I don't get what is going on in all your videos comment sections lately. Everyone is so bitter and angry. I just want to say there's definitely plenty of us out here who love your approach to these videos. You're willing to cover topics that upset all political ideologies and just focus on accuracy as it should be. I'm happy every time i see a new video from you
The contentious attitude you find here is going on everywhere. Everyone is so volatile and aggressive, The legacy and social media platforms are pushing with great gusto, it ups their viewership.
Entropy is something, unfortunately that is not well understood by the majority of people otherwise they would understand that the heat being used to convert the ice to water will heat the water rapidly once the ice is gone
If we compare the rapid melting of the ice from 12'000 years with today, they should know that half of Northern Europe was under a kilometer-thick layer of ice, and North America too. Today, most of the ice is already on the sea, only in Antarctica is it relatively balanced, but the masses of ice that are now over Greenland are no longer comparable to the kilometer-thick layers that existed in the past. The sea level will not rise much as a result. And the previous model predicted a rise of 2.5°C, we "only" achieved 1.5°C. So they were already 1°C too high! Most civilisations had a flowering period in warmer times, there were safe harvests. No reason to spread panic!
I've been a subscriber to your TH-cam channel for a couple years now. So, I just wanted to say to you that I'm grateful that a bright young person such as yourself takes the time and effort to produce such quality content that is easily understandable for so many to learn from and enjoy as much as I do. So, thank you Alex. And everyone that is part of helping you produce these videos. Alan Massoli United States
What refutes science: • Better science What DOESN'T refute science: • Your feelings • Your favorite politician • Your religion • Your half-baked opinion after watching two TH-cam videos
@@onlyonewhyphy no, you don't blindly trust the science. You strive to come up with a better explanation and prove it so that others get same results as you. Can't do it? then shut up
Morons are a dime a dozen, and the internet was made easily and affordably accessible. Instead of learning from that pipe line of information, they went the wrong way down stupidity holes.
@@MichaelHarto you should blame the ever changing story, the highly questionable record gathering, the experts with stock in "eco" companies and far more than anyone has to type out. I blame willful ignorance.
@@onlyonewhyphy Hardly an ever-changing story. Sure, new measurements come along, and models are adjusted, but they've all be saying broadly the same thing for decades. It would be more suspicious if it didn't ever change and all new data perfectly conformed. Sure, some people might be in line to make a profit from new Green tech companies, but that pales in comparison to the trillions of vested interests in Oil, Gas, Coal and the status quo in general.
I love your videos and am very impressed. Your slow and excellent narration allows me to get my head around what you are saying. I have a Bsc so am not a thicko but need time to understand a new concept. Well done. I am from Wales in the UK and think that you must hail from around the valleys in south Wales.
I really can't stand when they do that. It used to only cover just a couple of subjects, but now it keeps popping up under all kinds of videos under all kinds of different topics.
I imagine if they had internet in the medieval times there would have been a caption under Copernicus' video stating that according to the authorities the Earth is at the center of the solar system.
Alex, you have a wonderful voice that adds another layer to your presentations. I think all of your videos are outstanding, intelligent and chalked full of information. If people choose to live under a rock and pretend our world isn't changing dramatically, so be it.
Alex, another great offering by you and your very accomplished colleagues ! This quality of work keeps me coming back to your site when I want a dependable source for such information.
There is a massive bot problem on the internet, you can see them in the comments of every large creator's channels, their aim is to sow discord and division, do not engage, do not block, ignore. Any engagement is a win.
Indeed, and most dutch people dont even care these days. You can tell them all this stuff, they will still vote for rightist parties that deny climate change... its maddening
Want to adopt a star? Not a real one, just the one at the end of our videos - they’re lonely and could use a Patron’s name next to them 🙂 Sign-up here: bit.ly/4anEb5u
Want to free Palestinians from colonial settler apartheid war crimes? ISISsrael created and supports Hamas. Zionism is antisemitism and terrorism ❤️🍉🇵🇸🍉❤️
I've learned in lectures that the land ice in Greenland are big enough to attract ocean water in that region; the loss of Greenland ices could mean less water around Greenland and more water elsewhere
As a subscriber for a couple of years, thank you for continuing to produce videos like these. Even as an ecologist, I learn something new or a different way of looking at information with every episode. The graphics in this one are amazing, so much so that I need to go back more than once to internalise the changes being illustrated. A great part of my enjoyment in watching your episodes is the commentary - please never consider using AI voice generation. By the way, the introduction to the sponsorship spot was masterful!
First off, Alex, please don't ever consider not presenting and narrating yourself - you are at the top. Next, congratulations on another episode with amazing animated and still graphics and images. While still a lecturer at a university, I have presented some of the things you covered today in ecology lectures, but this would have blown the student away. Finally, I cannot understand the amount of negativity in many comment. Presumably you have spoiled them - they should try watching some channels supposedly covering science topics, and at least one that shall remain nameless, does not allow comments despite totally click-bait titles and low level research narrated by an AI that is still at Fourth Grade level.
Only if east coast American sea levels are all you care about. Globally (which I assume is what is implied in the title), the short answer is thermal expansion.
AMOC is very important. I just spent a few days watching TH-cam videos about it. Unfortunately we have absolutely no data as to what would happen if the AMOC did change in some way so there's no way to say it would be catastrophic, but all signs are pointing that direction such as Europe becoming as cold as Canada for example. AMOC is a good subject to explore for sure. Understanding how el niño and el niña are related to sea temperatures is important too. We're finding out more and more how the sun cycle effects our day to day weather so that's another subject of interest worth investigating more here on TH-cam. Lots to learn about for those willing to take the time.
Just a little typo correction at 6:46 - water heat capacity is not 4.18 kJ/m3/C but 4.18 kJ/l/C or 4.18 MJ/m3/C Disregarding this little detail, this is a fantastic video, thank you.
They even found tropical plant and animal fossils already on the continent surface. Things that got buried in mineral rich mud. Look up antarctic fossils. The continent wasn't always at it's present latitude. It was way further north -Equatorial at one point.
I sincerely appreciate this and your previous video. You did an excellent job of laying out all the refutations of climate-change deniers and then clearly presented the dire situation we now face. However, it's the up-beat, we can fix this ending that troubles me. Not because of anything you said, but because I don't believe humans are capable of hearing anything they do not want to hear.
I don’t think it’s about humanity not wanting to listen. There’s too many of us, wanting a standard of living and producing constantly. No amount of EVs which require more mining and destruction, or eating veggies will save us. We would have to all agree to severely lower our standard of living, that includes energy consumption. And then on the other side of consumers are industries which will keep polluting. We can’t solely blame consumers. I think change will only come from total collapse of global human population and collapse of the global economy.
Trying to prove this Climate change is like saying milk drowns Cheerios; In a hotter climate we had mega fauna and more flora than ever, transglaciation however already has centuries of reviewed data. Who cares if it is too hot out if the water sterilises you and the air gives you cancer? No what you did is gave up on Captain Planet for investment options you won't live to reap at the cost of your integrity.
@@agingerbeard the planet will do just fine, it’s the humans who will suffer. So yes, the sky is not falling, but everything that will ensue will cause food shortages, migration, global economy collapse and wars. Not to mention lost habitats and their biodiversity. We’ll probably all adapt, but it will be a different world.
Alex, I quite enjoyed this very interesting and informative segment. Your videos are par excellence bar none! Your content, narration, and production are better than some huge budget tv productions imo. 👊🇨🇦
It's all about the sun cycles and the earth's magnetic field. The recent solar storm was smaller than previous storms, yet it produced record breaking auroras reaching further around the earth than ever recorded previously. As the magnetic field is disrupted by repeated solar storms it's ability to resist those storms is degraded. We are one big CME away from a serious outage and I'm afraid world governments are not prepared for this disaster scenario. We should be burying electric lines and other cables underground. Makes you wonder why that hasn't happened despite the fact that power lines get blown down over and over by hurricanes and rebuilt just to blow over again.
The cost of burying is way higher that build lines. That's why they don't do it... Like for almost everything that is a problem, the answer is "financial benefits" which mostly profits to the ones that could make things right if their own financial interest didn't blind them complitely.
You overestimate these magnetic forces, which are far less than changes in solar irradiation and the Milankovitch cycles (both of which are in cooling phases) and the long-term carbon cycle as reflected in changes in the greenhouse composition of the atmosphere. In addition, those magnetic forces are relatively constant, so while they might impact the fluid dynamics of the atmosphere, it would only be in terms of short-term fluctuations working out to zero over the long-term.
Where are you getting that the recent solar storm was smaller than previous storms? As far as I am aware it was the single largest since the Carrington event. Being smaller than the biggest ever isn't unimpressive. Our systems held up perfectly, and while that doesn't necissarily mean anything for even larger storms, this storm was bigger than expected, not smaller. It was impressive what we just handled.
Burying the lines will protect them from wind storms, but it won't do jack for magnetic storms. Magnetic fields pass through dirt just fine - that's how we're able to use the magnetic field of the earth's core for, well, anything really. There are very few records of previous solar storms because most people had no cause to write them down - auroras weren't seen as a harbinger of doom like comets. But Captain Cook recorded seeing the Aurora Australis while he was sailing past the north coast of Australia, so we know there was a pretty big solar storm at that time. There's no evidence of the earth's magnetic field taking long term damage from solar storms or CMEs. The only thing that is damaged by these events is long distance power transmission cables, and we have no way to protect those. So the solution is to get rid of long distance power transmission cables, and then not worry about it because otherwise all a solar storm is going to do to us is make pretty lights in the sky for a few evenings.
Interesting thought. I know the water held in Three Gorges has had a measurable effect on day length - measurable in fractions of a millisecond, but still measurable.
@@YangLeee Will it make any significant difference to anything, though? Compared to extreme weather destroying crops and killing billions of people, and elevated CO2 well into the range that makes the remaining people stupid, sleepy, and anxious, I'm not convinced that even a few minutes' change in day length is the thing we need to be focusing on.
To a Californian, a quiet forest does not mean that it is dying. We have vast Redwood and Sequoia forests that are so quiet, you might imagine being in an anechoic chamber. Those forests are quiet because insects cannot live off of the redwood trees as they are too acidic for them to survive. That creates a chain reaction: no insects equals no birds and no birds means no sounds. But there is no feeling of impending doom. Those forests are just unbelievable!
Some of the issues in sea level rising. Is the sand that is used for construction. If you dig into this subject you’ll understand why we’re running out of building sand. And you’ll see how it affects the beach’s. It’s an open market with little to no oversight.
Pulling sand further inland would have the opposite effect. Much of that sand is pulled from the edges of the shores and just beyond it, for that exact reason. It doesn't matter how much you look into something, if you're looking in the wrong places.
@@michaelotoole1807 you are wrong. It’s beach sand that’s is the only sand useable in construction. Its shape is why that is. It’s also why you can build sand castles. Go look into it. Sand mafia is a good video.
Its not on a beach, it is set way back from the water, on a hill. And his house in Hawaii has a concrete sea wall. Most rich people that are educatied know where land uplift is at the same rate of sea level rise and also know how long it will take from nuisance flooding to major flooding.
A paper from the University of Toronto several years ago showed that the Antarctic ice shelves have a gravitational pull. That means when they disappear the water currently being pulled to the southern hemisphere will move north. Sea levels will recede in the southern hemisphere and rise in the northern. I've been wondering what effect all this shifting water will have on tectonic plates. Or is the water like the arms of a figure skater, she pulls them in close to spin faster and spreads them out to spin slower? Will the water concentrate at the equator slowing the earth's rotation?
@Pax.Alotin I think the point he was making is that liquid water would start mostly evenly distributing itself and its gravitational pull across all the world's ocean, whereas solid ice can pile up in huge mountains over antarctica, locally increasing gravity in that area relative to the rest of the planet.
@@KT-pv3kl There is far less arctic ice than antarctic ice and that gap is widening since the arctic ice is melting faster than the antarctic ice. Ice is more resilient over land than over water, and the arctic has a lot less land than the antarctic. Ice melting doesn't make the gravity of the water molecules go away of course, but mountains exert a locally elevated amount of gravity because the mass is piled up in one place. The same is presumably true for massive sheets of ice relative to the lower and flatter ocean.
As a physicist, that's just stupid. I'd ask why such a paper never crossed my desk considering I'm an expert in gravitation, but then I suppose not every dumb idea gets published in a reputable publication.
I really enjoy Astrum. I’m of the mind that if it weren’t for the Moon the Earth would not have such a balance in the ocean. Of course with the exception of when our orbit takes the higher plane and everything gets icy.
We are not doomed, we're just going to be forced to adapt in what seems thousands of years of complacency. I liked this video because it didn't have a doom tone, which is always present on climate change videos, which I hate. I don't believe climate change is a catastrophe, its something to be managed, a problem we could fix if we decided it was important and invested effort. It doesn't even need to be a lot, 15% of the GDP over decades might do it. What's dooming us is our inaction.
You can tell us how doomed we all are when you retire from work and get your pension, because unlike the crisis alarmist nonsense, that is going to happen!
The map shows wildly inconsistent sea level rise, it is around 6m in Southern Vietnam, in Florida it's about 25m and the Alaskan panhandle is around 700m. I tried to do Cuba but it didn't line up closely no matter what height I used. Just look at it, in what world would the Norwegian west coast be more affected than the Swedish and Finnish coast?
@@stanm4601 go to google maps look at the coastline of the Wikipedia map and check the altitude of the new coastline in google maps you will see vastly different values when the sea level should always have a consistent value and not vary by more than a few meters as water finds its level and cant be at 6m higher in one spot and 70m higher in another.
I'm really quite annoyed at Astrum for this video. First the click bait title, then discovering that it actually is the ice melting that will shut off the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, and finally the catastrophising.
Not just black swan coastal flooding events, but also the increasing intrusion of seawater into formerly fresh water coastal aquifers. So even if your Florida property is (for now) above flood levels, it doesn't mean you'll be able to drink the water.
Correct. But most of the heat is moved toward Europe by the underlying AMOC, which very much will collapse if too much freshwater is added at its northerly terminus.
Do you believe that salt water is heavier than fresh water? Do you believe that warm water is lighter than cold water? We are not talking about the Gulf Stream. We are talking about a water circulation system that operates across the whole planet with enormous consequences to the Northern Hemisphere climate. The AMOC has been shown to be slowing. Wind does affect the circulation but not so much on the global scale as the trade winds will always blow the same direction in the same season. What we detect as wind is contained within hundreds of km, not tens of thousands.
Weird... If you look at an interglacial chart we haven't crested the top yet of the current warming cycle. We have a few degrees higher to go and a couple hundred years to get there before we start down the other side towards a new ice age. For those of you in The peanut gallery. And ice age is a bad thing. That's when extinction events happen. There ain't no deserts around the equator and generally the world likes heat
"The world likes heat" - well said. We have temperatures going above fifty degrees in the capital, so the problem is that most people aren't equipped with acs. Cemented infrastructures and pitch roads are probably not deserts but the heat generated - wuff! "Other side of new ice age" - Nice, I like how you made a quick leap there. This guy in the video found it hard to predict what would happen in 2100 and you were able to determine nevertheless about the next ice age. I like your style of looking at things, you give me hope in humanity's sensibility.
Ice ages have been cyclical for millenia. Are you suggesting we intervene in the natural cycle to prevent ice ages? Something like... anthropogenic global warming?
@@jsonjsoff "Cyclical for millenia" - Proof beyond reasonable doubt based on observable trends is one way of looking at large time scales, but the interpolation is a long shot. Didn't say it wouldn't happen, but there is a possibility where the atmosphere heats up too much for ice to form. Or say the atmospheric layer runs haywire and the Earth's water is flung into space. These are some of the catastrophes that you may consider before coming to a conclusion that "what's bound to happen will happen" based on your deduction of "what's bound to happen".
It isn't the coastline changes that will cause the most chaos and carnage. What will cause the most hardship will be the droughts and the famines and the blights and the extremely energetic storms and the destabilized ecosystems.
In 1990, the IPCC First Assessment Report acknowledged that "Human-made aerosols, from sulphur emitted largely in fossil fuel combustion can modify clouds and this may act to lower temperatures", while "a decrease in emissions of sulphur might be expected to increase global temperatures".Since the 1980s, a decrease in air pollution has led to a partial reversal of the dimming trend, sometimes referred to as global brightening. This global brightening had contributed to the acceleration of global warming, which began in the 1990s. In 2020, COVID-19 lockdowns provided a notable "natural experiment", as there had been a marked decline in sulfate and black carbon emissions caused by the curtailed road traffic and industrial output. That decline did have a detectable warming impact: it was estimated to have increased global temperatures by 0.01-0.02 °C (0.018-0.036 °F) initially and up to 0.03 °C (0.054 °F) by 2023, before disappearing. Regionally, the lockdowns were estimated to increase temperatures by 0.05-0.15 °C (0.090-0.270 °F) in eastern China over January-March, and then by 0.04-0.07 °C (0.072-0.126 °F) over Europe, eastern United States, and South Asia in March-May, with the peak impact of 0.3 °C (0.54 °F) in some regions of the United States and Russia.
To puts things in perspective, it took tens of thousands of years for the Laurentide Ice Sheet to be completely melted because that warming was a hundred times slower than what's happening now. The remains of that ice pack are now on Greenland, but it will take another 1500 years or more to melt; that is very quick in geological time, but the concern now is, the first 5% of that ice melting makes a mess in the sea level cities.
What's most scary is that all the people who believe they should be controlling climate change are advocating for changes that will kill billions instead of just killing themselves. If you believe in climate change, you support genocide and oppose self-sacrifice.
I really enjoyed this video, but please allow me to make one small correction. You stated in the video that according to the Milinković cycles, the Earth should be starting to cool already. That is not correct. While we have passed the peak of the points in the cycles where maximum global warming occurs. We are not far enough past those peaks for cooling to have begun yet and it probably won’t for another one or 2 or even 3000 years. For example, the 40,000year cycle of how much earth is tilted, maxed out a few thousand years ago and is on its way back to minimum tilt which will produce cooling, but we are still at 23.5° tilt which is well above the average and therefore is still allowing warming. (maximum tilt is 24.5° and minimum tilt is 22.1° so we are still closer to the 24.5 then we are to 22.1 ) Another cycle precession which is a 26,000 year cycle, a few thousand years ago was at maximum when we were furthest from the sun during summer solstice for the northern hemisphere. That now occurs in July, which is a few weeks off of the summer solstice, but is still much closer to the solstice than it is to the equinox. Not until that gets close to the equinox in a few thousand years will the Earth begin to cool. Next the longest cycle, the 101,000 year cycle which has to do with earths eccentricity. We are still at almost a round orbit around the sun. Out of an average of 93,000,000 miles it only varies by one and a half million miles either side. When we get to maximum electricity it varies from 80,000,000 to 130,000,000 miles in earths orbit about the sun. And that’s what puts us into severe ice ages about every hundred thousand years. So while we are no longer at the maximum points in those cycles, we are still close enough to them that we are not anywhere close to starting to cool yet and will continue to warm for at least one to three more thousand years. If I may give an example for a shorter term cycle, which is earths seasons in one year: the summer solstice occurs around June 21, but that is not the hottest day of the year. Even though we are past the solstice after June 21, we continue to warm until mid to late July and only then are we far enough off solstice to start cooling down. The principal also applies to the Milankovich cycles. We are past the peaks, but we are still close enough to the peaks that we will continue to warm. If we were to reduce carbon emissions to absolute zero, the Earth would still continue to warm for another couple of thousand years. Since those 3 main cycles have such drastically different lengths from each other, normally they each peak at different times. But between about 8 to 10,000 years ago, they all peaked almost delicious at once. This led to the warmest integration. To occur during the 2.5 million year ice age that we are stuck in. Leaving us to the current warming that we are enjoying now and which it did lead to a 300 foot rise and sea level over the last 10,000 years, it also enabled the establishment of human civilization. We can trust that nature knows what it’s doing as we enjoy the continued mild warming that will still occur. Hopefully, in a couple of thousand years when the Earth does begin to cool, our technology will be such that we are capable of enduring another ice age.
Are you claiming saying that the current orbital positions within the Milankovitch cycles should not be cooling the Earth? If so, you defintely need to publish your research in a competitive high-impact science journal.
So a previous video, you showed how the earth has been warmer well over 10x's than we are are today, just like the previous we are on an uptrend, it also showed after each ice age's we heat up 4x in last 400k years
What role does the Earth's wobble have to do with the warming trends? 26,000 year wobble cycle, doesn't that line up fairly close with the Milankovitch cycles and glacial cycles?
We also have the magnetic poles reversing at reasonably regular cycles, does that effect climate and if so how and to what extent, we are apparently due another one, in geophysical terms it's imminent, however soon that may be.
The curiosity is, the highest temperatures recorded across America, happened during the 1930's. These records still stand today & were before mass production processes were developed and before the proliferation of motor vehicles, heating systems and aircon for commercial building and homes. It also pre-dates mass travel by air, seaor land. The 'anomoly' used as the base for measurement and comparisons since, are from 1860, when the world was still emerging from the little ice age. This is a political project, not scientific
@johnmurphy4814 Sure. There WERE some high temps in many places in the US in the 1930s. But the TREND then wasn't to warmer temps consistently, like it is now. There were ANOMALIES and there always will be. Temperature and HEAT are not the same thing. Think of Temperature as a linear measure. HEAT by that idea is a measure of VOLUME! So if the weather stays consistently warmer, but no extreme temperatures, there will be MORE HEAT in the environment. This translates to warmer air which can then absorb more water into it. This is NOT humidity! Think of humidity like temperature. Water is an even MORE potent green house gas so even MORE heat is reflected back to earth via the atmosphere. We are at over 400ppm carbon dioxide now. It was only about 300ppm in the 1930s. So it has gone up substantially in less than 100 years. And don't talk about "how small" a ppm is. It is NOT the specific number it is the potency of the value PER the attribute measured. Water can absorb about 4 times the heat that carbon dioxide does. So for the SAME capacity, it only has to be at 100ppm. Methane is about 10 times the heat capacity of carbon dioxide. So it only has to be at 40 ppm. Melting permafrost in Arctic land is releasing methane. Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are melting at an unprecedented rate. Mountain glaciers all around the world have retreated enormously in the past 50 years. The first thing that's going to happen is war over water as about half the world relies on mountain glaciers to keep a constant supply of water. Your inability to understand all of this DOES NOT make it political. You just don't want to accept what the DATA tells us because that would mean you have to change your life style. And DO some of your own research! Go find out WHY we know that the increase in carbon dioxide is human burning of coal and oil. Initially it was wood in the 1750s or so. But it changed to coal for about 150 years and then to oil AND coal the past 130 years or so. The enormous swaths of burning forests these past 10 or so years can be seen via this same metric. We KNOW that excess carbon dioxide from burning forests has gone up recently too. There really is a SMOKING GUN for that! Go! Go and learn!
@@rickkwitkoski1976 Oh dear, you do have it bad. Your maths don't even work but you're panicking about something that happens naturally. Temperatures have NOT risen in any consistent manner greater than before mass manufacturing and a world population half of what it is now. You're also ignoring the fact that the world has 'greened' by nearly 20% over the last 3 decades, entirely enabled by extra CO2 in the atmosphere. Doubling CO2 results in almost doubling crop yields with no extra fertilizer. You're the one who needs to learn - not to panic over something that's actually better for feeding people. Concentrating on a narrow band of misinformation isn't going to help you. FYI due to the characterisitics of CO2, the increase mechanism is very limited, due to the very narrow band of radiation that it absorbs in the first place. The impact of doubling CO2 is also logarithmic, not linear, limiting it further still. On the tail of that, heat is also escaping the atmoshpere at a far higher rate that previously claimed, due to many factors. You otherwise rely on nonsense, the Antarctic ice is gaining mass on one side far faster than it is melting. Greenland, back in the days of the Vikings, was ACTUALLY 'green'. There are a huge number of farms under the current snow, previously farmed by the Vikings for centuries because of the Medieval warm period, but abandoned directly because of the 'Little Ice Age'. Maybe look into the physics and historical facts instead of your alimentary canal.
The last ice age ended over 8000 years ago, and the climate has been fluctuating slightly ever since. Right now we are accelerating the rate of change.
@@rudolfsykora3505 Look at a graph. The temperature coming out of the last ice age peaked over 8000 years ago and has not gone significantly above that since. Until now.
@@jockyoung4491 Not much actually, non anthropogenic global warming accounts for 90%(but this is never reported) as the figures are being massaged into a narrative to sell electric cars. The truth is that the 90% is us leaving the ice age(we didn't leave it 8000 years ago), so what we are experiencing is basically entirely natural and some scientists believe we are going to go straight back into another ice age anyway.
TL:DR Science is just a way for us to process everything around us, and with all kinds of perspectives, we are bound to find out more about our world. Great video! It's a bit pathetic how angry people can get when they realise they were wrong about something. Science is a way to process everything around us, and since there are many researchers, there are many ways to research things like the climate, rising sea levels and whatnot. Some researchers are more biased than others, so I think we can often trust the science, but also trust the evidence when we see it for ourselves. If you notice a change in your environment, that doesn't mean it's less legit if you don't happen to be a researcher. Researchers work on that stuff, while others can do that as a hobby. So I personally believe both official researchers and amateurs are needed. Different perspectives are important. Remember that whenever you feel inadequate. Some People just happen to be favoured by many, and thus get more attention, but that doesn't mean everything these people say is automatically more important than your thoughts and ideas.
I've noticed the total lack of wildlife in the last 30+ years, we used to hear birds every morning, woods were filled with birdsong, if you went for a walk in the evening you'd see hundreds of hares and rabbits, now it's quite everywhere, the numbers are pretty low now and seeing any of the above is rare.
Not enough CO2. Levels are dangerously low on Earth. We need more CO2 plant food to make more plant growth to enrich soils, to feed more animals. CO2 is NOT pollution and not a cause of imagined global warming.
@@Squintz45 You've obviously never lived in the countryside, never gone on an evening walk in it and maybe too young to ever see it, which judging by your childish comment is probably about 15.
You forgot to mention the contribution of the connection between the Axial Procession and the Equatorial Bulge/tides influenced by the moon. And we have yet to see if the migrating Magnetic Poles have a major effect to the ice caps. And if we actually have a long over due Magnetic Flip, what that will contribute to the overall change.
Something i've never heard anyone discuss or even mention when it comes to sea level changes is under water volcanism. We know it takes place in many places around the globe and is evident through new islands being created, tectonic plate movement and sea bed eruptions... I'd be very interested to see a detailed video about it's effects, if at all...
Vulcanism is operating at historically low, fairly steady levels now. It is putting energy into the system, just as it's putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, but at a steady enough rate that we can discount it as part of what was an equilibrium state until the start of the industrial revolution. Inputs were balanced by outflows. Serious vulcanism is when an area at least as large as a medium sized country is uninhabitable due to repeat lava flows. Think "Deccan Traps" level vulcanism. What we have now is small change compared to that.
I think the main difference is the change predicated by Milanković cycles, can take thousands if not tens of thousand of years. What is happening now is taking a few hundred.
@@sugarloafoutdoors7601if the world changes in a thousand years it will have no meaning for me as to predict that far into the future is impossible to do, (science fiction speculation), likewise in a hundred years, (imagine the poor souls confusion if you bought a person born in the early last century into today), try to imagine a world your grandchildren mature in, once again SF speculation, not saying pollution control shouldn't be undertaken but the timescale has to be relevant to people today, the climate activists have warned about imminent deserts and ice ages within my lifetime, non of which have come about, knocks the street cred somewhat, making it difficult to put too much faith in any of the big claims.
I feel like in climate change discourse there are nowhere near enough talks about the major atlantic oceanic current and what impact it would have if it collapses. so much appreciation for mentioning it. aside from lowering northern to middle europes temperatures by up to -10°C, there is also a risk of temperature increase by up to +10°C around the equator. it wouldn't just affect whatever landmass touches the atlantic, but would affect the climate everywhere. not to mention that we're running out of time on that issue. if things stay as is it could collapse within the next 10 years, because it is already slowing down drastically
"primarily through the ocean currents" at 6:23 is highly incorrect. For northern polar it's ocean currents 900 terawatts, atmospheric currents 5,000 terawatts. Ocean currents are way too slow. Mostly what transfers heat is called "Hadley" "Ferrel" "Polar" cells (2 of each)
I have seen nobody do any studies about the sea weight causing see floor sinkage. We are just supposed to believe that ocean basins are juat like a bath tub.
@@stevebloom5606 Do you have any links to studies that contemplate ocean basin debth.and global worming? I don't find the general panic for the future to be very productive. I live miles from any roadway. I have all solar, cookin, water heating, electricity. I do not buy new clothes and grow most of my own food. I have gotten rid of gas powerd vehicals and have a couple of golf carts that can be solar charrged. i've eliminated entertainment and travel from my life. Dispite all my efferts my fellow humans are still demanding somthing from me. my problem is they refuse to define what that demand is.
The planet getting warmer would mean previously uninhabitable and unfarmable land would become so. In any case, nuclear is the answer. Not totally unfeasible wind and solar, the battery storage required for which is completely impossible to realize without immense environmental destruction of it's own.
It is likely by then end of this century that 3/4 of boreal region will reach crop feasible growing-degree-days conditions, as the permafrost moves northward if the current rate of global warming continues, but not enough top soil in quantities needed for industrial agriculture. Agriculture is already moving poleward. Way past that, agriculture will eventually have to go farther north in the northern hemisphere and farther south in the southern hemisphere, and the staple crops we depend on will have to change and will have to be able to grow in shorter growing seasons with longer days of sunlight in the summer. And specifically in the northern hemisphere crops will have to be able to grow in thawed tundra and glacial moraine, which are not arable in the longest days of the summer so mass scale agriculture would not be sustainable. Of course this is based on the assumption there will be no global dimming caused by a giant meteor strike or a volcanic eruption bigger than any in human history or absit omen a nuclear war. However there is the possibility of Northern Europe cooling off if the Gulf Stream slows down even more. Canada is likely to get warmer with longer growing season, but at the cost of more flooding and droughts. We know how the Gulf Stream helps keep summers from getting too hot and winters from getting too cold and that a weaker Gulf Stream will eventually change the weather pattern humans have been used to for agriculture. Keep in mind wind and solar are only meant to be stopgaps. Wind and solar will never carry the whole base load. Utility scale solar farms are the cheapest energy right now, but in order for them to surpass more than a third of the energy mix, a huge investment in storage is required. It will require a lot of concrete and square miles; worn out turbines and solar panels will not be the weakest link, but concrete probably will. It's too bad nobody can deliver a small modular nuclear plant today, thorium or otherwise. Maybe in another ten years.
@@rps1689 The thawing of permafrost will also release huge amounts of methane, which is likely to accelerate global heating and could spiral out of control quickly
@@_bellatrix_potens_-bps-8366 Siberia will have problems with agriculture, as the staple crops we depend on will have to change and will have to be able to grow in shorter growing seasons with longer days of sunlight in the summer. Crops will have to be able to grow in thawed tundra and glacial moraine, which are not arable in the longest days of the summer so mass scale agriculture would not be sustainable. Of course this is based on the assumption there will be no global dimming caused by a giant meteor strike or a volcanic eruption bigger than any in human history or absit omen a nuclear war.
That is what is the biggest eye-brow raising factor about the alarmism regarding purported climate change - THE very best means of addressing it while maintaining continuity of civilization would be an all out nuclear power push But instead the alarmist faction push totally inadequate green energy tech - which is woefully unrealistic to even make a dent. And to embrace that approach will lead to drastic de-industrialization (like what once prosperous Germany is undergoing), and it will unravel civilization itself. And with severely weakened advanced civilization, we will become helpless to do anything.
Sea level rise is due to both ice melt and the expansion of water as it warms. The sea level on the East coast has risen only about a foot so far, so it wouldn't be very noticeable. But that will accelerate.
For all those thinking that ice melting in a cup of water does not raise the level, there are 2 things: 1. Greenland and Antarctica are landmasses. Any ice being added to water can raise the level. 2. As the video mentioned, plate tectonics plays a role here. As the weight a plate bears decreases, the plate will rise, and some other plate will sink. Though this is not enough to trigger earthquakes, it is enough to rise/lower the sea level significantly. 3. Even in the ideal case where all ice would be present only in the water, and plates would not exist, the melting of ice would still release prehistoric organisms and chemicals trapped in it over many years. So yes, melting of ice is a big concern, as it is currently accelerated by humans. People saying that 'government' is trying to control us are just fear-mongering (though greenwashing is still equally deadly, and ruins the reputation of actual environment conservation efforts).
Let me start with #2 - Plate tectonics take hundreds of thousands of years to notice. #1 Yay-saying. You list the fact that two areas are landmasses, then just claim that adding ice to water raises the the water level. Yet the "ice" is already in the water, it is not magically spawning as if in a video game. Finally #3 those organisms are long dead. The only accurate thing you did post is the chemical would be released, but of course YOU have no idea what those chemicals are, or in what concentration since actual scientists can only predict both of those variable. So please stop pretending you understand these topics because you read a wiki page. The melting of ice has been going on for four decades and has yet to raise the water level AT ALL. Beach front property along the East and West coast of N. America, on average (some areas do fluctuate, but they average out over the entire continent) has not been disappearing or else the communities would be moving inland.
"the rabbits and foxes will be nice for hunting sports" said one sailor to the other and opened the cage in australia. only afterwards they realised, the rabbits are eating the local fauna and the foxes kill the local wildlife... just because you are part of the world doesnt mean you have a positive impact on the world - especially if you fck around with complex eco systems that you dont understand
One comment... if every single cubic cm of sea ice melted, then the sea level would not alter by so much as a single mm. The sea ice is already part of the ocean. Land-based ice on the other hand is a real danger.
Damn thats dumb. Go half fill a glass with water and add a vive of ice. Use a Sharpie to mark the waterlevel. Then leave for a while and come BACK after the ice has melted away. Use the Sharpie to mark a new water level. Compare and contrast the levels before and after melting and draw conclutions from there
Did you forget about the thermal expansion of matter that was also mentioned here in the video? Yeah, warmer water than 4°C expands the warmer it gets.
@@rastrisfrustreslosgomez544 from what i can see ice melting would increase the sea level by 60-70m according to various sources from NASA and the us government. what many people don't consider however is that this change will happen within 5000+ years if we continue the trend of carbon emissions and the climate models are accurate. that's longer than recorded human history and the average rise per century would be 1,2m even in the most pessimistic case rising sea levels wont be much of an issue for us humans.
@@KT-pv3kl *average* the keyword you're looking at. While the average around the coast lines across the world would take a 100 years to be of any notice in places like florida the distribution will be much higher than average
I don't get what is going on in all your videos comment sections lately. Everyone is so bitter and angry. I just want to say there's definitely plenty of us out here who love your approach to these videos. You're willing to cover topics that upset all political ideologies and just focus on accuracy as it should be. I'm happy every time i see a new video from you
BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE GETTING PEED OFF WITH THIS SO CALLED CLIMATE CHANGE CAUSED BY HUMANS
Probably deceptive titles
The contentious attitude you find here is going on everywhere. Everyone is so volatile and aggressive, The legacy and social media platforms are pushing with great gusto, it ups their viewership.
@@gayprepperz6862the truth is very unpleasant that some are not willing to accept
Entropy is something, unfortunately that is not well understood by the majority of people otherwise they would understand that the heat being used to convert the ice to water will heat the water rapidly once the ice is gone
great video! I’m used to astrum doing vids abt space, but a video about earth itself is a nice change
It's pandering.
If we compare the rapid melting of the ice from 12'000 years with today, they should know that half of Northern Europe was under a kilometer-thick layer of ice, and North America too. Today, most of the ice is already on the sea, only in Antarctica is it relatively balanced, but the masses of ice that are now over Greenland are no longer comparable to the kilometer-thick layers that existed in the past. The sea level will not rise much as a result. And the previous model predicted a rise of 2.5°C, we "only" achieved 1.5°C. So they were already 1°C too high! Most civilisations had a flowering period in warmer times, there were safe harvests. No reason to spread panic!
especially that example from 2020, a human made virus, yeah great. At least don't use a man made virus as example ASTRUM!
@@interstellarsurferpandering to who? Sounds like he made up his mind due to the evidence
Dude, earth is IN space
I've been a subscriber to your TH-cam channel for a couple years now. So, I just wanted to say to you that I'm grateful that a bright young person such as yourself takes the time and effort to produce such quality content that is easily understandable for so many to learn from and enjoy as much as I do. So, thank you Alex. And everyone that is part of helping you produce these videos.
Alan Massoli
United States
What a day. A new Astrum, PBS Spacetime and Veritasium video 👏🏻
Nice channels
2 out of 3 are Aussie ❤
Great Channel!👍🏻🇺🇲
Yes those are quality and entertaining channels.
Astrum's too good for TH-cam.
Astrum is exactly what TH-cam needs more of ❤
Yeah, but we really don't want him to leave
What refutes science:
• Better science
What DOESN'T refute science:
• Your feelings
• Your favorite politician
• Your religion
• Your half-baked opinion after watching two TH-cam videos
Rubbish
@mr.honeybee7661 yeah... my religion DOES REFUTE SCIENCE. Lol good 1.
Best comment I've seen. Some real mouth breathers in this comment section for some odd reason. Yikes.
_"Trust the Science"_ ✝️
@@onlyonewhyphy no, you don't blindly trust the science. You strive to come up with a better explanation and prove it so that others get same results as you. Can't do it? then shut up
Lot of people here saying personal opinions like it was scientific evidence 😞 I blame politics. And money
Morons are a dime a dozen, and the internet was made easily and affordably accessible. Instead of learning from that pipe line of information, they went the wrong way down stupidity holes.
I blame dunning kruger effect
@@MichaelHarto you should blame the ever changing story, the highly questionable record gathering, the experts with stock in "eco" companies and far more than anyone has to type out.
I blame willful ignorance.
@@onlyonewhyphy Hardly an ever-changing story. Sure, new measurements come along, and models are adjusted, but they've all be saying broadly the same thing for decades. It would be more suspicious if it didn't ever change and all new data perfectly conformed. Sure, some people might be in line to make a profit from new Green tech companies, but that pales in comparison to the trillions of vested interests in Oil, Gas, Coal and the status quo in general.
@@onlyonewhyphy In your case, blaming yourself might be helpful.
I love your videos and am very impressed. Your slow and excellent narration allows me to get my head around what you are saying. I have a Bsc so am not a thicko but need time to understand a new concept. Well done.
I am from Wales in the UK and think that you must hail from around the valleys in south Wales.
Thanks!👑 fantastic as always 🌟
The worst part is Google adding context from the United Nations, like thats something I need to hear to be able to think clearly.
I really can't stand when they do that.
It used to only cover just a couple of subjects, but now it keeps popping up under all kinds of videos under all kinds of different topics.
I imagine if they had internet in the medieval times there would have been a caption under Copernicus' video stating that according to the authorities the Earth is at the center of the solar system.
You're watching ads on TH-cam? Don't you have Firefox + unlock origin?
@@Roger-ws8rj Big Brother
@@sburgos9621 xacty
Alex, you have a wonderful voice that adds another layer to your presentations. I think all of your videos are outstanding, intelligent and chalked full of information. If people choose to live under a rock and pretend our world isn't changing dramatically, so be it.
Alex, another great offering by you and your very accomplished colleagues ! This quality of work keeps me coming back to your site when I want a dependable source for such information.
There is a massive bot problem on the internet, you can see them in the comments of every large creator's channels, their aim is to sow discord and division, do not engage, do not block, ignore.
Any engagement is a win.
Not a pinky commie bot as you claim...
@@easyfund You don't even know what that means
uhm never in the history of anything was ignoring a good strategy... absolutely report them
@@dimitralex1892reporting is fine, but don't block or reply to them
It’s sad to see an intelligent conversation descend into a stupid argument
Love your work, please continue, and please ignore the detractors. You make a difference.
Thank you for your absolutely amazing work.
Netherlands war against the sea continues
Submarine colony
My house is at -3m below current sea level 😳
Indeed, and most dutch people dont even care these days. You can tell them all this stuff, they will still vote for rightist parties that deny climate change... its maddening
Netherlands took away what belonged to the sea. It's just matter of time and it will claim back.
The Dutch get too much credit for coming up with the brilliant idea of digging a trench.
And not enough credit for the effort they put into it.
Want to adopt a star? Not a real one, just the one at the end of our videos - they’re lonely and could use a Patron’s name next to them 🙂 Sign-up here: bit.ly/4anEb5u
Not the own a star thing from three bodies problem 😂
@@mugennojin3513 y do you love me for
Want to free Palestinians from colonial settler apartheid war crimes? ISISsrael created and supports Hamas. Zionism is antisemitism and terrorism ❤️🍉🇵🇸🍉❤️
Dude your last couple videos are pretty lame and ignore a boatload of science on the matter.
@@themollerzlol yeah you nailed it. Im about to unsub🙃
0:10 - shouldn't that be "entangled flora", not fauna? Flora are plants. Fauna are animals.
Yeah you don’t see the entangled animals??
If you look close, you’ll notice Jada Pinkett Smith entangled there as well
These videos are great. Thanks for your time and effort.
Astounding as always 👏👍👌
One fact I believe you got wrong.. Man does not learn from his mistakes.
😢
If that was true, misanthrope, humanity would have gone extinct hundreds of thousands of years ago.
As it stands, humanity conquered nature.
Yeah mom has to always clean up after them.
edge. If true, we wouldn't be on youtube.
History always repeats itself.
I've learned in lectures that the land ice in Greenland are big enough to attract ocean water in that region; the loss of Greenland ices could mean less water around Greenland and more water elsewhere
we are talking about a few mm at best over the entirety of the planet here.
@@KT-pv3kl What ? Try differences of over 15 feet over the planet...it's called gravity and density !
6:58 What sort of man takes his phone into a sauna?
Wtf, gross
A married one
@@crobilly19Hehe good one
As a subscriber for a couple of years, thank you for continuing to produce videos like these. Even as an ecologist, I learn something new or a different way of looking at information with every episode. The graphics in this one are amazing, so much so that I need to go back more than once to internalise the changes being illustrated. A great part of my enjoyment in watching your episodes is the commentary - please never consider using AI voice generation. By the way, the introduction to the sponsorship spot was masterful!
First off, Alex, please don't ever consider not presenting and narrating yourself - you are at the top.
Next, congratulations on another episode with amazing animated and still graphics and images. While still a lecturer at a university, I have presented some of the things you covered today in ecology lectures, but this would have blown the student away.
Finally, I cannot understand the amount of negativity in many comment. Presumably you have spoiled them - they should try watching some channels supposedly covering science topics, and at least one that shall remain nameless, does not allow comments despite totally click-bait titles and low level research narrated by an AI that is still at Fourth Grade level.
Can't say that I've ever licked a ski lift pole, but I skill get your point.
Great video as always, I have learned things :) Thanks!
Short answer: Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC)
Only if east coast American sea levels are all you care about. Globally (which I assume is what is implied in the title), the short answer is thermal expansion.
AMOC is very important. I just spent a few days watching TH-cam videos about it. Unfortunately we have absolutely no data as to what would happen if the AMOC did change in some way so there's no way to say it would be catastrophic, but all signs are pointing that direction such as Europe becoming as cold as Canada for example. AMOC is a good subject to explore for sure. Understanding how el niño and el niña are related to sea temperatures is important too. We're finding out more and more how the sun cycle effects our day to day weather so that's another subject of interest worth investigating more here on TH-cam. Lots to learn about for those willing to take the time.
@@JonnoPlays A kindred soul ! Also , the fresh ice melt water is going to contribute to the AMOC to turn over .ICE BOMB !! Going to get fucken chilly.
Another short answer nothing because there is no Antarctica that would be the ice wall
I made sealevel rise when I displaced 200 lbs of water as I was swimming and splashing around..😊
Just a little typo correction at 6:46 - water heat capacity is not 4.18 kJ/m3/C but 4.18 kJ/l/C or 4.18 MJ/m3/C Disregarding this little detail, this is a fantastic video, thank you.
what a lovely report im looking forward for the future
It's rising because people are pouring their unfinished drinks into it.
Not only that. Every time I go swimming in the sea, I go pee.
No, it's coming from people flushing toilets.
I was just gonna say because the rivers keep flowing, duh!
It's rising because the core has reversed direction.... 😆
All possibly right . . . maybe. Although I did spit into the sewer today.
Fascinating!
Sorry guys, its my fault.
I left the tap on.
They even found tropical plant and animal fossils already on the continent surface.
Things that got buried in mineral rich mud. Look up antarctic fossils. The continent wasn't always at it's present latitude. It was way further north -Equatorial at one point.
Great job explaining a complex topic.
On a positive note:
As the polar caps ice melts will end Californias water shortages .
Did I miss the thermal expansion of the oceans? …now I’ll have to go back and properly listen instead of multitasking
11:35
I sincerely appreciate this and your previous video. You did an excellent job of laying out all the refutations of climate-change deniers and then clearly presented the dire situation we now face. However, it's the up-beat, we can fix this ending that troubles me. Not because of anything you said, but because I don't believe humans are capable of hearing anything they do not want to hear.
I don’t think it’s about humanity not wanting to listen. There’s too many of us, wanting a standard of living and producing constantly. No amount of EVs which require more mining and destruction, or eating veggies will save us. We would have to all agree to severely lower our standard of living, that includes energy consumption. And then on the other side of consumers are industries which will keep polluting. We can’t solely blame consumers. I think change will only come from total collapse of global human population and collapse of the global economy.
Trying to prove this Climate change is like saying milk drowns Cheerios; In a hotter climate we had mega fauna and more flora than ever, transglaciation however already has centuries of reviewed data. Who cares if it is too hot out if the water sterilises you and the air gives you cancer?
No what you did is gave up on Captain Planet for investment options you won't live to reap at the cost of your integrity.
They aren't willing to lower their own standard of living. They will force others to lower theirs, leading to genocide of billions.
I'm not denying climate change, but I am denying climate catastrophe 😊❤ the sky is a little warmer, not falling 😂
@@agingerbeard the planet will do just fine, it’s the humans who will suffer. So yes, the sky is not falling, but everything that will ensue will cause food shortages, migration, global economy collapse and wars. Not to mention lost habitats and their biodiversity. We’ll probably all adapt, but it will be a different world.
Alex, I quite enjoyed this very interesting and informative segment. Your videos are par excellence bar none! Your content, narration, and production are better than some huge budget tv productions imo. 👊🇨🇦
Thank you for another excellent presentation.😊
It's all about the sun cycles and the earth's magnetic field. The recent solar storm was smaller than previous storms, yet it produced record breaking auroras reaching further around the earth than ever recorded previously. As the magnetic field is disrupted by repeated solar storms it's ability to resist those storms is degraded. We are one big CME away from a serious outage and I'm afraid world governments are not prepared for this disaster scenario. We should be burying electric lines and other cables underground. Makes you wonder why that hasn't happened despite the fact that power lines get blown down over and over by hurricanes and rebuilt just to blow over again.
The cost of burying is way higher that build lines. That's why they don't do it... Like for almost everything that is a problem, the answer is "financial benefits" which mostly profits to the ones that could make things right if their own financial interest didn't blind them complitely.
You overestimate these magnetic forces, which are far less than changes in solar irradiation and the Milankovitch cycles (both of which are in cooling phases) and the long-term carbon cycle as reflected in changes in the greenhouse composition of the atmosphere. In addition, those magnetic forces are relatively constant, so while they might impact the fluid dynamics of the atmosphere, it would only be in terms of short-term fluctuations working out to zero over the long-term.
Where are you getting that the recent solar storm was smaller than previous storms? As far as I am aware it was the single largest since the Carrington event. Being smaller than the biggest ever isn't unimpressive. Our systems held up perfectly, and while that doesn't necissarily mean anything for even larger storms, this storm was bigger than expected, not smaller. It was impressive what we just handled.
Burying the lines will protect them from wind storms, but it won't do jack for magnetic storms. Magnetic fields pass through dirt just fine - that's how we're able to use the magnetic field of the earth's core for, well, anything really.
There are very few records of previous solar storms because most people had no cause to write them down - auroras weren't seen as a harbinger of doom like comets. But Captain Cook recorded seeing the Aurora Australis while he was sailing past the north coast of Australia, so we know there was a pretty big solar storm at that time.
There's no evidence of the earth's magnetic field taking long term damage from solar storms or CMEs. The only thing that is damaged by these events is long distance power transmission cables, and we have no way to protect those. So the solution is to get rid of long distance power transmission cables, and then not worry about it because otherwise all a solar storm is going to do to us is make pretty lights in the sky for a few evenings.
Looking on the bright side we might get a nuclear winter, that should help out the poles 😬
The Poles will likely have a hard time of it, though.
How many poles do we have ? like 3 ?
@@luizmonad777 A whole land full of them.
@@interstellarsurferThey make the best jokes... well, except for those aliens...
I think the Poles are more concerned with what Russia is up to.
Question as the poles melt and sea level rises, how much will it slow down earth rotation and change the length of a day?
Interesting thought. I know the water held in Three Gorges has had a measurable effect on day length - measurable in fractions of a millisecond, but still measurable.
This is actually a really good question. I haven't been able to find a common answer. We should really focus on this more.
@@YangLeee Will it make any significant difference to anything, though? Compared to extreme weather destroying crops and killing billions of people, and elevated CO2 well into the range that makes the remaining people stupid, sleepy, and anxious, I'm not convinced that even a few minutes' change in day length is the thing we need to be focusing on.
Negligible, I guess? The increase of sea level is nothing compared to the Earth's radius.
@@tealkerberus748 agreed almost nothing , just a observation
To a Californian, a quiet forest does not mean that it is dying. We have vast Redwood and Sequoia forests that are so quiet, you might imagine being in an anechoic chamber. Those forests are quiet because insects cannot live off of the redwood trees as they are too acidic for them to survive. That creates a chain reaction: no insects equals no birds and no birds means no sounds. But there is no feeling of impending doom. Those forests are just unbelievable!
It’s rare to see someone cover vertical land displacement.😊
Some of the issues in sea level rising. Is the sand that is used for construction. If you dig into this subject you’ll understand why we’re running out of building sand. And you’ll see how it affects the beach’s. It’s an open market with little to no oversight.
Same with drainage gravel and ballast mix, the ton bags turn up smelling of brine...... wonder where they're getting all of that..
I have never heard this aspect been mentioned before
Pulling sand further inland would have the opposite effect. Much of that sand is pulled from the edges of the shores and just beyond it, for that exact reason. It doesn't matter how much you look into something, if you're looking in the wrong places.
beach sand is not suitable for construction.
@@michaelotoole1807 you are wrong. It’s beach sand that’s is the only sand useable in construction. Its shape is why that is. It’s also why you can build sand castles. Go look into it. Sand mafia is a good video.
I'm still waiting for my invitation to Obama's Martha's'Vineyard beach front property party !
Its not on a beach, it is set way back from the water, on a hill. And his house in Hawaii has a concrete sea wall. Most rich people that are educatied know where land uplift is at the same rate of sea level rise and also know how long it will take from nuisance flooding to major flooding.
Is a Bugatti the most practical car? It's not? Then why do rich people buy them?!
Maybe we should stop building powerplants next to the coast and so on...
Fascinating as ever. Thank you
Fascinating presentation thanks xxx
''How dare you'' . . . Doom Goblin 2024.
A paper from the University of Toronto several years ago showed that the Antarctic ice shelves have a gravitational pull. That means when they disappear the water currently being pulled to the southern hemisphere will move north. Sea levels will recede in the southern hemisphere and rise in the northern. I've been wondering what effect all this shifting water will have on tectonic plates. Or is the water like the arms of a figure skater, she pulls them in close to spin faster and spreads them out to spin slower? Will the water concentrate at the equator slowing the earth's rotation?
the arctic ice shelves have the same gravitational pull so why do you think it will move north?
@Pax.Alotin I think the point he was making is that liquid water would start mostly evenly distributing itself and its gravitational pull across all the world's ocean, whereas solid ice can pile up in huge mountains over antarctica, locally increasing gravity in that area relative to the rest of the planet.
@@KT-pv3kl There is far less arctic ice than antarctic ice and that gap is widening since the arctic ice is melting faster than the antarctic ice. Ice is more resilient over land than over water, and the arctic has a lot less land than the antarctic.
Ice melting doesn't make the gravity of the water molecules go away of course, but mountains exert a locally elevated amount of gravity because the mass is piled up in one place. The same is presumably true for massive sheets of ice relative to the lower and flatter ocean.
@weissfox5857 your explanation is exactly right.
As a physicist, that's just stupid. I'd ask why such a paper never crossed my desk considering I'm an expert in gravitation, but then I suppose not every dumb idea gets published in a reputable publication.
Excellent episode, thanks!
I really enjoy Astrum.
I’m of the mind that if it weren’t for the Moon the Earth would not have such a balance in the ocean. Of course with the exception of when our orbit takes the higher plane and everything gets icy.
The heat capacity of water is 4.2kj/kg/°c not per cubic Meter
Thanks for the video brother Alex
I knew we were doomed. if I start having a tiny bit of optimism, I make sure I read the diahreah that is the youtube comments section.
We are not doomed, we're just going to be forced to adapt in what seems thousands of years of complacency.
I liked this video because it didn't have a doom tone, which is always present on climate change videos, which I hate.
I don't believe climate change is a catastrophe, its something to be managed, a problem we could fix if we decided it was important and invested effort. It doesn't even need to be a lot, 15% of the GDP over decades might do it.
What's dooming us is our inaction.
@@luizmonad77715% of countries GDP isn't a lot?😂
You can tell us how doomed we all are when you retire from work and get your pension, because unlike the crisis alarmist nonsense, that is going to happen!
@rr-zb3rh not if you live in africa or the middle east or south America 😂
@@rr-zb3rhUS politicians launder that amount in 6 months easy
The map at 4:09 is wrong. It shows a 6 meter sealevel rise, not 70 meters!
The map shows wildly inconsistent sea level rise, it is around 6m in Southern Vietnam, in Florida it's about 25m and the Alaskan panhandle is around 700m. I tried to do Cuba but it didn't line up closely no matter what height I used. Just look at it, in what world would the Norwegian west coast be more affected than the Swedish and Finnish coast?
@@roevhaal578 The map is on the wikipedia page of "Sea level rise"
@@EARTH-PFP-ANDY Well it's still an incorrect map. Wikipedia can't change geography.
..and what do YOU base that comment on?..?? IF you want to call someone wrong. How about some facts, proof. !
@@stanm4601 go to google maps look at the coastline of the Wikipedia map and check the altitude of the new coastline in google maps you will see vastly different values when the sea level should always have a consistent value and not vary by more than a few meters as water finds its level and cant be at 6m higher in one spot and 70m higher in another.
I'm really quite annoyed at Astrum for this video. First the click bait title, then discovering that it actually is the ice melting that will shut off the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, and finally the catastrophising.
Great visuals in this presentation and nuannced overview
I've lived on the beach in Florida since 2000, sea levels aren't rising. Unsubscribe
Regional observations are quite irrelevant.
Tell that to all the people who’ve already lost their homes to rising sea levels
Not just black swan coastal flooding events, but also the increasing intrusion of seawater into formerly fresh water coastal aquifers. So even if your Florida property is (for now) above flood levels, it doesn't mean you'll be able to drink the water.
Thats what wells are for
And filtration devices, they got plenty of sand
@@ClyDIley Ummmmm, not sure we're one the same page with this. Putting a well into salt water only brings up....salt water.
@@ClyDIley Sand doesn't filter out salt.
@@ClyDIley ... You know, wilful ignorance won't change reality. Plug your ears al you want, your won't magivally stop being under water.
Golf Stream is powered by wind. It's a surface water phenomena.
It's not going to be changed by salinity of the water.
Correct. But most of the heat is moved toward Europe by the underlying AMOC, which very much will collapse if too much freshwater is added at its northerly terminus.
@@stevebloom5606**may collapse, as shown by some simulations of theoretical models.
*Fixed that for you. 😉👍
Do you believe that salt water is heavier than fresh water? Do you believe that warm water is lighter than cold water? We are not talking about the Gulf Stream. We are talking about a water circulation system that operates across the whole planet with enormous consequences to the Northern Hemisphere climate. The AMOC has been shown to be slowing. Wind does affect the circulation but not so much on the global scale as the trade winds will always blow the same direction in the same season. What we detect as wind is contained within hundreds of km, not tens of thousands.
Excellent video. Man has a very short memory and rarely learns from our mistakes. We progress mostly from our adaptability.
Those time lapse graphics are great, cheers.
ONE PIECE FANS!
Vegapunk:- "The World is Sinking"😬
True! We must stop the world government from raising the water any higher!
Weird... If you look at an interglacial chart we haven't crested the top yet of the current warming cycle. We have a few degrees higher to go and a couple hundred years to get there before we start down the other side towards a new ice age. For those of you in The peanut gallery. And ice age is a bad thing. That's when extinction events happen. There ain't no deserts around the equator and generally the world likes heat
"The world likes heat" - well said. We have temperatures going above fifty degrees in the capital, so the problem is that most people aren't equipped with acs. Cemented infrastructures and pitch roads are probably not deserts but the heat generated - wuff!
"Other side of new ice age" - Nice, I like how you made a quick leap there. This guy in the video found it hard to predict what would happen in 2100 and you were able to determine nevertheless about the next ice age.
I like your style of looking at things, you give me hope in humanity's sensibility.
Ice ages have been cyclical for millenia. Are you suggesting we intervene in the natural cycle to prevent ice ages? Something like... anthropogenic global warming?
@@jsonjsoff "Cyclical for millenia" - Proof beyond reasonable doubt based on observable trends is one way of looking at large time scales, but the interpolation is a long shot. Didn't say it wouldn't happen, but there is a possibility where the atmosphere heats up too much for ice to form. Or say the atmospheric layer runs haywire and the Earth's water is flung into space. These are some of the catastrophes that you may consider before coming to a conclusion that "what's bound to happen will happen" based on your deduction of "what's bound to happen".
Oh no a typo - Antarctic*
AntARTic means… against art?
@@paulendry6398That would be Antiartic.. LoL
It isn't the coastline changes that will cause the most chaos and carnage. What will cause the most hardship will be the droughts and the famines and the blights and the extremely energetic storms and the destabilized ecosystems.
In 1990, the IPCC First Assessment Report acknowledged that "Human-made aerosols, from sulphur emitted largely in fossil fuel combustion can modify clouds and this may act to lower temperatures", while "a decrease in emissions of sulphur might be expected to increase global temperatures".Since the 1980s, a decrease in air pollution has led to a partial reversal of the dimming trend, sometimes referred to as global brightening. This global brightening had contributed to the acceleration of global warming, which began in the 1990s. In 2020, COVID-19 lockdowns provided a notable "natural experiment", as there had been a marked decline in sulfate and black carbon emissions caused by the curtailed road traffic and industrial output. That decline did have a detectable warming impact: it was estimated to have increased global temperatures by 0.01-0.02 °C (0.018-0.036 °F) initially and up to 0.03 °C (0.054 °F) by 2023, before disappearing. Regionally, the lockdowns were estimated to increase temperatures by 0.05-0.15 °C (0.090-0.270 °F) in eastern China over January-March, and then by 0.04-0.07 °C (0.072-0.126 °F) over Europe, eastern United States, and South Asia in March-May, with the peak impact of 0.3 °C (0.54 °F) in some regions of the United States and Russia.
I thought sea level rise was caused by the tears of haters.
Tears of global warming haters, right? :)
😂 I thought it was from carbon taxes flowing out into the deep blue
We have enough haters in the comment section on this video to do it all ourselves! Haha
It’s tears of laughter from the boomers. They caused this and got all the benefits and are laughing at us left to deal with it.
So far, it seems most of the haters are those who disagree with the people that are disagreeing with this video.
What's really scary is how quickly Greenland's glaciation is melting, and it's accelerating.
To puts things in perspective, it took tens of thousands of years for the Laurentide Ice Sheet to be completely melted because that warming was a hundred times slower than what's happening now. The remains of that ice pack are now on Greenland, but it will take another 1500 years or more to melt; that is very quick in geological time, but the concern now is, the first 5% of that ice melting makes a mess in the sea level cities.
Is it hell.
@@marcbiff2192 ?
What's most scary is that all the people who believe they should be controlling climate change are advocating for changes that will kill billions instead of just killing themselves.
If you believe in climate change, you support genocide and oppose self-sacrifice.
I really enjoyed this video, but please allow me to make one small correction. You stated in the video that according to the Milinković cycles, the Earth should be starting to cool already. That is not correct. While we have passed the peak of the points in the cycles where maximum global warming occurs. We are not far enough past those peaks for cooling to have begun yet and it probably won’t for another one or 2 or even 3000 years. For example, the 40,000year cycle of how much earth is tilted, maxed out a few thousand years ago and is on its way back to minimum tilt which will produce cooling, but we are still at 23.5° tilt which is well above the average and therefore is still allowing warming. (maximum tilt is 24.5° and minimum tilt is 22.1° so we are still closer to the 24.5 then we are to 22.1 ) Another cycle precession which is a 26,000 year cycle, a few thousand years ago was at maximum when we were furthest from the sun during summer solstice for the northern hemisphere. That now occurs in July, which is a few weeks off of the summer solstice, but is still much closer to the solstice than it is to the equinox. Not until that gets close to the equinox in a few thousand years will the Earth begin to cool. Next the longest cycle, the 101,000 year cycle which has to do with earths eccentricity. We are still at almost a round orbit around the sun. Out of an average of 93,000,000 miles it only varies by one and a half million miles either side. When we get to maximum electricity it varies from 80,000,000 to 130,000,000 miles in earths orbit about the sun. And that’s what puts us into severe ice ages about every hundred thousand years. So while we are no longer at the maximum points in those cycles, we are still close enough to them that we are not anywhere close to starting to cool yet and will continue to warm for at least one to three more thousand years. If I may give an example for a shorter term cycle, which is earths seasons in one year: the summer solstice occurs around June 21, but that is not the hottest day of the year. Even though we are past the solstice after June 21, we continue to warm until mid to late July and only then are we far enough off solstice to start cooling down. The principal also applies to the Milankovich cycles. We are past the peaks, but we are still close enough to the peaks that we will continue to warm. If we were to reduce carbon emissions to absolute zero, the Earth would still continue to warm for another couple of thousand years. Since those 3 main cycles have such drastically different lengths from each other, normally they each peak at different times. But between about 8 to 10,000 years ago, they all peaked almost delicious at once. This led to the warmest integration. To occur during the 2.5 million year ice age that we are stuck in. Leaving us to the current warming that we are enjoying now and which it did lead to a 300 foot rise and sea level over the last 10,000 years, it also enabled the establishment of human civilization. We can trust that nature knows what it’s doing as we enjoy the continued mild warming that will still occur. Hopefully, in a couple of thousand years when the Earth does begin to cool, our technology will be such that we are capable of enduring another ice age.
Are you claiming saying that the current orbital positions within the Milankovitch cycles should not be cooling the Earth? If so, you defintely need to publish your research in a competitive high-impact science journal.
So a previous video, you showed how the earth has been warmer well over 10x's than we are are today, just like the previous we are on an uptrend, it also showed after each ice age's we heat up 4x in last 400k years
What role does the Earth's wobble have to do with the warming trends? 26,000 year wobble cycle, doesn't that line up fairly close with the Milankovitch cycles and glacial cycles?
We also have the magnetic poles reversing at reasonably regular cycles, does that effect climate and if so how and to what extent, we are apparently due another one, in geophysical terms it's imminent, however soon that may be.
The curiosity is, the highest temperatures recorded across America, happened during the 1930's. These records still stand today & were before mass production processes were developed and before the proliferation of motor vehicles, heating systems and aircon for commercial building and homes. It also pre-dates mass travel by air, seaor land. The 'anomoly' used as the base for measurement and comparisons since, are from 1860, when the world was still emerging from the little ice age. This is a political project, not scientific
@johnmurphy4814
Sure. There WERE some high temps in many places in the US in the 1930s.
But the TREND then wasn't to warmer temps consistently, like it is now.
There were ANOMALIES and there always will be.
Temperature and HEAT are not the same thing.
Think of Temperature as a linear measure. HEAT by that idea is a measure of VOLUME!
So if the weather stays consistently warmer, but no extreme temperatures, there will be MORE HEAT in the environment. This translates to warmer air which can then absorb more water into it. This is NOT humidity! Think of humidity like temperature.
Water is an even MORE potent green house gas so even MORE heat is reflected back to earth via the atmosphere.
We are at over 400ppm carbon dioxide now. It was only about 300ppm in the 1930s.
So it has gone up substantially in less than 100 years.
And don't talk about "how small" a ppm is. It is NOT the specific number it is the potency of the value PER the attribute measured.
Water can absorb about 4 times the heat that carbon dioxide does.
So for the SAME capacity, it only has to be at 100ppm.
Methane is about 10 times the heat capacity of carbon dioxide. So it only has to be at 40 ppm.
Melting permafrost in Arctic land is releasing methane.
Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are melting at an unprecedented rate.
Mountain glaciers all around the world have retreated enormously in the past 50 years.
The first thing that's going to happen is war over water as about half the world relies on mountain glaciers to keep a constant supply of water.
Your inability to understand all of this DOES NOT make it political. You just don't want to accept what the DATA tells us because that would mean you have to change your life style.
And DO some of your own research! Go find out WHY we know that the increase in carbon dioxide is human burning of coal and oil. Initially it was wood in the 1750s or so. But it changed to coal for about 150 years and then to oil AND coal the past 130 years or so.
The enormous swaths of burning forests these past 10 or so years can be seen via this same metric. We KNOW that excess carbon dioxide from burning forests has gone up recently too.
There really is a SMOKING GUN for that!
Go! Go and learn!
@@rickkwitkoski1976 Oh dear, you do have it bad. Your maths don't even work but you're panicking about something that happens naturally. Temperatures have NOT risen in any consistent manner greater than before mass manufacturing and a world population half of what it is now. You're also ignoring the fact that the world has 'greened' by nearly 20% over the last 3 decades, entirely enabled by extra CO2 in the atmosphere. Doubling CO2 results in almost doubling crop yields with no extra fertilizer. You're the one who needs to learn - not to panic over something that's actually better for feeding people. Concentrating on a narrow band of misinformation isn't going to help you. FYI due to the characterisitics of CO2, the increase mechanism is very limited, due to the very narrow band of radiation that it absorbs in the first place. The impact of doubling CO2 is also logarithmic, not linear, limiting it further still. On the tail of that, heat is also escaping the atmoshpere at a far higher rate that previously claimed, due to many factors. You otherwise rely on nonsense, the Antarctic ice is gaining mass on one side far faster than it is melting. Greenland, back in the days of the Vikings, was ACTUALLY 'green'. There are a huge number of farms under the current snow, previously farmed by the Vikings for centuries because of the Medieval warm period, but abandoned directly because of the 'Little Ice Age'. Maybe look into the physics and historical facts instead of your alimentary canal.
I really had to go. I mean I REALLY had to go....
3:45 the last ice age isn´t over yet so we can not enter the next ice age. you messed up something.
The last ice age ended over 8000 years ago, and the climate has been fluctuating slightly ever since. Right now we are accelerating the rate of change.
Ice Age 7 is still in production so both of you stfu and be patient. it will be arriving in your favourite streaming service soon xx
@@jockyoung4491nope, current state of our planet is ending ice age
@@rudolfsykora3505
Look at a graph. The temperature coming out of the last ice age peaked over 8000 years ago and has not gone significantly above that since. Until now.
@@jockyoung4491 Not much actually, non anthropogenic global warming accounts for 90%(but this is never reported) as the figures are being massaged into a narrative to sell electric cars. The truth is that the 90% is us leaving the ice age(we didn't leave it 8000 years ago), so what we are experiencing is basically entirely natural and some scientists believe we are going to go straight back into another ice age anyway.
Thanks!
TL:DR Science is just a way for us to process everything around us, and with all kinds of perspectives, we are bound to find out more about our world.
Great video! It's a bit pathetic how angry people can get when they realise they were wrong about something.
Science is a way to process everything around us, and since there are many researchers, there are many ways to research things like the climate, rising sea levels and whatnot. Some researchers are more biased than others, so I think we can often trust the science, but also trust the evidence when we see it for ourselves.
If you notice a change in your environment, that doesn't mean it's less legit if you don't happen to be a researcher. Researchers work on that stuff, while others can do that as a hobby.
So I personally believe both official researchers and amateurs are needed. Different perspectives are important. Remember that whenever you feel inadequate. Some People just happen to be favoured by many, and thus get more attention, but that doesn't mean everything these people say is automatically more important than your thoughts and ideas.
great episode!
I've noticed the total lack of wildlife in the last 30+ years, we used to hear birds every morning, woods were filled with birdsong, if you went for a walk in the evening you'd see hundreds of hares and rabbits, now it's quite everywhere, the numbers are pretty low now and seeing any of the above is rare.
Where? What are you talking about?
This year there were more birds recorded during migration in the Great Lakes then ever before :)
Hundreds of hares and rabbits? The hare and rabbit farm must have closed some time in the last 30+ years.
Not enough CO2. Levels are dangerously low on Earth. We need more CO2 plant food to make more plant growth to enrich soils, to feed more animals. CO2 is NOT pollution and not a cause of imagined global warming.
@@Squintz45 You've obviously never lived in the countryside, never gone on an evening walk in it and maybe too young to ever see it, which judging by your childish comment is probably about 15.
You forgot to mention the contribution of the connection between the Axial Procession and the Equatorial Bulge/tides influenced by the moon.
And we have yet to see if the migrating Magnetic Poles have a major effect to the ice caps. And if we actually have a long over due Magnetic Flip, what that will contribute to the overall change.
There are multiple overlapping groclimactic factors and forces making our planet habitable.
There are a lot of things he didn't mention. You're going to have to deal with it.
I hate to be a downer but this video is two months old and in the past week they’ve announced a dramatic changes to the AMOC
Something i've never heard anyone discuss or even mention when it comes to sea level changes is under water volcanism. We know it takes place in many places around the globe and is evident through new islands being created, tectonic plate movement and sea bed eruptions... I'd be very interested to see a detailed video about it's effects, if at all...
Vulcanism is operating at historically low, fairly steady levels now. It is putting energy into the system, just as it's putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, but at a steady enough rate that we can discount it as part of what was an equilibrium state until the start of the industrial revolution. Inputs were balanced by outflows.
Serious vulcanism is when an area at least as large as a medium sized country is uninhabitable due to repeat lava flows. Think "Deccan Traps" level vulcanism. What we have now is small change compared to that.
So, if the milankovitch cycle had continued normally, we would be fucked. Because we intervened, we’re fucked.
Anyone else notice a pattern emerging?
Shut up and vote for Socialism or whatever.
I think the main difference is the change predicated by Milanković cycles, can take thousands if not tens of thousand of years. What is happening now is taking a few hundred.
@@sugarloafoutdoors7601if the world changes in a thousand years it will have no meaning for me as to predict that far into the future is impossible to do, (science fiction speculation), likewise in a hundred years, (imagine the poor souls confusion if you bought a person born in the early last century into today), try to imagine a world your grandchildren mature in, once again SF speculation, not saying pollution control shouldn't be undertaken but the timescale has to be relevant to people today, the climate activists have warned about imminent deserts and ice ages within my lifetime, non of which have come about, knocks the street cred somewhat, making it difficult to put too much faith in any of the big claims.
Yep. We're fkd.
YYYYyyyyep, ... gotta reduce all the carbon.
.... btw *YOU* are a carbon based life form, _who emites Carbon_
Sea levels are rising. Reason: Aliens are raising the ocean floor.
I feel like in climate change discourse there are nowhere near enough talks about the major atlantic oceanic current and what impact it would have if it collapses. so much appreciation for mentioning it.
aside from lowering northern to middle europes temperatures by up to -10°C, there is also a risk of temperature increase by up to +10°C around the equator. it wouldn't just affect whatever landmass touches the atlantic, but would affect the climate everywhere.
not to mention that we're running out of time on that issue. if things stay as is it could collapse within the next 10 years, because it is already slowing down drastically
"primarily through the ocean currents" at 6:23 is highly incorrect. For northern polar it's ocean currents 900 terawatts, atmospheric currents 5,000 terawatts. Ocean currents are way too slow. Mostly what transfers heat is called "Hadley" "Ferrel" "Polar" cells (2 of each)
🤦🏽♂ No problem, our invisible friends will take care of us 🤦🏽♂
Wait . . . you can't see them?
@@TDurden527 Guess I'm just not praying hard enough 😂
@@DougguoD Wait . . . I'll help. One . . . two . . . let me start over. On theee . . . one two threee Yaaaaaaaaaaa
@@TDurden527 One Two Thee 😄
Heretic!! There is only ONE Invisible Sky Wizard!! :P
I have seen nobody do any studies about the sea weight causing see floor sinkage. We are just supposed to believe that ocean basins are juat like a bath tub.
Everything we take as 'fact' is really just best guess repeated by enough flesh monkies.
Humans have just begun to open their flawed eyes.
It's been studied (of course). Over a very long time period the ocean basins are getting deeper.
@@stevebloom5606 Do you have any links to studies that contemplate ocean basin debth.and global worming? I don't find the general panic for the future to be very productive. I live miles from any roadway. I have all solar, cookin, water heating, electricity. I do not buy new clothes and grow most of my own food. I have gotten rid of gas powerd vehicals and have a couple of golf carts that can be solar charrged. i've eliminated entertainment and travel from my life. Dispite all my efferts my fellow humans are still demanding somthing from me. my problem is they refuse to define what that demand is.
You represent every human? No?
Well in oceans with an average depth of thousands of meters a couple of decimeters isn't much of a change in volume.
The planet getting warmer would mean previously uninhabitable and unfarmable land would become so. In any case, nuclear is the answer. Not totally unfeasible wind and solar, the battery storage required for which is completely impossible to realize without immense environmental destruction of it's own.
It is likely by then end of this century that 3/4 of boreal region will reach crop feasible growing-degree-days conditions, as the permafrost moves northward if the current rate of global warming continues, but not enough top soil in quantities needed for industrial agriculture.
Agriculture is already moving poleward. Way past that, agriculture will eventually have to go farther north in the northern hemisphere and farther south in the southern hemisphere, and the staple crops we depend on will have to change and will have to be able to grow in shorter growing seasons with longer days of sunlight in the summer. And specifically in the northern hemisphere crops will have to be able to grow in thawed tundra and glacial moraine, which are not arable in the longest days of the summer so mass scale agriculture would not be sustainable. Of course this is based on the assumption there will be no global dimming caused by a giant meteor strike or a volcanic eruption bigger than any in human history or absit omen a nuclear war. However there is the possibility of Northern Europe cooling off if the Gulf Stream slows down even more. Canada is likely to get warmer with longer growing season, but at the cost of more flooding and droughts.
We know how the Gulf Stream helps keep summers from getting too hot and winters from getting too cold and that a weaker Gulf Stream will eventually change the weather pattern humans have been used to for agriculture.
Keep in mind wind and solar are only meant to be stopgaps. Wind and solar will never carry the whole base load. Utility scale solar farms are the cheapest energy right now, but in order for them to surpass more than a third of the energy mix, a huge investment in storage is required. It will require a lot of concrete and square miles; worn out turbines and solar panels will not be the weakest link, but concrete probably will.
It's too bad nobody can deliver a small modular nuclear plant today, thorium or otherwise. Maybe in another ten years.
@@rps1689 The thawing of permafrost will also release huge amounts of methane, which is likely to accelerate global heating and could spiral out of control quickly
Imagine… Russia will rule the world for sure. As Siberia defrosts and everyone tries to emigrate there.
@@_bellatrix_potens_-bps-8366 Siberia will have problems with agriculture, as the staple crops we depend on will have to change and will have to be able to grow in shorter growing seasons with longer days of sunlight in the summer. Crops will have to be able to grow in thawed tundra and glacial moraine, which are not arable in the longest days of the summer so mass scale agriculture would not be sustainable. Of course this is based on the assumption there will be no global dimming caused by a giant meteor strike or a volcanic eruption bigger than any in human history or absit omen a nuclear war.
That is what is the biggest eye-brow raising factor about the alarmism regarding purported climate change - THE very best means of addressing it while maintaining continuity of civilization would be an all out nuclear power push
But instead the alarmist faction push totally inadequate green energy tech - which is woefully unrealistic to even make a dent. And to embrace that approach will lead to drastic de-industrialization (like what once prosperous Germany is undergoing), and it will unravel civilization itself. And with severely weakened advanced civilization, we will become helpless to do anything.
"Those given Life by their roots, are held to perish by them."
Excellent phrasing.
@astrumspace Seems the units are screwed up a little on the heat capacity screen.. 4.18MJ instead 4.18kJ would make more sense
It's rather tragic how many 'can't be bothered' if they don't receive affirmation within the first 5 minutes.
Sea level rise is due to both ice melt and the expansion of water as it warms. The sea level on the East coast has risen only about a foot so far, so it wouldn't be very noticeable. But that will accelerate.
Half the rise is thermal expansion of water, a fraction will also be less weight at the poles deforming this largely spherical planet.
what the hell do you mean by "so far"? based on what timeframe? and by how much will it accelerate?
For all those thinking that ice melting in a cup of water does not raise the level, there are 2 things:
1. Greenland and Antarctica are landmasses. Any ice being added to water can raise the level.
2. As the video mentioned, plate tectonics plays a role here. As the weight a plate bears decreases, the plate will rise, and some other plate will sink. Though this is not enough to trigger earthquakes, it is enough to rise/lower the sea level significantly.
3. Even in the ideal case where all ice would be present only in the water, and plates would not exist, the melting of ice would still release prehistoric organisms and chemicals trapped in it over many years.
So yes, melting of ice is a big concern, as it is currently accelerated by humans. People saying that 'government' is trying to control us are just fear-mongering (though greenwashing is still equally deadly, and ruins the reputation of actual environment conservation efforts).
Pseudo
Let me start with #2 - Plate tectonics take hundreds of thousands of years to notice. #1 Yay-saying. You list the fact that two areas are landmasses, then just claim that adding ice to water raises the the water level. Yet the "ice" is already in the water, it is not magically spawning as if in a video game. Finally #3 those organisms are long dead. The only accurate thing you did post is the chemical would be released, but of course YOU have no idea what those chemicals are, or in what concentration since actual scientists can only predict both of those variable. So please stop pretending you understand these topics because you read a wiki page. The melting of ice has been going on for four decades and has yet to raise the water level AT ALL. Beach front property along the East and West coast of N. America, on average (some areas do fluctuate, but they average out over the entire continent) has not been disappearing or else the communities would be moving inland.
The sea level stays the same. It is only the rising and falling land masses that change.
1. A shape-shifting alien intent on conquering the earth.
2. Intelligent winged starfish people.
What can you profit off a hot planet?
Probably the women will be carried away *shrug*
The Earth would not have made us if it did not want us here. We are not the enemy of the planet. We are part of it
So is HIV...
"the rabbits and foxes will be nice for hunting sports" said one sailor to the other and opened the cage in australia. only afterwards they realised, the rabbits are eating the local fauna and the foxes kill the local wildlife...
just because you are part of the world doesnt mean you have a positive impact on the world - especially if you fck around with complex eco systems that you dont understand
most people are not evil or enemies, they are just fools
@@dimitralex1892 yes fools that make click bait for doom scrollers.
VEGAPUNK WAS RIGHT THE WORLD IS SINKING
😂😂😂
One comment... if every single cubic cm of sea ice melted, then the sea level would not alter by so much as a single mm. The sea ice is already part of the ocean. Land-based ice on the other hand is a real danger.
Damn thats dumb. Go half fill a glass with water and add a vive of ice. Use a Sharpie to mark the waterlevel. Then leave for a while and come BACK after the ice has melted away. Use the Sharpie to mark a new water level. Compare and contrast the levels before and after melting and draw conclutions from there
Did you forget about the thermal expansion of matter that was also mentioned here in the video? Yeah, warmer water than 4°C expands the warmer it gets.
@Pax.Alotin sources: *trust me bro*
@@rastrisfrustreslosgomez544 from what i can see ice melting would increase the sea level by 60-70m according to various sources from NASA and the us government.
what many people don't consider however is that this change will happen within 5000+ years if we continue the trend of carbon emissions and the climate models are accurate. that's longer than recorded human history and the average rise per century would be 1,2m
even in the most pessimistic case rising sea levels wont be much of an issue for us humans.
@@KT-pv3kl *average* the keyword you're looking at. While the average around the coast lines across the world would take a 100 years to be of any notice in places like florida the distribution will be much higher than average