Interesting that you are childless or childfree, like me. No wonder we click so well. I agree with you, once again. Like Bowie used to sing, " We've got five years.....". The older I get, the more I take comfort in the things I will not be alive to see and suffer......

@TomMcGiverin Got to agree there. Like you I made a conscious decision that I didn’t want children although I do have step children in their 30’s now. All the indications are that this is not a good time to be born and many people take such joy in seeing another poor individual joining the ranks of the damned! (A bit melodramatic I know).

Oh well we are in it, can change it, but we can try to help our coexistentees through. It would be helpful if we could put all this religious/atheist nonsense down. It’s like being in a sinking boat and arguing over who should be baling out the water!

@TomMcGiverin as a Bowie fanatic, 5 Years was the first thing I thought of.

@Emerald Great minds think alike. Every time I sing that song at karaoke here in Iowa, people look at me like I've gone off my meds.....

@Geoffrey51 I think it was Krushev talking about nuclear war, who said, " The living will envy the dead".

@backwardsman Who are "you and your types"?

FEWER humans.

@yvilletom Not always. Many in the UK use less and few the same.

But, i agree. many less will be good.

No one wants to say it, but we really need to stop reproducing

@Remi I have said it and so have others. But there is a conundrum that few will listen to. When I was a board member of Zero Population Growth we would ask women to try to limit their births (one woman on the board did just that). We often got the answer that , yes, they agreed but also they saw that the minority classes were having more kids and the middle-class groups would become a minority (we are on that road). It's a racist remark but it is true. How can we ask and expect women in this country, the biggest generator of greenhouse gases and with the highest carbon footprint, when we also import millions of people from other countries whose sole purpose it is, is to increase their carbon footprint? It is not fair and is creating many problems. The anger felt by the conservatives and poorer people in the country is palpable and the result of that anger is tRump and his ilk and I feel some of our gun violence. Until we deal with this issue there will be no talk of limiting our progeny.

@JackPedigo well first off, it's not entirely the woman's fault she got pregnant so... That aside, educating women has proven to lower birth rates. We need to do a much much better job of educating people in general, but also educating everyone about sex ed. educating people about sex ed also is proven to lower the abortion rate which conservatives are so concerned about. I don't get it, there is a win-win solution to the abortion debate, but conservatives don't want to hear it. It would also help the environment, by causing less births. also reaching out to those immigrant women and helping them have a community, helping them get educated and get jobs, so that they are less likely to have as many kids. And then there's the whole religion part of the problem

@Remi I am hearing the same story that it is just about education. More than 2/3 of this nations population growth is directly or indirectly (births within the first generation) due to immigration. My late partner was an immigrant from Iran and she was very concerned about this issue. She was a master educator for an international, Seattle public elementary school and asked her 2nd graders the question: what is more important people or dirt? The immigration issue is very, very complicated and when a large majority of newcomers don't know the language or the culture and are struggling just to get by family planning education is a non-option. She and I dealt with many aspects of immigration. I understand it has to not be about individuals or even people but the system we all (including immigrants) have to live. When that breaks down (which it is and not just here) everyone suffers. Nature does not care for people and will toss us aside in the blink of an eye. It is harsh but only we can prevent it and we are failing. Some of us and most of the younger generation will bear the brunt. Preservation of the natural system that sustains us needs to be the primary priority above all others.

Grow algae with chemical fertilizer and spread it on your yard as organic fertilizer.

@Flying, there is a recent study, sorry I've forgotten where, that hemp is the largest absorber of CO2 and cleans soil of contaminants.

@Bushshaker
Accoeing to what I have heard/read, the oceans are absorbing a lot of CO2. However, as they become warmer, the waters will have less ads less ability to keep gases in solution. And the higher the ocean CO2 concentration, the more acidic the water becomes, which will massively disrupt food webs, coral reef formation, and who knows what else.

You ain’t lying

If the democrats take over we are really screwed so what are you talking about.

And this time, humans are here to witness, and learn. We live in interesting times.

So you reject the basic science involving greenhouse gases, as to why their presence traps heat?

Of course climate change happens all the time, but read the genuine science and you may understand better what is happening. Why would anyone 'spew hatred' at you? Science happens whether you believe it or not.

So you have a monopoly on thinking have you. ha ha

Yeah, right.

Yeah, people die all the time. Yeah, it's all pointless. Life is all hype, man, not just climate change

Pretty much the kind of comments I expected. I'm sure we're all going to die soon. Meantime, some people are making a ton of money off of all the hype, and not many seem to notice or care.

As far as the science goes, climatology is about as accurate as weather forecasting, seriously. We have no fucking clue. This isn't physics. It's p-hacking and fearmongering to make huge bank. And it wasn't all that long ago when top scientists were convinced that humans would soon evolve gills - all the data was there to prove it. Yet we're still gill-less.

If I've learned anything in life, it's never to trust what anyone says when there is so much money and power at stake. And if you think climatologists cannot be bought or influenced, that is just about as naive as one can be considering human nature and history.

Anyone else remember the hole in the ozone that was going to kill all of us in a few decades? Well, here we all are, all living and shit, and no worse for the wear. Believe what you'd like, just don't expect everyone to play along.

Well that makes me feel relieved

@Millerski25 Happy birthday.

So glad to hear a rational mind here. Far too many Chicken Little folks around. Read about climate history, this planet has had ice ages when the CO2 was much higher than today. The ice cover is growing in the arctic. The average temps are much lower here in the US than they were in the 30's
Money is driving this BS. It always has

@Boxdoc It always amuses me how excited some people get when you question what they hear on their favorite media outlets. And their responses are always the same: either hostility, name calling, or circular logic (the news reports can't be wrong, because here's another news report that says the same thing).

It's also amazing how many people believe climatology is a hard science, like physics. They're guessing - at best. They cannot even tell us what the weather will be like next week with any real degree of accuracy, let alone what the climate of the entire planet will be like in 50 years.

I also like how everyone focuses in on less than a century of data to extrapolate a phenomenon that lasts for dozens of millennia. Climate cycles are measured in the tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of years. A small deviation about the mean over the last few decades is hardly proof of a long-term trend. It's like trying to predict the entire season based on the opening set of downs in a preseason football game. Ridiculous. Why not analyze a more relevant timeline measured in tens of thousands of years instead of a few decades? Well, because then, the uptick over the last few moments suddenly becomes irrelevant. Pretty basic stats concept that a lot of people seem to have missed.

But I'm sure they're right this time; the sky really is falling now. Nevermind that the people funding the research are making billions of dollars from all the fearmongering.

It's not "we". It's the dumbass climate change deniers.

One more time: weather and climate change are not the same.

@Spinliesel I’m familiar with the difference. My point is that when they can accurately predict the short term then I will have more confidence in them long term. Remember Al Gore predicted that certain cities would be underwater by now

By then it will be too late. It almost is already.

Sorry, but you're wrong in two fronts.
1- we have figures going way further back. It's an entire subject called palaeoclimatology.
2- atmospheric scientists already take into account short cycle variance in the angular tilt of the earth, as well as the longer cycles of sunspot activity and orbital difference as the earth travels around the sun. It's not just the total change in ppm CO2 in the atmosphere, it's the rate of charge.

@MrBeelzeebubbles I suppose in that case nature itself will wipe out humans and then repair and reset itself.

@RobertMartin oh, I don't think that'll happen. Worse case scenario, lots of people will die. But there are tribes living in isolated microclimates in the Star Mountains of Papua New Guinea who will neither know nor care of we shoot ourselves in the proverbial face.

@MrBeelzeebubbles you keep getting me with your defending reproductive rights and trans rights and now the environment...

@Remi and I ride a really cute scooter!

@MrBeelzeebubbles maybe I need to look into that island in Ireland that wants Americans to move there... That's at least the same time zone...

Good move. every 125,000 years much of the ice melts. This is in response to the 3 known wobbles. 25k years, 40k years, and 100,000, years.

125,000 years ago sea level was at least 30 feet higher than now. Nothing we can do about it other than move north, and learn how to farm the tundra.

You’ll never live long enough to see that happen.

@Trajan61 Good to know. Thanks.

The technology, perhaps. But the will and ability to work on the problem, no way at all. Outer narcissistic shortsighted leadership, corporate and political, won’t even allow us to try.

Bury that head in the sand! That'll make the inconvenient truth go away!

Shush, honey, the grown-ups are talking.

@backwardsman What link? You say you have a link and mention flume gate several times in this thread, why didn't you repost it?

@Bushshaker fukishima killed the "plackton" now did it? All the "plackton" are dead because of a nuclear disaster at an outdated nuclear plant?

You just opened a can of worms that demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about any environmental issues. I am tired of having this discussion in the comments so I'm going to start a new thread about how nuclear is the cornerstone of minimizing or even reversing climate change.

@Bushshaker A meltdown literally means that the nuclear fuel melted. It's as simple as that. Those reactors were old by technological standards of the day, and are basically stone age compared to more modern designs.

The major problem with the Fukushima plants was not their design, it was their location. When they were constructed, they thought they would be safe from tsunamis and earthquakes based on the data that was then available. The odds are slim that the US will face a similar catastrophe. One reason we should be building new reactors in the US is so that we can replace our outdated ones, because boiling water reactors are trash.

Yes, it's coming faster, due to the feedbacks. All that polar ice has trapped CO2 and methane.

@bingst Yes according to recent articles, the melting permafrost is releasing methane faster than anticipated and the unfrozen land is crumbling into the sea and creating a feed-back loop.

@bingst ive been accused of to much gas but I think you’re right there should an increase of released gases and this poses an even greater danger