Some of these effects are two or three or more steps removed from the warming caused by co2, and there is a "cascade of uncertainty" in predicting them.
I agree with the GP that being climate (and atmosphere) omnipresent, it is easy and tempting to draw long causal chains from it to the most disparate effects. And that, given the theme is central to our time, and given the number of scientists of all disciplines working to study these effects, in the most rigorous fields a publication bias on the effects found must exist. In the less rigorous, most probably anything goes.
huh?!?
temperature raise is a lot more pronounced at poles, not at equator
Closer to the equator you'll find Kiribati, where salination of farmlands and aquifers has already happened. Luckily the rest of the world is still online and willing to keep their country on life support, but the prospects for kiribati to independently support itself in the long term are non-existent.
Carbon dioxide also raises ocean acidity which kills off corals and crashes fisheries, leaving coastal communities without reliable protein sources.
I hope you can see how an indifference to climate change on the part of predominately white countries to can be construed as racist. When someone says that, he or she is talking about all the non-white people who are currently suffering due to changes in their climates.
This is hilariously misled. Food must be imported into Hawaii because it's an island with very little arable land, not because it's "in the tropics." Equatorial nations have by far the greatest access to food when compared to any other place on the earth. That's why biodiversity is the greatest near the equator -- there are more resources.
> I hope you can see how an indifference to climate change on the part of predominately white countries to can be construed as racist. When someone says that, he or she is talking about all the non-white people who are currently suffering due to changes in their climates.
Yes, but they are not disproportionately affected due to some conspiracy, but rather just because money protects you from consequences. If you're poor, you can't move, and you can't buy water. That affects you less if you have a stable income and marketable skills (which are easier to access in the west).
I live out here in the pacific, I travel all over Oahu every day. People lived here for over a thousand years without foreign goods. The food scarcity is manufactured to suck money back to the mainland U.S.
Hah--oh wait, you're actually serious?
When you use words like "hilarious" and "hah" I feel annoyed, because I need a little more respect and acknowledgement for the work I am doing in horticulture, food security out here in the pacific. I have a hard time listening to what you are trying to say when you are typing laughter at me. Do you want to try and share your thoughts without implying that you think my world is a joke?
Nuclear is not a panacea, but we should build more because this is a global emergency. There is a racist component to the reaction to climate change because of who is being most immediately impacted (equatorial countries and the poor), but intent doesn't matter, because only action matters.
The science is bland and harsh, and doesn't care about how people consume it. You can put CO2 in an aquarium, seal it, and easily measure the greenhouse effect from CO2 yourself. You can even work out the basics of the relationship of CO2 concentration to degree of warming. This is happening right now - it's not predictions, it is our reality. It will happen to you regardless of how you feel about the discussion on either side of the issue.