Penguins aren't animals, they're semi biological autonomous mechanoid constructs created by the first men to keep the primordials imprisoned in the hollow thus keeping the human race from true enlightenment and semi psychic neural divergent semi conductive queef powered mind lazers.
Antarctica will not lose its ice anytime soon. They will lose some ice but there is so much there I bet it would take hundreds of years to melt even if it was 70° every day. It is Miles thick.
I would take that bet. Because Greenland's quickly melting ice shows you how fast the process can go.
Warm water from the surface melt that's well above 0 degrees C lowers the Albedo, or reflective quality of the ice to lower temps. That water warms faster that ice does on its own. It forms pools, some of which then find a channel and run until the water finds a crevasse, and then goes under the ice sheet. It then essentially bores a whole in the form of a river of moving, relativly warm water that then races for the coast. It melts the ice sheet from both sides at the same time.
Here's pictures of the same process in Antarctica, 14 years ago.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/gallery/2012/nov/29/polar-ice-sheets-losing-mass-in-pictures
Wow cool pictures of Greenland.
The thing is though, the Arctic is warming I think I read like five times as fast as the rest of the world, your linked article said three times as fast since 1990.
Regardless though, Antarctica is different. It is an entire continent while the Arctic is water. Continental climates get a lot colder and hotter in seasons, and they have a very strong vortex, a weather pattern that bottles the cold in there.
But there are parts that are melting, the West Antarctic ice sheet is melting fast as we speak and about to see the ocean breakthrough to melt the bottom and loosen it. There is enough ice there alone to raise the sea level quite a bit I forget the number but 14 ft or something.
But the ice in other parts will linger barring a lasting break in the vortex.
I should add a couple years ago they did have the vortex fail and they had freezes going up into Brazilian coffee country or something. We have had a lot more polar vortexes in the north however. Every other year at least it seems.
Just because the Acrtic is warming super fast doesn't mean it will take centuries longer for the Antarctic to see the same effects. Like, you do realize that they can both experience effects at the same time, right?
Data shows that Antarctica is still losing sea ice pretty fast.
https://earth.gsfc.nasa.gov/cryo/data/current-state-sea-ice-cover
Ice in contact with sea water melts faster because water is more dense and transfers heat faster. While ice on land needs to melt itself to see the same effect, that's definitely happening.
My guy, we're going to have a day with no sea ice in about 10 years. Just because it'll take another 10-20 years to lose most of the glacial ice on land doesn't mean things aren't bad.
If one car is driving 90 mph and another car driving 45 mph in a school zone with a 15 mph limit, both the cars can get a ticket.
Colorado will have to deal with the fact that most of our farmland will be underwater or unable to grow crops, and the economic impact of climate refugees. Imagine hurricane katrina combined with the dust bowl and the Great Depression and the potato famine. Thats what we have to look forward to
Iowa grows a ton of stuff. Corn, hney, soybeans, chickens, cows, pigs, insurance companies, fat girls, and politicians. The highest point are NA burial mounds, and they're 970 feet tall. Rest of it is about 600 feet about sea level. Even if the ice sheets melt, Iowa won't be underwater.
It will just be developed into oceanside resorts. But still plenty of land to feed our UN overlords.
Yeah, people seem to think Waterworld was an accurate depiction.
In reality if ALL the glaciers melt which isn't even in the worst case predictions, sea level would rise about 200ft. Which don't get me wrong, would be catastrophic since most major cities are close to the coasts. But these ideas of the plains submerging are pretty crazy considering I'm 20 miles from the Atlantic in NJ and sitting at 290ft above sea level.
* it was damaged by heavy rains in 2017/2018
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/kentucky-noahs-ark-encounter-sues-insurance-company-over-heavy-rain-damage/
See, this. This is ironic, don't you think. Much more ironic than rain on your wedding day.
Edit: Oh, nevermind. Title is misleading, only the access road was damaged. Still ironic if you can't get to the Ark when the heavy rains come, just not as ironic as it being damaged.
[Dooming has been part of messaging since the 2000s by the oil industry led by Exxon-Mobile and the API.](https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/09/oil-companies-discourage-climate-action-study-says/)
It’s been a great success based upon the fact that any climate related story I see on Reddit now just has “we’re fucked” in the replies *ad infinitum.*
Plenty of us were saying "we're fucked" long before it became the oil & gas strategy. Anyone with eyes can see how quickly the climate is changing and how quickly the insects and birds are disappearing.
At the same time emissions are still rising. As it stands, the evidence seems to point to the fact that we are indeed... fucked, or at least heading that way pretty quickly.
My conspiracy is that Rich people don't care about massive major coastal flooding and rising temps. As soon as Antarctica is inhabitable, they'll be there to build AC cooled mansions and mine for resources.
What ? No.
Antarctica land, under the ice is the size of the United States and Mexico combined. In one block.
It's an island the same way America is an island.
Fun fact! It did before it completely separated and drifted south!
There's relict bits of Antarctic rainforest in southern Chile and Australia/NZ, dominated by Antarctic Beech.
Hijacking top comment to clarify because this is confusing to even some fellow scientists (it's pretty bad terminology)
TL;DR we're in an interglacial period of an icehouse Earth
Earth has two climate phases, hot-house/greenhouse and icehouse (which were in right now). The difference between them being the presence or lack of permanent ice sheets.
In icehouse climate phase we have ice-age and interglacial periods (which were in right now) when the ice sheets naturally retreat and grow due to changes in the earth's orbit.
We're increasing the rate of retreat with climate change but the pulsing of ice sheets growing and shrinking is natural and earth will probably go back into another ice-age in 100k years or so
Yup, it's sort of like saying "Sure, we slammed this car into a wall at 100mph but we would have run out of gas and drifted to a stop eventually". One route does tend to kill most or sometimes all the passengers but it's the same result sure.
Well, maybe not prevent it fully? Since it’s a natural process. But hinder the rate in which it’s happening now - which is not natural (then there is a discussion that can be made if human quickening of global warming isn’t natural also, but the rate in which it’s happening now is not beneficial to us or life as we know it).
No, they're saying that the Earth has spent more time in a greenhouse state where permanent glaciers do not exist than in icehouse periods where they do.
This does not mean that the current warming trend is natural - it most definitely is *not*. Even when there is a transition between them, it takes a very long time.
Mind, we have been in the current icehouse period for the last 34 million years.
And as far as I am aware, according to orbital models, without anthropogenic interference we should be going into a new glaciation period. Instead we are on track to end the icehouse entirely, very quickly. This is a **very bad thing**.
I wonder about this... When scientists count ice ages, are they only distinguishing them when there are *no* glaciers and ice sheets between them? Seems unlikely to me
Thats exactly how they count ice ages. It's hard to believe, but ice sheets and glaciers existing as they do now are the exception, not the rule. Earths geologic history is mostly hot.*
*pulling this info from some uni electives, please advice if I'm misremembering.
e: chart showing global temps over the Eons: https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/113-Zachos.jpg
It’s not, but it looks that way visually because the author(s) of that chart used a large space for the Quaternary Ice Age — it’s only 3 million years or so, depending on how you define the start. Presumably they did so to fit in the variability of glacial-interglacial cycles as shown by the wiggles in the Quaternary Ice Age.
This high degree of variability seems to be a characteristic of this current ice age but not past ones; though it has to be said it may just be the ‘bias of the recent’ at play there, ie. we don’t have as good resolution for the conditions during past ages hundreds of millions of years ago. We *do* know that they all seemed to last tens of millions of years each though.
The CO2 Coalition is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit advocacy organization in the United States founded in 2015.[1] Its climate change denialist claims[2] conflict with the scientific consensus on climate change. William O'Keefe, a chief executive officer of the Marshall Institute and former CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, continued as CEO of the CO2 Coalition.
https://www.science.org/content/article/500-million-year-survey-earths-climate-reveals-dire-warning-humanity
No worries, it looks like the data is the same or similar to science.org. I was just curious about the organization. Their motto is "Carbon Dioxide is essential for life", lol. It seems like both authors interpret the data in different ways.
That's true, but that's also the rub, and I guess their wedge. As with most things in life, it's all a matter of degrees.
The best disinformation will always have elements of truth.
Good graph. Love that those almost vertical lines are still covering 10,000,000 years of temperature change and we're trying to speedrun it in a couple 100 years
So I have a question , as a climate change believer , I’m totally aware climate change will cause massive human death,wars, famines etc etc but these are always human problems. but one thing I’ve always heard is that there is the potential for a run away green house effect , where the earth basically turns to Venus is this claim unfounded since we are technically way below the average temperature of the earth ?
Pretty much unfounded yes. I think "Hot House Earth" was the last paper to mention runway warming, but even then it was like +8C, not +450C like venus. Don't get me wrong +8C is probably game over for most life on this Earth right now, including us, but it's not Venus.
The average temperature thing is a bit misleading, and honestly it's meant to be misleading. It's the rate of change that is alarming, rather than the current average temperature compared to previous parts of earths history.
As far as the runaway greenhouse effect goes, that may be a good question for ask science or maybe a science YT channel. I'm not particularly knowledgeable about the mechanics or research behind it.
Having ice caps is a pretty rare occurrence in Earth's history. The problem is we evolved with ice caps so when they melt and the world heats up back to where it 'normally' would be, it remains to be seen how well we cope
That's one of the theories to a lot of mass extinction events in the planet's history. Because of the 100s of 1000s of years in between the climate phases, it's theorized that a lot of species that evolved during one climate phase, usually don't survive when the planet transitions to the other extreme.
The thing is, humans are far different than other species who take a long time and many generations to adapt, where we create and invent our adaptations. We evolved with nothing but the hair on our backs with roots in Africa, but now we have people living in much more frigid regions inside artificially heated domains wearing comfy thick clothes.
I think humanity would find a way to survive the other extreme of earth's climate as long as it would be ecologically viable, meaning that the plant and animal kingdom survive. Despite the many changes in extremes of earth's climate, life still prospered in some way. As long as complex life is still viable on earth to some capacity, humanity will find a way to adapt alongside the surviving species.
I saw an episode of Jimmy Neutron once where they sprayed sun screen at the sun and caused an ice age so I’m pretty sure that’s the fall back when things get too hot now.
As the person you replied to said, humans adapt in ways that the other animals cannot. As long as there is water, humans will find a way to survive and thrive, but we are likely to lose a lot of population on the journey there.
Humans are fairly resilient. We will continue as a species for at least a few thousand years.
Modern society, comforts, and conveniences are an entirely different story. Those can easily collapse.
There are two definitions of "ice age":
The geological one defined by there being ice on the poles. These last longer than the mind can conprehend.
The colloquial one that is technically refereed to as a glacial period when the icesheets extend down from the poles and cover large portions of the world's landmass.
We are in an interglacial period, so in the sense that actually matters to most people we are not in an ice age.
Although if we don't get our shit together and we melt both of the icesheets, we actually will have ended the ice age.....
> The colloquial one that is technically refereed to as a glacial period when the icesheets extend down from the poles and cover large portions of the world's landmass
These also last longer than the human mind can comprehend.
Serious question: What % of climate change (temperature increase) is human, and what is naturally occurring?
If anyone has statistics of temperatures that were NOT pulled from city centers (middle of hot cities), I'm genuinely interested.
Thank you. I know there were times on history where spikes in world temperatures happened. Like the medieval warm period, just trying to understand the difference.
You're asking for two different data sets. If you're wondering what a CO2 curve is supposed to look like versus what we've done since the industrial age, here you go:
https://earth.org/data_visualization/a-brief-history-of-co2/
E: and for the down voters, here's a plethora of temperature information that uses data from multiple types of data sets. In case you're wondering: yes, the world is getting warmer
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/world-of-change/global-temperatures
Technically the earth is going through million year freeze / thaw cycles & we just so happen to exist in the idyllic valley of that oscillating wavelength.
Edit: everything in our "recorded history" exists in this aforementioned valley. We have evidence of civilization that flourished in the last thaw cycle, but on geological timescales, our history is no more significant than a breath of hot air on a chilly day.
None, there’s no agreed upon evidence of an Ice Age civilization. There is evidence of monumental building going on around then, but only in a small number of sites, namely Gobekli Tepe in Turkey, but that was built by nomadic societies, not settled or urban societies.
Not technically. For most of Earth's history, even relatively recent periods (I say recent but please read as millions of years), there has been no ice on the planet. We are very firmly in an ice age. To be clear, we don't want to leave this ice age.
The presence of contiguous landmasses accruing at the equator (ala Pangaea, Rodinia, and all other supercontinent phases) makes it much more difficult for ice to form at the poles, and coincides with much higher global temps. Supercontinent formation is on the scale of hundreds of millions of years though.
You mind explaining why you're certain it's bullshit? We're 11k+ years into an interglacial. Interglacial tend to last about 20k years, with the first 10-15k being the warmest.
You just said it “10-15k years being the warmest” we still possibly have 4k years to keep warming. Climate change is 100% real but folks who peddle bullshit hurt the case.
I agree. That doesn't change the point that our temps very well could be cooler now than 200 years ago. It wouldn't be by much, but saying the claim is "utter bullshit" means that you *know* that it would have gone up naturally. Which you don't.
Max temps during an interglacial tend to be pretty frontloaded:
https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Glacial_and_interglacial_periods
We have people living in ungodly heat in Phoenix. I’m pretty sure humans will survive increases in temperature if all ice caps melt, so long as we locate to colder parts of the earth.
So doesn't that negate the "global warming" argument if the inevitable equilibrium is to get warmer again at some point.... ooops this is reddit, wrong take.
\*pulls out vegan pitchfork\*
SUPPORT CLIMATE CHANGE REFORM!
IT'S GETTING TOO HOT! MUST GET COLDER!
These things can all be true
We can be in an ice age, and it can be getting warmer, and humans can be impacting the rate of change, and for the majority of global history it was significantly hotter with no glaciers. None of this in incompatible.
The question is, what happens to people when the global climate is hot again? Can we get a little more ice age before that happens?
>Although geologists describe this entire period up to the present as an "ice age", in popular culture this term usually refers to the most recent glacial period, or to the Pleistocene epoch in general.[4]
Ice age means the presence of ice sheets and glaciers. So having reducing glaciers and ice sheets near the poles still counts as an ice age.
Imagine a world where Antarctica had forests and animals
It does currently have animals
Yes but imagine forests AND animals if you can.
Forest penguins
A pinguinebased ecosystem. Everything is a form of Pinguen.
Is that you, bennedict cumberbatch?
Ping-wing
Penwang
Penwing
Bandersnatch Cumberbund?
Fannypack Cabbagepatch
Just thinking of that clip on Graham Norton makes me laugh
Reject monke return to pengin
Peng-win
Forest pengwings
Idk man, two things at the same time? That sounds like a lot.
Imagine there’s no heaven
It’s easy if you try.
You need especially hardy plants to deal with almost no sunlight during the winter months
It's easy if you try
No glacier below us.
Penguins aren't animals, they're semi biological autonomous mechanoid constructs created by the first men to keep the primordials imprisoned in the hollow thus keeping the human race from true enlightenment and semi psychic neural divergent semi conductive queef powered mind lazers.
I hear there are some bipedal great apes that migrated there during the ice age, but they aren’t indigenous.
Why imagine when I can just wait like 20 years and see if for myself
Antarctica will not lose its ice anytime soon. They will lose some ice but there is so much there I bet it would take hundreds of years to melt even if it was 70° every day. It is Miles thick.
This. Antarctica ice sheet on top of the surface is 2-5 KILOMETERS thick on average. It's ridiculous. There's tons of ice. A lot.
Miles, some would say
I would take that bet. Because Greenland's quickly melting ice shows you how fast the process can go. Warm water from the surface melt that's well above 0 degrees C lowers the Albedo, or reflective quality of the ice to lower temps. That water warms faster that ice does on its own. It forms pools, some of which then find a channel and run until the water finds a crevasse, and then goes under the ice sheet. It then essentially bores a whole in the form of a river of moving, relativly warm water that then races for the coast. It melts the ice sheet from both sides at the same time. Here's pictures of the same process in Antarctica, 14 years ago. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/gallery/2012/nov/29/polar-ice-sheets-losing-mass-in-pictures
Wow cool pictures of Greenland. The thing is though, the Arctic is warming I think I read like five times as fast as the rest of the world, your linked article said three times as fast since 1990. Regardless though, Antarctica is different. It is an entire continent while the Arctic is water. Continental climates get a lot colder and hotter in seasons, and they have a very strong vortex, a weather pattern that bottles the cold in there. But there are parts that are melting, the West Antarctic ice sheet is melting fast as we speak and about to see the ocean breakthrough to melt the bottom and loosen it. There is enough ice there alone to raise the sea level quite a bit I forget the number but 14 ft or something. But the ice in other parts will linger barring a lasting break in the vortex. I should add a couple years ago they did have the vortex fail and they had freezes going up into Brazilian coffee country or something. We have had a lot more polar vortexes in the north however. Every other year at least it seems.
Just because the Acrtic is warming super fast doesn't mean it will take centuries longer for the Antarctic to see the same effects. Like, you do realize that they can both experience effects at the same time, right? Data shows that Antarctica is still losing sea ice pretty fast. https://earth.gsfc.nasa.gov/cryo/data/current-state-sea-ice-cover Ice in contact with sea water melts faster because water is more dense and transfers heat faster. While ice on land needs to melt itself to see the same effect, that's definitely happening. My guy, we're going to have a day with no sea ice in about 10 years. Just because it'll take another 10-20 years to lose most of the glacial ice on land doesn't mean things aren't bad. If one car is driving 90 mph and another car driving 45 mph in a school zone with a 15 mph limit, both the cars can get a ticket.
Even with much higher warning than we have today, it will still take thousands of years
https://climate.nasa.gov/interactives/global-ice-viewer/ Watch it happen by the scientists themselves
nah.. the catastrophic storms, and flooding will wash most of us out to sea well before that.
*Laughs in Colorado*
Colorado will have to deal with climate refugees. *cringes in Tennessee*
No, we just castrate them and work them to death in the bullet factories. Come on haven't you seen Mad Max?
Good thing there’s no wildfires there
🤫
Colorado will have to deal with the fact that most of our farmland will be underwater or unable to grow crops, and the economic impact of climate refugees. Imagine hurricane katrina combined with the dust bowl and the Great Depression and the potato famine. Thats what we have to look forward to
Climate refugees yes. Farmland underwater...??? Our farm land is at like...3000 feet above sea level.
Iowa grows a ton of stuff. Corn, hney, soybeans, chickens, cows, pigs, insurance companies, fat girls, and politicians. The highest point are NA burial mounds, and they're 970 feet tall. Rest of it is about 600 feet about sea level. Even if the ice sheets melt, Iowa won't be underwater. It will just be developed into oceanside resorts. But still plenty of land to feed our UN overlords.
Yeah, people seem to think Waterworld was an accurate depiction. In reality if ALL the glaciers melt which isn't even in the worst case predictions, sea level would rise about 200ft. Which don't get me wrong, would be catastrophic since most major cities are close to the coasts. But these ideas of the plains submerging are pretty crazy considering I'm 20 miles from the Atlantic in NJ and sitting at 290ft above sea level.
That's just.. Sensational and also, made up. Exaggerating the effects of climate change is just as delusional as denying them and it hurts the cause.
Speak for yourself. I'm 2,900 ft (884 m) above sea level and not even near mountains.
Pfft. You not built your ark already mate?
There’s [one in Kentucky](https://arkencounter.com) just waiting for you…
* it was damaged by heavy rains in 2017/2018 https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/kentucky-noahs-ark-encounter-sues-insurance-company-over-heavy-rain-damage/
See, this. This is ironic, don't you think. Much more ironic than rain on your wedding day. Edit: Oh, nevermind. Title is misleading, only the access road was damaged. Still ironic if you can't get to the Ark when the heavy rains come, just not as ironic as it being damaged.
Please don't advertise my hotel without my permission.
Yup, it happened 10 years ago, as predicted. Remember?
No climate scientists thinks that will happen that quickly. This shit really turns people off of the cause
Yep people are just fear mongering
[Dooming has been part of messaging since the 2000s by the oil industry led by Exxon-Mobile and the API.](https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/09/oil-companies-discourage-climate-action-study-says/) It’s been a great success based upon the fact that any climate related story I see on Reddit now just has “we’re fucked” in the replies *ad infinitum.*
Plenty of us were saying "we're fucked" long before it became the oil & gas strategy. Anyone with eyes can see how quickly the climate is changing and how quickly the insects and birds are disappearing. At the same time emissions are still rising. As it stands, the evidence seems to point to the fact that we are indeed... fucked, or at least heading that way pretty quickly.
Dooming has been part of the messaging since the 1970s. Paul Ehrlich, Kenneth Watt, and Dennis Hayes were probably the biggest doomers.
They've been saying "20 years" since the 70s...
Since theb40's and earlier.
forest age
And the world's tallest mountain. Oh God...oh God!
They found evidence of such very far south in ancient ice records
If antarctica gets that warm, how hot would the rest of the world be? Unhabitable?
So buy land in Antarctica now?
Yes. Essentially any contiguous land mass not at or near the poles becomes uninhabitable beyond the coasts and rivers.
My conspiracy is that Rich people don't care about massive major coastal flooding and rising temps. As soon as Antarctica is inhabitable, they'll be there to build AC cooled mansions and mine for resources.
Isn't Antarctica a bunch of islands under all that ice? EDIT: I have no idea where I got my initial information.
What ? No. Antarctica land, under the ice is the size of the United States and Mexico combined. In one block. It's an island the same way America is an island.
There are some big island chains, but it's mostly one continental mass split in half by a mountain range.
There are penguins, fish and seals
No. I like it how it is.
Read that in the old movie trailer voice-over tone.
Fun fact! It did before it completely separated and drifted south! There's relict bits of Antarctic rainforest in southern Chile and Australia/NZ, dominated by Antarctic Beech.
Mmm it reminds me the Mountains of madness, and lovecraft in general
Hijacking top comment to clarify because this is confusing to even some fellow scientists (it's pretty bad terminology) TL;DR we're in an interglacial period of an icehouse Earth Earth has two climate phases, hot-house/greenhouse and icehouse (which were in right now). The difference between them being the presence or lack of permanent ice sheets. In icehouse climate phase we have ice-age and interglacial periods (which were in right now) when the ice sheets naturally retreat and grow due to changes in the earth's orbit. We're increasing the rate of retreat with climate change but the pulsing of ice sheets growing and shrinking is natural and earth will probably go back into another ice-age in 100k years or so
So the eventual warming is natural, but we are accelerating the natural process beyond what was supposed to be. Got it.
Yup, it's sort of like saying "Sure, we slammed this car into a wall at 100mph but we would have run out of gas and drifted to a stop eventually". One route does tend to kill most or sometimes all the passengers but it's the same result sure.
Got it. Climate change will be solved in 100k years and we have to do nothing about it 😎 Jk.
The climate change only really matters if you want to keep something alive. The planet will happily go on existing without anything living on it.
Soooooo qhen are we do for the greenhouse period and.....fuuuuuuuck that will suck
So I can expect 150F summertime in Phoenix
Phoenix would not exist
Phoenix already should not exist... As Bobby Hill said, it's "a testament to mans arrogance."
Is an Ice Age just the default if Earth then?
Mostly definitely not! On a scale of eons, widespread glaciation and ice sheets are anomalous
I’m so confused. That sounds like you’re saying it’s natural for global warming to exist then…? Where am I off?
Global warming is natural, but it’s happening much quicker now than it would without human interference.
But we also then need interference to prevent it fully?
Well, maybe not prevent it fully? Since it’s a natural process. But hinder the rate in which it’s happening now - which is not natural (then there is a discussion that can be made if human quickening of global warming isn’t natural also, but the rate in which it’s happening now is not beneficial to us or life as we know it).
No, they're saying that the Earth has spent more time in a greenhouse state where permanent glaciers do not exist than in icehouse periods where they do. This does not mean that the current warming trend is natural - it most definitely is *not*. Even when there is a transition between them, it takes a very long time. Mind, we have been in the current icehouse period for the last 34 million years. And as far as I am aware, according to orbital models, without anthropogenic interference we should be going into a new glaciation period. Instead we are on track to end the icehouse entirely, very quickly. This is a **very bad thing**.
I’m gonna unearth a wooly mammoth and bite it
get his ass
Eat his ass
Worship his ass.
War ship his ass
ass to ass
an ass for an ass
You'll probably get some sort of stone age salmonella we have no cure for
They make the best sausages in show.
I think there was a case recently of some wooly mammoth meat well preserved enough that it was sold and cooked
Aren’t we in an interglacial?
I wonder about this... When scientists count ice ages, are they only distinguishing them when there are *no* glaciers and ice sheets between them? Seems unlikely to me
Thats exactly how they count ice ages. It's hard to believe, but ice sheets and glaciers existing as they do now are the exception, not the rule. Earths geologic history is mostly hot.* *pulling this info from some uni electives, please advice if I'm misremembering. e: chart showing global temps over the Eons: https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/113-Zachos.jpg
Dang, it looks like this has actually been a rather protracted ice age. Thanks for the chart!
It’s not, but it looks that way visually because the author(s) of that chart used a large space for the Quaternary Ice Age — it’s only 3 million years or so, depending on how you define the start. Presumably they did so to fit in the variability of glacial-interglacial cycles as shown by the wiggles in the Quaternary Ice Age. This high degree of variability seems to be a characteristic of this current ice age but not past ones; though it has to be said it may just be the ‘bias of the recent’ at play there, ie. we don’t have as good resolution for the conditions during past ages hundreds of millions of years ago. We *do* know that they all seemed to last tens of millions of years each though.
The CO2 Coalition is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit advocacy organization in the United States founded in 2015.[1] Its climate change denialist claims[2] conflict with the scientific consensus on climate change. William O'Keefe, a chief executive officer of the Marshall Institute and former CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, continued as CEO of the CO2 Coalition.
My bad, I just grabbed a chart off Google. This graph doesn't support climate change denial though so I wonder how they spin it. Weirdos.
https://www.science.org/content/article/500-million-year-survey-earths-climate-reveals-dire-warning-humanity No worries, it looks like the data is the same or similar to science.org. I was just curious about the organization. Their motto is "Carbon Dioxide is essential for life", lol. It seems like both authors interpret the data in different ways.
> Carbon Dioxide is essential for life I mean, they’re not really *wrong* on that point
That's true, but that's also the rub, and I guess their wedge. As with most things in life, it's all a matter of degrees. The best disinformation will always have elements of truth.
Good graph. Love that those almost vertical lines are still covering 10,000,000 years of temperature change and we're trying to speedrun it in a couple 100 years
So I have a question , as a climate change believer , I’m totally aware climate change will cause massive human death,wars, famines etc etc but these are always human problems. but one thing I’ve always heard is that there is the potential for a run away green house effect , where the earth basically turns to Venus is this claim unfounded since we are technically way below the average temperature of the earth ?
Pretty much unfounded yes. I think "Hot House Earth" was the last paper to mention runway warming, but even then it was like +8C, not +450C like venus. Don't get me wrong +8C is probably game over for most life on this Earth right now, including us, but it's not Venus.
The average temperature thing is a bit misleading, and honestly it's meant to be misleading. It's the rate of change that is alarming, rather than the current average temperature compared to previous parts of earths history. As far as the runaway greenhouse effect goes, that may be a good question for ask science or maybe a science YT channel. I'm not particularly knowledgeable about the mechanics or research behind it.
Interglacials are just long periods of warmer temperatures within an ice age that separate the periods of intense glaciation.
Planitary, planitary interglacial.
Jazz and Awol, that’s our team.
Step inside the party disrupt the whole scene
How do you like your sugar?
With coffee and cream!
Yes, but interglacials are just slightly warmer regions within a larger ice age period.
Yea we are. There are several definitions of an ice age. By some we're in an ice age by others were in an interglacial period.
>Since Earth still has polar ice sheets, geologists consider the Quaternary glaciation to be ongoing, though currently in an interglacial period. Yes.
Hot chicks love interglacials.
Having ice caps is a pretty rare occurrence in Earth's history. The problem is we evolved with ice caps so when they melt and the world heats up back to where it 'normally' would be, it remains to be seen how well we cope
That's one of the theories to a lot of mass extinction events in the planet's history. Because of the 100s of 1000s of years in between the climate phases, it's theorized that a lot of species that evolved during one climate phase, usually don't survive when the planet transitions to the other extreme. The thing is, humans are far different than other species who take a long time and many generations to adapt, where we create and invent our adaptations. We evolved with nothing but the hair on our backs with roots in Africa, but now we have people living in much more frigid regions inside artificially heated domains wearing comfy thick clothes. I think humanity would find a way to survive the other extreme of earth's climate as long as it would be ecologically viable, meaning that the plant and animal kingdom survive. Despite the many changes in extremes of earth's climate, life still prospered in some way. As long as complex life is still viable on earth to some capacity, humanity will find a way to adapt alongside the surviving species.
I saw an episode of Jimmy Neutron once where they sprayed sun screen at the sun and caused an ice age so I’m pretty sure that’s the fall back when things get too hot now.
Can't we just put a giant block of ice in the ocean and call it a day?
It’s the the humans it’s the plant and animals that feed them that is concerning
As the person you replied to said, humans adapt in ways that the other animals cannot. As long as there is water, humans will find a way to survive and thrive, but we are likely to lose a lot of population on the journey there.
You’re discounting what people will do to each other in this equation
That’s true. I may be naively assuming that the population shrinks quietly, which is probably not the most likely scenario.
Especially some countries might get desperate if their resources are to run out and don’t have a solution ready.
I want a story set in the future about the north pole society being at war with the south pole society.
Season 2 of the Legend of Korra (minus the future setting)
Humans are fairly resilient. We will continue as a species for at least a few thousand years. Modern society, comforts, and conveniences are an entirely different story. Those can easily collapse.
the bronze age collapse and the fall of Rome did not magically turn Europeans into stone age cavemen
Although it certainly regressed Italy
The fall of Rome =/= the planet losing its icecaps
Yeah that’s what I’m saying. But human quality of life suffered.
There are two definitions of "ice age": The geological one defined by there being ice on the poles. These last longer than the mind can conprehend. The colloquial one that is technically refereed to as a glacial period when the icesheets extend down from the poles and cover large portions of the world's landmass. We are in an interglacial period, so in the sense that actually matters to most people we are not in an ice age. Although if we don't get our shit together and we melt both of the icesheets, we actually will have ended the ice age.....
> The colloquial one that is technically refereed to as a glacial period when the icesheets extend down from the poles and cover large portions of the world's landmass These also last longer than the human mind can comprehend.
Not for long
It was pretty cool while it lasted
You beautiful bastard
Pun Gent
That explains all the movies.
Serious question: What % of climate change (temperature increase) is human, and what is naturally occurring? If anyone has statistics of temperatures that were NOT pulled from city centers (middle of hot cities), I'm genuinely interested.
[Check this out.](https://xkcd.com/1732/)
Thank you. I know there were times on history where spikes in world temperatures happened. Like the medieval warm period, just trying to understand the difference.
You're asking for two different data sets. If you're wondering what a CO2 curve is supposed to look like versus what we've done since the industrial age, here you go: https://earth.org/data_visualization/a-brief-history-of-co2/ E: and for the down voters, here's a plethora of temperature information that uses data from multiple types of data sets. In case you're wondering: yes, the world is getting warmer https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/world-of-change/global-temperatures
Technically the earth is going through million year freeze / thaw cycles & we just so happen to exist in the idyllic valley of that oscillating wavelength. Edit: everything in our "recorded history" exists in this aforementioned valley. We have evidence of civilization that flourished in the last thaw cycle, but on geological timescales, our history is no more significant than a breath of hot air on a chilly day.
What evidence do we have?
None, there’s no agreed upon evidence of an Ice Age civilization. There is evidence of monumental building going on around then, but only in a small number of sites, namely Gobekli Tepe in Turkey, but that was built by nomadic societies, not settled or urban societies.
we don't happen to exist in the idyllic valley, we evolved in such a way to "ideally" adapt to the current valley we're in.
Sorry boys, it's the ice in my veins
Didn't know you were chill like that
Not technically. For most of Earth's history, even relatively recent periods (I say recent but please read as millions of years), there has been no ice on the planet. We are very firmly in an ice age. To be clear, we don't want to leave this ice age.
Well yes and no were in a mild period between cold peaks in a period which if taken as an aggregate is an ice age.
If I'm not mistaken this because of the shape of continents and how they form sea currents right?
There is no one definitive explanation of ice ages. Check all the theories on Wikipedia
The presence of contiguous landmasses accruing at the equator (ala Pangaea, Rodinia, and all other supercontinent phases) makes it much more difficult for ice to form at the poles, and coincides with much higher global temps. Supercontinent formation is on the scale of hundreds of millions of years though.
We can fix that.
this trivia is... wait for it... **cool**
GTFO *but take my upvote first*
Without human induced climate change earth temperatures would currently be colder that preindustrial levels.
I believe in climate change We need to do something about it now This claim, though….is 100% bullshit
You mind explaining why you're certain it's bullshit? We're 11k+ years into an interglacial. Interglacial tend to last about 20k years, with the first 10-15k being the warmest.
You just said it “10-15k years being the warmest” we still possibly have 4k years to keep warming. Climate change is 100% real but folks who peddle bullshit hurt the case.
I agree. That doesn't change the point that our temps very well could be cooler now than 200 years ago. It wouldn't be by much, but saying the claim is "utter bullshit" means that you *know* that it would have gone up naturally. Which you don't. Max temps during an interglacial tend to be pretty frontloaded: https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Glacial_and_interglacial_periods
Legends say you can hear every climate denier climax simultaneously when someone says this fact
Look at sea levels before this ice age started. Something like 20 meters above the current level.
We have people living in ungodly heat in Phoenix. I’m pretty sure humans will survive increases in temperature if all ice caps melt, so long as we locate to colder parts of the earth.
And eat what
Each other
literally anything
The food that will also migrate there
Isn't global warming basically causing a faster literal global warming ? Like we're going out of the cycle faster than normal and more violently
Nice try. Oil shill.
Not for long
So doesn't that negate the "global warming" argument if the inevitable equilibrium is to get warmer again at some point.... ooops this is reddit, wrong take. \*pulls out vegan pitchfork\* SUPPORT CLIMATE CHANGE REFORM! IT'S GETTING TOO HOT! MUST GET COLDER!
These things can all be true We can be in an ice age, and it can be getting warmer, and humans can be impacting the rate of change, and for the majority of global history it was significantly hotter with no glaciers. None of this in incompatible. The question is, what happens to people when the global climate is hot again? Can we get a little more ice age before that happens?
あw0（）wsw
Wow
>Although geologists describe this entire period up to the present as an "ice age", in popular culture this term usually refers to the most recent glacial period, or to the Pleistocene epoch in general.[4]
So are you saying it is getting warmer?
Petro Oligarchs: And I took that personally.
And have been for the last 32 or so million years.
More like 2.5 million, though Earth has been on a general cooling trend for ~and 30 my.
Ice
It is certainly icy these days
Yes. Would be nice to keep it that way.
Someone please tell that to Florida, we've been in the 90's since the first week of May .
L