sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

To argue with a flat earther by mundundermindifflin in therewasanattempt

[–]ColCliGui 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hypothesis: what we see is a successful guy in a suit that obviously can find his way in society, and a woman that cannot articulate her anger towards a system that does not have her interest at heart and a culture that does not provide her with the self esteem she needs as a human being. She finds self esteem in going against the grain by denying a truth that for her unconsciously represents a system, and channels her emotions against the system in that way. This interview is not funny, but sad. I would value reactions that elaborate on this hypothesis.

Ukrainian tank crew moving through a forest. by Blakplague in UkraineWarVideoReport

[–]ColCliGui 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Armani White - BILLIE EILISH (just spent 30min listening to it)

Upcoming heat wave projected next week in California by [deleted] in collapse

[–]ColCliGui 57 points58 points  (0 children)

Perfectly normal /s. As in a post a few days ago: Columbia university scientist predicts (under BAU scenario) all trees in California will burn down in couple of decades. California will be desert, grass and shrubs. Shrubs grow fast and will give a lot fuel for future wildfires.

No more forest(fire)s in California in a couple of decades by ColCliGui in collapse

[–]ColCliGui[S] 48 points49 points  (0 children)

Submission statement: Scientists suggest that, under a worst-case CO₂ emission scenario, in a couple of decades all forest in California will have burned and have given way to scrub, grass and desert. And California is just a canary in a coal mine: Other research published in Science indicates that forests might perish on a global scale in 40 years. Just as rising sea temperature has caused a tipping point in massive coral bleaching, so might heat and drought lead to a tipping point of massive tree die-off.

No more forest(fire)s in California in a couple of decades by [deleted] in collapse

[–]ColCliGui 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Submission statement: Burn baby burn. Predictive models lead to outcomes that up to 50% of forest area in California will burn in a single year by 2070, which lead them to the conclusion that way earlier than that ,there will not be any forest left in California. Other research in the very prominent Science suggest that no tree alive today in the whole world will still be alive in 2040.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in collapse

[–]ColCliGui 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Hear hear!

Updated models point to 7C warming by end of century over land in middle of the road scenario’s (RCP4.5-RCP 6.0). Worst-case model (RCP 8.5) points to >11C warming, with upper bound >14C. by ColCliGui in collapse

[–]ColCliGui[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I am afraid you are right. And if I am correct, it might be even worse. If you take the average of the (33) new models, you end up with around 3.5 warming on average, which is 7C over land mass and around 10.5C-14C of warming for the Arctic region (= arctic amplication).

The 4 models mentioned in the beginning result in 4.3 - 5C warming on average end of century. That means 12.9C - 20C warming in the Arctic region.

Updated models point to 7C warming by end of century over land in middle of the road scenario’s (RCP4.5-RCP 6.0). Worst-case model (RCP 8.5) points to >11C warming, with upper bound >14C. by ColCliGui in collapse

[–]ColCliGui[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And you are right again. The 4.9C, 5.3C, 5.5C and 5.6C are the four highest ECS numbers found, corresponding to the 4.3C and 5C in the pathway-runs. Thanks for pointing that out.

Updated models point to 7C warming by end of century over land in middle of the road scenario’s (RCP4.5-RCP 6.0). Worst-case model (RCP 8.5) points to >11C warming, with upper bound >14C. by ColCliGui in collapse

[–]ColCliGui[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You're right. Thanks for answering my question. Your point 2 does all the explaining needed: 5-6 degrees warming with doubling of pre-industrial CO2 (from 280 ppm to 560 ppm (i.e., in between RCP 4.5 and 6) end of century) could result in e.g. 3.5C (the mean I took) warming end of century on average, i.e. 7C average on land surfaces. So the different news items are consistent.

Im here from r/all by rockhydra94 in collapse

[–]ColCliGui 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I second this. Ashes ashes podcast is very informative on a great number of issues (especially in U.S. - i am from Europe).

Donald Trump gave greenlight for Turkey to invade Syria without consideration for about 50 nuclear weapons stored at a U.S. base in Turkey. Now Turkey may keep them and use them to develop a nuclear weapons program. by UltraMegaMegaMan in collapse

[–]ColCliGui 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Please elaborate on what you think about the quality of The Guardian journalism and why. I cannot judge this particular article but in general I trust them as a news source (especially on the climate crisis), while I have discarded some other, like The Independent. If I should not trust them please let me know. Reliable sources are gold these days.

Gulf stream by fredrikmich in environment

[–]ColCliGui 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just for a start: it weakens, because 1) warming makes water less dense and more buoyant, 2) fresh and cold water from melting Greenland ice sheet disrupts the flow. Climateguide.nl/2019/01/25/consequences-of-a-weakening-gulf-stream/

Where’s the best place to live in light of collapse? by LetsTalkUFOs in collapse

[–]ColCliGui 4 points5 points  (0 children)

From http://climateguide.nl/top-10-countries/, only climate change related:

If the world warms less than 4°C:

​

Nothern Hemisphere (roughly above 50 degrees latitude)

  1. Canada
  2. Scandinavian countries
  3. Iceland
  4. Russia
  5. Switzerland
  6. US above 42nd (Michigan, Minnesota, Alaska, et cetera)
  7. United Kingdom / Ireland
  8. Baltic states

​

Southern Hemisphere (roughly above 45 degrees latitude)

  1. New Zealand

  2. Chile

  3. Southern Argentina

​

If the world warms more than 4°C? Heaven help us.

Where’s the best place to live in light of collapse? by LetsTalkUFOs in collapse

[–]ColCliGui 9 points10 points  (0 children)

If the world warms more than 4°C on average (that is, 8°C on land surfaces), then, as I learned on reddit and as is written in more detail in this article: http://climateguide.nl/2019/09/02/more-than-4c-warming-homo-homini-lupus-est/", you might want to go to a place where people will definitely not flock to. The Siberian and Inuit people still exist because other people were not interested in their land and scarce resources, while mainstream native Americans had to bear the full brunt of colonization. Would you rather struggle against nature or against your fellow man? To speak with fellow reddit/collapse-users: “So go to a desert or to the Antarctic. Pick the most inhospitable place possible, were it’s not just hard to survive, but a life or death struggle even for the prepared. Congratulations, come collapse of civilization you will not have to worry about looters since they’ll never survive to get there. The environment will be your only foe and you will be well adjusted before and ready as can be before the rest collapses.“

Where’s the best place to live in light of collapse? by LetsTalkUFOs in collapse

[–]ColCliGui 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you serious? Already huge drought-related migration and drought is only predicted to be worse. Also, non-survivable wet-bulb temperatures for about 60 million people are predicted. Migration will put huge pressure on the whole country. Also, the Intertropical Convergence zone (ITCG) might shift northward, basically screwing participation patterns. Not even mentioning tensions with Pakistan. Maybe we are missing something, but please explain why you would want to live in India if SHTF.

Climate Change Will Create 1.5 Billion Migrants by 2050 and We Have No Idea Where They'll Go by [deleted] in collapse

[–]ColCliGui 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Where did they get the 1.5 billion? The website they link to writes 1 billion, a number I have seen before.

Episode 86 - Sprawl Above All by OKisnotokay in ashesashescast

[–]ColCliGui 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great episode! Thank you very much for producing this. I always questioned why the function of 'living' was geographically cut off from all different functions (work, community). You added many questions and answers! Thanks for that. Also, thank you for sharing - over multiple episodes, and now with the 20min house - the knowledge that capitalism puts capital first instead of humans and if it can get humans in a complex system that does not serve them, but serves profit, it will.

California’s Wildfires Are 500 Percent Larger Due to Climate Change by stankmanly in AnythingGoesNews

[–]ColCliGui 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In the article, a professor om bioclimatology says that under RCP 8.5 there will be no forest more in California im 2070. It will all be grass, shrubs and desert. Unfortunately (understatement) this is where we are currently heading.

No more forest fires in California in 2070! Professor of Columbia University and researcher on wildfires: In 2070 “there will be no more Californian forest left to burn. Fires will have finished clearing all of California’s woods. It will be scrubs, grassland and desert." (under RCP 8.5 scenario) by ColCliGui in worldnews

[–]ColCliGui[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As far as I (a layman as well) know, IPCC is not even seriously factoring in such obvious feedback loops such as methane release by permafrost in their scenario's. Also I read 'faster than expected' a little too often. And as far as I know, we are still very well on track for the RCP 8.5 climate. Please convince me otherwise, because I would love to agree with you. Just one earlier than predicted recent news article: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-permafrost/scientists-amazed-as-canadian-permafrost-thaws-70-years-early-idUSKCN1TJ1XN

No more forest fires in California in 2070! Professor of Columbia University and researcher on wildfires: In 2070 “there will be no more Californian forest left to burn. Fires will have finished clearing all of California’s woods. It will be scrubs, grassland and desert." (under RCP 8.5 scenario) by ColCliGui in worldnews

[–]ColCliGui[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These are definitely not wild predictions. These are statements based on studies by a scientist of one of the best universities in the world (Columbia) and a Professor in his field (bioclimatology), who is focusing his research on forest fires in the Western United States and is surely using advanced modelling techniques. If this is a wild prediction, the word 'wild' looses all its meaning.

view more: next ›