this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
539 points (95.3% liked)

Earth, Environment, and Geosciences

1792 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to c/EarthScience @ Mander.xyz!



Notice Board

This is a work in progress, please don't mind the mess.



What is geoscience?

Geoscience (also called Earth Science) is the study of Earth. Geoscience includes so much more than rocks and volcanoes, it studies the processes that form and shape Earth's surface, the natural resources we use, and how water and ecosystems are interconnected. Geoscience uses tools and techniques from other science fields as well, such as chemistry, physics, biology, and math! Read more...

Quick Facts

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Be kind and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.


Jobs

Teaching Resources

Tools

Climate



Similar Communities


Sister Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Plants & Gardening

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Memes

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Muun@lemmy.world 77 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Because I can already hear the anti-man-made-climate-change crowd shrieking... how do we go about determining global temperatures thousands of years ago?

Edit: Stopped being lazy and googled it: https://gizmodo.com/how-do-scientists-know-what-the-temperature-was-thousan-1714597561

[–] crawley@lemmy.world 51 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Very informative but you see, science doesn't convince the anti-science crowd, pretty much by definition.

[–] Muun@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yup, but if I'm talking to someone who doesn't believe in man-made climate change and I show them the xkcd and answer their obvious follow-up question about how we know past temperature, and they STILL don't want to listen to me... well then I know I can never talk to that person again. :)

[–] jabathekek@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 year ago

anti-science crowd

Too bad the anti-science crowd are our elected officials. ༎ຶ‿༎ຶ

[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

I can already hear the anti-man-made-climate-change crowd shrieking…

https://skepticalscience.com/

Generally a good source for this use case. You can sort by popular arguments or arguments by type, and for many answers choose from different detail levels, sometimes even languages.

I didn't find your specific question in their catalogue of answers, but they have a blog post about that topic: https://skepticalscience.com/two-centuries-climate-science-3.html

[–] Rubanski@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

There is also that group that says it will get warmer naturally, by whatever solar flare etc bullshit ever. So business as usual, can't change the course anyway so I will buy a second SUV

Centuries of applied critical thinking.

[–] SamirCasino@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

It's good to ask the question.

The problem is when they refuse to accept the answer.

[–] xkforce@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One slight correction: evidence indicates that the americas were colonized before the ice age corridor opened. It is now thought that the americas were colonized via short excursions near shore via boats resulting in the coastal areas being inhabitated in only ~500 years from alaska all the way down to the tip of south america. This is thought to be the same way that australia was inhabited 60,000 years ago. The oldest settlement sites are now underwater.

[–] StorminNorman@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Isn't that more of a recent discovery though? I only mention it cos this comic is from 2016, which, as much as I don't want to acknowledge the passing of time, is 7yrs ago.

[–] xkforce@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It was understood by the early 2010s that the timeline was off. Scientific American ran an article about it at the end of 2012 but it does not surprise me that Monroe would still go by the old timeline in 2016. I only knew about it years ago because I was an undergrad and one of my professors worked extensively in Alaska and neighboring areas during his PhD.

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 28 points 1 year ago

Direct image link for those who can't see it well: https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png

[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 year ago

Well that certainly puts things into a horrifying perspective!

[–] runjun@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I will continue doing what I can to help. But it’s over.

[–] bobaduk@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (5 children)

It's really not. It's just getting started. The worst predictions, of 4-6 degrees of warming, are more or less off the table. Current trajectory is ~3 degrees of warming which... is civilisationally devastating admittedly, but we have pathways to reduce that. Even the 1.5c target isn't over yet.

There is a broad range of potential future climates, and this generation decides which one we end up with. It's not over by a long shot.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Eryn6844@beehaw.org 14 points 1 year ago

It's been nice knowing you guys. If we get through this I hope the scientist say to every one of the nay stays I told you so!. they should write it on 100ft high obelisk in marble and granite.

[–] reattach@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I've always liked this plot. Quick note: at least for me, the embedded image isn't readable due to low resolution.

[–] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Looks fine for me in Lemmy Connect. How are you using Lemmy? App? Website?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

I had to open it in a new tab to see it anyways, looks fine there

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cobra89@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is from 2016. Randall should do a new one. I wonder how bad it is now...

[–] jabathekek@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

Likely exactly the same, considering a seven year difference would be barely noticeable on it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Randal never struck me as a young earth creationist, but there you go!

[–] confusedbytheBasics@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What are you smoking? The graph goes back 14,000 years beyond what the young earth folks accept. And it's obviously not intended to be a full history of Earth.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

"There were probably nobody around before 14,000 years ago to draw the before part of the graph."

- Philomena Cunk

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] KISSmyOS@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Fun fact: We're doing even worse than this 7-year-old graph's "CURRENT PATH".
We've hit +1.4°C about 10 years earlier.

load more comments
view more: next ›