To anybody wondering why I wish for the destruction of mankind, for the end of our species. Well I do because of posts like this one above.

Let's be honest folks, you can't read a post like this and not hope deep inside that mankind will come to an end. You can't read a post like this and believe for a second that we deserve to go on.

Do you still want to believe that there may be some good, some wisdom to save us all when so many humans are this far gone and this much disconnected from reality? I can't, I simply can't.

Everybody is frantically posting every computer simulation, model, prediction, etc. that they found on the web and I don't have the time to explain the difference between those and reality for every case. Models aren't reality, only direct observations/measurements are. Lot's of models now mix real measurements with simulated "data" to create the appearance of objectivity, another trap to behold.

A good example for the distinction between model and data is the "Drowning of the Maldives" hysteria which has been predicted forever. After all, the models claim a hockey stick warming and sea level rise. The science is settled, only deniers disagree.

Maldives are drowning in 1837 (!) -- the hysteria began early.

<SNIP>

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/4173156

Drowning again predicted in 1988

<SNIP>

http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/102074798

Perpetual drowning in 2018, it just never stops

<SNIP>

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/islands-sea-level-rise-flooding-uninhabitable-climate-change-maldives-seychelles-hawaii-a8321876.html

So much for the models but what about reality?

Curb your enthusiasm, the Maldives have.... grown bigger, the oceans declined. The old man shows you were the sea line was when he was younger. Real observations vs. fake modelling.

<SNIP>

Observational facts do not verify the story of a rapidly rising sea level in the Maldives. On the contrary, stability in sea level is well documented for the last 30-40 years.... As their [IPCC] idea is not based on actual field studies only modeling, our observational facts should be held superior.

http://myweb.wwu.edu/dbunny/pdfs/Evid_Based_Climate_Sci/Ev_Based_Climate_Sci_Chap7.pdf

That objective led a fieldwork team to the Maldives, and resulted in a conclusion that sea level in the islands fell by approximately 30 cm during the past few decades.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818105000780

Oh but I have a feeling that shit will hit the fan long before our grand children roam the earth as adults.

You are talking about CO2 and its direct effects to our health which I am not fully familiar with but I am certain these are bad as you explain. But there will be a more pressing problem with increasing concentrations of CO2 and worse with CH4 (Methane). The most pressing issue is the change in climate due to the greenhouse effect magnified by CO2 and the much more powerful CH4.

You see the warming of the global climate is going to trigger a whole bunch of positive reinforcing feedback loops which in turn will accelerate the warming which will at some point trigger a natural release of billions of tons of CH4 contained in shallow waters such as the waters of the east Siberian Arctic shelve (The so called clathrate gun) which will accelerate even more the warming of the climate due to the very powerful greenhouse methane gas released. Once these feedback loops are triggered there is no stopping them.

And finally the worst problem that this sudden increase in heat will cause is not climate change or stronger storms, hurricanes, extreme heat and droughts causing massive fires (like we see in Australia) all these are very bad on their own. The worst will come with the crops that are the base for our food, these crops will not resist the coming changes and at some point they will collapse, at first by a few percents then more until 95% of all crops fail to grow and the entire world goes into a famine. No need for me to draw a picture of what that would mean (panic, social chaos, wars all over the globe, starvation everywhere) That's when shit really hits the fan. Can't tell you when exactly that will happen, I can only tell you that we are heading in that direction and we are accelerating towards it.

"I mean that a human being with an allegedly working brain could think for a second that economics>natural order"

for the vast majority of people and everyone who visits this forum, economics does trump the natural order

whenever we build houses or lay roads to drive our cars or build airports to move across countries what do you believe is happening?

to access this forum you use a computer built in a factory from materials extracted from the earth connected via extensive networks spanning thousands of miles

how many ecosystems are disrupted within these processes? do you have any idea how much energy is consumed to create consoles and the video games that run on them? or to keep those consoles turned on and connected?

how many people in one breath voice concern about how bad climate change is then cheer at the implementation of 5g networks?

a lot of this crying about how urgent global warming is to me sounds a little hypocritical, i know personally that if it came to it i could go live in the bush off the grid and still feel contentment with regards to life, fully understanding what that means and how much more difficult life would be, but I don't think many of people people lamenting climate change and that WE MUST DO SOMETHING can say the same

The evidence is undeniable at this point.

Since 1880 sea levels have increased by 240mm~ with an average rate of around 3.3mm per year.

Pemalite said:

Not to mention you haven't even fucking read your own links! You have misquoted sciencedirect, they recognize that sea levels have risen! (Which contradicts all your prior statements on the issue!)

Everybody is frantically posting every computer simulation, model, prediction, etc. that they found on the web and I don't have the time to explain the difference between those and reality for every case. Models aren't reality, only direct observations/measurements are. Lot's of models now mix real measurements with simulated "data" to create the appearance of objectivity, another trap to behold.

A good example for the distinction between model and data is the "Drowning of the Maldives" hysteria which has been predicted forever. After all, the models claim a hockey stick warming and sea level rise. The science is settled, only deniers disagree.

Maldives are drowning in 1837 (!) -- the hysteria began early.

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/4173156

Drowning again predicted in 1988

http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/102074798

Perpetual drowning in 2018, it just never stops

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/islands-sea-level-rise-flooding-uninhabitable-climate-change-maldives-seychelles-hawaii-a8321876.html

So much for the models but what about reality?

Curb your enthusiasm, the Maldives have.... grown bigger, the oceans declined. The old man shows you were the sea line was when he was younger. Real observations vs. fake modelling.

Observational facts do not verify the story of a rapidly rising sea level in the Maldives. On the contrary, stability in sea level is well documented for the last 30-40 years.... As their [IPCC] idea is not based on actual field studies only modeling, our observational facts should be held superior.

http://myweb.wwu.edu/dbunny/pdfs/Evid_Based_Climate_Sci/Ev_Based_Climate_Sci_Chap7.pdf

That objective led a fieldwork team to the Maldives, and resulted in a conclusion that sea level in the islands fell by approximately 30 cm during the past few decades.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818105000780

"However we have been warned about this for years to come... It was asserted by a climate change study that the impacts of climate change would be directly observable by 2020 in Australia and we are definitely seeing that, the fire chiefs have all been warning about it for years... And were ignored, resulting in the current situation. - And we still have uneducated cucks who think Climate Change isn't real, just because they saw a facebook meme or a Youtube video."


At some point, the changes will become so drastic people cant ignore it anymore.
Its just a matter of what does it take?

Florida to be in the ocean? because of riseing sea levels? Something else?

Netherlands will be hard to keep afloat.

I guess there won't be anymore mangroves either.

The Netherlands already lives a long time below sea level. But with enough sabd suppletions we will be fine for a long time. Although we should remake the delta works eventually. We use controlled flooding and create river bypasses to deal with the meting Gletsjers. As for coastal erodion due to sea level rising The Dutch build the zandmotor/sandengine. So The Netherlands will be afloat for a long time, other delta's without Dutch Watermanagement (its kind a Dutch specialty) will face big challenges though. The bigger problem the Netherlands is facing is soil subsidence. 

The Netherlands already lives a long time below sea level. But with enough sabd suppletions we will be fine for a long time. Although we should remake the delta works eventually. We use controlled flooding and create river bypasses to deal with the meting Gletsjers. As for coastal erodion due to sea level rising The Dutch build the zandmotor/sandengine. So The Netherlands will be afloat for a long time, other delta's without Dutch Watermanagement (its kind a Dutch specialty) will face big challenges though. The bigger problem the Netherlands is facing is soil subsidence. 

Hoogmoed komt voor de val...

It's a long slow race which nature will eventually win. Rising sea levels will slow down the discharge of the rivers while rising temperatures will increase precipitation causing more water to come down the rivers. Controlled flooding is a last defense measure which only goes so far in one of the most densely populated countries in the world. At some point it will simply get too expensive to keep the Netherlands dry. Although some of the land seems to be floating anyway. My sister used to have a farm near Uitdam, when she was riding her horse around you could see and feel the ground bounce in a slow wave effect as if you were standing on water. Bizarre.

Your maths teacher from primary school is not amused.

He didn't misquote sciencedirect, the sentence that he quoted was indeed a 1:1 quote from the sciencedirect link that he posted. But his quote is a nice example how a quote taken out of context can give an impression that is almost the exact opposite of what the quoted source actually states.

On the other hand, what you've written about that sciencedirect link is not just misleading, but wrong. The short abstract available under that sciencedirect link does not state that sea levels have risen instead of falling. Basically, it just states that after some team of scientists found that sea levels in the maldives have fallen about 30cm in the decades before 2000, another team of scientists came to at least slightly different conclusions, that the fall in sea levels at least wasn't as high as 30cm, and that they believe rise in sea levels in the maldives in the future to be the most reliable scenario.

numberwang probably simply copy-pasted that quote and the link from somewhere else without even reading it. Apparently, you didn't read it either, at least not carefully. numberwang probably didn't intentionally give a false impression - he could have just linked to this scientific paper instead as "proof":

https://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/MornerEtAl2004.pdf

Some scientists wrote a paper that came to this conclusion, other scientists wrote another paper that came to another conclusion, and ultimately neither of these papers is ultimate proof of anything. When it comes to the maldives, we just know for sure that those politicians and scientists who a few decades ago warned that they would be sunk by 2020 were utterly wrong. I still remember fearing the Maldives would already be sunk by the time I was finally able to visit them when I was a kid in the 80s.

Afaik the biggest problem with rising sea levels in the Netherlands are not dams and dikes towards the ocean, but that they have to somehow raise the levees around the rivers, otherwise they'll flow right through half the country in a couple years at high tide, especially the Rhine.

Hence why the plan is to open the Deltaworks during low tides to let the rivers unload their water content into the ocean and then close down just before the high tide rolls in and hope it rises slower than the tide.

That effect is due to the ground water being almost just below the surface, so if it rises any higher, it will become very swampy and probably unsuitable for any major human activity anymore.

@bolded: Not so sure about that. Scientists are still debating what the effects will be exactly for western Europe. But one thing is sure, the glaciers will be providing less and less water to the rivers simply because there are less and less glaciers, and what remains is much smaller than what they were before.

Here in Luxembourg, the result from the Alsace region getting much less snow during winter to feed the Moselle river is that it starts getting hazardous sometimes for ships and boats to sail on the river, as the low discharge means it's not deep enough outside of it's center anymore. And the same could happen to the other mountains that feed the Rhine (the Moselle flows into the Rhine), like the Black Forrest, the Eiffel, the Mittelgebirge and of course the Alps - if it's not already happening right now.

While more heat can mean more rain, it can also just mean more moisture in the air without added precipitation. Keep in mind also that the hotter the air is, the more water it can contain in form of moisture. Also, regions like southern to mid Spain are starting to show early sings of desertification, so it's quite possible that the Sahara will creep closer and closer to our regions further to the north.