440
Pretty interesting, huh? (mander.xyz)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 26 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

The PETM wasn't so bad, and neither was the Cretaceous hothouse Earth. Paleontology gives me the perspective needed to know that we're not all going to die even in the worst-case scenario.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    We may revert back to monke though.

    Jokes aside, no way do I want to live through a "worst case scenario" or anything even close to it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    On a long enough timeline, we don't have a choice. Whether we cause a catastrophe or not, there is always going to be another worst case scenario.

    At the same time that writing was being developed in mesopotamia, most of Northern Europe was under a mile of ice. As that ice receeded, the cradle of civilization, mesopotamia, went from being the breadbasket of the world and a lush garden to a desert. Eventually, well within what we would consider to be civilization, there was a collapse in the bronze age because the climate in those regions stopped being capable of supporting the life that it did previously. So things get warmer, it's a worst case scenario. Things get colder, it's a worst case scenario.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yeah I'm sure the rich and powerful will be a-ok in their bunkers while the rest of us burn, drown, and fight over the last remaining resources.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Bunkers? Burn? The air will still be breathable and the temperature will still be within the livable range. Global warming is a big problem, but it isn't going to turn the planet into an uninhabitable wasteland, just as it didn't during the multiple times in the past when it happened naturally.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    We're already seeing an increase in natural disasters, with various areas experiencing floods, draughts or wildfires that didn't use to have them.
    This alone leads to political conflicts in those areas, but also leads to mass emigrations, ultimately causing the political egoists right in unaffected areas being strengthened, which could at its worst lead to another Nazi uprising, world war etc..

    I do also think that humanity as a whole will survive (that is, if we don't obliterate the ecosystems sustaining our lives, like e.g. pollinators). But our current life style of 8 billion people across all areas of Earth may not be sustainable anymore, which does mean the more privileged will be fine, others not.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Honestly this is my perspective too. Not saying bad times are good, but that history shows us many different times periods and of wide variety of environmental conditions.

    Honestly, there are a lot of places that the climate could go and none of them are good for us. Human history had already begun and we were still in the midst of an ice age which, if we had the same sort of ice age today would wipe out half of the countries on the planet. We've also had warmer periods, and they ended up making the center of the supercontinents that existed at the time completely uninhabitable because water just wasn't making it over there.

    Looking at things from geographical scales makes you realize how ephemeral a lot of the things that we consider to be important to be. If we plan to Forest today, over geographical time. It will grow, die, decompose into co2, and grow again and there won't even be a big impact on the geographical record not like the carboniferous period. On the other hand, sedimentary rock makes up entire mountains, and represents life taking unimaginable amounts of CO2 out of the atmosphere, binding it up with minerals like calcium, and that carbon precipitating onto the ocean bed over millions of years.

    The dominant species on Earth didn't alway survived these events, but even when the ice age after the oxygen catastrophe turns the entire globe into an ice cube, 10% of Life survived and went on to become everything.

    So besides the lesson that we can change the world for the worst, I think we need to be thinking about how we can make sure our species is resilient because another ice age will come. It's inevitable. There may be another time that we pulled too much carbon out of the atmosphere, that could come too. There are so many things that we need to be worrying about and instead we focus on one problem. I really think that that's human nature.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    The good thing about most of those things is that they take a very long time to happen, so we have a very long time to respond. Climate change, by comparison to the natural cycles is happening very quickly since we let it get so out of hand.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent