The Earth became darker from 2001 to 2024, meaning it reflects less sunlight, a research team reports in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
That’s actually not clear at all. How did you draw this conclusion from what’s written here? It cites decreased pollution across the northern hemisphere as one of the drivers of this, for example, and how is that horrifying?
Also due to reduced water vapor and ice cover lol. It’s a conclusion that can be drawn without much reliance on the article, which focuses a lot on specific climate model improvements and not the obvious concern: given our desire for the earth to reflect more of the sun’s rays and cool off, reflecting fewer and warming up is not good
Yeah, between extremophiles that will probably outlast the atmosphere and the mesozoic having been pretty balmy, life finds a way. That said, complex life is about to have a very bad time, especially specialists that can’t handle wide temperature ranges. It’s an extinction event, and our species is gonna have to really try to survive it.
Oh, right. I barely clock exaggerations of that sort anymore. People reach straight for the top shelf with their words. Especially in this case I think it works in environmentalists’ favor. Maybe I’m wrong and we should be more concerned about pushback when people overstate the case, but even within the left I’ve encountered few people who seem to profess that much interest in biodiversity or wild plant/animal/fungal rights to existence, so misunderstanding the issue in exaggerated terms at least evokes concern rather than apathy. It’s not like the conservative’s real issue with climate change is that akshually “life” in the broadest sense will find a way to adapt.
Life is incredibly resilient, a ton of life is going to survive and adapt just fine. You think marginally increased global temperatures are worse than the Chicxulub impact? It’s crazy that in the face of environmental catastrophe people can still find ways to irrationally catastrophize
Less albedo -> more heat -> ice caps melting -> less albedo and more greenhouse gases -> much more heat, and so on.
It’s a vicious cycle, and there doesn’t seem to be any viable solution. We could put shades between us and the sun, but that’d probably reduce light too much and kill most plants, leading to even more carbon being released.
We’re fucked, and probably way beyond any chance of unfucking ourselves. We let those pass by years ago.
That’s actually not clear at all. How did you draw this conclusion from what’s written here? It cites decreased pollution across the northern hemisphere as one of the drivers of this, for example, and how is that horrifying?
Also due to reduced water vapor and ice cover lol. It’s a conclusion that can be drawn without much reliance on the article, which focuses a lot on specific climate model improvements and not the obvious concern: given our desire for the earth to reflect more of the sun’s rays and cool off, reflecting fewer and warming up is not good
“The extinction of all life in Earth” is not a reasonable conclusion to draw from this
Yeah, between extremophiles that will probably outlast the atmosphere and the mesozoic having been pretty balmy, life finds a way. That said, complex life is about to have a very bad time, especially specialists that can’t handle wide temperature ranges. It’s an extinction event, and our species is gonna have to really try to survive it.
Oh, right. I barely clock exaggerations of that sort anymore. People reach straight for the top shelf with their words. Especially in this case I think it works in environmentalists’ favor. Maybe I’m wrong and we should be more concerned about pushback when people overstate the case, but even within the left I’ve encountered few people who seem to profess that much interest in biodiversity or wild plant/animal/fungal rights to existence, so misunderstanding the issue in exaggerated terms at least evokes concern rather than apathy. It’s not like the conservative’s real issue with climate change is that akshually “life” in the broadest sense will find a way to adapt.
Because absorbed light is excess energy.
It’s pretty big leap from the Earth absorbing slightly more energy from the sun to “the extinction of all life on Earth.”
My friend, it really is not.
Life is incredibly resilient, a ton of life is going to survive and adapt just fine. You think marginally increased global temperatures are worse than the Chicxulub impact? It’s crazy that in the face of environmental catastrophe people can still find ways to irrationally catastrophize
Daisyworld.
Less albedo -> more heat -> ice caps melting -> less albedo and more greenhouse gases -> much more heat, and so on.
It’s a vicious cycle, and there doesn’t seem to be any viable solution. We could put shades between us and the sun, but that’d probably reduce light too much and kill most plants, leading to even more carbon being released.
We’re fucked, and probably way beyond any chance of unfucking ourselves. We let those pass by years ago.