Thankfully the earth is a self-stabilizing system. Unfortunately it takes a few million years for the natural carbon cycle to reach equilibrium from a swing out point such as this.
Yeah, and it will stabilize to a climate that isn’t very habitable for anything that currently lives here, maybe nothing will be here but simple called organisms, we really don’t know how bad it will be.
Please reread my comment. It will stabilize it will just take an epoch. We will be very dead and extinct before that happens planet will be fine though It’s been through far worse. I for one am excited to see what survives the next great dying.
My field is not climate change Nor am I an climate historian, but if I remember correctly take something like 25 to 35 million years give or take for the current excess carbon to be sequestered naturally
Sorry to be an ass but the stupid “the Earth will be fine” nonsense needs to end. Nobody thinks we’re going to “kill” all the rocks, and earth’s core, and the mantle and mountains lol. We’re talking about our fucking habitat and ecosystem we need to survive.
We and many/most other species cannot survive/adapt fast enough to a fast and catastrophic change to our habitat, which we absolutely objectively are causing. Just because we could possibly survive this because of our ingenuity and intelligence is completely irrelevant. I don’t want our greatest challenge as a species to be figuring out how to survive a dystopian apocalyptic scenario because of extreme greed and selfishness. I’d prefer our species challenges to be things like star trek warp drives and replicators and holodecks and other cool stuff instead, but no we gotta keep making sure billionaires make even more money.
We’re talking about our fucking habitat and ecosystem we need to survive.
Are we though? I see so much “The earth is gonna die!” and “Life is doomed!” everywhere, but as this guy correctly points out, the planet will be fine.
In fact, humans will endure too. It’s just our current civilisation that’s in danger, that’s all.
But people do like to hyperbolise all over the place haha, and people start to believe it. It’s important to make the distinction.
Well dolphins are already being cooked to death in shallow rivers and most of the crabs are gone. Are they fine?
The planet and the concept of organic life will likely be fine but a massive extinction of most life really isn’t “fine” it’s horrific and should be a wake up call at the concept of that amount of loss of life and diversity.
Whatever remains even if humans are part of it would be so vastly different it’s hard to even begin to predict the appearance of it. It’s like saying don’t worry the dinosaurs survived their apocalypse cause that chicken you ate for dinner shared an ancestor.
Best case scenario is a mostly dead planet where we stay in large concrete bunkers all day and eat the phytoplankton blooms on the surface of the ocean that killed most interior life for protein and substance while we hide from the sun… Yay. What a life. And that’s saying no one struggles while drowning and throws bombs around.
I know hope is how people get through all this and you just got to keep it to move forward but like we need to realistically look at the future in order to not just be blinded by a false hope because it’s easier and what is needed to be sold to people so they keep consuming without looking at where it’s leading us.
There isn’t hyperbole in the horrors that happen because we couldn’t get our shit together.
Is it actually self-stabilizing though? Or I guess it depends what you mean by that. AFAIK the earth has been in many different stages lasting for long times, changing from one to the other due to various factors. But it’s unlikely earth will return to a pre-industrial state, even after millions of years, especially if we keep emitting CO2, I believe.
But if you just mean that a new plateau will be reached eventually, then sure, a mass extinction will still happen though.
If the earth enters a state where most of the water is locked up in glaciers (‘snowball earth’), then it is unlikely that it will be able to exit it. Similarly, if it becomes too hot, it is again unlikely that it will return to what it is now. The earth can handle small disturbances in CO2 / temp, but a sufficiently large swing can lock us into one of the extreme situations.
True, however there were extinctions caused by far larger increases in CO2 than we have today and it didn’t happen. So at this moment it does not seem likely that we will achieve it this time.
When Windows dropped support for XP, our NMR lab decided to change the OS of the PC linked to the NMR machine to Linux. Since I don’t work there anymore I don’t know if they were able to do that successfully.
I don’t know how we can’t legislate this into existence eventually if nothing else just based on climate change and the amount of working material we just… throw away. Especially as more and more things integrate software, I imagine that it’s going to feel absolutely insane to people in a few decades (after the water wars and the great migrations) that they had technology like the microscope in the post but the company decided no more software updates so now it’s just garbage.
The US (and all of their allies) are in favor of wealth redistribution to the ultra-wealthy, so predatory practices like this will never be stopped unless there is a sufficiently organized and pissed off mass movement calling for it. Researchers are a tiny group, so it won’t happen.
because “we” don’t own our government, the parasites who profit from the thing you want to change have all the power. labor needs to organize, the alternatives are capitalists killing us all or the-doohickey
The more PhDs I know and the closer I am to grad school, the more it feels like getting a PhD is about being stubborn than it is about being smarter than everyone in the room.
In my experience it’s being stubborn or possessing a robust resiliency to mental health damage. Being smart, or better yet from a family that is wealthy enough to support you just makes everything a fair bit easier.
Also, making friends with your advisors doesn’t hurt either.
It feels so weird to me that the small change in degrees might actually kill a virus. I mean, wouldn’t all viruses by now have become accustomed to “warmer climates”?
Or is it a cat / mouse game, our bodies being able to heat up more and them getting more fire resistant by the year. Was a fever less hot a couple of hundred years ago?
I am not an expert but I believe the temp threshold is for when proteins denature due to the ambient heat overcoming the strength of the bonds (mostly h-bonding i believe) that hold the protein in its specific tertiary structure and when you exceed it the proteins unfold/break
I read that this is a common misconception: the high heat is not enough to denature any proteins (else it would kill you too) and, what’s more surprising, it actually makes viruses/bacteria more active. But it also makes your immune system more active, with an overall win in effectiveness over the microbes, which is what makes it useful.
Yep - our bodies turn the thermostat up, increasing metabolism/cellular functions, which increases body temperature. Fatigue slows us down as our bodies redirect resources towards supporting our immune systems and producing cells to fight off the infection, vs spending that energy on being mentally and physically active.
Once our bodies get a handle on things, the fever “breaks” and we start recovery and return to homeostasis.
Viruses do adapt and mutate though. Look at all the various strains of H1N1 and SARS-COV-2.
Just because they don’t reproduce without a host cell doesn’t mean evolution doesn’t happen. If a trait emerges that is beneficial to future generations, viruses carrying that trait can infect more cells and spread further.
Usually it’s evolution itself that people give too much agency to. Mutations are a crapshoot. They can be beneficial or they can cause birth defects, sterility, prevent reaching sexual maturity, or make finding a mate excessively difficult. Or all of the above.
mander.xyz
Top