50 percent of greenhouse emissions come from animal agriculture. Why aren’t 97% of scientists plant based? This is much more achievable than buying an electric car. It will piss off a lot of industrialists though.
Then step-up to the plate and get in the faces of those you interact with that are deniers. Keep talking about our existential threat to everyone you meet. Yes, you'll probably lose friends, but at least they'll realise at some point how truthful you were. . Yes collective change is required to change the human paradigm. But be under no illusion that anything humans do (with or without political will) will result in a positive outcome. Global warming is irreversible. We live in a predicament, that has no solutions.
@@tyronekim3506 Bro, a Norwegian from way up north, and even My grandmother that's 100 years old have never seen such a change in both climate and wildlife due to overfishing. You can't even get a fish from the pier anymore and the glaciers are all melting at a rapid pace. Even the vegetation has changed, like plants that didn't grow north of the polar circle due to mountainous terrain has now taken over our natural vegetation.
14:30 As a chemical engineer that has actually met with the Carbon Engineering team I can say with confidence that full sequestration with their technology is at least $200/tonne. Until every high intensity emission source is doing carbon capture and storage their technology is very uncompetitive in terms of cost. These presenters are all pie in the sky and don't have a clue what it will actually take to decarbonize. The idea that we can decarbonize without a drastic hit to standard of living is just a straight up LIE.
Can’t help but wonder who is funding big think and if there is any conflict of interest at play. I worry as many do about climate change being come to be accepted as something we shouldn’t have to worry about because of some belief that other people will figure out how to solve it
well my friends, they burnt witches. near constant war,the papacy.... Most people are doing their best if just a small part of their "world" can be justified. expect what you find, thats all there is to work with
@Robert P No one wants to take all the CO2 from the atmosphere Robert. Don't be infantile. We all know that CO2 is essential to life on earth. It's about one simple concept that most children understand by the age of 7. Like water for example, we need water to survive. Without water we die. Yet, if i droped you in the middle of the pacific ocean you would die. How can this be? Is water good or bad? It depends on the circumstances and quantities. Like CO2 too much of a "good" thing can be bad. I dont want you to be droped in the middle of the pacific ocean, Robert. Do you react to this by stating that i hate water and want to remove all the water from planet earth?
_Coke, Pepsi and Other Soft Drinks? --_ Not a word about these from anyone -- . . Concerning thousands of tons of CO2 produced each year worldwide for Coca Cola, Pepsi and many other soft drinks -- Corrupt corporate driven agendas [AKA Global Warming] don't extend to limiting profits for the soft drink industry . . Money rules -- are you ruled? . . Or can you think --
@Kent Horvath Yes kent, a strawman was what he was trying to imply - That we either A: increase CO2 content in the atmosphere artificially by burning fossil fuels or B: we must remove all CO2 from the atmosphere This, Kent, is a strawman. And so i followed his logic with a strawmen of my own to try and show him that if we all use strawman arguments nothing would make sense. But if you don't understand engineering or basic physics you probably wont understand basic logical fallacies.
Jed mcC j He’s just had enough! He’s been trying so hard for such a long time but no one listens or cares. Most people in his situation would do the same. Even if he’s not the brightest scientist he still argues valid points backed by scientific proof, that doesn’t sound moronic to me.
@@thatautogarage3644 sorry but no just no. He pushes agendas for money thats what he does the fact you think he's a reliable source of information says a lot about you. This is the same guy who says there are many genders, which no self respecting scientists would EVER say. Hes basically nothing but a hipster, who had a show about basic science (which he now denies) that anyone could do, now all you morons who believe everything you here on tv think hes an actual scientist in a subject that is relevant to anything he talks about
I see no hope of change here in Australia. The Federal Labor Government put a carbon tax in place and not long after we have had 8 years of backward conservative Government, The National party and the Liberal party (The Coalition) One of the first things the did in government was to get rid of the tax on carbon. Both sides of government get huge money from fossil fuel companies.
The rate of velocity warming is what will bring humanity to its knees. Forget the political issue. There are 440 nuclear reactors around the world mostly in the US and Europe. These reactors are vulnerable b/c they are near large bodies of water and susceptible to floods (heavy rains and sea rise). So we probably have between 5-15 years left.
200M is for seas level rise. 2B people live in the zones at or near the equator that will be too hot to live let alone grow food. The real problem is the American cultural myth that someone or something will be done at the last minute to save them. It's likely too late to save the American food system. Think this is overreach? Why are both China and Saudi Arabia buying farm land in Africa? Think the Americans will just let this happen? Think again. Gwyn Dyer's 16 scenarios talk about these exact scenarios. I'm Canadian and can see the day when the Americans come demanding our water.
28,000 views while music videos, Amber-Depp drama, fart-prank channels, all have MILLIONS of views each lol... Theres an immediate problem right there in my view..
We have so not evolved to comprehend what is at our feet. Even when the climate was changing quickly in the past it would happen over about three generations not 30 years. What's happening now is exponential and unfortunately we are proving that we are not able to comprehend it. It's simply amazing to watch on a daily basis and see for me. All species go extinct. My ex started laughing when I told her Don't worry about the people grabbing beans worry about the people grabbing barbecue sauce,: ) Brace for impact and find some good gallows humor while you're at it.
How To Reduce Pollution 1. Many Production Companies Has To Be Stopped We manufacture so many products and it is creating pollution and pollution has increased to such an extent that it has become a threat to the world. Well maybe we won't have a major natural disaster soon, but it will come some day. So if we minimise our products, pollution would be less. We produce so many things which we do not need as a necessity, like cold drinks, leather products, potato wafers, chips, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. Cold drinks, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. should be cooked at home only. Instead of cold drinks people should drink natural drinks such as lime water, coconut water or just any fruit, not any fruit juice, just the whole fruit which can be served when a customer comes in a shop, hotel or a person selling this drinks on a street and serve it to him. If we stopped producing this things which are not required as a necessity for humans, so much pollution could be reduced. If we colour the clothes pollution occurs. So if we don't colour our clothes, the pollution resulting from colouring the clothes can be stopped. Let everything remain in white natural colour. 2. We Should Cook Foods In Its Natural Form We can cook rice and wheat in our homes and eat it. Rice and Wheat is produced in farms. Then it is packed and transported to big warehouses, then wholesalers buy from them and supply to retail shops. But if a manufacturing company makes bread from rice and wheat, then to make bread a manufacturing company has to be set up, machines and working staffs are needed. When a company is built many other things are also needed. Then at last a plastic pack is required to pack the breads. So if we start cooking eatable things in its natural form then we do not need many companies like bread manufacturing company, tomato ketchup, fruit jam, pizza, burger, etc., the things required for the company and the plastic pack, paper box pack and glass bottles. If done like this, so many companies will not be required and hence less pollution for the world. Humans have to do this before it is too late. If this is done, then many jobs would be lost. But human jobs or planet earth, which should we save, planet earth is more important. Humans have to take this step certainly instead of going on polluting the earth, making wildlife extinct and also mass extinctions of humans after 100 or 200 years. Prior to the industrial revolution or before that humans worked everything handmade. So if after shutting down many manufacturing companies which are not required as a necessity for humans, if we started doing many things handmade only then many people would not lose jobs. Many peoples should do farming and they should be given loans if they do not have enough money to start farming on their own. Is their any another solution, that humans won't lose jobs and also planet earth will be saved. 3. We Should Stop Using Makeup Products Many women's all over the world do makeup. Makeup is not a necessity for humans. Instead of doing makeup to look beautiful, women's should do exercise daily. If they exercise and sweat, eat fruits daily, they would have less dead skins and be naturally beautiful. They could save so much money if they stop using makeup products. If this is done then all the makeup manufacturing companies can be shut down. In this way all the pollution resulting from the makeup manufacturing companies would also be stopped. 4. Electricity Pollution We create electricity from many types of sources like coal, water, etc., but it creates pollution. If electricity created from windmill and solar energy then no pollution occurs. But still to manufacture windmill and solar machines pollution would occur. As I previously said that if we shut down many manufacturing companies which are producing things which are not a necessity for humans, then the world would not require so much electricity. Then maybe we could provide electricity to the whole world from windmill and Solar panels which are not pollutant. If we stopped producing electricity from coal, water, etc., then the pollution resulting from them won't occur. Shouldn't we take this step to protect our earth as already our earth is suffering so much from pollution. At present the world is researching how to solve the pollution problem, it would take how many years I don't know and also would it possible or impossible, God knows. Could we wait till that time when scientists would find how to solve pollution problems and till that the earth won't have a major natural disaster, nobody knows. 5. Firecrackers should be banned Firecrackers should be banned because it is harmful for animals. Animals have different levels of hearing and when we burst crackers which have a loud noise the dogs run away from that place. The dogs may hear the noise more louder than humans. When we fire the rocket cracker up in the sky and it bursts and if any bird is near to the explosion then that birds internal organs are damaged and they die just because of that explosion sound. Also peoples who have asthma illness, they face problems during Diwali. So much papers and threads are used in manufacturing crackers. The persons working in the manufacturing companies also suffer. Now when their are animals rights for not harming them, then this step of banning firecrackers must be taken. 6. Hair dye manufacturing should be banned People use hair dye to colour their hairs. The hair dye manufacturing companies after production dumps its waste in rivers or seas which pollutes the water. So all hair dye manufacturing companies should be shut down. 7. We Can Stop Eating Sweets, Cakes And Stop Drinking Liquor, Wine And Beer We consume sweets and cakes. We make it from many things such as wheat, coconut, etc. and add sugar to it. But what we want is the sweet thing to consume which we are getting directly from fruits. The fruit is naturally sweet. So if we want to consume sweets and cakes, we do not have to prepare it, just we have to eat fruits. So all the sweet manufacturing companies can be shut down. If you shut down a sweet manufacturing company, then so many paper boxes need not be manufactured which are used to pack the sweets. Liquor, wine and beer are also made from fruits. So if you want to consume liquor, wine and beer, just eat fruits. If this is followed, then you do not have to set up liquor factories and prepare cartoon boxes for liquors. Everybody should go to the rehabilitation centres those who can't live without liquor. 8. To Stop Using Perfumes And Powders Which Is Not A Necessity For bad smell in body both men and women should exercise and sweat, it would reduce the bad smell. If you stop using perfumes and powders, we don't need perfume and powder manufacturing companies and perfume and powder bottles need not be manufactured, cartoon boxes need not be manufactured for packing them and transportations can be reduced.
With the stupidity and ignorance in the world, it's quite inevitable sadly. I mean look at the richest and second richest country in the world, a sad joke ... I still do my part to try and avoid this, even only by principle, but it's like fighting the wind.
_Coke, Pepsi and Other Soft Drinks? --_ Not a word about these from anyone -- . . Concerning thousands of tons of CO2 produced each year worldwide for Coca Cola, Pepsi and many other soft drinks -- Corrupt corporate driven agendas [AKA Global Warming] don't extend to limiting profits for the soft drink industry . . Money rules -- are you ruled? . . Or can you think --
Feedback loops.. everything is reciprocal. Burn oil and coal like maniacs for 100 years you’re going to have to grow kelp in the ocean like maniacs for 100 years for all those plane trips you took and lights we lit the streets with to drive combustion engines cars down to go to from house to gym haha
and of that 3% of scientists that don't agree with climate change, how many of those do you think have skin in the game or are in big business's pockets? I'd wager most of them.
By the way, the three percent of climate scientists don't even necessarily say it's "not" happening. Even they concede major points to the AGW worried scientists.
It’s so funny how some people like to think they “aren’t fooled” by the “so called” mainstream media, but in fact they are making fools of themselves. Gullible and sad at the same time because there’s no amount of facts we can provide to these people to convince them of the contrary. Now we’re stuck in this planet with a large portion of idiotized subhuman beings that will not cooperate with the survival of our species.
Some people just don't like being forced to do something. That said I live in California so I have no choice if I want to eat. This video is horse shit by the way.
As an individual, changing your diet to a plant-based one if the single most effective thing you can do to reduce your carbon footprint, land use and water use
You can't save the planet without making real changes to behavior. So many people are trying to figure out how to avert disaster without changing anything. Thats not going to happen.
Corby Ziesman agreed, some people are trying to rely on carbon negative technology that doesn’t even exist yet. That’s like knowing the titanic is taking on water but hoping someone else will figure out a way of stopping it at some point
Jack Schitt Farmable land destroyed by climate change also equals no food. Read the NYT piece from 4 days ago "The Great Climate Migration Has Begun". There are already farmers in central America who cant grow ears of corn with more than 3 or 4 kernels on the barren cobs.
@@jackschitt1709 Well, first of all I kinda would like to shine a spotlight on the suffering of the animals often involved. Depending on wether you believe that animals have an individual experience (which I personally think is bonkers to deny but to be fair the science isn't quite clear yet on that) your argument is not that different from saying "oh we can't close the nazi death camps! what about all the people working in supporting them?" But that is just the moral argument. Apart from that there is the ecological argument Ruth Clements alluded to, which is absolutely true and significant. In addition there are the antropocentric arguments of firstly mass lifestock farms pumping their animals full with antibiotics massively increasing the possibility of an antibiotic resistant superbug, imagine corona on steroids in the worst case. Secondly the fact that there are many people still not having enough food while we put the majority of our agricultural output into the mouths of our lifestocks reducing the caloric output of our agriculture. And in addition to all of that there is the square egoistical argument of most cheap meat simply being unhealthy for you. The animals stress experienced during and the inappropriate lifestile itself we are forcing them to develop under as well as inappropriate food and too little movement is resulting in many hormones and just plain bad meat quality that is bad for you. If you want to eat good meat get yourself some deer meat or something from wild living animals. At least you are not killing yourself in the progress.
Tax corporations. Tax the 1%. Give people in the West ultimatums. In South Africa, water was due to be CUT OFF in July. People starting to feel this and are conserving. So far, the water has not been cut off, to my knowledge. Without LIMITS and consequences people will not change. It will not be pretty. But it needs to be done. Someone better be the parent in the room.
The comments on this video by people deep in denial, unable and unwilling to accept the dire situation we've gotten ourselves into, make me certain that we're doomed. In the 90s I imagined by 2020 we would be well on our way to solving climate change, instead we worsened our behavior. We haven't even begun to solve anything or to work together as a species. I'm skeptical we ever will. By the time these idiots accept there's a real problem, we will be far far past the point when we could have stopped it.
Corby Ziesman I’m afraid I’d agree, while we’re busy talking, the planet keeps warming, most scientists agree we’re already past the +2* mark, but that’s still manageable, but 3, 4, or 5 degrees: we all starve, it’s frustrating
Humans be like we don't care, the funny thing is the earth will get rid of us one way or the other or as many of us as possible. We don't deserve anything less!
You have a journalist, astronomer, mechanical engineer,and who ever pushing this narrative! Where are the climatologists? You have an auto mechanic diagnose a pluming problem in your house do you? That’s why I’m skeptical! There are than 20 percent of the climatologists who don’t push this narrative, and they have facts to back them up also. Who do you believe? I tend to believe the climatologists over journalists because the records are only accurate for about 2 to 3 hundred years back. And if you city the ice records they only go back 16 to 20 thousand years and show major changes in climate. I have a sneaking suspicion there’s a lot of money to be made by going green. But there’s also money in fossil fuel. We also have to get the third world countries and China, India, and Russia to go along or we’re wasting our time! We can’t do this alone!
@Kent Horvath sustainable and regenerative agriculture. It's simple as planting trees. As humans, we have manipulated nature for the worst. Imagine if we benefited nature by planting trees and native species like crazy... unfortunately it's too late and we are locked in to hot house earth (death)
Give people a suitable and affordable alternative and they will get on board. A 55,000-dollar automobile is not suitable or affordable for most people. If you're not thinking of solutions that the masses can get behind, you're just spitting in the wind.
My Father who lived thru WWII said people only do something out of crisis. And that crisis has already started & will keep ramping up. The question is how much of a crisis will it need to become before action is taken? I think it will need to get so bad the only option left will be geo-engineering.
Most people here (including you) are missing the point... The biosphere is changing state. That equates to *game over* for most, if not all extant eukaryotic life on this beleaguered Earth.
It would seem that by the time people except that global warming is a crisis it will be too late. We will have already passed the point of no return sometimes referred to is triggerpoints
The question is: why are the protest movements still non-violent? Don't we have every right to destroy and also kill, to defend our lives? Sorry, friends, but seeing humanity not acting at all, I will soon start killing to protect my daughter. And you all should join this path if you really want to save the planet.
Yeah, we could start with our own health, most people are over weight, and out of shape. There may be little we can do about climate change, unless everyone wants to park their cars. I think we have painted ourself into a corner, having to ship things overseas for trade, and working too far away for most of us to walk. Countries need to be more self sufficient, like many were in the 19th century and part of the 20th century. All of these so called advances we made were not advances. LOL
so good to think in solutions and not problems. My question: how do we gain the power to control political parts of our world so that they all think less or less in their own gain and true faith in the earth as a living organism
According to current world events and data, these dates of "2100" are too far ahead. We're going through the beginning of this now. Look at India, the massive heat combined with drought, knocking out parts of their power grid, having to stop exports of their crops...it's happening now.
Rest of 3 % are delusional or have pockets in interest groups like fossil fuels or just want to gain interest being contrarian . Imagine election and 97% gain one candidate? Impossible! So 97% is remarkable !
@@alexsclewis In what way is it dishonest? There is far more profit to gain from ignoring climate facts, you should take more of a look at the large corporations and industries like oil and gas that stand to benefit from ignoring their contribution to global climate change.
Great!! Why do we not talk about nuclear energy? That technology has a greatly educed carbon footprint. I some times think that these people are more against capitalism than worrying about climate change. I am worried about climate change and if I was younger I would love to work on the challenges that are being faced today.
How To Reduce Pollution 1. Many Production Companies Has To Be Stopped We manufacture so many products and it is creating pollution and pollution has increased to such an extent that it has become a threat to the world. Well maybe we won't have a major natural disaster soon, but it will come some day. So if we minimise our products, pollution would be less. We produce so many things which we do not need as a necessity, like cold drinks, leather products, potato wafers, chips, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. Cold drinks, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. should be cooked at home only. Instead of cold drinks people should drink natural drinks such as lime water, coconut water or just any fruit, not any fruit juice, just the whole fruit which can be served when a customer comes in a shop, hotel or a person selling this drinks on a street and serve it to him. If we stopped producing this things which are not required as a necessity for humans, so much pollution could be reduced. If we colour the clothes pollution occurs. So if we don't colour our clothes, the pollution resulting from colouring the clothes can be stopped. Let everything remain in white natural colour. 2. We Should Cook Foods In Its Natural Form We can cook rice and wheat in our homes and eat it. Rice and Wheat is produced in farms. Then it is packed and transported to big warehouses, then wholesalers buy from them and supply to retail shops. But if a manufacturing company makes bread from rice and wheat, then to make bread a manufacturing company has to be set up, machines and working staffs are needed. When a company is built many other things are also needed. Then at last a plastic pack is required to pack the breads. So if we start cooking eatable things in its natural form then we do not need many companies like bread manufacturing company, tomato ketchup, fruit jam, pizza, burger, etc., the things required for the company and the plastic pack, paper box pack and glass bottles. If done like this, so many companies will not be required and hence less pollution for the world. Humans have to do this before it is too late. If this is done, then many jobs would be lost. But human jobs or planet earth, which should we save, planet earth is more important. Humans have to take this step certainly instead of going on polluting the earth, making wildlife extinct and also mass extinctions of humans after 100 or 200 years. Prior to the industrial revolution or before that humans worked everything handmade. So if after shutting down many manufacturing companies which are not required as a necessity for humans, if we started doing many things handmade only then many people would not lose jobs. Many peoples should do farming and they should be given loans if they do not have enough money to start farming on their own. Is their any another solution, that humans won't lose jobs and also planet earth will be saved.
Its not like getting US/Canada on board is going to be easy either. People like their comforts and their luxuries and don't seem willing to make any sacrifices or changes to their consumerism even if it means saving the planet. (And especially if the US/Canadian attitude is "why should I make any changes to my behaviour if India and China aren't on board?")
Robert P Robert, my friend, I’m sorry to say but you’re simply just wrong. I’m not certain if you are trolling or not, but can I ask why you disagree with 97% of the worlds scientists on this matter?
Robert P It isn’t difficult to grasp that while Methane and Carbon are important gases for stimulating life on this planet, they still act as greenhouse gases. A thing can be two things at once. Are you being wilfully ignorant or genuinely just don’t understand that?
The amount of energy to freeze water is significantly higher that it is to melt it. Also when it’s gone a thing called latent heating happens. All the energy being reflected from that white ice ( the albido effect ) is now absorbed into the dark water. Unfortunately this heat stays in the water. Ever but of it has to be extracted again before the temperature of the water can become low enough to freeze again. So once the ice is gone it’s gone. And when it’s gone it causes effects which make it ever coming back much more difficult. At least in human time scale.
No ever talks about the hot ass concrete that we keep pouring on the ground. To many buildings no balance with that. Plus humans cant stop littering the easiest thing so there alot of small problems cant fix where everyone only talking about carbon
Geez, this was so optimistic. I don't see it taking long at all for Earth to shake us off. We are causing exponential, unstoppable, irrepreparable harm. It's too late baby. It's just too late.
guystudios no, it’s really not. As much as you people want to have sway over the earth.... it truly doesn’t need you to protect it. It was here long before man kind. It will be here long after. The only way to destroy living conditions on earth is if the entirety of the population collectively killed all plants.
morgothra1 Very true. As a general rule, I’ve noticed that the intelligence in TH-cam comments sections seem to be far lower than that of the general public, due in no small part evidently to trolls like these.
If we don't solve this we'll have some problems. But we work on ways to survive rven on mars, so we won't die out. But still, a big majority of us will die
People deny human caused climate change because they don't want to change their ways or contribute money to adapting to a warmer climate. Humans have been adapting to the climate for hundreds of thousands of years. We will continue to do so while silly people argue about what's real. Warm is better than cold. Longer growing season and on average a wetter planet. I'm pro global warming. I don't like the cold and don't want to move south. Relax...keep an eye on the weather (don't let it kill you), practice conservation, adapt and don't be silly.
I looked up record high annual temperatures for my state. They apexed in 1936 and have been going down ever since. Ocean acidification is there to sucker people who never had had sea water on their lips. Bill nye the actor guy
@ Dominance Logistics - Wow really - are you observing the same world that I am ? But sincerely, if you can be more specific, I will seriously consider your points because I don’t know what I don’t know.
. . well, the sun is rising soon -- so you had better run for cover . . your own thought process will not likely follow -- we need real change, in the form of an individual perspective. Real thought requires personal initiative and the ability to recognize various independent sources of information. Sponsored channels most often fill the role served by television for several decades to limit perception in many respects. The internet became a rebirth of the individual perspective, while the attempt now is to remake this into the former role we came to accept largely as our perspective toward the world in place of the individual. It is the individual perspective that is the focus of power by which no person can be set against another with false or self serving interpretations from another outside of ourselves.
Yikes! This is false hope. No way can humanity be organized. No way can you get a majority to agree. And we've waited too long. This video is a waste of time.
On the high end of model we could hit 2.2 to 2.4C by 2040 but none of them spend anytime tells us the worst case scenario. It seems like we don’t actually have to change anything just tweak a bit and everything will be fine. The reality is we are past the point of massive climate disruption and we already may not be able to keep civilization as we know it going for more than another few decades. Not doing much now pretty much locks in the end of civilization.
The thing is that is much more cost effective to transform our society in non CO2 polluting sources of energy than tackle with this: 1) Sea level will cause trillions of dollars of damage. 2) The world's coral reefs will die. 3) Millions of species will go extinct. 4) Millions of people will be displaced. 5) Lower altitude glaciers will disappear. 6) Millions of people will lose access to fresh water. 7) Hurricanes will grow more intense. 8) Floods and drought will increase. 9) Forest fires will become more frequent and grow into the size of megafires. Also using source of energy that is slowly depleting with TODAY 8 billion people on Earth is stupid without building alternative sources. Fossil fuel price is going up every year because it's more costly and harder to get new reserves because they are finite sources and because it's more environmentally unfriendly (fracking and underground water pollution)..
_Coke, Pepsi and Other Soft Drinks? --_ Not a word about these from anyone -- . . Concerning thousands of tons of CO2 produced each year worldwide for Coca Cola, Pepsi and many other soft drinks -- Corrupt corporate driven agendas [AKA Global Warming] don't extend to limiting profits for the soft drink industry . . Money rules -- are you ruled? . . Or can you think --
Sincere questions, If sunlight can pass through co2 gas on the way into our atmosphere, but then gets 'trapped' on the way out, how is it that co2 gas functions as a one way door for sunlight? 2nd question How do Malinkovich cycles play into these issues? Serious answera only if you please and I would prefer source information from scientific papers for the evidence so I may read the papers.
It's not about the sunlight it self, it's about the heat that the sunlight transfers to earth. If we didn't have co2 in atmosphere, earth would be much much hotter and radiation would be deadly. Problem with co2 is that it doesn't let the heath from earth to go into space, so earth becomes like one giant greenhouse. This is my understanding of it as none scientist and how I remember what I have heard and read. Am happy to learn more tho :)
The one-way-door thing works because shorter wavelengths of light pass easier through certain media (including CO_2) than longer wavelengths. The sun emits a wide spectrum, of which the longer wavelengths are partially "reflected" back into space by the atmosphere. The shorter ones reach the surface heating it up in the process. The surface, in turn, emits heat energy on the long wavelength spectrum. This long wavelength light is blocked by the greenhouse gasses from being radiated out into space.
Light passes through co2 but when it hits dark things, like car seats, it turns in to heat. Heat does not pass through co2 so it stays in the atmosphere. Even with the windows rolled down.
Profitable path, maintain economic growth in green, good business. You CANNOT have infinite growth on a finite planet. Resources are finite. Species diversity (both flora and fauna) and their symbiotic interrelationships are finite. We need to STOP plundering the earth and give it opportunity to replenish resources… Climate change is just one vector that just happens to be the directly most urgent, bit species extinction comes right after that. Loss of species = loss pf habitat. Human habitat included. Habitat is what we should bw focussed on, not just climate change (just one “source” for loss of habitat).
You can't burn CO2. You can hardly do anything with it other than use it as a compressing gas. It's chemically incredibly stable and hard to break apart into anything useful.
I'd love to know how you intend to burn CO2 (LMAO!)... The whole point is to 'draw-down' the atmospheric CO2 (and the other ghgs) and (re) sequester them FOREVER. That said, the task is financially highly unlikely given that one source has stated the tech and support would cost every nation around $14 trillion each year, in perpetuity... Assuming that tech existed, which currently it does not. Why do you capitalist nitwits always think with your wallet?
Car has two tanks , one gets filled with hydrocarbon fuel when empty, the other gets emptied of carbon when full. Apply this concept with all hydrocarbon fuel burning machines and the carbon never makes it into the atmosphere. At the same time use the new technology to suck existing carbon from the atmosphere. Problem solved. …… drops the mic 🎤
if its true, start it in 1st world, dont push the 3rd world country to abandon the basic energy generation. They dont have enough capacity to convert to renewable energy, let them developed first. Start with your 1st world country because they are the big contributors to climate change.
I get that you try to make a point about the seriousness of climate change, which I agree is extremely important, but the refugees from Syria are not fleeing because of climate change, these people run away from torture and death caused by a criminal regime and from Putin's bombs. Saying they flee to Europe because of climate change is an insult considering the hell they went through. Put yourselves in their place and see how would it feel if you had to hear that.
I think you misunderstood what he was saying. I read it as look at the political upheavals caused by the million refugees displaced by the Syrian civil war alone; that was 1 million, think what it would mean if tens of millions were displaced. I heard 600 million people displaced by sea level rise alone can be expected.
Um... No. That is a common fallacy. The Syrian refugee crisis is the first stages of climate change upheval, these are climate migrants. Many have left Syria because they were unable to continue being farmers. The same goes for those crossing from Africa and Meso America. BTW Whose bombs? You single-out Putin.... Whereas it is clear that the US have caused more strife in this region than Russia and continue to meddle in middle-eastern affairs. Russia is not your enemy. The US/UK governments are.
.......Meanwhile half the world is more concerned with the Kardashians. We should probably accelerate global warming so we might at least get a public consensus that it’s happening. Many people still don’t believe it, so they will need to experience droughts, and food shortages and power outages, 50 degree summers and civil unrest. It might be a bit too late by then but at least they will be educated.
@@uprightape100 If you've learned about all that stuff, you'll know that we're in the middle of an inter-glacial period and have been for some 10,000 years. That process is not the reason why sea levels are currently rising - which is due to two main factors: thermal expansion of the oceans, and the addition of vast amounts of extra water, due to melting of glaciers and sea ice. Both are caused by rising global temperatures - due to the rising levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Joseph Lindquist if you warm an object the molecules that make it up expand, the ocean reacts the same way to a warmer atmosphere, the tricky part is, the melting ice caps are creating cold spots: imagine a simmering pot, as you add room temperature vegetables it settles down, takes time to heat up again, but eventually you stop adding vegetables, they heat up and if you aren’t paying attention the pot boils over. The ocean is the same, the problem doesn’t look as bad as it is, but all of a sudden it’s going to boil, acidify and self destruct. Just like that pot of vegetables...
Andrew Clifton IMO - I don’t think we have ever fully came out of ice age for 2 hundred million years... we almost get out of ice age(like now)& then we suddenly fall back into ice age... if looking at petrified forest & sea creature that are found at altitude then obviously we are returning to ‘normal’ even if we don’t like the changes!
@@luckybassturd7260 You're kinda right, we're in what geologists call the Quaternary glaciation - an "ice age" that started 2.58 million years ago (not 200 million!). Right now, we're in the Holocene interglacial period, which began about 11,650 years ago. But it's still part of an ice age - nowhere near as warm as it previously has been, outside of ice ages, during what are called "greenhouse" periods, when there are no glaciers on Earth.
Climate change is probably a grave problem, but there is so much self-deception and dishonesty in the political realm and in journalism, that science, which is normally trustworthy, might be corrupted on this issue. The stakes here are large. I don't like that the minority-view challenges on climate change are suppressed and dismissed as being in collusion with financial interests, even though this is likely a factor. I would like to hear the debate. The social sciences appear to be badly corrupted in American universities by amoral, nonsensical identity politics (critical race theory, intersectionality, etc.). I hear there is no toleration for challenging their doctrine--it is considered to be racist out-of-hand (again, what is really true?). Physical science is certainly more reliable, but how much? We really need to know the truth about climate change, whatever it is, and act responsibly. I am an environmentalist who believes in practical answers, including going green to a practical degree (it depends on what is true), and in nuclear power, which is actually quite safe.
@@GGoAwayy I have never been complacent or in denial, though far too many are. I do not trust the nay-sayers are being honest with themselves, and have trusted the prevailing scientific view, but recently wonder. I am perhaps 80-85% sure we have a major climate problem.
_Coke, Pepsi and Other Soft Drinks? --_ Not a word about these from anyone -- . . Concerning thousands of tons of CO2 produced each year worldwide for Coca Cola, Pepsi and many other soft drinks -- Corrupt corporate driven agendas [AKA Global Warming] don't extend to limiting profits for the soft drink industry . . Money rules -- are you ruled? . . Or can you think --
No. If you're driving headlong towards a cliff - and then at some point, you're somehow forced to slow down a little bit for a short time, without changing direction - and then as soon as you possibly can, you hit the gas again and accelerate... You're still going over that cliff, unless you actually change course. The only way the slowdown can help is to buy you a little time, to think about doing that.
@@Zen_Power Well, if that's the intended hypothesis, it's not at all credible! First, it's pure fantasy to attribute intentions or purposes to viruses; second, it's almost certainly impossible for a virus to kill "all humans". A pandemic-based, long-term collapse of modern civilisation is just about possible (albeit, very improbable) - but SARS-CoV-2 (which causes Covid-19) is nowhere near deadly enough to do that. That would require need a very long, symptom-free but highly infectious incubation period, followed by a very high mortality rate (as imagined, for instance, in the novel "I am legend" and the movies it inspired). From a virology point of view, fortunately, this is highly unlikely.
@Jacob L We need a transition, not only to other energy sources but also to a sustainable economic system that isn't addicted to growth. Prosperity increases if we uses resources more efficiently to maximise human well-being, rather than consuming more and more pointless junk.
@@Zen_Power maybe it keeps mutating into something deadlier and deadlier though, greatly reducing the overpopulation of humans. I’ve also read that there is evidence that it’s causing infertility which would further reduce the population.
@Sleepy BIden no affects? What about the endless wildfires, floods, weather events destroying crops, permafrost and ice caps melting at alarming rates?
@Sleepy BIden well first off the whole planet being on fire isn't normal. Rapid melting of permafrost and ice caps is not weather but a consequence of a warmer planet, just like the mass extinction event we humans have started! You're not ganna prove anything to me because you don't understand what a green house gas is. So I suggest you learn what that is before you keep looking like an idiot. If you're to hard headed to figure out the truth, don't worry the end is near and it will all make sense soon enough.
In approx. 8 (eight){Tipping point is closer. Do what you want with the info.} years It will be too late (at the current rate). (Humans stopped caring for humans\children a long time ago. Will humans start caring again?\Have humans ever cared?) I need to turn off my pc. Have a nice day!
I wish I could deny and argue this but the facts are undeniable. We as a species are terrible, use up all our natural resources, and destroy everything “for the common good”. This is something that’s weighed heavy on my heart since I was a child, with that being said I’ve never quite felt human. My delusional dream is that people like myself (not normal humans) can band together and create a utopian society lead by science and god. Unfortunately social media, correct politicians, and leaders will never understand what’s going on until it’s too late.
@@thatautogarage3644 aw thats cute you want to feel special and different. Sadly you are just an insignificant spec in a cold dark indifferent universe.
Some used that information to make exaggerate video that will happen much sooner so now you have those that misuse that news media to disprove that never will happen because "they were wrong all the time" if we do not do something. It's happening as we speak, Earth is warming. Even if we stop emitting CO2 tomorrow this EXTRA CO2 that is present in atmosphere will heat up whole planet to 1.5°C . Just like your oven, you cranked to max and wait to heat up. Earth is much bigger so you need decades for equilibrium to happen.
@@geoffreyweights7697 Africa is lowest CO2 emitter, 50 times less CO2 per person than USA or EU or China. India 10 times less. Today china have half off all electric vehicles and fastest accelerating and current installed solar and wind capacities. They are not great, we can and must do all more. Problem is that those people in Africa suffer the most from global warming problems and they contributed at least to this shit.
Have questions for any of the speakers featured in this video? Let us know! We'll keep them in mind for our next video.
50 percent of greenhouse emissions come from animal agriculture. Why aren’t 97% of scientists plant based? This is much more achievable than buying an electric car. It will piss off a lot of industrialists though.
Only 22k views. Ridiculous, this is the type of video which needs to be viral. We need collective change.
Then step-up to the plate and get in the faces of those you interact with that are deniers. Keep talking about our existential threat to everyone you meet. Yes, you'll probably lose friends, but at least they'll realise at some point how truthful you were.
.
Yes collective change is required to change the human paradigm. But be under no illusion that anything humans do (with or without political will) will result in a positive outcome. Global warming is irreversible. We live in a predicament, that has no solutions.
I've seen drastic changes in nature and climate just in my short life span that my father and grandfather never thought possible.
Like what exactly ?
Please be specific about the changes you've seen.
@@tyronekim3506 Bro, a Norwegian from way up north, and even My grandmother that's 100 years old have never seen such a change in both climate and wildlife due to overfishing. You can't even get a fish from the pier anymore and the glaciers are all melting at a rapid pace. Even the vegetation has changed, like plants that didn't grow north of the polar circle due to mountainous terrain has now taken over our natural vegetation.
@@kallah4999 Aren't the changes you describe a good thing except for fishing?
@@tyronekim3506 stay of the internet. Don’t have kids!
It’s not climate change. It’s climate catastrophe! First of all one should address it like this.
I have been hearing the same explanation since I was a little kid. What are we going to DOOOO. Is time for action. Let's MOOOVEEEE
What I am gonna do is eat a double Angus beef burger with cheese sauce and 4 types of cheese and bacon tonight 🤤
@@ukeyaoitrash2618 colon cancer or mad cow's disease? You're well on your way to both.
@@ukeyaoitrash2618 A typical selfish response.
14:30 As a chemical engineer that has actually met with the Carbon Engineering team I can say with confidence that full sequestration with their technology is at least $200/tonne. Until every high intensity emission source is doing carbon capture and storage their technology is very uncompetitive in terms of cost. These presenters are all pie in the sky and don't have a clue what it will actually take to decarbonize. The idea that we can decarbonize without a drastic hit to standard of living is just a straight up LIE.
Can’t help but wonder who is funding big think and if there is any conflict of interest at play. I worry as many do about climate change being come to be accepted as something we shouldn’t have to worry about because of some belief that other people will figure out how to solve it
well my friends, they burnt witches. near constant war,the papacy.... Most people are doing their best if just a small part of their "world" can be justified. expect what you find, thats all there is to work with
@Robert P No one wants to take all the CO2 from the atmosphere Robert. Don't be infantile. We all know that CO2 is essential to life on earth. It's about one simple concept that most children understand by the age of 7.
Like water for example, we need water to survive. Without water we die. Yet, if i droped you in the middle of the pacific ocean you would die. How can this be? Is water good or bad? It depends on the circumstances and quantities. Like CO2 too much of a "good" thing can be bad.
I dont want you to be droped in the middle of the pacific ocean, Robert. Do you react to this by stating that i hate water and want to remove all the water from planet earth?
_Coke, Pepsi and Other Soft Drinks? --_ Not a word about these from anyone --
. . Concerning thousands of tons of CO2 produced each year worldwide for Coca Cola, Pepsi and many other soft drinks -- Corrupt corporate driven agendas [AKA Global Warming] don't extend to limiting profits for the soft drink industry . . Money rules -- are you ruled? . . Or can you think --
@Kent Horvath Yes kent, a strawman was what he was trying to imply -
That we either A: increase CO2 content in the atmosphere artificially by burning fossil fuels
or B: we must remove all CO2 from the atmosphere
This, Kent, is a strawman. And so i followed his logic with a strawmen of my own to try and show him that if we all use strawman arguments nothing would make sense.
But if you don't understand engineering or basic physics you probably wont understand basic logical fallacies.
Seems far too little way too late and overly optimistic to me 🙏🏼
It is. Just try and live a happy decent life
@@T1tusCr0w Agreed 🙏🏼
Hey David Wallace Wells, billionaires aren't going to solve the problem. We need a completely new economic system.
Bill’s just like, screw it, do what you want, I’m done
Bill Nye is a moron
Jed mcC j He’s just had enough! He’s been trying so hard for such a long time but no one listens or cares. Most people in his situation would do the same. Even if he’s not the brightest scientist he still argues valid points backed by scientific proof, that doesn’t sound moronic to me.
@@thatautogarage3644 sorry but no just no. He pushes agendas for money thats what he does the fact you think he's a reliable source of information says a lot about you. This is the same guy who says there are many genders, which no self respecting scientists would EVER say. Hes basically nothing but a hipster, who had a show about basic science (which he now denies) that anyone could do, now all you morons who believe everything you here on tv think hes an actual scientist in a subject that is relevant to anything he talks about
mabey because climate science has been fully debunked by space weather experts
Jed mcC j your opinion of an individual does not change the climate science, the numbers speak for themselves
I see no hope of change here in Australia. The Federal Labor Government put a carbon tax in place and not long after we have had 8 years of backward conservative Government, The National party and the Liberal party (The Coalition) One of the first things the did in government was to get rid of the tax on carbon. Both sides of government get huge money from fossil fuel companies.
We're totally screwed. I talk about this on my channel alot.
The rate of velocity warming is what will bring humanity to its knees. Forget the political issue. There are 440 nuclear reactors around the world mostly in the US and Europe. These reactors are vulnerable b/c they are near large bodies of water and susceptible to floods (heavy rains and sea rise). So we probably have between 5-15 years left.
I doubt politicians will ever invest in a three trillion carbon subsidy if carbon doesn’t donate to their campaign
200M is for seas level rise. 2B people live in the zones at or near the equator that will be too hot to live let alone grow food.
The real problem is the American cultural myth that someone or something will be done at the last minute to save them. It's likely too late to save the American food system. Think this is overreach? Why are both China and Saudi Arabia buying farm land in Africa? Think the Americans will just let this happen? Think again. Gwyn Dyer's 16 scenarios talk about these exact scenarios. I'm Canadian and can see the day when the Americans come demanding our water.
28,000 views while music videos, Amber-Depp drama, fart-prank channels, all have MILLIONS of views each lol... Theres an immediate problem right there in my view..
Covid was not deadly enough to save us
We have so not evolved to comprehend what is at our feet.
Even when the climate was changing quickly in the past it would happen over about three generations not 30 years. What's happening now is exponential and unfortunately we are proving that we are not able to comprehend it.
It's simply amazing to watch on a daily basis and see for me.
All species go extinct.
My ex started laughing when I told her Don't worry about the people grabbing beans worry about the people grabbing barbecue sauce,: )
Brace for impact and find some good gallows humor while you're at it.
How To Reduce Pollution
1. Many Production Companies Has To Be Stopped
We manufacture so many products and it is creating pollution and pollution has increased to such an extent that it has become a threat to the world. Well maybe we won't have a major natural disaster soon, but it will come some day. So if we minimise our products, pollution would be less.
We produce so many things which we do not need as a necessity, like cold drinks, leather products, potato wafers, chips, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. Cold drinks, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. should be cooked at home only. Instead of cold drinks people should drink natural drinks such as lime water, coconut water or just any fruit, not any fruit juice, just the whole fruit which can be served when a customer comes in a shop, hotel or a person selling this drinks on a street and serve it to him. If we stopped producing this things which are not required as a necessity for humans, so much pollution could be reduced.
If we colour the clothes pollution occurs. So if we don't colour our clothes, the pollution resulting from colouring the clothes can be stopped. Let everything remain in white natural colour.
2. We Should Cook Foods In Its Natural Form
We can cook rice and wheat in our homes and eat it. Rice and Wheat is produced in farms. Then it is packed and transported to big warehouses, then wholesalers buy from them and supply to retail shops.
But if a manufacturing company makes bread from rice and wheat, then to make bread a manufacturing company has to be set up, machines and working staffs are needed. When a company is built many other things are also needed. Then at last a plastic pack is required to pack the breads.
So if we start cooking eatable things in its natural form then we do not need many companies like bread manufacturing company, tomato ketchup, fruit jam, pizza, burger, etc., the things required for the company and the plastic pack, paper box pack and glass bottles. If done like this, so many companies will not be required and hence less pollution for the world. Humans have to do this before it is too late.
If this is done, then many jobs would be lost. But human jobs or planet earth, which should we save, planet earth is more important. Humans have to take this step certainly instead of going on polluting the earth, making wildlife extinct and also mass extinctions of humans after 100 or 200 years.
Prior to the industrial revolution or before that humans worked everything handmade. So if after shutting down many manufacturing companies which are not required as a necessity for humans, if we started doing many things handmade only then many people would not lose jobs. Many peoples should do farming and they should be given loans if they do not have enough money to start farming on their own.
Is their any another solution, that humans won't lose jobs and also planet earth will be saved.
3. We Should Stop Using Makeup Products
Many women's all over the world do makeup. Makeup is not a necessity for humans. Instead of doing makeup to look beautiful, women's should do exercise daily. If they exercise and sweat, eat fruits daily, they would have less dead skins and be naturally beautiful. They could save so much money if they stop using makeup products. If this is done then all the makeup manufacturing companies can be shut down. In this way all the pollution resulting from the makeup manufacturing companies would also be stopped.
4. Electricity Pollution
We create electricity from many types of sources like coal, water, etc., but it creates pollution. If electricity created from windmill and solar energy then no pollution occurs. But still to manufacture windmill and solar machines pollution would occur.
As I previously said that if we shut down many manufacturing companies which are producing things which are not a necessity for humans, then the world would not require so much electricity. Then maybe we could provide electricity to the whole world from windmill and Solar panels which are not pollutant. If we stopped producing electricity from coal, water, etc., then the pollution resulting from them won't occur. Shouldn't we take this step to protect our earth as already our earth is suffering so much from pollution.
At present the world is researching how to solve the pollution problem, it would take how many years I don't know and also would it possible or impossible, God knows. Could we wait till that time when scientists would find how to solve pollution problems and till that the earth won't have a major natural disaster, nobody knows.
5. Firecrackers should be banned
Firecrackers should be banned because it is harmful for animals. Animals have different levels of hearing and when we burst crackers which have a loud noise the dogs run away from that place. The dogs may hear the noise more louder than humans. When we fire the rocket cracker up in the sky and it bursts and if any bird is near to the explosion then that birds internal organs are damaged and they die just because of that explosion sound. Also peoples who have asthma illness, they face problems during Diwali. So much papers and threads are used in manufacturing crackers. The persons working in the manufacturing companies also suffer.
Now when their are animals rights for not harming them, then this step of banning firecrackers must be taken.
6. Hair dye manufacturing should be banned
People use hair dye to colour their hairs. The hair dye manufacturing companies after production dumps its waste in rivers or seas which pollutes the water. So all hair dye manufacturing companies should be shut down.
7. We Can Stop Eating Sweets, Cakes And Stop Drinking Liquor, Wine And Beer
We consume sweets and cakes. We make it from many things such as wheat, coconut, etc. and add sugar to it. But what we want is the sweet thing to consume which we are getting directly from fruits. The fruit is naturally sweet. So if we want to consume sweets and cakes, we do not have to prepare it, just we have to eat fruits. So all the sweet manufacturing companies can be shut down. If you shut down a sweet manufacturing company, then so many paper boxes need not be manufactured which are used to pack the sweets.
Liquor, wine and beer are also made from fruits. So if you want to consume liquor, wine and beer, just eat fruits. If this is followed, then you do not have to set up liquor factories and prepare cartoon boxes for liquors. Everybody should go to the rehabilitation centres those who can't live without liquor.
8. To Stop Using Perfumes And Powders Which Is Not A Necessity
For bad smell in body both men and women should exercise and sweat, it would reduce the bad smell.
If you stop using perfumes and powders, we don't need perfume and powder manufacturing companies and perfume and powder bottles need not be manufactured, cartoon boxes need not be manufactured for packing them and transportations can be reduced.
So you want us to go back to the stone age. And you call people like me morons your idea will lead to far more damage than "climate change"
With the stupidity and ignorance in the world, it's quite inevitable sadly. I mean look at the richest and second richest country in the world, a sad joke ...
I still do my part to try and avoid this, even only by principle, but it's like fighting the wind.
_Coke, Pepsi and Other Soft Drinks? --_ Not a word about these from anyone --
. . Concerning thousands of tons of CO2 produced each year worldwide for Coca Cola, Pepsi and many other soft drinks -- Corrupt corporate driven agendas [AKA Global Warming] don't extend to limiting profits for the soft drink industry . . Money rules -- are you ruled? . . Or can you think --
Feedback loops.. everything is reciprocal. Burn oil and coal like maniacs for 100 years you’re going to have to grow kelp in the ocean like maniacs for 100 years for all those plane trips you took and lights we lit the streets with to drive combustion engines cars down to go to from house to gym haha
The biosphere, now in early stages of changing state of thermoequilibrium, will reach 4 deg C LONG BEFORE the next century.
and of that 3% of scientists that don't agree with climate change, how many of those do you think have skin in the game or are in big business's pockets? I'd wager most of them.
By the way, the three percent of climate scientists don't even necessarily say it's "not" happening. Even they concede major points to the AGW worried scientists.
The fact that some people can’t even wear a mask doesn’t bode well for our future.
Because a lot of us arent fooled the bullshit MSM
It’s so funny how some people like to think they “aren’t fooled” by the “so called” mainstream media, but in fact they are making fools of themselves. Gullible and sad at the same time because there’s no amount of facts we can provide to these people to convince them of the contrary. Now we’re stuck in this planet with a large portion of idiotized subhuman beings that will not cooperate with the survival of our species.
Some people just don't like being forced to do something. That said I live in California so I have no choice if I want to eat. This video is horse shit by the way.
BrainXTC it’s a 98% survival rate. You are an easy led sheep
@@JR113FTW Good for you. Being a moron is impressive.
New York just turned Subtropical
@Sleepy BIden oh no prob still get snow
The standard of viewers and comments displayed here show a serious lack of Big Thinking....
As an individual, changing your diet to a plant-based one if the single most effective thing you can do to reduce your carbon footprint, land use and water use
You can't save the planet without making real changes to behavior. So many people are trying to figure out how to avert disaster without changing anything. Thats not going to happen.
Jack Schitt oh you’re right, let’s keep trashing the planet to save people’s jobs..
Corby Ziesman agreed, some people are trying to rely on carbon negative technology that doesn’t even exist yet. That’s like knowing the titanic is taking on water but hoping someone else will figure out a way of stopping it at some point
Jack Schitt Farmable land destroyed by climate change also equals no food. Read the NYT piece from 4 days ago "The Great Climate Migration Has Begun". There are already farmers in central America who cant grow ears of corn with more than 3 or 4 kernels on the barren cobs.
@@jackschitt1709 Well, first of all I kinda would like to shine a spotlight on the suffering of the animals often involved. Depending on wether you believe that animals have an individual experience (which I personally think is bonkers to deny but to be fair the science isn't quite clear yet on that) your argument is not that different from saying "oh we can't close the nazi death camps! what about all the people working in supporting them?" But that is just the moral argument.
Apart from that there is the ecological argument Ruth Clements alluded to, which is absolutely true and significant.
In addition there are the antropocentric arguments of firstly mass lifestock farms pumping their animals full with antibiotics massively increasing the possibility of an antibiotic resistant superbug, imagine corona on steroids in the worst case. Secondly the fact that there are many people still not having enough food while we put the majority of our agricultural output into the mouths of our lifestocks reducing the caloric output of our agriculture.
And in addition to all of that there is the square egoistical argument of most cheap meat simply being unhealthy for you. The animals stress experienced during and the inappropriate lifestile itself we are forcing them to develop under as well as inappropriate food and too little movement is resulting in many hormones and just plain bad meat quality that is bad for you. If you want to eat good meat get yourself some deer meat or something from wild living animals. At least you are not killing yourself in the progress.
This is a real lowball estimate. Even money that we will have a BOE up North in the next couple of years
Tax corporations. Tax the 1%. Give people in the West ultimatums. In South Africa, water was due to be CUT OFF in July. People starting to feel this and are conserving. So far, the water has not been cut off, to my knowledge. Without LIMITS and consequences people will not change. It will not be pretty. But it needs to be done. Someone better be the parent in the room.
The comments on this video by people deep in denial, unable and unwilling to accept the dire situation we've gotten ourselves into, make me certain that we're doomed. In the 90s I imagined by 2020 we would be well on our way to solving climate change, instead we worsened our behavior. We haven't even begun to solve anything or to work together as a species. I'm skeptical we ever will. By the time these idiots accept there's a real problem, we will be far far past the point when we could have stopped it.
Corby Ziesman I’m afraid I’d agree, while we’re busy talking, the planet keeps warming, most scientists agree we’re already past the +2* mark, but that’s still manageable, but 3, 4, or 5 degrees: we all starve, it’s frustrating
Humans be like we don't care, the funny thing is the earth will get rid of us one way or the other or as many of us as possible. We don't deserve anything less!
You have a journalist, astronomer, mechanical engineer,and who ever pushing this narrative! Where are the climatologists? You have an auto mechanic diagnose a pluming problem in your house do you? That’s why I’m skeptical! There are than 20 percent of the climatologists who don’t push this narrative, and they have facts to back them up also. Who do you believe? I tend to believe the climatologists over journalists because the records are only accurate for about 2 to 3 hundred years back. And if you city the ice records they only go back 16 to 20 thousand years and show major changes in climate. I have a sneaking suspicion there’s a lot of money to be made by going green. But there’s also money in fossil fuel. We also have to get the third world countries and China, India, and Russia to go along or we’re wasting our time! We can’t do this alone!
Clearly this is an issue that requires the world to work as one to tackle it, would anyone in their right mind expect that to work?
Not really but it means life or death. I think that says a lot...
@Kent Horvath sustainable and regenerative agriculture. It's simple as planting trees. As humans, we have manipulated nature for the worst. Imagine if we benefited nature by planting trees and native species like crazy... unfortunately it's too late and we are locked in to hot house earth (death)
@Geek X what's fraud about climate change? It actually is history and physics with a lil 8th grade biology. Is that hard for you to understand?? Haha
@Geek X I could've guessed everything to you is a conspiracy theory! I hope you have a good sturdy tinfoil hat on right now
Let’s just get to 1.5 degrees already ! This subject is getting so tiresome.
How does the extinction of all species as a subject become tiresome?
Go to fucking bed if your THAT tired.
Give people a suitable and affordable alternative and they will get on board. A 55,000-dollar automobile is not suitable or affordable for most people. If you're not thinking of solutions that the masses can get behind, you're just spitting in the wind.
Like public transport, walkable cities and vegan agriculture!
My Father who lived thru WWII said people only do something out of crisis. And that crisis has already started & will keep ramping up. The question is how much of a crisis will it need to become before action is taken? I think it will need to get so bad the only option left will be geo-engineering.
Most people here (including you) are missing the point... The biosphere is changing state. That equates to *game over* for most, if not all extant eukaryotic life on this beleaguered Earth.
It would seem that by the time people except that global warming is a crisis it will be too late. We will have already passed the point of no return sometimes referred to is triggerpoints
I agree, humans are loathe to change their ways and will only do so under duress.
The question is: why are the protest movements still non-violent?
Don't we have every right to destroy and also kill, to defend our lives?
Sorry, friends, but seeing humanity not acting at all, I will soon start killing to protect my daughter. And you all should join this path if you really want to save the planet.
Obsessed with beach cleaning, half of it is coke and pepsi, dudes we need help!
Yeah, we could start with our own health, most people are over weight, and out of shape.
There may be little we can do about climate change, unless everyone wants to park their cars. I think we have painted ourself into a corner, having to ship things overseas for trade, and working too far away for most of us to walk.
Countries need to be more self sufficient, like many were in the 19th century and part of the 20th century. All of these so called advances we made were not advances. LOL
so good to think in solutions and not problems. My question: how do we gain the power to control political parts of our world so that they all think less or less in their own gain and true faith in the earth as a living organism
According to current world events and data, these dates of "2100" are too far ahead. We're going through the beginning of this now. Look at India, the massive heat combined with drought, knocking out parts of their power grid, having to stop exports of their crops...it's happening now.
I'm slightly horrified that only 97% of scientists are very concerned about climate change. Why not 99.7%?
Rest of 3 % are delusional or have pockets in interest groups like fossil fuels or just want to gain interest being contrarian .
Imagine election and 97% gain one candidate? Impossible!
So 97% is remarkable !
or they see the dishonest agenda that is behind the global warming narrative...
@@alexsclewis In what way is it dishonest? There is far more profit to gain from ignoring climate facts, you should take more of a look at the large corporations and industries like oil and gas that stand to benefit from ignoring their contribution to global climate change.
That stat is horse shit.
@@JedmcCj-uq5dw Is it more or less than 97%?
It all falls down where the people who are blocking the work are only interested in their own access to power.
I read the thumbnail as "Earth, a world with NOOOOOOIIIIIIIICCCEEEE!!"
Sounds nice to me. My house is at about 47* N and the snow is not going away.
That too.
Can't fix climate without fixing economics first.
If by fixing you mean collapse of capitalism, than yes.
Great!! Why do we not talk about nuclear energy? That technology has a greatly educed carbon footprint. I some times think that these people are more against capitalism than worrying about climate change. I am worried about climate change and if I was younger I would love to work on the challenges that are being faced today.
How To Reduce Pollution
1. Many Production Companies Has To Be Stopped
We manufacture so many products and it is creating pollution and pollution has increased to such an extent that it has become a threat to the world. Well maybe we won't have a major natural disaster soon, but it will come some day. So if we minimise our products, pollution would be less.
We produce so many things which we do not need as a necessity, like cold drinks, leather products, potato wafers, chips, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. Cold drinks, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. should be cooked at home only. Instead of cold drinks people should drink natural drinks such as lime water, coconut water or just any fruit, not any fruit juice, just the whole fruit which can be served when a customer comes in a shop, hotel or a person selling this drinks on a street and serve it to him. If we stopped producing this things which are not required as a necessity for humans, so much pollution could be reduced.
If we colour the clothes pollution occurs. So if we don't colour our clothes, the pollution resulting from colouring the clothes can be stopped. Let everything remain in white natural colour.
2. We Should Cook Foods In Its Natural Form
We can cook rice and wheat in our homes and eat it. Rice and Wheat is produced in farms. Then it is packed and transported to big warehouses, then wholesalers buy from them and supply to retail shops.
But if a manufacturing company makes bread from rice and wheat, then to make bread a manufacturing company has to be set up, machines and working staffs are needed. When a company is built many other things are also needed. Then at last a plastic pack is required to pack the breads.
So if we start cooking eatable things in its natural form then we do not need many companies like bread manufacturing company, tomato ketchup, fruit jam, pizza, burger, etc., the things required for the company and the plastic pack, paper box pack and glass bottles. If done like this, so many companies will not be required and hence less pollution for the world. Humans have to do this before it is too late.
If this is done, then many jobs would be lost. But human jobs or planet earth, which should we save, planet earth is more important. Humans have to take this step certainly instead of going on polluting the earth, making wildlife extinct and also mass extinctions of humans after 100 or 200 years.
Prior to the industrial revolution or before that humans worked everything handmade. So if after shutting down many manufacturing companies which are not required as a necessity for humans, if we started doing many things handmade only then many people would not lose jobs. Many peoples should do farming and they should be given loans if they do not have enough money to start farming on their own.
Is their any another solution, that humans won't lose jobs and also planet earth will be saved.
Nuclear, clothing coupons, less packaging, big and little solutions are possible.
How do we get China and India on board. We can reduce US/Canada carbon output, that will not be enough.
US is the one that isn’t onboard. The other two are still committed to the Paris Climate Accord
Its not like getting US/Canada on board is going to be easy either. People like their comforts and their luxuries and don't seem willing to make any sacrifices or changes to their consumerism even if it means saving the planet. (And especially if the US/Canadian attitude is "why should I make any changes to my behaviour if India and China aren't on board?")
Robert P No Robert, no.
Robert P Robert, my friend, I’m sorry to say but you’re simply just wrong.
I’m not certain if you are trolling or not, but can I ask why you disagree with 97% of the worlds scientists on this matter?
Robert P It isn’t difficult to grasp that while Methane and Carbon are important gases for stimulating life on this planet, they still act as greenhouse gases. A thing can be two things at once. Are you being wilfully ignorant or genuinely just don’t understand that?
Hopefully, by then technology can keep up with the rate of climate change. Water can be frozen as soon as the ice melts.
The amount of energy to freeze water is significantly higher that it is to melt it. Also when it’s gone a thing called latent heating happens. All the energy being reflected from that white ice ( the albido effect ) is now absorbed into the dark water. Unfortunately this heat stays in the water. Ever but of it has to be extracted again before the temperature of the water can become low enough to freeze again.
So once the ice is gone it’s gone. And when it’s gone it causes effects which make it ever coming back much more difficult. At least in human time scale.
No such technology exists that could practically freeze the Arctic ocean... You're clutching at very short plastic straws.
No ever talks about the hot ass concrete that we keep pouring on the ground. To many buildings no balance with that. Plus humans cant stop littering the easiest thing so there alot of small problems cant fix where everyone only talking about carbon
Geez, this was so optimistic. I don't see it taking long at all for Earth to shake us off. We are causing exponential, unstoppable, irrepreparable harm. It's too late baby. It's just too late.
Excellent video! Such an important topic.
guystudios no, it’s really not. As much as you people want to have sway over the earth.... it truly doesn’t need you to protect it. It was here long before man kind. It will be here long after. The only way to destroy living conditions on earth is if the entirety of the population collectively killed all plants.
Dominance Logistics The simple fact of the matter is; if we continue damaging the earth’s climate, it will become unlivable for us humans.
morgothra1 Very true. As a general rule, I’ve noticed that the intelligence in TH-cam comments sections seem to be far lower than that of the general public, due in no small part evidently to trolls like these.
"we shouldn't be scared of fear"... im gonna need a minute with that one. *lights bowl*
This is an excellent compilation
Agreed.
If we don't solve this we'll have some problems. But we work on ways to survive rven on mars, so we won't die out. But still, a big majority of us will die
“Plot idea: 97% of the world’s scientists contrive a climate crisis, but are exposed by a plucky band of billionaires and oil companies...”
The most succinct (and funny) comment I've seen on this topic.
Kent Horvath I’ll make room on my mantle, it’s not too big is it?!...
Geek X isn’t that cute, you can do basic addition, keep it up and your assignments will be on fridge door...
People deny human caused climate change because they don't want to change their ways or contribute money to adapting to a warmer climate.
Humans have been adapting to the climate for hundreds of thousands of years. We will continue to do so while silly people argue about what's real.
Warm is better than cold. Longer growing season and on average a wetter planet.
I'm pro global warming. I don't like the cold and don't want to move south.
Relax...keep an eye on the weather (don't let it kill you), practice conservation, adapt and don't be silly.
I looked up record high annual temperatures for my state. They apexed in 1936 and have been going down ever since.
Ocean acidification is there to sucker people who never had had sea water on their lips.
Bill nye the actor guy
Tell Bill Nye to make ice to stop ice free arctic! Shower sea water to carbon snow stop the acidic ocean right!
🙄🙄🙄
Source? And you do understand that we are talking global average temperatures and not "well it was hottest in one location on one day"...
Dundoril the oceans ph is too high as it is. Why would you worry about acidification?
@@ChipmunkRapidsMadMan1869 because it's not to high.. Unless you have a strange hate of calcifying organisms and want them all dead
Don’t look up
18:53 Yes, lets vote Trump out - then push our new administration to address climate change. Get the public educated.
Trump 2020
Carpenter Family it’s clear you are the one who has no common sense. Educated? You mean indoctrinated.
@ Dominance Logistics - Wow really - are you observing the same world that I am ?
But sincerely, if you can be more specific, I will seriously consider your points because I don’t know what I don’t know.
. . well, the sun is rising soon -- so you had better run for cover . . your own thought process will not likely follow -- we need real change, in the form of an individual perspective. Real thought requires personal initiative and the ability to recognize various independent sources of information. Sponsored channels most often fill the role served by television for several decades to limit perception in many respects. The internet became a rebirth of the individual perspective, while the attempt now is to remake this into the former role we came to accept largely as our perspective toward the world in place of the individual. It is the individual perspective that is the focus of power by which no person can be set against another with false or self serving interpretations from another outside of ourselves.
Yikes! This is false hope. No way can humanity be organized. No way can you get a majority to agree. And we've waited too long. This video is a waste of time.
It’s amazing this has been out a year and only got 28k views with 3.88 million subscribers….🤔..denial possibly❤️🌎
On the high end of model we could hit 2.2 to 2.4C by 2040 but none of them spend anytime tells us the worst case scenario. It seems like we don’t actually have to change anything just tweak a bit and everything will be fine.
The reality is we are past the point of massive climate disruption and we already may not be able to keep civilization as we know it going for more than another few decades. Not doing much now pretty much locks in the end of civilization.
lol thats not remotely true
The thing is that is much more cost effective to transform our society in non CO2 polluting sources of energy than tackle with this:
1) Sea level will cause trillions of dollars of damage.
2) The world's coral reefs will die.
3) Millions of species will go extinct.
4) Millions of people will be displaced.
5) Lower altitude glaciers will disappear.
6) Millions of people will lose access to fresh water.
7) Hurricanes will grow more intense.
8) Floods and drought will increase.
9) Forest fires will become more frequent and grow into the size of megafires.
Also using source of energy that is slowly depleting with TODAY 8 billion people on Earth is stupid without building alternative sources.
Fossil fuel price is going up every year because it's more costly and harder to get new reserves because they are finite sources and because it's more environmentally unfriendly (fracking and underground water pollution)..
morgothra1 lol
_Coke, Pepsi and Other Soft Drinks? --_ Not a word about these from anyone --
. . Concerning thousands of tons of CO2 produced each year worldwide for Coca Cola, Pepsi and many other soft drinks -- Corrupt corporate driven agendas [AKA Global Warming] don't extend to limiting profits for the soft drink industry . . Money rules -- are you ruled? . . Or can you think --
. . on the high end, we could hit double digits for IQ with a little effort --
WASF
Get rid of politics and choose only scientists as leaders.
Sincere questions, If sunlight can pass through co2 gas on the way into our atmosphere, but then gets 'trapped' on the way out, how is it that co2 gas functions as a one way door for sunlight? 2nd question How do Malinkovich cycles play into these issues? Serious answera only if you please and I would prefer source information from scientific papers for the evidence so I may read the papers.
It's not about the sunlight it self, it's about the heat that the sunlight transfers to earth. If we didn't have co2 in atmosphere, earth would be much much hotter and radiation would be deadly.
Problem with co2 is that it doesn't let the heath from earth to go into space, so earth becomes like one giant greenhouse.
This is my understanding of it as none scientist and how I remember what I have heard and read. Am happy to learn more tho :)
The one-way-door thing works because shorter wavelengths of light pass easier through certain media (including CO_2) than longer wavelengths. The sun emits a wide spectrum, of which the longer wavelengths are partially "reflected" back into space by the atmosphere. The shorter ones reach the surface heating it up in the process. The surface, in turn, emits heat energy on the long wavelength spectrum. This long wavelength light is blocked by the greenhouse gasses from being radiated out into space.
@Sleepy BIden If only you could conduct an experiment to find out for yourself. Oh wait, you can.
@Sleepy BIden The "Greenhouse Effect" is a proven scientific fact, not a "socialist lie". Watch some proper videos; I recommend those by potholer 54.
Light passes through co2 but when it hits dark things, like car seats, it turns in to heat. Heat does not pass through co2 so it stays in the atmosphere. Even with the windows rolled down.
Profitable path, maintain economic growth in green, good business. You CANNOT have infinite growth on a finite planet. Resources are finite. Species diversity (both flora and fauna) and their symbiotic interrelationships are finite. We need to STOP plundering the earth and give it opportunity to replenish resources… Climate change is just one vector that just happens to be the directly most urgent, bit species extinction comes right after that. Loss of species = loss pf habitat. Human habitat included. Habitat is what we should bw focussed on, not just climate change (just one “source” for loss of habitat).
I had the same nightmare
Taking CO2 out of the atmosphere and store it somewhere would create enormous wealth, as the CO2 could be sold and burned up again!
And as soon as you burn it again, it's back to being in the atmosphere. Do you even stop to think? Even for a second?
Oh dear!
You can't burn CO2. You can hardly do anything with it other than use it as a compressing gas. It's chemically incredibly stable and hard to break apart into anything useful.
I'd love to know how you intend to burn CO2 (LMAO!)...
The whole point is to 'draw-down' the atmospheric CO2 (and the other ghgs) and (re) sequester them FOREVER. That said, the task is financially highly unlikely given that one source has stated the tech and support would cost every nation around $14 trillion each year, in perpetuity... Assuming that tech existed, which currently it does not.
Why do you capitalist nitwits always think with your wallet?
C02 is the product of combustion. You can’t burn what has already been burned
The heat is already in the system. The methane clathrates will destabilize, there is no stopping it.
6:53. Because Syria was also full of Iraqi, Turkish, Somalian etc who all came our way...
Car has two tanks , one gets filled with hydrocarbon fuel when empty, the other gets emptied of carbon when full. Apply this concept with all hydrocarbon fuel burning machines and the carbon never makes it into the atmosphere. At the same time use the new technology to suck existing carbon from the atmosphere. Problem solved. …… drops the mic 🎤
We're killing the ocean in many ways, I'm a
if its true, start it in 1st world, dont push the 3rd world country to abandon the basic energy generation. They dont have enough capacity to convert to renewable energy, let them developed first. Start with your 1st world country because they are the big contributors to climate change.
I get that you try to make a point about the seriousness of climate change, which I agree is extremely important, but the refugees from Syria are not fleeing because of climate change, these people run away from torture and death caused by a criminal regime and from Putin's bombs. Saying they flee to Europe because of climate change is an insult considering the hell they went through. Put yourselves in their place and see how would it feel if you had to hear that.
I think you misunderstood what he was saying. I read it as look at the political upheavals caused by the million refugees displaced by the Syrian civil war alone; that was 1 million, think what it would mean if tens of millions were displaced. I heard 600 million people displaced by sea level rise alone can be expected.
Um... No. That is a common fallacy. The Syrian refugee crisis is the first stages of climate change upheval, these are climate migrants. Many have left Syria because they were unable to continue being farmers. The same goes for those crossing from Africa and Meso America.
BTW Whose bombs? You single-out Putin.... Whereas it is clear that the US have caused more strife in this region than Russia and continue to meddle in middle-eastern affairs. Russia is not your enemy. The US/UK governments are.
Am the only one who read the thumbnail as this “the world with noice?
Where is the proof of gloom and doom from climate change?
...asks the frog in the pan with ever hotter water..
@@herbayum76 Don't broadcast your ignorance.
@@tyronekim3506...asks the patronizing frog etc...
What does a philosopher know about climate change?
Glad I didn't have kids.
Never heard so much hopium and magical solutions to a problem that can't be solved.
I love this period
.......Meanwhile half the world is more concerned with the Kardashians. We should probably accelerate global warming so we might at least get a public consensus that it’s happening. Many people still don’t believe it, so they will need to experience droughts, and food shortages and power outages, 50 degree summers and civil unrest. It might be a bit too late by then but at least they will be educated.
Ty for the video.
Storms that can put boulders on top of mountains . .? I can’t process that!
Take boulders from the bottom of the ocean, And place them on top of a mountain.
It is
I have a stupid question how did the ocean levels increase without man aiding or producing these gases
Ummmm, Wikipedia is your friend. Ice ages and interglacial periods are caused by wobbles in Earth's orbit. Read. Learn.
@@uprightape100 If you've learned about all that stuff, you'll know that we're in the middle of an inter-glacial period and have been for some 10,000 years. That process is not the reason why sea levels are currently rising - which is due to two main factors: thermal expansion of the oceans, and the addition of vast amounts of extra water, due to melting of glaciers and sea ice. Both are caused by rising global temperatures - due to the rising levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Joseph Lindquist if you warm an object the molecules that make it up expand, the ocean reacts the same way to a warmer atmosphere, the tricky part is, the melting ice caps are creating cold spots: imagine a simmering pot, as you add room temperature vegetables it settles down, takes time to heat up again, but eventually you stop adding vegetables, they heat up and if you aren’t paying attention the pot boils over.
The ocean is the same, the problem doesn’t look as bad as it is, but all of a sudden it’s going to boil, acidify and self destruct. Just like that pot of vegetables...
Andrew Clifton IMO - I don’t think we have ever fully came out of ice age for 2 hundred million years... we almost get out of ice age(like now)& then we suddenly fall back into ice age...
if looking at petrified forest & sea creature that are found at altitude then obviously we are returning to ‘normal’ even if we don’t like the changes!
@@luckybassturd7260 You're kinda right, we're in what geologists call the Quaternary glaciation - an "ice age" that started 2.58 million years ago (not 200 million!). Right now, we're in the Holocene interglacial period, which began about 11,650 years ago. But it's still part of an ice age - nowhere near as warm as it previously has been, outside of ice ages, during what are called "greenhouse" periods, when there are no glaciers on Earth.
Climate change is probably a grave problem, but there is so much self-deception and dishonesty in the political realm and in journalism, that science, which is normally trustworthy, might be corrupted on this issue. The stakes here are large. I don't like that the minority-view challenges on climate change are suppressed and dismissed as being in collusion with financial interests, even though this is likely a factor. I would like to hear the debate.
The social sciences appear to be badly corrupted in American universities by amoral, nonsensical identity politics (critical race theory, intersectionality, etc.). I hear there is no toleration for challenging their doctrine--it is considered to be racist out-of-hand (again, what is really true?). Physical science is certainly more reliable, but how much? We really need to know the truth about climate change, whatever it is, and act responsibly. I am an environmentalist who believes in practical answers, including going green to a practical degree
(it depends on what is true), and in nuclear power, which is actually quite safe.
Meanwhile your entire view on this seems to have been informed by trusting sources you should have known better than to trust.
@@GGoAwayy I have never been complacent or in denial, though far too many are. I do not trust the nay-sayers are being honest with themselves, and have trusted the prevailing scientific view, but recently wonder. I am perhaps 80-85% sure we have a major climate problem.
_Coke, Pepsi and Other Soft Drinks? --_ Not a word about these from anyone --
. . Concerning thousands of tons of CO2 produced each year worldwide for Coca Cola, Pepsi and many other soft drinks -- Corrupt corporate driven agendas [AKA Global Warming] don't extend to limiting profits for the soft drink industry . . Money rules -- are you ruled? . . Or can you think --
@@davidbrown6340 80-85% is not good you should be 100% , as the science should be too if its not 100% accurate it is inevitably flawed
….. also maybe the carbon can be solidified and used as a cheap yet super strong, versatile building material
And if we dry and stack our poop, we can reach the heavens.
Cute...they think weve got a chance.😂😂 118f in siberia....siberia......Its over folks. Stop with the hopium. The sooner you except it the better.
A winter or two ago iirc we had rain in the arctic.
Could the new coronavirus be a (bitter) solution to this?
No. If you're driving headlong towards a cliff - and then at some point, you're somehow forced to slow down a little bit for a short time, without changing direction - and then as soon as you possibly can, you hit the gas again and accelerate... You're still going over that cliff, unless you actually change course. The only way the slowdown can help is to buy you a little time, to think about doing that.
@@Zen_Power Well, if that's the intended hypothesis, it's not at all credible! First, it's pure fantasy to attribute intentions or purposes to viruses; second, it's almost certainly impossible for a virus to kill "all humans". A pandemic-based, long-term collapse of modern civilisation is just about possible (albeit, very improbable) - but SARS-CoV-2 (which causes Covid-19) is nowhere near deadly enough to do that. That would require need a very long, symptom-free but highly infectious incubation period, followed by a very high mortality rate (as imagined, for instance, in the novel "I am legend" and the movies it inspired). From a virology point of view, fortunately, this is highly unlikely.
@Jacob L We need a transition, not only to other energy sources but also to a sustainable economic system that isn't addicted to growth. Prosperity increases if we uses resources more efficiently to maximise human well-being, rather than consuming more and more pointless junk.
@@Zen_Power maybe it keeps mutating into something deadlier and deadlier though, greatly reducing the overpopulation of humans. I’ve also read that there is evidence that it’s causing infertility which would further reduce the population.
...and I'm still just watching on a phone I bought from China
every day 121 million tons of GHG added to atmosphere. 50 billion tons per year.....
@Sleepy BIden no affects? What about the endless wildfires, floods, weather events destroying crops, permafrost and ice caps melting at alarming rates?
@Sleepy BIden well first off the whole planet being on fire isn't normal. Rapid melting of permafrost and ice caps is not weather but a consequence of a warmer planet, just like the mass extinction event we humans have started! You're not ganna prove anything to me because you don't understand what a green house gas is. So I suggest you learn what that is before you keep looking like an idiot. If you're to hard headed to figure out the truth, don't worry the end is near and it will all make sense soon enough.
In approx. 8 (eight){Tipping point is closer. Do what you want with the info.} years It will be too late (at the current rate). (Humans stopped caring for humans\children a long time ago. Will humans start caring again?\Have humans ever cared?) I need to turn off my pc. Have a nice day!
Carbon is the economy of the future
Hate to burst your bubble, but it hits 4.c by 2050. Good luck.
Yes in technology there is soo much remains to done.
Well. You wanted control of everything and now you have to pay for your negligence.
So you're saying I'm going to have to drink my Scotch neat? TERRIFIC
stocking up on fava beans and chianti.
I am glad that this world awaits the slow agony of Leviathan. Mother Earth will finally get rid of the human plague.
Never happen humans will out live the sun.
@@JedmcCj-uq5dw Nah, they won't outlive shit lol. Humans are a self destructive species. Sooner or later, they will go extinct. And that's a fact.
I wish I could deny and argue this but the facts are undeniable. We as a species are terrible, use up all our natural resources, and destroy everything “for the common good”. This is something that’s weighed heavy on my heart since I was a child, with that being said I’ve never quite felt human. My delusional dream is that people like myself (not normal humans) can band together and create a utopian society lead by science and god. Unfortunately social media, correct politicians, and leaders will never understand what’s going on until it’s too late.
Social Ecology NOW
@@thatautogarage3644 aw thats cute you want to feel special and different. Sadly you are just an insignificant spec in a cold dark indifferent universe.
Rapid cooling deep freeze time
Calm down!!
One doesn’t experience self-transcendence, the illusion of self only dissipates. Non-Duality.✌️&♥️
Wasn't this supposed to have happened back in the 1990s?
Some used that information to make exaggerate video that will happen much sooner so now you have those that misuse that news media to disprove that never will happen because "they were wrong all the time" if we do not do something.
It's happening as we speak, Earth is warming.
Even if we stop emitting CO2 tomorrow this EXTRA CO2 that is present in atmosphere will heat up whole planet to 1.5°C . Just like your oven, you cranked to max and wait to heat up.
Earth is much bigger so you need decades for equilibrium to happen.
@@klokoloko2114 were is the unpoliticised research? Were are the groups condemning china india and africa for being the biggest polluter?
@@geoffreyweights7697 Africa is lowest CO2 emitter, 50 times less CO2 per person than USA or EU or China. India 10 times less.
Today china have half off all electric vehicles and fastest accelerating and current installed solar and wind capacities.
They are not great, we can and must do all more.
Problem is that those people in Africa suffer the most from global warming problems and they contributed at least to this shit.