• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How fast can we stop earth from warming?

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
As some of you know, climate warming is a big issue for me. I am very concerned about it.

This article is written by a professor of climate science.

How fast can we stop Earth from warming?

Quoting from the article:

Global warming doesn’t stop on a dime. If people everywhere stopped burning fossil fuels tomorrow, stored heat would still continue to warm the atmosphere.

But that doesn’t mean the planet returns to its preindustrial climate or that we avoid disruptive effects such as sea level rise...

It is important to note that this is only the peak, when the temperature starts to stabilize – not the onset of rapid cooling or a reversal of climate change...

Our most robust finding is that the less carbon dioxide humans release, the better off humanity will be. Committed warming and human behavior point to a need to accelerate efforts both to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to this warming planet now, rather than simply talking about how much needs to happen in the future.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
Another article from the same source:

Climate change report: what we must do to avert the looming crisis

Climate change is a threat to all aspects of our lives. Every degree of global warming is likely to increase the intensity and frequency of climate extremes, such as drought and flooding. In a bid to address this, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – an intergovernmental body of the United Nations – has released a key report which looks at mitigation of climate change.

The report is prepared by 278 authors from 65 countries, based on evidence from 18,000 scientific references. It examines the sources of global emissions and explores the strategies that can be taken to limit and prevent global warming induced by humans...

According to the report, the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions caused by people (what’s known as “anthropogenic emissions”) for example through industrial activities, has continued to rise. Its concentration in the recent decades (between 2010 and 2019) exceeded previous decades. This applies to all greenhouse gases and sectors, such as energy, transport, and manufacturing...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
"We have the tools and know-how required to limit warming."

But not the will or discipline.

I think that we can assume that the trend will continue more or less unabated for several more years, and will decelerate to slowly to prevent crisis at a level that threatens power and money. Such people can withstand much more than those who will have difficulty relocating or finding water, for example, and will allow them and the biosphere to suffer as much damage as they themselves can absorb.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Another article from the same source:

Climate change report: what we must do to avert the looming crisis

Climate change is a threat to all aspects of our lives. Every degree of global warming is likely to increase the intensity and frequency of climate extremes, such as drought and flooding. In a bid to address this, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – an intergovernmental body of the United Nations – has released a key report which looks at mitigation of climate change.

The report is prepared by 278 authors from 65 countries, based on evidence from 18,000 scientific references. It examines the sources of global emissions and explores the strategies that can be taken to limit and prevent global warming induced by humans...

According to the report, the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions caused by people (what’s known as “anthropogenic emissions”) for example through industrial activities, has continued to rise. Its concentration in the recent decades (between 2010 and 2019) exceeded previous decades. This applies to all greenhouse gases and sectors, such as energy, transport, and manufacturing...

The largest growth in emissions was that of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels and industry. It was followed by methane. In 2019, anthropogenic emissions reached 59 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide, about 12% higher than in 2010.

It’s not all bad news. The rate of growth of emissions between 2010 and 2019 was lower than that between 2000 and 2009. There was a reduction in the annual growth rate of greenhouse gas emissions by 2.1% per year between 2000 and 2009. And 1.3% per year between 2010 and 2019.

However, this isn’t enough to limit global temperature warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels in line with the Paris Agreement.

The target of 1.5°C was meant to limit some of the worst effects of climate change, such as an increased number of severe heat waves on land, extreme storms and the destruction of ecosystems around the world.

Emission of greenhouse gases is on the rise, an indication that the worst lies ahead. According to the IPCC’s report, we will likely exceed 1.5°C during the 21st century.

The report projects a peak of greenhouse gas emissions between 2020 and 2025 in global modelled pathways if we have to limit warming to 1.5°C and it’s assumed that action will be taken to limit further warming thereafter.

However, without a beefing up of policies – beyond efforts by each country to reduce national emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change (known as the nationally-determined-contributions) implemented by the end of 2020 – emissions are projected to continue rising past 2025, leading to an average warming of 3.2°C by 2100.

Such projected warming is likely to cause multiple and compound climate-related risks such extreme drought, rainfall deficits, and risks associated with water availability.

This is the time to act swiftly and shape the future. There is a need for concerted efforts to limit the emission of greenhouse gases from all sectors. This action must be taken at all levels; by individuals, countries and regions.

In the words of the UN Secretary General during the release of the report:

"It is time to stop burning our planet and start investing in the abundant renewable energy all around us."

Fossil-fuel combustion and industry, a leading emitter of carbon dioxide, requires more attention than before.

Green initiatives – such as increased generation of renewable energy and a focus on green economies that are low carbon, resource efficient and socially inclusive – are key to the reduction of emissions and adaptation to climate change. These initiatives will also provide health and economic benefits.

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the entire energy sector entails major transitions, including:

  • a marked reduction in overall fossil fuel use

  • the deployment of low-emission energy sources

  • switching to alternative energy carriers

  • energy efficiency and conservation.
This is challenging but possible...

Apart from efforts to minimise the emissions, strategies are needed to remove the part of the carbon dioxide that is already in the atmosphere. This process, called carbon sequestration, entails capturing, securing and storing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. This can happen in vegetation, land and water. Recently, machines have been developed which can suck carbon directly from the air...

Although it remains challenging to realise net zero emissions where there is a balance between the greenhouse gases put into the atmosphere and those taken out, emissions can be halved by 2030. As Hoesung Lee, the IPCC Chair, said:

"We are at a crossroads. The decisions we make now can secure a liveable future. We have the tools and know-how required to limit warming."
Messing with mother nature can be worse than one thinks.
 

KW

Well-Known Member
As some of you know, climate warming is a big issue for me. I am very concerned about it.

This article is written by a professor of climate science.

How fast can we stop Earth from warming?

Quoting from the article:

Global warming doesn’t stop on a dime. If people everywhere stopped burning fossil fuels tomorrow, stored heat would still continue to warm the atmosphere.

Picture how a radiator heats a home. Water is heated by a boiler, and the hot water circulates through pipes and radiators in the house. The radiators warm up and heat the air in the room. Even after the boiler is turned off, the already heated water is still circulating through the system, heating the house. The radiators are, in fact, cooling down, but their stored heat is still warming the air in the room.

This is known as committed warming. Earth similarly has ways of storing and releasing heat.

Emerging research is refining scientists’ understanding of how Earth’s committed warming will affect the climate. Where we once thought it would take 40 years or longer for global surface air temperature to peak once humans stopped heating up the planet, research now suggests temperature could peak in closer to 10 years.

But that doesn’t mean the planet returns to its preindustrial climate or that we avoid disruptive effects such as sea level rise...

It is important to note that this is only the peak, when the temperature starts to stabilize – not the onset of rapid cooling or a reversal of climate change...

Even if the air temperature were to peak and stabilize, “committed ice melting,” “committed sea level rise” and numerous other land and biological trends would continue to evolve from the accumulated heat. Some of these could, in fact, cause a release of carbon dioxide and methane, especially from the Arctic and other high-latitude reservoirs that are currently frozen...

The possibility that a policy intervention might have measurable impacts in 10 years rather than several decades could motivate more aggressive efforts to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. It would be very satisfying to see policy interventions having present rather than notional future benefits.

However, today, countries aren’t anywhere close to ending their fossil fuel use. Instead, all of the evidence points to humanity experiencing rapid global warming in the coming decades.

Our most robust finding is that the less carbon dioxide humans release, the better off humanity will be. Committed warming and human behavior point to a need to accelerate efforts both to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to this warming planet now, rather than simply talking about how much needs to happen in the future.


We can't stop it or change it because our impact is insignificant.

It's leftist propaganda masquerading as science.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It's probably too late. Human's aren't wired for the interventions called for. Hunter-gatherers living hand-to-mouth and day-to-day have no need for, and no innate facility for long term planning. If it's not a clear and immediate threat, we're not psychologically adapted to deal with it.
We have not had the time to significantly modify this.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
We can't stop it or change it because our impact is insignificant.
Our impact is significant. It's our impact that created the problem. We don't seem to have the will to make the changes necessary to change it.
It's leftist propaganda masquerading as science.
Huh? Leftist propaganda? Masquerades?
This you'll have to explain.
 

KW

Well-Known Member
T
Our impact is significant. It's our impact that created the problem. We don't seem to have the will to make the changes necessary to change it.
Huh? Leftist propaganda? Masquerades?
This you'll have to explain.

Those true scientists who looked at the actual data have been driven out. Richard Lindzen, Judith Curry etc.

Facts don’t support the claim that human activity has any significant impact.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
T


Those true scientists who looked at the actual data have been driven out. Richard Lindzen, Judith Curry etc.

Facts don’t support the claim that human activity has any significant impact.
You do realize these two are outliers, with extremely unorthodox opinions? The overwhelming majority of scientists from many disciplines disagree with them -- and they have looked at the actual data. It was they who generated it, in fact. From actual observations and measurements. Moreover, physical observations are consistent with predictions by climatologists, geologists, chemists, biologists, &al.
 
Last edited:

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
New As some of you know, climate warming is a big issue for me. I am very concerned about it.

David Attenbouroghs "A life on Our Planet" is brilliant and all need to watch and embrace the ideas given.

Can be watched on Netflix, highly recommend. I was watching that when you posted this. ;)


Regards Tony
 

stanberger

Active Member
But not the will or discipline.

I think that we can assume that the trend will continue more or less unabated for several more years, and will decelerate to slowly to prevent crisis at a level that threatens power and money. Such people can withstand much more than those who will have difficulty relocating or finding water, for example, and will allow them and the biosphere to suffer as much damage as they themselves can absorb.
we are at 32 degrees tonite in Memphis. so much for global warming usually 60 at nite in April
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
It's probably too late. Human's aren't wired for the interventions called for. Hunter-gatherers living hand-to-mouth and day-to-day have no need for, and no innate facility for long term planning. If it's not a clear and immediate threat, we're not psychologically adapted to deal with it.
We have not had the time to significantly modify this.
Saying it's too late plays into the hands of those who don't want to do anything about it. It's true, though, that the political systems are geared for short term and not long term.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
David Attenbouroghs "A life on Our Planet" is brilliant and all need to watch and embrace the ideas given.

Can be watched on Netflix, highly recommend. I was watching that when you posted this. ;)


Regards Tony
Video is unavailable to me, due to copyright in my country.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
we are at 32 degrees tonite in Memphis. so much for global warming usually 60 at nite in April
Climate warming refers to averages over time, not to any specific day. At present the average temperature per day is about 1.2 degrees Celsius, which doesn't sound like much, but it is causing environmental damage.
 

KW

Well-Known Member
You do realize these two are outliers, with extremely unorthodox opinions? The overwhelming majority of scientists from many disciplines disagree with them -- and they have looked at the actual data. It was they who generated it, in fact. From actual observations and measurements. Moreover, physical observations are consistent with predictions by climatologists, geologists, chemists, biologists, &al.

30,000 scientists signed the Oregon Petition which denied the alarmism of the left.

You have been lied to.
 

KW

Well-Known Member
Climate warming refers to averages over time, not to any specific day. At present the average temperature per day is about 1.2 degrees Celsius, which doesn't sound like much, but it is causing environmental damage.

The Heat Island effect is used to skew the data. We are in a warming trend that has nothing to do with human activity.
 

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member
You are talking about a heat sink the size of a planet. It took a couple centuries to get here. There is no way we are going to reverse this quickly.

If it warms enough for methane to be released form arctic permafrost, it is pretty much game over.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
But not the will or discipline.

we are at 32 degrees tonite in Memphis. so much for global warming usually 60 at nite in April

Do you think that that is an argument against anthropogenic global warming? It's not.

I used to spend a fair amount of time in Memphis. Nice city. We've stayed at the Peabody, seen the Cardinals minor league team in the stadium in the city, visited Beale Street a few times, saw Graceland and had the pink Cadillac tour, visited Sun Records, and saw two concerts at the Pyramid. In the late nineties, the bridge over the Mississippi connecting Tennessee to Arkansas had welcome to Tennessee, Home of Vice President Al Gore, and the other way said welcome to Arkansas, Home of President Bill Clinton.

I think that we can assume that the trend will continue more or less unabated for several more years, and will decelerate to slowly to prevent crisis at a level that threatens power and money. Such people can withstand much more than those who will have difficulty relocating or finding water, for example, and will allow them and the biosphere to suffer as much damage as they themselves can absorb.

30,000 scientists signed the Oregon Petition which denied the alarmism of the left. You have been lied to.

No, you have been lied to. I've seen and can interpret the data directly.

And "The Global Warming Petition Project, also known as the Oregon Petition, is a disinformation campaign to sow doubt about the scientific consensus on climate change."

There is not likely to be much progress very soon.

Agree. We're already crossed the tipping point into catastrophic weather, and I expect it to worsen for at least ten more years, probably more.
 
Top