Most of us have particepated or particepate in discussions involving global warming/icing/sun dimming/whatever. Whether man made or natural, I don't know, could be a little of both, but we know that the climate is changing (you don't need it peer reviewed, just ask people around the globe, on internet it's relativly easy). How rapid the changes, how far and in which direction they will go.. nobody really knows, including the scientists who all drag the carpet to their many sides. I have nor the scientifical edu., nor the data I would want to speculate on it, but it seems that even the speculators on all sides have little hard data. So I ask you not to speculate on this in this thread, there are so many others! But it seems that we have 2 worst case scenarios: 1) It gets very hot; 2) Welcome back ice age. I might not be a scientist, but I know that it is good to be reasonably prepared if we have such a climate change. Suppose next month we get 99% sure confirmation on one of these worst case scenarios, what should we do in case 1 and 2, what should be done in Americas, Europe, North Asia / South Asia, Africa, Australia? Pick one of these and propose. See it as an interesting little mind exercise. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! If shit happens at least people at Sciforums will know how to act, where to go, etc. It's very doubtly anything will happen in our generation, but as I said, it's a bit of a game, so relax.
Scenario 1: It gets very hot. We all paint our houses white and buy as much insect repellent as can be manufactured. In the short term, all countries should concentrate on stockpiling food (if they have any surplus) - the major agricultural regions, such as the heart of the USA and Western Europe, may become far less wet and fertile. Of course, more heat means more rain overall, and other places - including the Sahara, hopefully - will grow more productive. If the climate changes were to be very rapid (several degrees in a decade), the best we could do would be to save as many people as possible from starvation until new the bread-baskets were definitely established and could be brought into cultivation properly. Inevitably, a lot of people would die, many nations would cease to exist or lose most of their population to famine, floods and plagues. There would be wars fought over land like never before: the onus would be on the G7 nations to prevent the use of nuclear weapons. One could imagine the hordes of refugees from a drought-stricken India pouring northward into Siberia, and the Russian government demanding huge financial compensation for accomodating them. The thawing Arctic tundra would be a new frontier for colonisation by the displaced - and the sad fact is, its charcteristic wildlife would all but disappear as it warmed. Polar bears are one species which I doubt could survive, outside zoos. The problem, in the Southern Hemisphere, is that there is very little sub-polar land at equivalent latitudes. Long-term: the ice caps, of course, will melt. If all the land-based glaciers on Earth disappeared, global sea levels would rise over 70 meters, reducing the planet's land area by as much as 10%; this would take thousands of years, however, because all that ice couldn't physically melt any faster regardless of how quickly the temperature rises. I suppose the major coastal cities could all be gradually rebuilt into tall stilt-mounted Venices, keeping their main concourses above the water by any means possible... The citizens of those countries which couldn't afford to do this, and had no higher ground to migrate to, should all receive individually-signed letters of apology from the heads of the richer states (in waterproof ink). Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I could carry on for hours speculating about this - I haven't even touched on the increased frequency of tropical storms, the spread of jungle climates into Mexico and Argentina, the Australian hinterland becoming green and lush, or homegrown British figs and olives. Ultimately, humans would be genetically and surgically modified to be fully amphibious, so rising sea levels would no longer be a problem... as Busted sang it: in the year 3000 not much has changed - but they live underwater.
First, i ENCOURAGE you to look at this problem from as many perspectives as possible for example, i agree with you of the COFUSION about all this. who the fuk are we to believe? My answer to that is to look deeper. example, WHo are the ones saying that what 's happening is not to do with us humans? It is the scientists who are mechanistic-minded. who see, feel, and experience the Earth and cosmos as a machine, and people as biochemical machines. so, are you going to trust them is the question i ask myself?....NO, is the reply so, next, 'what IF?'.....what if temperature rises. well it is/has and although 'we' may feel alright--for example i sense in UK a feeling of 'i'm alright jack' cause of hotter summers. But the rest of the world is really suffering. we are talking drought, infestations of mosquitos, tropical diseases, wildlife confused and suffering, native species of lora going extinct, further threatening native anilams and insects.... Islands disappearing....it's already happened in the Pacific, but the media didn't doesn't really mention it, know what i mean? and ice age? Who the fuck knows how to survive ? we are all so domesticated and dependent on push-button-ology. It'll be horrendous but the bottom line is that it is all of us individuals putting up with this race to destruction. putting up with this arch-oppression that dictates our lives, and leads the whole world into either desert or arctic, then DENY any claim to its cause!
in N america: get the americans and tie them in a wall to hold back the sea in canada Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! as for me, ill just head inland with a tent a machete and some matches
Oh, please! What have I or most Americans ever done to you?? Ice age future: if we had a few decades, the world could all agree to cut the birth rate and try to make sure the population grew small enough for the lands round the equator to support us all. Especialy if the Sahara and other deserts got wetter, like Starthane hoped. But I read that Australia was actualy even drier during the ice age than now..
Suppose next month we get 99% sure confirmation on one of these worst case scenarios, what should we do in case 1 and 2, what should be done in Americas, Europe, North Asia / South Asia, Africa, Australia? ??????????? where do you get your information?? not flaming would just like to see it or read about it.
Did you read anything I wrote? :bugeye: I said "suppose" ----- To all the rest: Thank You for your input. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I shall particepate soon, can not now due to some work I can not postpone. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
before the worst case scenario happens you should ask yourself this >> Am I self sufficient ? Could you look after yourself, by yourself ? that is all you need to worry about. For the time being, we should be replacing the flora so that we balance out the carbon levels we have emit from taking the balance from plant life onthe land developed by human society, we should be walking to the video store instead of driving, we should make a pizza instead of buying one. Once we start to live a less consumable lifestyle, the future generations will have enough time to figure out the global problems us and our ancestors have inflicted upon ourselves. God help the the ones who will have to work harder than we do to live a comfortable lifestyle for all living beings on our great mother Gaia.
by yourself yes, but you might well not be on your ow - thered be millions of homeless people lookin for land + food if much of the world became too cold or was drowned. You'd need to protect your self sufficient life, which may mean gaurding what land + money you have - this would be easier in groups, with firearms and barricades etc. Small towns and farms would have to become like separate states and keep others out, however starving.
On this basis would it not be a lot more honest and practical to take out the population of what will become desirable real estate by neutron bomb or biological agent. That way whomever is currently in the technological lead remains there. You need to think on a national and global basis, not personal and local.
So we need an absolute dictator, divorced from personal feelings, who is unafraid to make really awful, genocidal decisions for the mythical greater good? Let's just use our biotechnological genius to clone Adolf Hitler, and put him in charge of the United Nations..! There's a solution to global warming or sudden glaciation!
I hope you realise my post was intended to highlight the natural consequences of Jennyrater's recommendations. If we adopt a selfish stance in the face of crisis and cataclysym we perish. Pretending we are just protecting our families is a trite excuse. Faced with Avatar's scenario I have no idea what we should do, but I am certain it should be done together as one people on one planet meeting the challenge as one. The alternative will make Hitler look like Mother Theresa.
China just cancelled the plans (10 in all) for some of its largest power-plants-to-be ever. They never have done such a thing, before, and it seems a bit at odds with their predicted economic growth. H5N1 just made its first human-human victim, probably, in Thailand (the girl that died last week - her mother also died without having had any reported contacts with infected birds, unlike the girl) H5N1 has an estimated kill rate of 75%, compared with 5-8% with the influenza epidemic of 1918, if I heard one researcher correctly. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! One may think to see all the ingredients correctly, but you can never predict in which order disasters will finally come... making all scenarios so much waste of paper. As to the original question, maybe that large flotilla of refugees drifting across the oceans from Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash would become a feasible reality in both cases, so you would not really have to invade any territory.
I don't think my idea was as selfish as Gambit Stars'... It would be great if all the world could come together in love and harmony when faced with a world wide disaster :m: - but people generaly ARE selfish when theres not enough food, or land, or anything for everyone. If the sea was rising or the ice caps growing nice + slow, all the governments - even places like north Korea or Libya - might see the light, listen to Jon Lennon together and sort things out. If it happend quickly, like in that film Day After Tomorow, thered be chaos. A novel? Perhaps it gave Kevin Costner the idea for Water world..
Scenario 1:- emigrate to Antarctica. I hate hot weather! Scenario 2:- break out the champagne - it might actually snow in England again! But seriously, both scenarios would take place over many decades if not longer, so all that would happen would be process of gradual change and adjustment which for the most part we'd hardly even notice. After all, how many folk at the time were aware of the onset, or the end, of the Little Ice Age? Or any of the other multi-centennial variations of global/regional climate that have occurred in the past few thousand years. And it was, after all, climate change that forced our distant ancestors to climb down from the trees. And much more recently led to the the development of farming, and then to the building of the first towns and ultimately civilisation. Who knows what great improvements the next major climate shift might bring?
Could well be. Waterworld was made in 1995, Snow Crash is from 1992. Huge flottila centered around a former US Navy Aircraft Carrier sold off as scrap, picking up refugees whenever they drift close to shore. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Crash Ultracool read.
Looks cool indeed! Even if its about a warmer world... That idea of America fallin apart and losin most of its land - I bet vslayer would like it!
Regardin Vslayer saying that America would lose most of its land, New Zealand would lose about one third of its land as well, so he's got nothing to be smug about. The South Island of New Zealand in particular will be very badly affected by sealevel rise, because most of the Canterbury Plain will be underwater. Also, when the ice is removed completely removed from Greenland and Antarctica (which could happen as early as 2100, in one scenario) we would have to face the problem of both continents rising out of the sea because of the removal of billions of tons of ice. When that happens, we'll be dealing with earthquakes the like of which we've never experienced, as the crust readjusts itself over the entire planet to compensate for the shifting of asthenospheric material. Also, the rising of Antarctica and Greenland will displace water (obviously) and cause a further rise in sea level.
Whether it's hot or cold, the one thing certain is migration. If it gets hot, North Dakota would reverse its population decline, but the current residents might not be too happy about it. Hispanics, blacks and Southern Baptist whites would create quite a culture shock for the German/ Scandinavians. Ice Age means the Canadians would move in. A lot depends on the change in precipitation in each place. The meteorologists can't even get a 5-day forecast right anymore, so I doubt all the predictions for rainfall.
Don't worry, Avatar, I won't be posting here. But there is a contradiction in your proposal. You asked people not to speculate, and then offer two highly speculative possibilities, extremely unlikeley, if I am allowed to say. Seeing the entire Earth's climatic history, especially from Glacial Termination III, we see tha natural variations in Earth's climate were not very big, and the Holocene's 8,2 Kybp cooling event was not so deep. It is not a specualtion to say there will be not an increase of more than 2ยบ C by the year 2100 (and this will be highly beneficial for mankind and the whole environmnet), and also it is not speculation to say it could happen a Double Gelissberg solar mimina by 2030, sending us back to the Little Ice Age for another 200 years (it is not a full glaciation, though, but people in Canada and northern and central Europe will hate it). So put to rest your fears and panics, and start enjoying your lives, once and for all. Feel happy not to live in a Third World country. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
