Climate change may be worse than we think

it wouldn't surprise me at all. between the difficulty of measurement, and obfuscation by political leaders, who knows how bad it really has been, or is.

 

Temperatures go up, pine beetle moves north and decimates forests, leaving tinder-dry dead trees, which go up in flames during hotter/dryer summers. The domino effect.

 

And I guess that forest fire smoke contributes to global warming? Not sure if it's net cooling or warming.

 

It is too low and insufficient sulfur dioxide to reflect light. The soot deposits on polar snow and charcoal absorbing left overs along with greatly reduced CO{2} to O{2} conversion makes it a heating source ... not counting the CO{2}

Bob Wilson

 

Be careful of recency bias.
BBC - Future - The trouble with big data? It’s called the ‘recency bias’
There are more economic losses or destruction from weather related events because there are more people on Earth to be victims. It's inevitable that every successive hurricane season breaks records of human deaths and destruction. We have records of hurricanes of only the last 150 years. The Earth is billions of years old. Statistically, we have not seen the worst in the small subset of time we occupy.

I believe in global warming, that's why I own Prius. But there is no reason for sensational news. Let the facts speak for themselves.

 

I was hoping that we had an excellent handle on this issue, and were close to solving it quickly with very little difficulty.

 

Global warming and population growth go hand-in-hand maybe?

 

on the plus side, the diseases spreading due to global warming should help with that.

 

Throw in lots of air travel, keep those germs homogenized.

 

I'm sure there is a theory that supports more biomass due to a warmer planet like in the Cretaceous period. The abundance of food moved up the food chain to able to support large dinosaurs.

So in order to replenish oil reserves which come from dead dinosaurs, we need to burn more of it to warm up the planet. To make more dinosaurs. The circle of life!!

 

It might be everything is fine. Very zen.

 

Climate change is already bad. Many just don't know it yet.

 

"oil reserves which come from dead dinosaurs"@11 Perhaps just making a joke here - I can't tell. Algae and larger plankton feeding on them are the biological starting point for petroleum.

Dinos deserve credit for a long run of planetary dominance, but not for this.

Sinclair Petroleum may have been responsible for this but their bigger sin was Teapot Dome.

 

Dinosaur Fever - Sinclair's Icon - American Oil & Gas Historical Society

It's fun, fair enough. Sinclair's plastic dinosaur toys, being made from petroleum, were very "meta".

Nobody wants plastic toys of pond scum, so there you go.

Millions of years required (from any staring material) somehow did not enrage anything-but-evolutionists back then. Ah, simpler times...

 

Mammals of the prehistoric age:



Oh my eyes! My eyes!

 

what does charge point give you when you fill up?

 

Well, the Dimetrodon(the guy with the fin back) isn't a dinosaur, but a synapsid. If people can call birds dinosaurs, then we can call him a mammal.

 

Dimetrodon is very interesting story. Yes in the mammal "stem', prototypical of how large mean animals ought to look, and extinct before dinosaurs rose to dominance. More subtle mammals subsequently spent ~200 million years in hiding/purgatory/being ratike until dinosaurs collectively tripped over a 10-km rock. Then mammals had a lot of birth defects and TA DAH!

So, a like for that. but not compelling that image bag-o-mammals was other than sadly mislabeled.

But why I wonder are you troubled by bird~dinosaur? Is because 'descended from' is so very often misleading? Could agree on common ancestry? This is what is most often intended but often misstated.

==
I should apologize for misdirecting this discussion. Certainly severity of some things related to climate change are underestimated. It's just I think our whole discussion of climate is whacked. Not broad/inter related, not subtle and not time sensitive. But I don't now how to unwhack it. It is as if people disagreeing about favorite levels of CO2 imagine that they are contributing to humanity.

By disagreeing.

 

I think it has to do with nomenclature, and how it is presented.

Dinosaurs were a huge group that dominated the planet for millions of years, and birds are descended from one branch of that tree. I have seen birdness applied to an unrelated branch by a display in a prominent natural history museum. The Wikipedia article is claiming that dinosaurs haven't gone extinct because of birds. Dinosaur - Wikipedia Perhaps the scientific community decided to recategorize birds, and I missed the news because the public was upset about Pluto.

Calling birds dinosaurs isn't any different than calling humans modern day protoprimates. Yes, there is a lineage, but the separation by time means that they could be more different than the same.

As for climate change, I think we are already doomed, but I have a nihilist streak.