that there's going to be a humongous famine for both man and beast.
And humans are going to have to scramble for their life to artificially pollinate trees and vegetables in the field and grasses if they expect life to go on and food to keep growing.
And yes it's right around the corner bee colony decline is already in high gear!
That of course means that there's going to be a humongous famine for both man and beast.
And humans are going to have to scramble for their life to artificially pollinate trees and vegetables in the field and grasses if they expect life to go on and food to keep growing.
And yes it's right around the corner bee colony decline is already in high gear!
2019-08-09 9:20 am
You can be sure that fake Dirac will come up with a formula proving the exact timeline.
Only thing that is going to cause mass discomfort that quick is socialism. It can (as history shows) destroy any civilization faster than any natural phenomenon.
People are fighting back around the world. Liberal media, of course will never report any of it.
.
Only thing that is going to cause mass discomfort that quick is socialism. It can (as history shows) destroy any civilization faster than any natural phenomenon.
People are fighting back around the world. Liberal media, of course will never report any of it.
.
2019-08-08 4:54 pm
I highly doubt we will get to 2050, maybe 2030 if Yeshua delays.
2019-08-08 9:07 pm
If we don't accomplish some significant goals soon, we're going to be paying much more than we should ever have to. It's simple economics - pay some now or pay a lot later....
but republicans are too stupid to get it - LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
what idiotic fools!!
but republicans are too stupid to get it - LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
what idiotic fools!!
2019-08-09 8:51 am
Nope I lived through several tipping points ,nothing happened
收錄日期: 2021-04-27 23:15:49
原文連結 [永久失效]:
https://hk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20190808032452AAvrKHY