[removed]

Anecdotal, but in my own experience with faith: it's not about not wanting to know the reality, but rather about fervently wanting to know and experience a reality that doesn't exists.

Rambling here, but i think you can argue faith is the desire for a certain idea of reality to exist, or the belief that that idea of reality does indeed already exists, or doesn't exists yet; the word "yet" being fundamental to that whole belief system.

The hysteria was literally funded by oil and gas. It still is. Society is steered by money and the politicians that they own.

What in your mind is the way we get people to stop drilling, stop using cars and just outright curb fossil fuel use? What mechanisms in society exist for us to do this, specifically?

Edited grammar 2nd edit. Also globally there have been dozens of new plants built and dozens more planned.china has built 53 and has 24 more planned. Seems like good planning.

I am well aware of the safety of nuclear power instead of fossil fuels. That doesn’t take away from the mass hysteria that led to a stoppage of new plant construction globally.

Nice to blame the bogeyman, but society has responsibility on this one.

Sea level rise is not linear and is not rising uniformly or at all in some places. Many places are experiencing zero or even negative sea level change. This variance can occur even on a kilometer-by-kilometer basis. It is primarily driven by changes in ocean currents, wind, sea surface temperatures, and tectonic and other hydrological dynamics.

On the Oregon Coast for example, some low-lying areas will likely experience 12-18”+ of SLR by 2050. Other areas (primarily in the south), are undergoing rapid tectonic uplift that will outpace sea level rise until at least the mid 2030s, and may experience few impacts because of the high continental freeboard.

These systems are highly dynamic and variable, but it is clear that overall global sea level is rising on average at a MUCH higher rate compared to the historical record and will lead to costly impacts for many communities.

It is very interesting to observe where the feeling of curiosity and love increase and decrease relative to each other depending on what they were caused by.

For example: Just about every mother you know decides to stay ignorant about the bad parts of their kids; so, you can make the assumption that their love for them is greater than their curiosity. That is very interesting.

Evil oil companies fund them to propagate anti nuclear propaganda. Are you aware that the two largest nuclear accidents have less dead people in these instances than 6 months of fossil fuel production every year?

The visual stimulus was 100% perceptible by vision. What other means could have possibly been used to pass that information to the subconscious? 6th sense?

As for the impirtance of "normal parlance", I refer you to Wittgenstein, §43 of Philosophical Investigations: “The meaning of a word is its use in the language"

You must have forgotten about three mile island… virtually all environmental groups came out anti-nuclear. Still mostly that way.

No wonder they're always angry!

I’m recycling and riding my bike as much as I can man, I even stopped my personal train from derailing in Ohio and shut down my lithium mine.. what more do you want from me?!

I'm sure the ~95% of people in the world who are not US-Americans are very excited to hear it's that simple.

Hold my beer!

You know a lot of people are going to die, right? This isn’t some fairy tale where we stop putting animals in a cage and force feeding them for months. There are skyscraper pig farms in China. It’s only going to get worse.

Mandatory laser tag?

[removed]

I work in healthcare and a patient let me know a life-hack for alcohol use that should also work for coffee. He said, if you never let your glass get empty, it only counts as one drink

It's worth noting that this paper is actually good news, as it predicts lower global sea-level rise contributions from ice melt than previous models did; from the Abstract:
> "The combined effect is likely to decelerate global sea-level rise contributions from Antarctica relative to the uncoupled climate-forced ice-sheet model configuration."

In "Discussion" they call this out specifically for high-emission scenarios:
> "In our high-emission scenario model simulations that include parameterizations for hydrofracturing, ice-cliff instabilities, and capture sea-ice and atmospheric responses, the net impact of ice-sheet/climate feedbacks on SL rise is negative."

It looks to be a fairly marginal change, though; the projected amount of sea-level rise is still enough to be a serious problem, impacting where hundreds of millions of people currently live.

Which does already exist, so …

[removed]

It’s difficult to retort because sea levels are not rising quickly. The tidal gauge records from harbors around the world are centuries long, and they mostly indicate very slow linear sea level rise since before modern industrialization.

There are plenty of sea level gauges around the United States, some having been in operation over 100 years. NOAA has analyzed these quite a bit and they show some sea rise over the years. I estimated an 8 inch rise at Key West over 100 years based on their data.

I believe the point of all these studies is not to look at what happened, but what will happen well in to the future. The past 100 years is not a good way to estimate future changes in the ocean. That's not a good retort, but the biggest changes have not happened yet. A 6" rise in the last 100 years is still not insignificant.

[removed]

[deleted]

They consider 95% accuracy to be significant findings. Other fields require much higher accuracy