Jump to content

Climate Change Will Not Subside Using Halfway Measures

Recommended Posts

IMO, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is correct.  Halfway measures to combat climate change are a death knell for humankind.
Bees, bats, beetles, birds, moths and butterflies, pollinate about 90 percent of wild plants and cross-pollinate at least 30 % of the world's crops.  Bat and butterfly species are dying out as fast as bees. 
Between 50% and 80% of the world's oxygen is produced by phytoplankton and they too, are being threatened by warming oceans.  If pollinators die out and plankton becomes scarce, atmospheric oxygen will become diminished.  -  Add several lifetimes worth of oxygen tanks to required supplies for any survival shelter which might be capable of protecting it's occupants.
Phytoplankton – the foundation of the oceanic food chain. Scientists estimate that phytoplankton contribute between 50 to 85 percent of the oxygen in Earth’s atmosphere. Image via NOAA

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, bludog said:
IMO, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is correct.  Halfway measures to combat climate change are a death knell for humankind.


I think you're right. How bad it will get for life on earth, and how many will die before their time: that's a function of how soon we start.


Maybe technological advance coupled with political will can slowly fix it. I hope so.


But if not:


As energy continues to be added to the climate, winds will get worse. More and worse tornados and hurricanes, and even regular wind will become faster.


What happens to communities if tornados regularly pass through them once a year it once every two years? Or floods? Do people rebuild? Or do they move to big cities where they can build dikes, and where skyscrapers block the worst wind? What happens to farming?


But while climate change is the most obvious danger, the oceans must also be cleaned. All life in Earth is consuming plastic, with consequent endocrine harm.


There are even plastic bags in the Mariana Trench, the deepest part of the ocean.


The solution may end up being forced on us, if it gets so bad that there's a massive Malthusian population collapse.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

in 2050 we will need to produce twice as many calories as we do today to feed the world population. This is real if you have kids today. That is only 30 years away. My 19 year old will only be 50 in 2050. Consider the poorest nations that really did not cause this issue. Most in the poorest nations will be forced to migrate in order to survive.

In Syria, people who were sheep herders were forced to move closer to the cities due to climate change in an already arid land. Remember the folks who fled Iraq during the US invasion in 2002/3, where they went across the border into Syria fleeing from the dangers of that war?


Where is the best place to go in the coming years to be safe, that's a good question, a lot of people will be asking soon. We are doing nothing but accepting the inevitable - when we could be helping to save the world. 

The Green New Deal has to be all encompassing, but we are stuck in the rut, seeing how nothing much has been done thus far.

I know, I know, Teddy Roosevelt was wild, but man he was virtuous regarding saving natural resources. Little did he know what we now know. It was a completely different world back then. How long ago was it when he stood with this Scottish son, John Muir


Image result for picture of john muir and teddy roosevelt




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...