Welcome to the future

Well . . . it was going to either get colder or get warmer and I guess warmer it is. Humanity has done it and is starting to beat the ice age we are currently in. The earth will survive. It has been a lot hotter and a lot colder than now.

As for the poor . . . I think historically a colder climate has always been more daunting to live in than a warmer one. At least in terms of life on the planet.

 

Well, there will be less land, so land cost will go up....and up

 

Back to Vox:

 

I'll be dead by the time it matters.

 

I can understand travel agencies, but why is everyone against a tropical Earth?

 

Well, I'm going to do my part and plant a tree just in case.

Eh fuck it, someone plant a tree on my behalf please.

 

With the extra heat, you can plant that tree in the former tundra.

 

That sounds like a future we should all be working towards. The tundra sucks.

 

I imagine that many plants from the present-day tropical and temperate regions won't like the almost 6-months daylight and 6-months dark in polar regions as it will screw up the photosynthesis and respiration cycles to which they are adapted. You're probably going to have to either genetically modify them or adjust the tilt of the Earth's axis.

 

http://xkcd.com/1732/

 

That's the hockey stick. Yet I've heard it that "i"n the 20th century, contrarily, the greatest warming occurred from 1900 to 1940 when human CO2 production was low. During the cooling from 1940 to 1980 human production of CO2 increased the most."

Then too consider the source: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/09/17/historical-wind-patterns-a-problem-for-model-validation/

Now this seems to square with the top-down approach:
http://www.livescience.com/37055-greenhouse-gas-desert-plants-growing.html

The oceans are growing more acid.

I wonder if there is something else going on--something no one has put a meaurement to....

Come on fusion power.

 

It's not enough to plant a tree, you have to mean it.

 

Anything to put carbon back to the soil.

 

Actually, carbon doesn't really get back to the soil, it's part of the wood that grows. The more trees and the bigger the trees are, the more carbon is kept out of the atmosphere, where too much of it is detrimental.

 

Seeding the oceans with iron might be another way to sequester carbon by stimulating phytoplankton blooms although there might well be adverse ecological side effects.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fertilizing-ocean-with-iron-sequesters-co2/

 

You know the oceans are dying from too much acidity already so we don't have much too lose.

 

Adding iron would make the oceans acidic? I don't think so. In fact, it would make them less acidic. Iron reacts with carbonic acid to give iron carbonate and hydrogen. However, in seeding scenario, the phytoplankton would instead take up the dissolved carbon dioxide during photosynthesis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization#Role_of_iron

 

No I mean that the ocean is dying already so we don't have much to lose.