Climate change is inconsequential (because Peak Oil is a bigger issue)

[Bofferbrauer2]

o_O.Q said:

SpokenTruth said:

Earth has had many cooling and heating trends in the past.  What separates those trends to this one is the rate of change.

Past trends took thousands to even millions of years to achieve the same type of changes we are currently witnessing in just 200 years.  It simply a much faster rate of change than any previous period.  So the question is why is it changing so fast?  After extensive research for decades, we have concluded that we are the responsible party for that change.

As for the future, it's difficult to determine when 'natural' changes will take place and how long it takes for them to happen because we've altered the natural cycle.    So the previous of 'natural' changes cannot happen independently of our own impact on that change.  The dire implication is that if our impact and the natural cycle coincide and magnify each other...we largely won't survive it. 

"Past trends took thousands to even millions of years to achieve the same type of changes we are currently witnessing in just 200 years. "

can you post a link for this?

"As for the future, it's difficult to determine when 'natural' changes will take place and how long it takes for them to happen because we've altered the natural cycle."

for the other planets as well?

https://www.space.com/33001-mars-ice-age-ending-now.html

"The dire implication is that if our impact and the natural cycle coincide and magnify each other...we largely won't survive it. "

at some point we were not going to survive anyway... this planet for vast stretches of time was uninhabitable and it will become that way again with time

Here on this diagram you see the changes ove the last: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/All_palaeotemps.svg

It does fluctuate a fair bit, but that's due to time compression outside of the ice ages. Even then, the spikes are less high than the 2050 projection, and much less than the 2100, which rise from the base value (1960-1990 mean temperature) even surpasses the spikes after some ice ages. The only exception is the PETM, or Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, which happened over 56 Million years ago, and from where we know some of the effects of such a rapid heat increase, like the shifting of sea currents, the methane clathrates and the acidification of the oceans, which is devastating for most sea life with shells, like corals or mollusks.

Did I mention that it is considered an extinction event (although a minor one, since it was already very hot before)? Trees and algae thrived during that period since they feed on CO₂ (much higher amounts than today of CO2 are confirmed for the period, but hey, it was also a mean 12 degree celsius (21 degrees Fahrenheit) hotter), but some fauna wasn't so lucky, especially at sea.

The earth cooled down afterwards when Antarctica slowly moved in direction of the south pole, starting to freeze over. The resulting lower sea level freed up much land in modern Canada and Siberia, and along with tectonics (eastern Siberia and Alaska rising up due to their continental plates clashing), created more land to cover in snow, this time on the northern half.

The fact that there was much life when the earth was 12 degrees hotter should not be considered a proof that we will be fine with rising temperatures, though. Life on the planet is adapted to the conditions for thousands of years now, and that includes us humans. Like the thawing after the last glacial period killed of animals like Mammouths, the speed at which the temperature rises right now will kill a lot of species which just can't adapt fast enough to the changing situations.