This is a fantastic discussion. I have two daughters (12 & 10) recently made aware of the immensity of the climate problem by joining in on the school strikes. Unfortunately the side effect among them and many of their peers is a belief that they only have ten years before the world might become uninhabitable (some even believe less than 2 years). I have given them some relief by showing them good reasons why these dire forecasts are wide of the mark, but to have this conversation available to them will both set their minds at ease while also galvanising their desire to be proactive. A really great conversation. Many thanks.
Professor Lawrence Krauss, it is always an absolute pleasure to listen to your podcasts. Thank you for this! You are, and undoubtedly I think, one of the most important intellectual of this era!
I started listening to these podcasts at night hoping to drift off to sleep. Instead I end up spending another sleepless night because they are fascinating. Thanks I guess.
When I heard Dan say "that 60% that goes into the air, half of that will still be in the air a thousand yrs from now" it was like a hammer to the face! I wish all humans could hear an understand that one single fact... SHOCKING! I already understood climate change but this fact really shows the urgency of our situation. Thanks Lawrence for your time and The Origins Podcast, also THANK YOU very much Dan Schrag for putting it in terms anyone who cares about humanity can understand. Until this podcast I never heard it put in such shocking terms.
Fascinating and important subject, this guest was excellent! Thanks for providing such well communicated science to non academics, I'm a 31 year old chef and find these podcasts so interesting and accessible.
The importance and relevance of this topic for a global audience is such that, please, consider supporting/allowing/promoting its translation into as many languages as possible
Great information. Once again thanks Lawrence! I want every person I know and every person I don't know to watch this. Lawrence keep doing what your doing 👏
Wow, the fact regarding the gravitational pull of the ice sheets puts the magnitude of things in a more relative frame (in my head). I am grateful for the Origins podcast. Thank you for what you are doing, Dr. Krauss.
Lawrence if you read this please change the title or repost with a different title. A title that reflects the content. This video should have 100,000's of views or millions.
These are like watching the talks they did, back in their University. Only thing missing is the audience being able to asking questions at the end. A q and a on some of these talks would be interesting.
Very important points on the application of human values on geological realities. Written many papers on it recently (not published) so I’m glad someone is being honest about it
Merci Lawrence Krauss, ces rencontres sont extrêmement intéressantes et instructives. Dan Schrag réussi à nous communiquer très clairement des informations sur des sujets d’une grande complexité 👍🏻.
Topics to cover in future episodes along the lines of this episode: How does large scale animal agriculture (CAFOS), and specifically a drastic reduction of this abhorrent practice, help reduce ill effects of climate change? I hear this argument a lot but where/what is the data? I hear more and more about *regenerative agriculture* as a way to improve soil regeneration and adding nutrients back into our food AND as a way to reduce climate disaster. Would love to hear expert opinions.
Can someone tell me why the one percenters won't decide that "depopulation" is part of the solution? Also, why no discussion about geothermal being part of the solution?
What is actually "crazy" is that all this discussion about geoengineering is taking place in a context where the fossil fuel industries are intentionally investing far more resources (& our so-called carbon "budget") into extracting more oil and gas, compared to renewables that would reduce CO2 emissions, and that there is a serious lack of investment in nature-based solutions such as reforestation, peat-land restoration. Plus, the economic model is based on "growth" (even in developed countries, which generally means more resources for the rich) which generally is the opposite of what we need to do. And that's reducing resource and energy demands (in so-called "developed" countries). There are so many examples of how to do that. For example, replace private transport with public transport (the point being is that the main problems are related to people not wanting to make the right decisions. Oh, the hardship of not owning an SUV. spoiled rich "kids") What it will actually take to mitigate climate change, is what has been missing for the last few decades, a serious focused effort by the majority of people. That is a psychological problem. For example, if the effects of climate change such as tens of metres of sea level rise or mega-droughts lasting many years, were generally known to be our immediate future (e.g., within ten years), then we'd be acting like it's an emergency and doing all we can to prevent it. But, because climate change is always framed as a disaster that's related to the distant future, one day, that future will be now. This year (2023) climate-related events have exceeded climate projections and "shocked" many climate scientists. And yet, there remains a serious lack of urgency in general. Year after year, people keep repeating the same self-fulling prophecy "Well, we can't stop burning fossil fuels by tomorrow!" Stop burning them in twenty years then! Set a friggin deadline! Stop being so insular and think on a systems level.
I wish Krauss would let the guest talk more, even if *he* knows exactly what the guest is going to say, I as a listener might not. I wish he'd refrain from trying to say it while the guest is about to say something. The guest almost has to press on to finish making his points! This is long form podcasting - for Rogan's sake, let the guest speak!
This discussion seemed to have started off as one between two like-minded people, but coming towards the end, one can see a slow shift taking place. Prof. Dan Schrag certainly knows his stuff and understands the dynamics of earth and oceans and atmospheres better than most, but he seemed to come across as someone who cannot entertain the same degree of concern as expressed by the rising tide of global opinion on climate change and environmental catastrophes caused by humans. It horrifies one to think that ideas such as injecting particles into the atmosphere to cool it, or solar geoengineering, or low cloud precipitations, can be mooted as solutions, without understanding the unseen consequences of tampering with the complexities of nature [Prof. Schrag did mention that he is involved in studies at Harvard to study just that]; but why can't the same degree of cleverness be shown in removing, for example, plastic from the oceans [and a myriad other challenges that can be met successfully, if only there was a willingness to do it]. Not a word also, for example, about how the whole edifice of life is being threatened by our relentless consumerism, or the decimation of the insect base because of the use of pesticides by large scale aggro-industries [just one example of many others]. I think perhaps a follow-up of this discussion will help inform the lay public a bit more next time.
We should perhaps give thanks to the energy scientists (Geologists, Geophysicists and Engineers) past who have apparently found and produced enough carbon intensive energy to potentially delay the next re-glaciation of the planet for several hundred years or more.
Obviously Krauss has to be polite to his guests and let them interrupt, but it happens a lot and it’s kinda annoying. Surely he also wants to give them sufficient platform to portray their insight, but it’s fair to say that it would be a more productive conversation and more satisfying to an audience, if these people developed krauss’ listening skills. Still, amazing scientists nonetheless. Much respect to both of them for the work they do.
An important discussion with many insightful comments, but to say "some people might suffer maybe even die" due to climate change is naive. Millions, more than WWII, have already died from climate and environmental related causes. This number is certain to increase exponentially, principally among people of color in poor countries (who have done the least to cause the crisis and benefited the least). There was no mention of the threats to agriculture and water supplies which are the most imminent consequences of the crisis. Topsoil and water tables are in peril worldwide. Ocean acidification and the proliferation of toxic pollutants and plastics are out of control. A more comprehensive conversation is hoped for.
@27:00 Dan made an obvious error "at the Permian-Triassic "we" lost over 60%, so we are not there yet" The Permian-Triassic extinction event occurred over 60 (± 48) thousand years. Let that sink in, 60 thousand years. The present 6th mass extinction event is occurring over a far shorter period. We are heading "there" much faster! "The rapid loss of species we are seeing today is estimated by experts to be between 1,000 and 10,000 times higher than the natural extinction rate" (WWF)
I hate to differ, but water is the one substance that expands when it freezes and contracts when warm. so emitting vapour through the higher pressure than atmosphere. yada yada yada.
Solids, liquids and gases expand when heated. Water expands about four percent when heated from room temperature to its boiling point. However, it also expends after reaching a 0 C
What about atmospheric engineering and possible ways to cool the atmosphere? Why doesn't anyone ever talk about that? What about fast-breeder nuclear reactors that would drastically reduce emissions and ensure energy sufficiency? (Program was killed by Clinton/Gore) No mention about that either. What about the nonsense of telling people that windmills and solar cells are actually helpful, when in fact they are wasteful and super expensive to make and maintain, and retire a lot of land which is needed for agriculture and new settlements? Can we PLEASE talk about these topics and stop doing cheap politics?
Lawrence, could you please sounds less, "Yeah yeah we all know this..." when your guests are talking! Then you butt in "Ohh lets just explain this" Are you gonna have a conversation where you talk as if your guess is an idiot?, or are you gonna have a conversation where you respect that not ALL listening are gonna be as informed as you? PICK ONE!
Different people, different personalities... This guy isn’t gonna change because of comment-section bitching. What energy are you putting out here? Viva la difference. We can watch or change the channel. Soon , we’ll all be perfect zombie-clone-parrot-lemming-sheep so enjoy other personalities while we still have them.
Wait, can I change my answer? This “interview” really needs to STFU! Is he on 2much blow or something? Does he even need the other person there? It’s a bit ridiculous. He keeps saying “physics” like it’s some weird form of Tourette’s
Ok, climate change is real and humans are contributing to it, but why is the IPCC ONLY blaming CO2 contributions, especially when temperatures had already started rising BEFORE humans made any significant CO2 contributions? Finally, why does the Green New Deal read like an atempt to implement radical socialist policies? Oh, and there is no 98% consensus... believe THAT
Rational person : ok , climate change is real, so what do you propose we do about it? Leftist: oh, we just need to eradicate thousands of jobs and give "guaranteed income" to everyone, even those who aren't willing to work!!!" Me : 🖕🥴🖕
Why have all these been dumped in my feed at the same time? Krauss needs better social media people, it's been stunted by a regressive attempt to use it as merely a set of adverts for the Patreon, instead of releasing PROPER stuff for free and EXTRA stuff for patrons. I like Krauss, but whoever came up with this business model needs to go back to traditional TV and give the job to someone who understands TH-cam.
@@andybeans5790 I thought I had joined awhile ago, but it must have been from one of my other accounts, and I wanted to respond to you.. so maybe I have more than one now..
Questions started popping in my head when you talked aboit the sea level rising. The guest says Greenland melts - how do you calculate that ? Just thos task seems to be extremely comlicated without massive oversiplyfying. Then he talks about scale of hundreds of years - go look how Boston where you are sitting right now looked like hundred years ago. How can you assume wealth of nations stays ? I think peole just adapt, it wont be a massive wave sinking all but slow process. The problem with enviromentalists is that it always ends up with some social engineering wet dreams.
![SAFEPLANET - ดาวเคราะห์ [ THE PLANET ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4X1XL3I_k3c/mqdefault.jpg)
This is a fantastic discussion. I have two daughters (12 & 10) recently made aware of the immensity of the climate problem by joining in on the school strikes. Unfortunately the side effect among them and many of their peers is a belief that they only have ten years before the world might become uninhabitable (some even believe less than 2 years). I have given them some relief by showing them good reasons why these dire forecasts are wide of the mark, but to have this conversation available to them will both set their minds at ease while also galvanising their desire to be proactive. A really great conversation. Many thanks.
Professor Lawrence Krauss, it is always an absolute pleasure to listen to your podcasts. Thank you for this! You are, and undoubtedly I think, one of the most important intellectual of this era!
thanks
The Origins Podcast monopoly
I’ll send
I started listening to these podcasts at night hoping to drift off to sleep. Instead I end up spending another sleepless night because they are fascinating. Thanks I guess.
same
Me tooo
When I heard Dan say "that 60% that goes into the air, half of that will still be in the air a thousand yrs from now" it was like a hammer to the face! I wish all humans could hear an understand that one single fact... SHOCKING! I already understood climate change but this fact really shows the urgency of our situation.
Thanks Lawrence for your time and The Origins Podcast, also THANK YOU very much Dan Schrag for putting it in terms anyone who cares about humanity can understand. Until this podcast I never heard it put in such shocking terms.
Fascinating and important subject, this guest was excellent! Thanks for providing such well communicated science to non academics, I'm a 31 year old chef and find these podcasts so interesting and accessible.
The importance and relevance of this topic for a global audience is such that, please, consider supporting/allowing/promoting its translation into as many languages as possible
There is so much crap and pseudo-science on TH-cam thank 'God' for Lawrence Krauss and The Origins Podcast. A gift for humanity.
Great information. Once again thanks Lawrence! I want every person I know and every person I don't know to watch this. Lawrence keep doing what your doing 👏
What a great guest.
Dr.krauss. you are hands down one of my favorite people on the planet .
Wow, the fact regarding the gravitational pull of the ice sheets puts the magnitude of things in a more relative frame (in my head). I am grateful for the Origins podcast. Thank you for what you are doing, Dr. Krauss.
I believe that in a lot of rooms Dr. Krauss is the smartest person.
Wouldn't it be funny, if your intelligence level fluctuated depending on which room you're in. :P
Lawrence if you read this please change the title or repost with a different title. A title that reflects the content. This video should have 100,000's of views or millions.
Brilliant conversation. Thank you LK
Thank you Dr. Krauss
An astonishing interview - a hammer in the face of effect
These are like watching the talks they did, back in their University. Only thing missing is the audience being able to asking questions at the end. A q and a on some of these talks would be interesting.
Very important points on the application of human values on geological realities. Written many papers on it recently (not published) so I’m glad someone is being honest about it
Merci Lawrence Krauss, ces rencontres sont extrêmement intéressantes et instructives. Dan Schrag réussi à nous communiquer très clairement des informations sur des sujets d’une grande complexité 👍🏻.
Merci
Topics to cover in future episodes along the lines of this episode:
How does large scale animal agriculture (CAFOS), and specifically a drastic reduction of this abhorrent practice, help reduce ill effects of climate change? I hear this argument a lot but where/what is the data?
I hear more and more about *regenerative agriculture* as a way to improve soil regeneration and adding nutrients back into our food AND as a way to reduce climate disaster. Would love to hear expert opinions.
Superb interview :)
Hello from Serbia!!
Can someone tell me why the one percenters won't decide that "depopulation" is part of the solution?
Also, why no discussion about geothermal being part of the solution?
Please state that as a question.
fabulous. and it was great because both guest and interviewer got to speak, with a little more balance.
Good job Lawrence
This is so fascinating!!! Love it👌😍
Lawrence, let your guests talk. We know about you already.
Jesus Dan, give Lawrence a chance to talk!!
Lawrence let the guy finish his thoughts
great lecture
I really enjoyed this and the other podcasts. Just tweeted this to @GretaThunberg as I thought she would enjoy it as well.
What is actually "crazy" is that all this discussion about geoengineering is taking place in a context where the fossil fuel industries are intentionally investing far more resources (& our so-called carbon "budget") into extracting more oil and gas, compared to renewables that would reduce CO2 emissions, and that there is a serious lack of investment in nature-based solutions such as reforestation, peat-land restoration. Plus, the economic model is based on "growth" (even in developed countries, which generally means more resources for the rich) which generally is the opposite of what we need to do. And that's reducing resource and energy demands (in so-called "developed" countries). There are so many examples of how to do that. For example, replace private transport with public transport (the point being is that the main problems are related to people not wanting to make the right decisions. Oh, the hardship of not owning an SUV. spoiled rich "kids")
What it will actually take to mitigate climate change, is what has been missing for the last few decades, a serious focused effort by the majority of people. That is a psychological problem. For example, if the effects of climate change such as tens of metres of sea level rise or mega-droughts lasting many years, were generally known to be our immediate future (e.g., within ten years), then we'd be acting like it's an emergency and doing all we can to prevent it. But, because climate change is always framed as a disaster that's related to the distant future, one day, that future will be now.
This year (2023) climate-related events have exceeded climate projections and "shocked" many climate scientists. And yet, there remains a serious lack of urgency in general. Year after year, people keep repeating the same self-fulling prophecy "Well, we can't stop burning fossil fuels by tomorrow!"
Stop burning them in twenty years then! Set a friggin deadline! Stop being so insular and think on a systems level.
Big question, what are the ingredients of these aerosols.
The active ingredients are mostly sulphates.
I wish Krauss would let the guest talk more, even if *he* knows exactly what the guest is going to say, I as a listener might not. I wish he'd refrain from trying to say it while the guest is about to say something. The guest almost has to press on to finish making his points! This is long form podcasting - for Rogan's sake, let the guest speak!
What happened to posting on Spotify? Nothing uploaded since October 24th
This discussion seemed to have started off as one between two like-minded people, but coming towards the end, one can see a slow shift taking place. Prof. Dan Schrag certainly knows his stuff and understands the dynamics of earth and oceans and atmospheres better than most, but he seemed to come across as someone who cannot entertain the same degree of concern as expressed by the rising tide of global opinion on climate change and environmental catastrophes caused by humans. It horrifies one to think that ideas such as injecting particles into the atmosphere to cool it, or solar geoengineering, or low cloud precipitations, can be mooted as solutions, without understanding the unseen consequences of tampering with the complexities of nature [Prof. Schrag did mention that he is involved in studies at Harvard to study just that]; but why can't the same degree of cleverness be shown in removing, for example, plastic from the oceans [and a myriad other challenges that can be met successfully, if only there was a willingness to do it]. Not a word also, for example, about how the whole edifice of life is being threatened by our relentless consumerism, or the decimation of the insect base because of the use of pesticides by large scale aggro-industries [just one example of many others]. I think perhaps a follow-up of this discussion will help inform the lay public a bit more next time.
YES
We should perhaps give thanks to the energy scientists (Geologists, Geophysicists and Engineers) past who have apparently found and produced enough carbon intensive energy to potentially delay the next re-glaciation of the planet for several hundred years or more.
Obviously Krauss has to be polite to his guests and let them interrupt, but it happens a lot and it’s kinda annoying. Surely he also wants to give them sufficient platform to portray their insight, but it’s fair to say that it would be a more productive conversation and more satisfying to an audience, if these people developed krauss’ listening skills. Still, amazing scientists nonetheless. Much respect to both of them for the work they do.
A good "fact/fiction" book about this is
James Lawrence Powell's
"The 2084 Report: An Oral History of the Great Warming".
What a rebel. He became of a Physicist instead of a doctor! lol. But seriously, wow, what an interesting interview.
all is great BUT where is Mr Dawkins?
An important discussion with many insightful comments, but to say "some people might suffer maybe even die" due to climate change is naive. Millions, more than WWII, have already died from climate and environmental related causes. This number is certain to increase exponentially, principally among people of color in poor countries (who have done the least to cause the crisis and benefited the least). There was no mention of the threats to agriculture and water supplies which are the most imminent consequences of the crisis. Topsoil and water tables are in peril worldwide. Ocean acidification and the proliferation of toxic pollutants and plastics are out of control. A more comprehensive conversation is hoped for.
Perhaps you should be the one to start the more comprehensive conversation.
Anyone listening to this and playing playing Death Stranding?
FTL is more my speed when listening to stuff that is interesting... I'd also play Darkest Dungeon... Maybe a little Civ
Playing Dota while listening
i wonder if this convo predicts the impact..
No compute.
@27:00 Dan made an obvious error "at the Permian-Triassic "we" lost over 60%, so we are not there yet"
The Permian-Triassic extinction event occurred over 60 (± 48) thousand years. Let that sink in, 60 thousand years. The present 6th mass extinction event is occurring over a far shorter period. We are heading "there" much faster!
"The rapid loss of species we are seeing today is estimated by experts to be between 1,000 and 10,000 times higher than the natural extinction rate" (WWF)
😤 How dare you!? 😆
Lawrence....you're a man of science. Please tell me why you need headphones when you're talking one-on-one to someone in the studio?
to ensure that the microphones are picking up the voices correctly.
Joe Rogan prefer to wear headphones as well
Tehehehe I know him. My dad worked with him at Harvard and were fam friends which is chiiiillllll
I hate to differ, but water is the one substance that expands when it freezes and contracts when warm. so emitting vapour through the higher pressure than atmosphere. yada yada yada.
Actually, it contracts when "warmed" up from 0 to 4 celsius. Beyond 4c it starts to expand again.
Solids, liquids and gases expand when heated. Water expands about four percent when heated from room temperature to its boiling point. However, it also expends after reaching a 0 C
What about atmospheric engineering and possible ways to cool the atmosphere? Why doesn't anyone ever talk about that?
What about fast-breeder nuclear reactors that would drastically reduce emissions and ensure energy sufficiency? (Program was killed by Clinton/Gore) No mention about that either.
What about the nonsense of telling people that windmills and solar cells are actually helpful, when in fact they are wasteful and super expensive to make and maintain, and retire a lot of land which is needed for agriculture and new settlements?
Can we PLEASE talk about these topics and stop doing cheap politics?
There are no climate deniers. That expression is just an idiot-fuck leftist agenda.
we should be cloud mining venus and shipping to mars
Ahhhh... sounds like an Issac Arthur fan....
Lawrence, could you please sounds less, "Yeah yeah we all know this..." when your guests are talking! Then you butt in "Ohh lets just explain this"
Are you gonna have a conversation where you talk as if your guess is an idiot?, or are you gonna have a conversation where you respect that not ALL listening are gonna be as informed as you? PICK ONE!
You’re the only person here complaining, he does a good job 👍🏼
Different people, different personalities... This guy isn’t gonna change because of comment-section bitching. What energy are you putting out here? Viva la difference. We can watch or change the channel. Soon , we’ll all be perfect zombie-clone-parrot-lemming-sheep so enjoy other personalities while we still have them.
@@peterwelsh1932 fair point. Cheers
Wait, can I change my answer? This “interview” really needs to STFU! Is he on 2much blow or something? Does he even need the other person there? It’s a bit ridiculous. He keeps saying “physics” like it’s some weird form of Tourette’s
Ok, climate change is real and humans are contributing to it, but why is the IPCC ONLY blaming CO2 contributions, especially when temperatures had already started rising BEFORE humans made any significant CO2 contributions?
Finally, why does the Green New Deal read like an atempt to implement radical socialist policies?
Oh, and there is no 98% consensus... believe THAT
Rational person : ok , climate change is real, so what do you propose we do about it?
Leftist: oh, we just need to eradicate thousands of jobs and give "guaranteed income" to everyone, even those who aren't willing to work!!!"
Me : 🖕🥴🖕
Why have all these been dumped in my feed at the same time? Krauss needs better social media people, it's been stunted by a regressive attempt to use it as merely a set of adverts for the Patreon, instead of releasing PROPER stuff for free and EXTRA stuff for patrons.
I like Krauss, but whoever came up with this business model needs to go back to traditional TV and give the job to someone who understands TH-cam.
I don't understand.. you are upset that we are releasing all our full video episodes for free on youtube now? I guess you can't please everyone.
@@lawrencekrauss4726 wow, you only joined TH-cam 22 minutes ago, welcome to the land of fake accounts!
@@andybeans5790 I thought I had joined awhile ago, but it must have been from one of my other accounts, and I wanted to respond to you.. so maybe I have more than one now..
@@lawrencekrauss4726 You are doing just fine Lawrence - keep op the good work - Gretings from Denmark
STOP INTERUPTING.
Questions started popping in my head when you talked aboit the sea level rising. The guest says Greenland melts - how do you calculate that ? Just thos task seems to be extremely comlicated without massive oversiplyfying. Then he talks about scale of hundreds of years - go look how Boston where you are sitting right now looked like hundred years ago. How can you assume wealth of nations stays ? I think peole just adapt, it wont be a massive wave sinking all but slow process. The problem with enviromentalists is that it always ends up with some social engineering wet dreams.
Looks like Prof. Lawrence Krauss had sat with the wrong person this time.
Sounds like a shill
No, the oil and coal shills are on the other side of the debate.