This isn’t even remotely true. Extreme freezes and droughts will destroy crop growth and livestock across the globe. Mass starvation will be inevitable and the ones who will starve won’t be the descendants of the people getting rich off of destroying the climate today. It’ll be your grandkids (or nieces and nephews).
This current isn’t critical to the survival of the human species.
So what you’re telling me is that you think that climate change will make Earth so extreme that humans - who currently live in every biome from the Sahara desert to the high arctic tundra - aren’t going to be able to survive anywhere on it.
This community is named “science” so I’m going to ask you to back that extraordinary claim up, please.
Extinction doesn’t need to happen in seconds, like when a big space object collides with earth. It can also happen gradually. Major environmental alterations like weakened amoc and global warming will make many more regions of the earth uninhabitable, for example when the temperature rises over 46°C regularly or when there are regular droughts or floods. A lot of land where hundreds of millions of people currently live on, will be completely submerged, desertificated or barren. And these changes won’t just affect humans, but also whole ecosystems that we need to survive, for example fishing grounds, forests or, if you think about the extinction of species, especially insects, arable land in all parts of the world.
Our civilization as we know it right now can not survive catastrophes like these in the long term, and we cannot be certain that human life will remain possible on the planet without being completely dependent on artificial habitats, food, water sources etc.
will make many more regions of the earth uninhabitable
Emphasis added. So, not all of it then.
we cannot be certain that human life will remain possible on the planet without being completely dependent on artificial habitats, food, water sources etc.
I already gave the examples of the Sahara an high arctic tundra as places humans can survive. We lived there just fine without advanced technology, even - the Inuit and Bedouin for example.
Again, is the whole entire Earth going to be worse than those places?
I’m telling you that if nothing is done about it, global warming, the extinction of species and other factors will raise the likelihood of humanity’s extinction to a higher level than it has been in tens of thousands of years, over the course of the next few hundred years. We can only speculate about how earth will be like in three hundred years and if there are places left that remain inhabitable for humans.
The inuit rely on fish, which are on track to become extinct in this century even. People survive in the Sahara by bringing lifestock/food and water with from elsewhere, but the desert grows from year to year.
This isn’t even remotely true. Extreme freezes and droughts will destroy crop growth and livestock across the globe. Mass starvation will be inevitable and the ones who will starve won’t be the descendants of the people getting rich off of destroying the climate today. It’ll be your grandkids (or nieces and nephews).
In the comment you’re responding to I said:
So what you’re telling me is that you think that climate change will make Earth so extreme that humans - who currently live in every biome from the Sahara desert to the high arctic tundra - aren’t going to be able to survive anywhere on it.
This community is named “science” so I’m going to ask you to back that extraordinary claim up, please.
Extinction doesn’t need to happen in seconds, like when a big space object collides with earth. It can also happen gradually. Major environmental alterations like weakened amoc and global warming will make many more regions of the earth uninhabitable, for example when the temperature rises over 46°C regularly or when there are regular droughts or floods. A lot of land where hundreds of millions of people currently live on, will be completely submerged, desertificated or barren. And these changes won’t just affect humans, but also whole ecosystems that we need to survive, for example fishing grounds, forests or, if you think about the extinction of species, especially insects, arable land in all parts of the world.
Our civilization as we know it right now can not survive catastrophes like these in the long term, and we cannot be certain that human life will remain possible on the planet without being completely dependent on artificial habitats, food, water sources etc.
Emphasis added. So, not all of it then.
I already gave the examples of the Sahara an high arctic tundra as places humans can survive. We lived there just fine without advanced technology, even - the Inuit and Bedouin for example.
Again, is the whole entire Earth going to be worse than those places?
I’m telling you that if nothing is done about it, global warming, the extinction of species and other factors will raise the likelihood of humanity’s extinction to a higher level than it has been in tens of thousands of years, over the course of the next few hundred years. We can only speculate about how earth will be like in three hundred years and if there are places left that remain inhabitable for humans.
The inuit rely on fish, which are on track to become extinct in this century even. People survive in the Sahara by bringing lifestock/food and water with from elsewhere, but the desert grows from year to year.
You’re “telling me.” Okay. Got anything to back that up other than just your say-so, though?
Yes, lots of sources. They’re easy to find if you start by thinking about who would know the most of a subject.
Go ahead, then.