Well being is going down in tandom with rising temperatures

[Brian2]

No. I do not believe that human interference is not a factor in current climate changes. We need to be as careful as possible for our own sake. But @wellwisher's graph in his post #7 also is correct. We are still in the cold-age. We may revert back into an ice-age very rapidly. We do not understand these changes very well. As one can see from the graph, climatic changes are very rapid.

They have caused five extinction events on earth when humans were not around, some failed Godly experiment. It is simplisistic to blame humans alone for climate changes. It is something bigger than us. Life existed on earth irrespective of whether polar ice-caps were there or not. At one time, Rhinos and Hippopotamis roamed in what is now France.

"The "Big Five" mass extinctions:

1. Ordovician–Silurian extinction events (End Ordovician or O–S): 450–440 Mya at the Ordovician–Silurian transition.
2. Late Devonian extinction 375–360 Ma near the Devonian–Carboniferous transition.
3. Permian–Triassic extinction event (End Permian) 252 Ma at the Permian–Triassic transition.
4. Triassic–Jurassic extinction event (End Triassic) 201.3 Ma at the Triassic–Jurassic transition. About 23% of all families, 48% of all genera (20% of marine families and 55% of marine genera) and 70% to 75% of all species became extinct. Dinosaurs come.
5. Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event (End Cretaceous, K–Pg extinction, or formerly K–T extinction) 66 Ma at the Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) – Paleogene (Danian) transition interval. Dinosaurs go.
Extinction event - Wikipedia

.............................^......................^..............................^............^.....................................^...................

It seems we do know about greenhouse gases however and what they produce. We also know that humans are pumping them out at a fast speed and the known consequences are happening. Global temperatures are going up and we are having more floods and bush fires and famines and loss of land and species etc. We know that going to much higher temperatures will be catastrophic for humanity and for the planet and if we can help avoid that we should. And we know we can help avoid it because we know the cause in this case, human green house gas production.
Saying we do not understand the causes well and so we should do nothing is not an option we can afford, especially if the main real reason to do nothing is so that some people can keep making a lot of money.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Saying we do not understand the causes well and so we should do nothing is not an option we can afford, especially if the main real reason to do nothing is so that some people can keep making a lot of money.

Where did I say that we do nothing? We do not know about mega climatic changes and that is a fact, in which human contribution does not count. Basically, it is the developed world which is spewing out most per capita carbon. Are they ready to change? India has said undertaken by 2050, half of its energy will be by renewable sources. We go fully with Paris declaration.
For example it is 24 metric tons for Britain, 15.7 for USA and 1.8 metric tons for India (per person per year).

 

[Brian2]

Where did I say that we do nothing? We do not know about mega climatic changes and that is a fact, in which human contribution does not count. Basically, it is the developed world which is spewing out most per capita carbon. Are they ready to change? India has said undertaken by 2050, half of its energy will be by renewable sources. We go fully with Paris declaration.
For example it is 24 metric tons for Britain, 15.7 for USA and 1.8 metric tons for India (per person per year).

Human contribution did not really count in the mega changes to temperature in the past and if things like that happened again we probably would not be able to bring the temp down very easily. All we could do it try, just as we are doing now.
Thank Narendra Modi for his efforts for us all.
In Australia we are on about 15 Tons per person.

 

[Truthseeker]

No. I do not believe that human interference is not a factor in current climate changes. We need to be as careful as possible for our own sake. But @wellwisher's graph in his post #7 also is correct. We are still in the cold-age. We may revert back into an ice-age very rapidly. We do not understand these changes very well. As one can see from the graph, climatic changes are very rapid.

They have caused five extinction events on earth when humans were not around, some failed Godly experiment. It is simplisistic to blame humans alone for climate changes. It is something bigger than us. Life existed on earth irrespective of whether polar ice-caps were there or not. At one time, Rhinos and Hippopotamis roamed in what is now France.

"The "Big Five" mass extinctions:

1. Ordovician–Silurian extinction events (End Ordovician or O–S): 450–440 Mya at the Ordovician–Silurian transition.
2. Late Devonian extinction 375–360 Ma near the Devonian–Carboniferous transition.
3. Permian–Triassic extinction event (End Permian) 252 Ma at the Permian–Triassic transition.
4. Triassic–Jurassic extinction event (End Triassic) 201.3 Ma at the Triassic–Jurassic transition. About 23% of all families, 48% of all genera (20% of marine families and 55% of marine genera) and 70% to 75% of all species became extinct. Dinosaurs come.
5. Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event (End Cretaceous, K–Pg extinction, or formerly K–T extinction) 66 Ma at the Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) – Paleogene (Danian) transition interval. Dinosaurs go.
Extinction event - Wikipedia

.............................^......................^..............................^............^.....................................^...................

Yes, I can see that over the last about 50 million years temperature has been down compared to the average for the last 500 million years. But this graph does not show how humans evolved over the last 7 million years or so and we are suited for these relatively colder times. In the realtive small time scale of the next 100 years, it is almost guaranteed that things will get warmer, to the point which will cause a lot of turmoil in our world. A few degrees Celsius warming doesn't seem bad at all, but it is bad if that happens. You don't realize what havoc that would cause it appears, though I could be wrong about that.

 

[Aupmanyav]

In the relative small time scale of the next 100 years, it is almost guaranteed that things will get warmer, to the point which will cause a lot of turmoil in our world.

That is like another Bahaollah's unevidenced prediction. You see the fluctuations in the graph. We really don't know where temperature is headed. Yeah, we could certainly reduce the carbon emissions. That alone is in our hands, but doing that too is difficult given the way our civilization works.

 

[Truthseeker]

hat is like another Bahaollah's unevidenced prediction. You see the fluctuations in the graph. We really don't know where temperature is headed. Yeah, we could certainly reduce the carbon emissions. That alone is in our hands, but doing that too is difficult given the way our civilization works.

That graph is on too large of a scale. Saying it is too difficult is to invite disaster because then nothing will be done to prevent it. You don't know that renewable sources, that don't emit greenhouse gas are getting cheaper? Also, the resources of the Earth are not unlimited. Oil, gas and coal will run out. As these resources get smaller, they will cost more. Supply and demand.

See these graphs:

 

[Aupmanyav]

Agree to all that and that methane generated by livestock also is a big problem in rising temperatures, perhaps even more than carbon-Di-oxide emissions. There are governments who do not even agree to Paris declaration. We (rather our generations) will face whatever the consequences are.

 

[Truthseeker]

Agree to all that and that methane generated by livestock also is a big problem in rising temperatures, perhaps even more than carbon-Di-oxide emissions. There are governments who do not even agree to Paris declaration. We (rather our generations) will face whatever the consequences are.

It would feed more people anyway if we ate more vegetables, fruit, and grain and cut back on meat. Feeding livestock instead of us is counterproductive. Some non-meats have protein which we need. These Paris goals are not being met, andf the current cut-back goals are not sufficient anyway. The goals would limit temperature rise to about 3 degrees from what I hear. We are at about 1.2 degrees rise now, and there are some "climate refugees" already, though it's hard to define exactly what a climate refugee is. Drought in Syria helped trigger the civil war there, how much is hard to tell, and the refugees poured out of there.

 

[Aupmanyav]

A war is not required. People have migrated to more prosperous and peaceful countries all through the history unless the country prohibits it. India too saw many migrations, invasions. In this part of the world, wherever there is a problem, people migrate to India.

 

[Truthseeker]

A war is not required. People have migrated to more prosperous and peaceful countries all through the history unless the country prohibits it. India too saw many migrations, invasions. In this part of the world, wherever there is a problem, people migrate to India.

Yes, war is never required. When people migrated to Europe from Syria and from other places, though, xenophobia increased, which of course is not required or necessary, either. But it is a problem.

 

[Aupmanyav]

When people migrated to Europe from Syria and from other places, though, xenophobia increased, which of course is not required or necessary, either. But it is a problem.

There always are problems behind problems.