Stephen Hawking: Earth could turn into a hothouse planet like Venus

a reply to: proteus33

There have been many conspiracies expressed about his voice box, lol.

Hey, who knows.

a reply to: olaru12well i seem to remember they said by 2020 east coast and florida would be underwater you got three years or less to go . i dob't see it happening but who knows?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Greven

Why are we talking about the cost of coastal cities flooding when the Paris accord is 0.2 degrees, it won't flood anything. And that's 0.2 degrees in the year 2100, not tomorrow.

You misunderstand.

The accord is thought (if 100% of goals were achieved) to reduce warming by 0.2°C, not only be 0.2°C. The actual warming projected is far larger than that.

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: olaru12well i seem to remember they said by 2020 east coast and florida would be underwater you got three years or less to go . i dob't see it happening but who knows?

Whoever said that? They grossly underestimate how long it takes for ice to melt.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: olaru12well i seem to remember they said by 2020 east coast and florida would be underwater you got three years or less to go . i dob't see it happening but who knows?

Whoever said that? They grossly underestimate how long it takes for ice to melt.

Sea level is definitely rising in Florida, you see it in saltwater intrusion, coastal flooding is becoming more frequent at high tides, especially in Miami. If you go down to the keys in some places you can see where places are starting to see the effects.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Just some quick additional information to my earlier comment.
A study by the University of Victoria came out with a projection that the earth may have less time before it become's like Venus but it also suggests that Human's can NOT turn the planet into a venus like world before that without a vast increase in our CO2 and other greenhouse gas output, still 500.000.000 years is not a long time on either the geological or the biological scale.
io9.gizmodo.com...
www.livescience.com...
As you may note these articles are not new so are based on current but not fresh data, there projection's or rather the projections of the research the articles are based on however is still valid.

It is interesting to note that the Habitable or Goldilocks zone around our sun has been shown to be much narrower than previously thought and that our planet is very close to it's edge meaning that as the sun get's warmer over the next half a billion years and even though the sun itself will not die out until about 5 billion years time being roughly only a middle aged star that the earth will find itself in the region that is too warm for it to retain liquid water on it's surface far sooner than the older estimates.

Of course humanity COULD created huge floating sun screen like satellites that would orbit around the equator and deflect much of the excess heat of the sun BUT it is hard enough to get two nation's to cooperate on anything and to get the world to cooperate on such a project would be nearly impossible until it was literally too late because to construct such a massive orbiting superstructure would require the resources and the cooperation of the entire planet and of course Private enterprise could NOT do such a financially unprofitable job so it would require government level space program's.

But as material science evolves we may yet see this become more possible and of course all that reflected solar energy could be harvested and turned into power as well if those orbiting sun screen's were also solar farms AND if we ever do get to that level of cultural and technological societal evolution then we will also likely have colony's in the asteroid belt and far beyond it, which I have to say given human nature and blind foolish power mongers running our world is actually less likely that it is for us to self destruct in resource wars gone nuclear long before we would need to do this.

a reply to: Greven
thats what they were saying in the 70s,80,and al gore in the 90s. i have been around for a minute and have an extraordinary memory for useless facts.

a reply to: openminded2011funny i have fam in key west and they haven't mentioned this?

originally posted by: openminded2011

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: olaru12well i seem to remember they said by 2020 east coast and florida would be underwater you got three years or less to go . i dob't see it happening but who knows?

Whoever said that? They grossly underestimate how long it takes for ice to melt.

Sea level is definitely rising in Florida, you see it in saltwater intrusion, coastal flooding is becoming more frequent at high tides, especially in Miami. If you go down to the keys in some places you can see where places are starting to see the effects.

Is this some kind of new phenomenom? Nope, it's been happening at the same rate for 150 years.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Greven

Why are we talking about the cost of coastal cities flooding when the Paris accord is 0.2 degrees, it won't flood anything. And that's 0.2 degrees in the year 2100, not tomorrow.

You misunderstand.

The accord is thought (if 100% of goals were achieved) to reduce warming by 0.2°C, not only be 0.2°C. The actual warming projected is far larger than that.

And like I said that 0.2C won't make a difference. So maybe all the money would be better spent another way, in a way that would make a difference.

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: openminded2011funny i have fam in key west and they haven't mentioned this?

I didn't say it was evident everywhere. Please re-read my post. Because of lots of factors, such as bottom topography and tidal interaction, its more evident some places than others.

a reply to: wildsaffy


Regardless of how long ago it started its happening. We have been burning coal since the mid 1700's.

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: olaru12

To be honest, I don't know what to believe.

I understand your feeling but don't share your dilemma. I am a scientist (physicist) and have measured the absorption and emission spectra of carbon dioxide. It simply can not do anything but cause warming.People are welcome to their opinions about the economics of mediating the problem, but they are not welcome to their own set of facts.

Steven Hawking has been dead for a long, long time.. It is impossible to live as long as he has with ALS.

a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Pop-scientists are clowns. Hawking has been on the downslope of a long time, hes already published some great books and his work is now done. Now he's just a typical robo-mouthpiece. He's probably insufferable as a person, no wonder his wife beat him.

So tired of people saying that man-made climate change proponents are in it for the money. If they are, they're doing it wrong. If people would just do a little research they would find that Federal funding for climate research hasn't increased significantly since 1995. And the alternative/renewable energy sector isn't employing climate scientists. Those companies employ engineers, materials scientists and physicists but not climatologists.

Some say that our tax dollars are being wasted on climate change prevention and research. What they don't take into account is the amount of tax money spent on cleaning up climate change disruption. Forest fires, flooding, crop loss and disaster preparedness and response all cost the US tax payer much more than the cost of actually solving the problem of man-made climate change.

In the long run, addressing climate change now will save money. Ignoring it and continuing with the "business as usual" plan will cost much more than money, it will cost lives. Our descendants will ultimately pay the price.

We need to increase investment in renewable energy and scale back fossil fuel energy production. It just makes sense.

I love this thread. The entire collective output of ATS hasn't achieved a millionth of what Hawking has managed, and yet here we are, being lectured by Vince Hodge of Kalamazoo on how Hawking doesn't understand science or is just some kind of pointless TV celebrity.

originally posted by: LiberLegit
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Pop-scientists are clowns. Hawking has been on the downslope of a long time, hes already published some great books and his work is now done. Now he's just a typical robo-mouthpiece. He's probably insufferable as a person, no wonder his wife beat him.

How many degrees do you hold? Hawking has 12. Seems to me that you're the one who's insufferable and possibly a clown as well.

originally posted by: openminded2011

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: olaru12well i seem to remember they said by 2020 east coast and florida would be underwater you got three years or less to go . i dob't see it happening but who knows?

Whoever said that? They grossly underestimate how long it takes for ice to melt.

Sea level is definitely rising in Florida, you see it in saltwater intrusion, coastal flooding is becoming more frequent at high tides, especially in Miami. If you go down to the keys in some places you can see where places are starting to see the effects.

Could be and probably is in some places but the question is what's the cause of the rise?

a reply to: Blarneystoner

book sense and common sense rarely go together.