
Earth Had Its 4th Warmest Year on Record in 2018, Say NOAA and Nasa - chewbacha
https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/Earth-Had-Its-4th-Warmest-Year-Record-2018-Say-NOAA-and-NASA?cm_ven=hp-slot-2
======
pattle
Statistics like this and global warming in general doesn't really worry me
that much because I feel like we've got the technology and methods to stop
global warming in a very short space of time. The only thing stopping us doing
this is people's habits / lack of education. However I reckon they'll come a
point when the urgency really hits people and we'll be fine.

~~~
shawnb576
What evidence do you have to support this? I don’t know if any tech that can
stop this let alone reverse it. Even with zero emissions tomorrow we are in
for real trouble.

All the money in the world won’t help you if the planet’s ability to support
life collapses and takes millions of years to recover. Yes, that’s a thing
that we are on track for.

We won’t be fine, it’s a question of how bad we let it get and if it’s even
feasible to stop it once we realize the trouble we are in. People don’t know
how much danger we are in already.

~~~
pattle
I don't have any evidence to support it, I just feel like it would be easy to
reduce global emissions in a short space of time as we already have the
technology. E.g mass installation of renewal energy like wind and solar which
we already have the tech for. Eating more plant based foods as animal products
are incredibly wasteful, again we can easily do this it's just changing
people's habits. More recycling etc, lots that can be done.

Is it really true that with zero emissions tomorrow we'd still be in trouble?
I find that hard to believe

~~~
danaris
> I don't have any evidence to support it, I just feel like it would be easy
> to reduce global emissions in a short space of time as we already have the
> technology.

Unfortunately, none of our _feelings_ are going to be helpful when we pass
tipping points that cause the effects to compound on each other. We've already
started that process—melting arctic ice means that the ocean there absorbs
massive amounts more heat, rather than it reflecting off the surface of the
ice.

By the time it's obvious enough that even deniers might believe in it—that is,
by the time we have sea levels rising enough to start to drown coastal cities,
and formerly fertile places start to become genuine deserts—it will be much,
much too late to just "reduce global emissions in a short space of time" or
"just change people's habits."

 _If_ it were possible to have zero emissions tomorrow, it would still take
many years for the climate to return to what we consider "normal"—and some
parts might not be able to do so at all, as weather patterns have already
begun to change enough that they might not return to a previous equilibrium,
but find a new one that shifts moisture or heat from one region to another to
the great detriment of both (at least for a few generations).

And zero emissions isn't something we're going to be able to get to this
century. Not unless the political situation changes hugely worldwide.

So...we're in trouble. Not "we will be". We are. Now. And it's going to get a
_lot_ worse. It is _possible_ to make things better, but it will take massive
shifts in patterns of consumption, and probably won't happen until we've seen
several parts of the world devastated by famine and war.

------
aceon48
Another way of saying this year was colder than the last 3 years

~~~
osullip
Or another way is that the past 20 years have been hotter than the previous 20
years, excluding 1998 which was a spike in the the otherwise consistent trend.
It's in the chart in the article.

You did read more than the title, right?

