Yes they have already reconciled that it is already happening now. They are figuring out how to stop it so that all life on Earth doesn’t go extinct…
Has the scientific community ever reconciled with the fact global warming is going to happen and there is no stopping it?
Submitted 7 hours ago by Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com to [deleted]
Comments
bacon_pdp@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
ripcord@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
There are virtually no scientists that think all life on earth will go extinct.
notsosure@sh.itjust.works 2 hours ago
That ALL life will go extinct is hard to imagine, but many scientists do see a high chance that humanity is going extinct (due to climate collapse) or, at the very least a population collapse of >95% is certain to happen within 200 years.
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
But then Nestle says “Life? Or profits today?..PROFITS!!! FUCK YO’ WATER SUPPLY!!! I DO WHAT I WANT!!!”
andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 3 hours ago
Yes, constantly.
Most people, imo, don’t have a good idea who the scientific community is and what their discussions look like. The scientific community is made up primarily of working class nerds who work at universities and suppliers and contract companies, and they communicate through blog and magazine articles in publications by and for other academics.
If you go to a scientific conference, you’ll see talks and panels on this subject and it’s a routine topic at coffee breaks and drinks in the evenings.
The scientific community has been discussing this topic literally longer than anyone else.
JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social 7 hours ago
Uhhhh…. they’ve been warning us for many decades, now? (and sounding alarms)
There’s also the fact that Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius (and others) discovered key mechanisms of the Greenhouse Effect, and CO2’s key role in such, back in the 1800’s. So you know, want to know about a science issue? Maybe ask literal scientists?
It’s not the body of relevant scientists that are letting us down, Dafty…
Ephera@lemmy.ml 2 hours ago
As others said, it’s generally a routine thing. I did once see a Mastodon post from a climate scientist, where they expressed that they’re losing hope.
If that’s the kind of reconciling you’re talking about, I imagine every climate scientist has gone through that, but it’s something they tend to deal with individually rather than stating it publicly.The problem is that you don’t want to give the public the impression that it’s hopeless. Fossil fuel corporations will use that against you. And it just does not make rational sense.
Any amount of greenhouse gas that we don’t put into the atmosphere makes our lives easier. Even if you give up hope for some particular goal, you would still want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as much as possible, so that it doesn’t become worse sooner.Climate change already affects our lives. We really don’t want it to become worse sooner.
Proprietary_Blend@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
And lose my funding?
GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 6 hours ago
It’s been settled for 20 years that the world is warming. The efforts at this point are entirely focused on containing and limiting the damage. The fight to stop it is long over, and there’s absolutely nothing that can stop some level of catastrophic damage.
TheTactfulSaboteur@lemmy.ca 4 hours ago
It’s actually been settled science for over 40 years at this point. Here’s Carl Sagan laying it out to Congress in 1985 youtu.be/Wp-WiNXH6hI
notsosure@sh.itjust.works 2 hours ago
Yes, scientists have reconciled with this. In fact, climate change is now an outdated term; it is called climate collapse, and scientists (across many disciplines), most (rational, non-populist) politicians and citizens acknowledge that the dramatic effects are omnipresent.
thevoidzero@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
There are different fields of science. In my field (water resources), any scientist that is reasonable knows the climate change is happening, you can see it in any data that spans for last 50 years. We’re focused on how to deal with it, given it’ll get worse. All the future scenarios (from simulations) are worse than history, there’s less worse and more worse depending on how people will act. But I think even the worst case did not have “world war” into consideration. So we might have wayy worse than our predictions. But again, predicting future is hard, there could be effects that we’re not expecting. Specially the current geopolitical scenario when climate change (and greed) is making life hard leading into authoritative regimes which is making it worse on top of previous policies. Which exceeds the linear growth pattern used in the simulations.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 hours ago
But I think even the worst case did not have “world war” into consideration.
Specifically “blowing up regional methane storage” was probably unexpected.
dhork@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
“Scientific Community” is kind of a broad term. It is composed of a lot of smarty-pants types who are unlikely to take “no” for an answer, and will keep trying to fix the problem.
In the end, you may be right, and there’s no way to stop the runaway train, and all these folks will accomplish is getting our hopes raised while they earn their PhD’s and present papers in worldwide conferences they all burned jet fuel to get to.
But, what if you turn out to be wrong, and one of those poindexters actually figures out how to scrub CO2 from the atmosphere in an economical fashion, and they manage to stop the train? That person will be instantly famous, and the Nobel Prize might be the least of their accolades. They will be remembered as one of humanity’s greatest minds. If they happen to be British, they will be buried next to Newton and Darwin, that’s how important it will be.
So, they will keep trying, because it’s as close as you can get in this life to immortality.
HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 6 hours ago
It’s an energy problem, not a smarts problem.
Imagine the Hiroshima bomb.
How much energy that contains.
Now understand that, just from excess emissions alone, we are adding at least four of those nuclear explosions worth of energy into the atmosphere.
Per second.
That’s right, per second.
There is no solving this without technology that would be indistinguishable from magic, so not happening. We had our chance, capitalism won, and those at the top are hoarding and preparing for what’s coming next.
trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
Remember that we have technology that 100 years ago would have been indistinguishable from magic.
DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
They can either give up, or keep trying. Which would you do?
CannedYeet@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
The place to read that would be the latest IPCC reports www.ipcc.ch
Devadander@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
Lmao
Doomsider@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
No, scientists can definitely do something about it.
I think if you replace scientists with a body that is paralyzed with inaction because of regulatory capture like the US it would make more sense.
Has the US government ever reconciled with the fact global warming is happening and there is no way they can work together to stop it?
The answer is then a clean yes.
mystrawberrymind@piefed.ca 6 hours ago
Well for example, I read they’re harvesting coral samples so we can try to regrow the coral reefs in the future.
msokiovt@lemmy.today 5 hours ago
Global warming was a fraud created from geoengineers. This was the reason why they were shifting blame of their weather modification onto the people.
BanMe@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
I had to reckon with this as a civic-minded class of 2000, we got the early digital everything and they had such fanfare for bringing us up, and into the future, a gateway to a new generation - and as kids, we had media for 20 years telling us something had to change - they told us Millennials were going to solve the looming problems of the past. But then we found out the world didn’t really want those changes, and we burned out like Great Value Incandescents. Then it was several years of “how do I plan a retirement against the coming climate wars…” and then the Great Despair where I just did drugs for several years and gave up,