Climate Change: Why aren't more people concerned about it?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 1521 - 1540 of total 2314 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
tuolumne_tradster

Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
Apr 19, 2017 - 04:50pm PT
climate change
puts moose on danger

the guy in the photo ^^^ is a wildlife biologist who is trying to help moose. He is conducting research to determine what is killing off moose in the Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa area.
NutAgain!

Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
Apr 20, 2017 - 08:54am PT
Interesting observations in this article:
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2017/04/explaining_science_won_t_fix_information_illiteracy.html


A key point is this: the political polarization we see in scientific issues like global warming is not just caused by stupid people not getting it. Even people who can articulate the details of a scientific consensus, thus demonstrating that they are not just plain stupid and unable to grasp the concepts, even these people are subject to the "liberal"/"conservative" political polarization of viewpoints.

The article makes great observations, but I don't think it goes far enough to explore the "why" of it. I think they should explore the dance between the emotional and intellectual parts of our minds, and explore what emotional needs are being met by political alignment, which usurps people's ability to make decisions based on facts and reason.


My conclusion is that people's fear of not belonging to a tribe (and fear of invading tribes) drives them more than the fear poisoned air and water, the fear of economic misfortune, the fear of losing democracy and large-scale organized civilization. Returning to the stone age with small tribes would be physically uncomfortable for most people accustomed to soft chairs and smart phones, but it would be psychologically more comfortable for them. People crave simplicity, certainty, identity, fellowship. All of the other things that seem like they should be more important for our society, these all take a back seat when they are juxtaposed with the basic individual human cravings of simplicity, certainty, identity, fellowship.
clifff

Mountain climber
golden, rollin hills of California
Apr 21, 2017 - 02:07am PT
Racing To The Precipice: Prof Noam Chomsky (March 2017)

capseeboy

Social climber
portland, oregon
Apr 21, 2017 - 10:18am PT
People don't see their own personal consumer behavior as part of the problem. "It's those people doing it!", not me.

Stooopid Americans.
Craig Fry

Trad climber
So Cal.
Apr 21, 2017 - 11:13am PT
Credit: Craig Fry
tuolumne_tradster

Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
Apr 21, 2017 - 01:37pm PT
"The Death of Expertise"

NutAgain!

Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
Apr 21, 2017 - 01:56pm PT
Craig, to be fair, that graph shows a clearly increasing trend but nothing in that graph pins the causation on humans. It could be part of some century-long oscillation based on phenomena we don't understand yet. I think it is more damning to look over very long time cycles (tens or hundreds of thousands of years) and then look at the differences that have happened since the industrial revolution. That is so striking that it quickly throws into doubt that any process independent of humans could have caused it.
Craig Fry

Trad climber
So Cal.
Apr 21, 2017 - 02:16pm PT
The graph speaks for itself

It shows the concentration of CO2 from 1958 to 2017
That's all

We all know where the CO2 came from, and we all know that the CO2 concentration has varied over time.
It may have changed before on a similar time scale, but when it did it was because of some cataclysmic volcanic activity,
it has never changed this quickly since human life has inhabited earth

every time it did reach >400 ppm, it caused the climate to be hotter than it was at 310 ppm
NutAgain!

Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
Apr 21, 2017 - 03:01pm PT
The only thing that graph speaks to me is that carbon content has a seasonal cycle within each year and a clearly increasing trend over the last few decades.

If your intent is to make clear that human activity is a cause of climate change, and that we need to change our behavior to reverse the alarming trend.... Well in that case, your choice of timescale in the graph can backfire because this slice of data leaves huge room for doubt that natural cycles bigger than humans are the cause. This creates the space for disingenuous people to spin the argument in a misleading direction, and it empowers people who are still somehow sitting on the fence to keep ignoring the problem. A much longer timescale of the same graph would be much more compelling to an analytical mind.

And if you are trying to convince a mind not receptive to analytical arguments, why bother showing the graph?

Edit: I suppose you might be side-stepping the issue of human causality and just focusing on the fact that the higher values are correlated with lots of things humans will not find desirable, which presumably would motivate human interventions? But if the belief in human causation is not affirmed, then people will feel discouraged that human activity can be impactful to reverse the trend ostensibly caused by global non-human processes.

monolith

climber
state of being
Apr 21, 2017 - 03:13pm PT
NutsAgain, you really need to dig deeper. Carbon isotope ratios show man is responsible. Get in there and learn for yourself instead of whining about a post that didn't have everything you wanted to see.
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Apr 21, 2017 - 04:44pm PT
Craig, to be fair, that graph shows a clearly increasing trend but nothing in that graph pins the causation on humans

Carbon isotope ratios show man is responsible.
True dat.

Also one could convert barrels per day to ppm CO₂

8,887 grams of CO₂ /gallon of gasoline =8.887 × 10-3 metric tons CO₂/gallon of gasoline
https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and-references

For 2016, the IEA Oil Market Report forecasts worldwide average demand of nearly 96 million barrels of oil and liquid fuels per day – that works out to more than 35 billion barrels a year.
https://www.iea.org/about/faqs/oil/

35 billion barrels/year * 42 US gallons/barrel * 8.887 × 10-3 metric tons CO₂/gallon = 13.2 *10**9 metric tons/year

but 1ppm CO₂ in the atmosphere = 2.12 gigatons
https://onlineconversion.vbulletin.net/forum/main-forums/convert-and-calculate/11072-convert-gtco2-to-ppm-rise-in-atmosphere

so 13.2*10**9 metric tons/year = 6.2ppm increase per year

our calculation ignores CO₂ dissolved in the ocean, which will lower the final observed value IN THE ATMOSPHERE.

The annual growth of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) during 2015, above three parts per million (ppm) per year, was the largest ever recorded at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii, said climate researchers Wednesday.
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/2016/03/10/record-annual-increase-of-carbon-dioxide-observed-for-2015/

As the ocean becomes more saturated with CO₂, we will see more of the full increase of 6ppm per year in the atmosphere.


You can BS all you want, but that won't change the physics.
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Apr 21, 2017 - 05:49pm PT
1.015 billion cars
The US publisher Ward's, estimate that as of 2010 there were 1.015 billion motor vehicles in use in the world. This figure represents the number of cars; light, medium and heavy duty trucks; and buses, but does not include off-road vehicles or heavy construction equipment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle

1.2 Billion Vehicles On World's Roads Now, 2 Billion By 2035
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1093560_1-2-billion-vehicles-on-worlds-roads-now-2-billion-by-2035-report

As we have a billion CO2 producing machines, I guess we'll need a billion CO2 removal machines. And they will have to run without fossil fuels. We better get started.

Oh wait, we're not working hard on the technology because we're still denying there's a problem.

We are fools.
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Apr 27, 2017 - 01:12pm PT
http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/docs/rising-seas-in-california-an-update-on-sea-level-rise-science.pdf
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Apr 29, 2017 - 06:37am PT
https://theintercept.com/2017/04/28/how-a-professional-climate-change-denier-discovered-the-lies-and-decided-to-fight-for-science/
jgill

Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
Apr 29, 2017 - 09:12pm PT
Too much uncertainty about spotty world efforts to curb CC at a time when the American middle class is shrinking. Better perhaps to plan on ways to adapt.
monolith

climber
state of being
Apr 29, 2017 - 09:33pm PT
Fighting CC has little to do with shrinking the middle class, since the fight reduces annual growth by only .06 percent of gdp.

So we’re talking annual growth of, say, 2.24 percent rather than 2.30 percent to save billions and billions of people from needless suffering for decades if not centuries.

https://thinkprogress.org/the-ny-times-promised-to-fact-check-their-new-climate-denier-columnist-they-lied-72ad9bdf6019
Binks

climber
Uranus
Apr 29, 2017 - 10:13pm PT
Just let the American Middle class die. What are they good for anyway ;)
jgill

Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
Apr 29, 2017 - 10:19pm PT
Fighting CC has little to do with shrinking the middle class, since the fight reduces annual growth by only .06 percent of gdp

A statistic that doesn't make a dent in the concerns of those who are being downsized. When you are anticipating losing your home to foreclosure you are not going to be very concerned about climate change. It's the optics. And don't forget, economics is the Dismal Science.
monolith

climber
state of being
Apr 30, 2017 - 07:10am PT
Jobs in renewable energy are an opportunity for the middle class. Already there are more jobs in renewable energy then in the coal industry. Of course, Trump wants to reverse that and let China and Germany lead the way.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/03/31/trump-wrong-about-climate-change-and-jobs-too
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Apr 30, 2017 - 01:05pm PT
I wonder if the cost to relocate New York City will exceed the cost to switch off fossil fuels. I suppose the state of Florida has some value as well.

But neither has good climbing - piss on them.




But, for better or worse, thinking hard about – and preparing for – the long-term future is not the American way.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/can-new-york-be-saved-in-the-era-of-global-warming-20160705

“One way or another, we get educated, and it’s much cheaper to listen once in a while to engineers and scientists.”
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/09/new-york-future-flooding-climate-change.html

“The best place really is Alaska,”
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/08/is-anywhere-on-earth-safe-from-climate-change/400304/
Messages 1521 - 1540 of total 2314 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews