The lessons of the pandemic and global warming

[_ajax18]

As it was under the Paris Accord we're not going to see any noticeable decrease in CO2 emissions for at least 50 years. At this point it would depend on whether developing nations decide to honor their commitment to reducing emissions as well. Then how many years until this reduction in CO2 emissions starts reversing global warming? Is it impossible that the earth continues to get warmer even if human beings are eradicated and go extinct?

[_Gunnar]

Obviously, the Paris Accord is not nearly good enough. It is only a modest beginning. The earlier and more aggressively humankind gets together to address this problem, the less it will ultimately cost us in both money and human lives. There is, by now, no escaping that reality; like it or not.

[_Brackite]

I have never relinquished my 2nd amendment rights nor would I hesitate to defend them if necessary.

Nothing is going to happen to the 2nd amendment for many years to come. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals about a month ago ended up striking down California's large magazine ban law. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is not the left-leaning Court that it used to be.

I want a President who will acknowledge the reality of climate change and have a plan to deal with it. I want a President who believes he doesn't have the right to go around Congress to use the power of the purse to harm the environment. Trump has been an anti-environment president. I will be voting for Biden/Harris.

[_Themis]

Then you shall be severely disappointed. I have a healthy and strong children who I work every day to support. I have never relinquished my 2nd amendment rights nor would I hesitate to defend them if necessary.

I glad your children are healthy and strong. Dying breed refers to bad beliefs and actions. Many of who have those beliefs are getting old and dying, and many are younger but over time realize some of these beliefs are wrong. Your children will hopefully be apart of that group. Children do have a habit of ditching some or much of their parents beliefs as they grow older.

[_Themis]

As it was under the Paris Accord we're not going to see any noticeable decrease in CO2 emissions for at least 50 years. At this point it would depend on whether developing nations decide to honor their commitment to reducing emissions as well. Then how many years until this reduction in CO2 emissions starts reversing global warming?

While I know you haven't read the accord and get your incorrect information from Breitbart kind of sources, you are only saying we need to do more to address climate change you supposedly don't believe in. :confused:

Is it impossible that the earth continues to get warmer even if human beings are eradicated and go extinct?

In what way is it impossible to get warmer?

[Guest]

Obviously, the Paris Accord is not nearly good enough. It is only a modest beginning. The earlier and more aggressively humankind gets together to address this problem, the less it will ultimately cost us in both money and human lives. There is, by now, no escaping that reality; like it or not.

Ok, but given your criticism for the US leaving the accord can you provide some quantifiable information that gives us a before/during/after of US environmental performance?

[_Res Ipsa]

If humans were to go extinct, the evidence would lead us to conclude that temperature may continue to rise for a relatively short period, but the amount of greenhouse gases would would begin to fall, leading to cooling. As Gunnar correctly pointed out, absent human influence, the atmosphere would be cooling.

The Paris agreements did not cut enough carbon emissions, and everyone knew it at the time. But you can't cut enough if you never get started cutting at all. If everyone is finding ways to cut, the odds that folks will find new and better ways to cut increase. Its a global problem that cannot be solved by every country sitting around and waiting for someone else to go first.

[_subgenius]

If humans were to go extinct, the evidence would lead us to conclude that temperature may continue to rise for a relatively short period, but the amount of greenhouse gases would would begin to fall, leading to cooling. As Gunnar correctly pointed out, absent human influence, the atmosphere would be cooling.

The Paris agreements did not cut enough carbon emissions, and everyone knew it at the time. But you can't cut enough if you never get started cutting at all. If everyone is finding ways to cut, the odds that folks will find new and better ways to cut increase. Its a global problem that cannot be solved by every country sitting around and waiting for someone else to go first.

Again, how did the US perform with regard to making these "cuts"? and how have we performed since? and how did thd Paris agreements perform globally?

[_Brackite]

Scientific American has now come out to endorse Biden for president.

Scientific American has never endorsed a presidential candidate in its 175-year history. This year we are compelled to do so. We do not do this lightly.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... joe-biden/

[Guest]

Hooray for Scientific American! That was a powerful and timely endorsement and admonition. Hopefully the voters who take it to heart will sufficiently outnumber the scientifically illiterate fools who refuse to acquaint themselves with it, and heed that advice. It is literally a matter of life and death for many millions of earth's residents, both human and non-human.