100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Heated discussions on a hot topic.
User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10076
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by landrew » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:40 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Fri Dec 28, 2018 12:25 am
That event would not knock out written books and reports, or the knowledge and skill inside peoples heads. Sure, it would be a set back, but electronics can be and would be rebuilt.

Networks can be replaced by manual systems quickly. Not perfectly, but it would not be an existential threat. Just a major pain.

It is not terribly difficult to "harden" computers and other electronics against flares or electromagnetic pulse threats. Simply putting them in a Faraday box, and making sure they are unplugged from mains power normally does the trick. With a little warning, this can even be done at home to protect your own devices
It would be impossible to harden our electronics from an EM pulse of sufficient magnitude.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3822
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Lausten » Fri Dec 28, 2018 9:07 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 10:43 pm
landrew wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 10:39 pm
Lance Kennedy wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 9:03 pm
Landrew
As to living simpler if the internet or something else fails. There is no reason to assume a total collapse. Humanity without the internet still has its libraries, laboratories, engineering works etc. No one is going to go back to what you foolishly call a simpler way of life.
No reason to assume a total collapse but it could certainly happen. No need to refute the possibility. A little research will reveal how vulnerable we are with the current infrastructure. If the Carrington event of 1859 were to occur today, it could reduce our infrastructure to a shambles. The grid and most electronics could get knocked out. I suggest you read up a bit before you embark on your arguments against the scenario:
https://www.powermag.com/expect-death-i ... ower-grid/
Good suggestion. Virtually all distribution of goods, including food, is controlled through vulnerable networks. There would not be much time to get the systems up and running again before massive disaster ensued.
I can't see how knocking out grids is anything but disastrous. Unless you want to say that total annihilation is the only disaster. There are a lot of people that don't know where food comes from or know how to do anything but get take out. Those people wouldn't just quietly die off, they would feel justified in stealing and who knows what to get to food. It's true that billions of people are subsistence farmers, but then you're talking about human survival as a species, not the survival of civilization. It would be a weird mix of agrarian societies with pockets of technology, but it wouldn't be what we have now.

On the one hand, it might make it harder for advance parts of the world to disrupt the less advanced like they do now, on the other hand, we couldn't protect them either.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 11786
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by OlegTheBatty » Fri Dec 28, 2018 9:13 pm

Cities survive a few days of outages etc from hurricanes, earthquakes. There would be a few days before disaster became catastrophe.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Major Malfunction » Fri Dec 28, 2018 11:48 pm

Something like 94% of us have the genes for digesting people... So....

Nom nom.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12542
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:09 am

You do not need to wait that long, MM. Become a Mars colonist.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17810
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:15 am

OlegTheBatty wrote:
Fri Dec 28, 2018 9:13 pm
Cities survive a few days of outages etc from hurricanes, earthquakes. There would be a few days before disaster became catastrophe.
Lance makes no distinction between a few extended families living in caves with human civilization. ........I have a triple and quadruple face plant jpg when the time is right..........although...........Lance./why bother???
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Major Malfunction » Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:29 am

No-one likes my idea of being fungus-munching fusion ice ants?

I has a sad. :(
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17810
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:31 am

I'm fine with fungus-munching (never knew it was called that), and ok with ants...........but I hate being cold.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Major Malfunction » Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:50 am

You'll have a fusion heater in every room. It's all good.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12542
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:48 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:15 am
Lance makes no distinction between a few extended families living in caves with human civilization.
Wrong again.
I just have a more realistic idea of the risk involved. For example, there are satellites monitoring the sun 24/365, and with their data, there is a 24 hour notice of coming solar flares.
This is sufficient for the big boys to take precautions, like temporarily shutting down parts of the power grid.

A massive solar flare would still be very damaging but it takes a pathological pessimist to call it a civilization destroying catastrophe.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10076
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by landrew » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:59 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:48 am
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:15 am
Lance makes no distinction between a few extended families living in caves with human civilization.
Wrong again.
I just have a more realistic idea of the risk involved. For example, there are satellites monitoring the sun 24/365, and with their data, there is a 24 hour notice of coming solar flares.
This is sufficient for the big boys to take precautions, like temporarily shutting down parts of the power grid.

A massive solar flare would still be very damaging but it takes a pathological pessimist to call it a civilization destroying catastrophe.
You have no idea about that which you are talking about. Do some research before you call someone pathological.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17810
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Dec 29, 2018 3:12 am

Lance: pay attention. The issue is WHAT HAPPENS if the grid goes down for 1-2-3 weeks. CIVILIZATION is not as robust as you think. Too many "natural disasters" around the world to LOOK AT and appreciate what happens when the FABRIC of society is torn. Nothing to do with Solar Flares, a single Nuke 50 miles up, or terrorism, or flooding or whatever. People living hand to mouth don't have the luxury of waiting three weeks for emergency food trucks to arrive.........when they aren't being sent in the first place.

Recall New Orleans that was getting lots of attention and even with nearly went full anarchy? ......... It doesn't take much.

Which is lacking most? Knowledge or Imagination??
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12542
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sat Dec 29, 2018 4:14 am

Landrew
Bobbo accuses me of having no sense of humor, but you cannot see any in a phrase like pathological pessimist ? It is sad.


Bobbo

Nuclear war could well end civilization. A solar flare is extremely unlikely to. Even if the grid did go down for 3 weeks, it would not cause irreparable damage. Serious damage, yes, but not irreparable.

There is a big difference between something nasty, and something that destroys an entire civilization.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17810
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Dec 29, 2018 4:48 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Sat Dec 29, 2018 4:14 am
Landrew
Bobbo accuses me of having no sense of humor, but you cannot see any in a phrase like pathological pessimist ? It is sad.


Bobbo

Nuclear war could well end civilization. A solar flare is extremely unlikely to. Even if the grid did go down for 3 weeks, it would not cause irreparable damage. Serious damage, yes, but not irreparable.

There is a big difference between something nasty, and something that destroys an entire civilization.
Knowledge and Imagination. I don't have the knowledge of how much of what has to happen before a "real" cascade takes place.....a crash to the bottom. I can imagine a "crash to the bottom" of subsistence farmers and living off the land actually not taking all that much. "Maybe" some isolated small enclaves would have power and water.........but food comes from outside ...........and who ever has anything will be an immediate target of those who survive.

I'm not misled by notions that this or that impact could occur AND THEN IF there were no further cascading events, yes society could recover==>but what would make a cascade large enough to start, to end? """""Everyone Remain Calm"""""""===>but no one does. We are all just too much connected. Entire HUGE metropolitan areas have one weeks food on hand. After that, you need the "whole system" to be up and working for any more food to arrive. Thats only one issue out of dozens.

I have about one year of staples on hand, mostly rice and canned goods....water purification. My plan is to hide in my house, eat what I have, make my own alcohol, read books and remember the good old days until.................whatever happens next, I assume a drunken exsanguination. I'll miss my tv and computer. Ham radios just don't cut it.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12542
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:12 am

Fortunately, Bobbo other people do not follow your selfish plan.
In the event of a solar flare disaster, putting the grid out of action for a time, there would be millions of more dynamic people going out there to work their little butts off, fixing the problems.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Major Malfunction » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:31 am

And it depends which way the planet is facing at the time.

We have trip-switches and UPSes these days. Many failsafes. It's not like 1859.

But having said that, I could predict global network outages by watching the SOHO feed.

Ah, here it comes... It gets a little haywire.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4741
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by ElectricMonk » Sat Dec 29, 2018 8:15 am

In biology, there is something called A-stress: it's a non-fatal worsening of conditions that allow an organism to prepare for much worse to come. First frost, a small infection, slowly drying soil are examples.
Civilization could survive a power outage of months if we had plans and reserves ready to go; if another country exploded an EMP over a major city, that might be exactly what we need to properly prepare for a more large-scale infrastructure failure.
We have the technology to produce power and food locally - we just won't allow it to become competitive.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10076
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by landrew » Sat Dec 29, 2018 6:40 pm

It's a very different world now than it was in 1940. Most people had a garden in their back yard, and there was local commerce between numerous farms and the cities. Most people had wood or coal stoves and they could subsist for long periods without outside services, on preserves and food stored in the cellar and chickens in the back.

It's a very very different world today. Experts predict that hundreds of millions would die within months. This is not something to pass off lightly.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17810
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Dec 29, 2018 6:55 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:12 am
Fortunately, Bobbo other people do not follow your selfish plan.
In the event of a solar flare disaster, putting the grid out of action for a time, there would be millions of more dynamic people going out there to work their little butts off, fixing the problems.
Good example of nice sounding words, except calling me selfish because my "plan" is to leave everyone else alone, but meaning absolutely nothing.

Please give an example of what any office worker in an average city could "do" for the general good when there is no power, all the stores have been looted, all his food has rotted or been eaten, his bathtub has 2 gallons of water left, and he's got 5 gallons of gas in his car. Go=========>
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4741
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by ElectricMonk » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:30 pm

landrew wrote:
Sat Dec 29, 2018 6:40 pm
It's a very different world now than it was in 1940. Most people had a garden in their back yard, and there was local commerce between numerous farms and the cities. Most people had wood or coal stoves and they could subsist for long periods without outside services, on preserves and food stored in the cellar and chickens in the back.

It's a very very different world today. Experts predict that hundreds of millions would die within months. This is not something to pass off lightly.
Agreed.
But would the remainders be able to recover?
Probably.
If there is one thing we have more of than in 1940, it's people.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12542
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:39 pm

Bobbo

On selfishness.
There are natural disasters every year. Those bring out the best and the worst in people. There are always plenty who get off their butts and work really hard to help others. There are the criminals who loot. And there are the people who sit at home avoiding responsibility. You have already told us that you are one of the latter.

The office worker is an administrator/organizer. Such people are always needed. Logistics, for example, need organising. Of course, in time of disaster, the work force structure will change, and people with skills in one area will find themselves developing skills in other areas.

Landrew
On the hundreds of millions dead. That would take a very serious catastrophe. Possible, but not likely simply from power outages for 3 weeks.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17810
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:48 pm

1. There are always plenty who get off their butts and work really hard to help others/// I help by staying out of the way. A dead helper in a row of sand bags doesn't help at all.

2. We aren't talking about those natural disasters that happen every year. As always.......your avoid the issue.

3. Organize the Logistics? How do you organize the delivery of food WHEN THERE IS NO FOOD for friggen sakes. As always..... you can't keep track of the issue.

4. A power outage for 3 weeks would TOTALLY DO IT........depending on the scope/size of the outage. The entire USA? yep...USA would be "gone." I agree civilization would continue in fairly good shape with the rest of the world not effected if that is the hypothetical. When speaking of "Mother Earth" the North American Continent is still a "local" area. Large and Significant....but not the whole world.

Ha, ha.............the cascade I would see is World War Three between the remaining powers for who would get to recolonize......You know, since I would be too lazy to organize the militia to counter their imperious ways.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12542
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sat Dec 29, 2018 8:27 pm

No one "helps" by staying out of the way. There are always workers and drones.

It would be similar to a natural disaster, especially in terms of how people reacted.

There is always food. Dry food and canned food will remain good in warehouses. Farmers will not stop farming. They would probably need more workers, though. The problem is not lack of food but stuffed up food distribution and that needs organising.

A three week power outage is only a catastrophe to a pathological pessimist. People are stronger than you think. World War II in Britain was far, far worse than a modern 3 week power outage.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17810
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Dec 29, 2018 8:51 pm

Lance: try to engage. Shirley your own intellect can parse out many errors/distinctions between comparing Britain in WW2 from a power outage of size today? I pity the fool who can't.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12542
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:13 pm

I can clearly see the distinction. WWII in Britain was far worse.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17810
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:49 am

Lance: try to engage. As you have zero imagination.....watch any of 50 end of times movies. Its all much worse than Britain in WW2. not to mention, you got some mania going on to think that you "KNOW" ANY comparison of what has already happened to what has yet NOT HAPPENED. Just silly.....but while blathering this, a thought did occur: Say Lance while we all know its not possible for the future to be worse than the past, can we imagine a scenario where it would be? You know........with your absolute fact based knowledge otherwise.......lets really get wild? How about: Aliens arrive and put us all in cages with electrically charged anal probes powering THEIR society that is based on breathing Chanel No 5. Would that be worse than Britain in WW2????

Use your own imagination..........................
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12542
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sun Dec 30, 2018 1:12 am

No need to be silly, Bobbo.
Future worse than the past ?
Just think of the Cuban Missile Crisis without Arkhipov.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17810
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 100 Million Could Die From Climate Change By 2030

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:07 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Sun Dec 30, 2018 1:12 am
No need to be silly, Bobbo.
Future worse than the past ?
Just think of the Cuban Missile Crisis without Arkhipov.
How does that get you to the future? Makes no sense.........time goes in one direction. Speaking of arkhipov, what is REALLY amazing, is that he was in the Navy. They really aren't known for thinking independently. How did he escape the review process?

Anyway, yes, a great man............aka "individual" somehow thinking his own thoughts. Kinda makes me proud.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?