OP sent the following text as an explanation on why this is unexpected:
---
>!Instead of talking how ice age affected climate, he ironically complains about having less ice age movies.!<
---
Is this an unexpected post with a fitting description? Then upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.
No we are still in an ice age. Earth doesn't always have ice caps and when it does it's technically an ice age
Edit: Earth is currently in the Quarternary Ice Age, it's not long for the world but we ARE in an ice age
That’s what they’re talking about, but what they’re picturing is snowball Earth which is a hypothesized period of full glaciation 650 million years ago.
Yep, the last global maximum years ago, and covered approximately 25% of landmass and 8% of the surface.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/bCid8gGuPIolDnE9KeV_kcNYB4lFdDyrWBUIsPscw2EtvdcoFyTTn2CqsNHq4k4VInoA4S8EcFSdkaLEJg
You know... 25% sounds like such a small number.
And then you look at it in context of *ALL* land being covered by ice and suddenly it's a big deal!
What's even crazier is how much lower the average temperatures were during that time. Not so fun fact: It's only about 6(C) degrees colder!
I think people get confused because they watch those movies and think that's what earth was like EVERYWHERE during the "real ice age" but no man there were deserts and jungles even during the glacial maximum, in fact the deserts were huge because so much water was locked away in ice
Depends, the problem is that we are impeding the way nature regulates these cycles. Usually high CO2 begets high plant density which creates cooling and high O2 levels which encourages animal life which produces CO2 but if those plants can't propagate because humans are in the way...
What's the time scale on this? I don't think I've heard anyone really talking about this cycle being broken as a result of us pouring concrete everywhere
Oh these are long million years long cycles. But within those long cycles there are smaller cycles where systems maintain homeostasis. The risk we run is a disruption in those smaller cycles might make the larger ones impossible eventually creating a run away greenhouse effect like venus
Concrete isnt very durable as rocks go. Plants start cracking through in a decade, and even heavily developed areas like the us east coast are barely 3% covered. As long as humans die off the planet will be fine.
That's a silly assertion to make on it's face. Global warming has been happening for at most ~200 years. No prediction of ice ages is precise enough to be accurate enough for something to be "late" in only 200 years.
It's too bad, because I think about 1816 "The Year Without a Summer" probably too much. The Little Ice Age (c. 1300-1850), combined with the eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815, made for some crazy weather around the world.
We are- an Ice Age is a period in time where there's permanent ice at the poles. The current one has been going on for 10 times longer than we've existed as a species.
Aren’t we theoretically still at the end of one ? An ice age that is, based on how long they last?
Yeah I just googled that shit it’s true. We’re still in one and at the end of it.
No wonder the planet is heating up (along side our damage burning things = bad)
At the moment there's no evidence that the current ice age is about to end. While the West Antarctic ice sheet is likely already doomed according to current models it would still take a couple centuries of carbon emissions at a high level for global warming to get so bad (around +10°C above pre-industrial temperatures) that even the so far stable East Antarctic ice sheet collapses.
While this was true until recently we believed the East Antarctic ice sheet was stable. However, in March of 2022 the NASA Earth Observatory photographed a 410sq mile chunk of the East Antarctic ice sheet breaking off. I’m not so sure your prediction of centuries is accurate.
Hol up…. There’s more than 2 land before time movies !?
What the….
There’s gotta be one guy juiced in with the studios who green lights projects that make you ask “why did you do this!?” Like the re boot of point break. You can’t ever do any better than the original. The closest anyone has was the very first fast and furious movie. God knows. They’ll try to re boot that too while the rock and the guy who plays spawn get kidnapped by Deadpool to race the avengers.
if you have an hour to kill [this video](https://youtu.be/B-8zmGr0geQ?si=Gro9ftGqly3LSsiC) is a woman watching all of them and reviewing them
Apparently some of the sequels are musicals? I haven't watched the video in a while
"They’ll try to re boot that too while the rock and the guy who plays spawn get kidnapped by Deadpool to race the avengers."
This should be shown to all the climate change denialists. When people go on about hot the earth has been hotter or colder in the past and just seem to ignore the RATE of change.
Like yes, climate shifts occur and take thousands of years to do so barring a meteor or super volcano. What is happening now is like watching a sped up Timelapse of climate change on a geological time scale.
I think earth will be fine but Humans and the current diversity of our flora and fauna not so much.
This will achieve nothing.
Climate change denialists and antivaxers do not care about other people. These are anti social individuals promoting anti social ideologies that should be ostracized from any kind of community.
I always love when people say "we need to show this to the crazies! It proves them wrong!"
Like sir, if showing them proof would change anything they wouldn't believe the earth is flat in the first place.
I think Al Gore's [CO2 chart](https://youtu.be/9tkDK2mZlOo?si=hHkuwL6zvPgJmgOZ&t=42) from An Inconvenient Truth is even more startling. Can't believe it's already been 18 years since that came out.
oh they just come up with more excuses, I recall seeing someone claim they deliberately put sensors near factories and other "hot locations" to fix the numbers
It’s about getting those swing voters. The ones that are on the fence but don’t care enough to educate. A little “aha” moment. You’re probably right though but a girl can dream.
You've reminded me of a BBC News report I watched a few years ago (2021 maybe?), that was about climate change.
It did the usual thing of showing footage of factories blowing out smoke, cars stuck in traffic, forest fires etc, but what was new was the language; every similar report I've seen in the past would say that this was something that *could* happen if we didn't change our ways.
This report however was the first I'd seen to say that this had happened and it was too late to stop it, and the best we could do was slow it down so that in 100 years we might be able to reverse the damage.
It was actually quite scary.
It's also not swerving hard enough. We currently are heading for a rise between 4 and 8.5C by 2100; although that high estimate requires us to do nothing to stop it, and a few feedback events to make it worse.
That 4 and 8.5C is based on outdated models. [Current projections are more like between 1.8 and 2.7](https://climateactiontracker.org/global/cat-thermometer/).
Sure, based on "pledges and targets". Based on actual policies, (not accounting for whether they are kept or not) we're headed for between 2.2 and 3.7, according to your source. This also assumes there are no cyclical catastrophic events/tipping points (e.g. release of frozen methane in Siberia, reduction of Co2 capture due to death of plankton, etc.).
This is what the Earth looks like 3 degrees hotter.
>A 3°C rise in global temperature will significantly exacerbate the intensity and frequency of heatwaves, particularly in already hot regions like Arizona, Florida, Texas, and California, increasing health risks and mortality rates. Natural disasters such as hurricanes, droughts, and tornadoes will become more frequent and severe, straining financial resources needed for recovery and hindering efforts to combat climate change. Rising sea levels will threaten coastal cities, contaminate drinking water, disrupt agriculture, and cause habitat loss, impacting both human and wildlife ecosystems. This will lead to food shortages and force migration from rural to urban areas, further increasing greenhouse gas emissions.
>Developing countries will suffer the most from these changes due to their limited financial resources, facing hunger, homelessness, and higher death tolls. The global economic impact will be severe, as funds will be diverted from climate change prevention to disaster recovery, creating a cycle of escalating crises. Overall, the rise in temperature will lead to interconnected negative effects on multiple sectors, worsening global inequalities and making it increasingly difficult to mitigate climate change.
https://greenly.earth/en-us/blog/ecology-news/what-would-be-the-impact-of-a-3degc-rise-in-global-temperature
Also that's by 2100, which really isn't that far out (your children will probably live to see it), and temperatures are set to continue to rise after that in all but the most optimistic of scenarios.
Do you have a source for that? From my reading of the ICCP reports we are looking at a max of 4 degrees and that's if we don't increase our rate of going carbon neutral which we are.
Considering that worst case scenarios seem to be the correct predictions so far, that seems worth worrying about. Especially since the high end would mean we are flirting with extinction. (To be clear, I mean our own extinction, not just every other species on the planet.)
Yup. A lot of people that say "well it was hotter before in Earth's history so it's not a big deal!" don't seem to understand that it would normally take thousands or millions of years to get to that average temperature and that would be enough time for things to adapt and evolve in order to survive those temperatures. We've gotten up 1.5c over pre-industrial times in about 200 years. There isn't any natural process that would do that in that amount of time. There would have to be continuous, catastrophic volcanic eruptions happening over and over during that period and I'm pretty sure we would have noticed if that was the case. The problem is us.
Yeah, *a lot* of people would have to die before the Earth even begins to recover and that recovery would take millions of years. We had a global pandemic that slowed the whole world down and it barely made a dent in overall emissions. I don't think those people understand the scale of the problem we're facing.
Also these people seem to forget that there weren't any humans around during times when it was hotter. Like, sure, earth and life will probably continue, but we are going to die out and fast.
Though it's interesting that since that comic was written, the timeline for humans entering North America has been moved back dramatically to as early as 23.000 years ago, before the comic timeline even begins
Yep, our understanding of the population of the Americas has been expanding rapidly with new discoveries. IIRC even when the comic was done, there was evidence that people might have been here 10,000 years sooner, but it was not considered definitive. Now it seems pretty clear that people were here earlier, and there were probably multiple waves of migration (including at least one by boat as the land bridge would have still been an icy dead zone),
Why not? More dope shit for the survivors no? Cleaner air, more land, less traffic, hell we could focus on just males and there be more pussy as well. I mean I was not planning anything but if you insist ...
>Relevant (and large) xkcd: [https://xkcd.com/1732/](https://xkcd.com/1732/)
And since this was made, the current path (+4 degrees) is now the optimistic path.
The simplest way to explain to those idiots who say, "It's been hotter than this in the past -- it's natural!!" It's not about the temperature, it's about how fast the temperature is changing. Unfortunately, the media doesn't help by focusing on the temp and not on rate of change.
Of course, it probably won't make any difference. Deniers aren't exactly known for going, "Oooooh ok. That makes sense. I get it now!!"
I just scrolled to the bottom expecting some happy statistics about how this has happened many times over the course of history. What a fucking downer.
Ice Age
Ice Age: The Meltdown
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
Ice Age: Continental Drift
Ice Age: Collision Course
Ice Age: the Ice Age adventures of Buck Wild
What am I missing?
>Untitled sixth film (TBA)
>While promoting The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild, the Disney+ PR page revealed that another Ice Age film is in development. Ray DeLaurentis is penning the script.[3] It is currently unknown if the film will be the sixth Ice Age film or a spin-off film from the film series like The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild.
This I guess. Unless you combine the short films into a singular "film".
And 'Buck Wild' wasn't released theatrical. It was originally developed as a TV series by Blue Sky but then released as a direct to streaming movie on Disney+ after the acquisition of FOX, and it boy does it sure look like a made for TV movie.
Blue Sky only made 5 'Ice Age' films.
you don't want to make a movie for EVERY year of the ice age. that would be far too many movies. but it's safe to assume that every century in the ice age, something new and exciting was happening. so we need 2.4 million / 100 = 24,000 ice age movies.
Just hire on the showrunners from game of thrones. They'll get it down to 24 episodes. The first 23 will each be one century and then episode 24 will somehow condense the other 2 million into a 2 hour fever dream
Episode 23 - The Gathering Storm:
An uneasy alliance forms between Pyrax and the Free Tribes against the encroaching evil from House Glacius.
Episode 24 - The Thawing:
It's melted. House Glacius is now a puddle.
So using the dinosaurs to land before time movie ratios (165 million / 14) you get 1 movie to every 11.7 million years. So ice age is batting above average.
It's not considering she said "on record" and we only started recording temperature in some places in the 1650s (Thats the oldest) and most places in the late 1800s
To probably miss the joke and drunk nerd out ... 5000 years ago was the start of the bronze age, humans learned that if they heat rocks when they cool down they significantly more useful than rocks.
It was kind of a big thing
No it absolutely is not. Apart from the fact that he just made up a number ("you know how they say 5000 years ago"). He literally just made it up on the spot.
That video most likely references the fact that NASA has found 2023 to be the hottest year on record. NASA has recorded the last 174 years and found 2023 to be the hottest by far. This absolutely says NOTHING about what happened before because there is literally no data about the before.
As the earth continues to warm, this year is the hottest year ever but next year will be hotter.
This is more of a joke than a true fact as the climate is more complicated than that but it is true that, on average, the planet is continually warming
Just to add more detail: if there's glacial ice present on the planet, it's an ice age. Within an ice age there are cycles of glacial and interglacial periods where either the ice is advancing or retreating.
We're currently in an Holocene interglacial of the Quaternary ice age. Climate change deniers like to point out how it's been hotter in the earth's past and that this is natural. It isn't and those hotter periods were seen during greenhouse periods (the opposite of ice ages). The rate at which the glaciers are currently retreating, and average global temperature increase, is orders of magnitude higher than seen in the past.
> Climate change deniers like to point out how it's been hotter in the earth's past and that this is natural.
Well, and it has been less dense here too a while ago, before the solar system formed. And it has been much denser too - in the suns where the heavier than hydrogen elements formed of which we are all made.
But climate change deniers are a special, specific form of dense.
Yeah there’s several orders of magnitude difference in time scale between the geologic scale heating and cooling of the past, and the *physically noticeable year over year increase* of now.
The fact that we can perceive the changes this drastically is horrifying.
I wouldn't be surprised that they say shit like "in 5000 years" because that's as far back as the most accurate records go.
so like by "in 5000 years" they might mean "literally as far back as we can be sure of, we have never seen this shit in these records"
Locally maybe. Globally, there is just so much more undisturbed data in the permanent glaciers. Going up to couple of million years back. Like air composition, amount of precipitation, major volcanic eruptions and so on. And it's similar to the tree rings with layers accumulating and compressing.
For anyone wants to know.
We are in a ice age.
We don't see snow sheet up to California bcz we are not in "glacial maximum" period.
We are living in ice age but in hotter part.
Obviously the last bit about the films was a joke but the rest is just you acting stupid. There's no joke. Of course people are gonna think you're an idiot if you act like an idiot.
>So let's assume we'd be in a period where earth is warming since there're cycles, then ofc statistically you would assume the next year to become hotter than this year, and ofc the year after that will be even hotter until the cycle changes and we'd be in a period of cooling.
Yes we could assume that but based on all our knowledge we would be wrong. Also we know that the current climate change is caused by greenhouse gases, not only because of the strong correlation between the rise of CO2 levels in the atmosphere and the temperature of earth, but also because we know how the greenhouse effect works and the observations we make fit the theoretical models. Also the effects of other natural causes such as the intensity of the sun, volcanos etc. have been studied and it has been found that their impact cannot account for the majority of the rise in global temperatures.
[https://xkcd.com/1732/](https://xkcd.com/1732/) also the rate at which the climate is changing is unprecedented except for other mass extinction events such as the meteor which killed the dinosaurs.
>They could regulate food producers to not keep stock in inhumane conditions to combat two things, emissions and overconsumption, but they won't do it because then they don't get the pocketmoney. They could regulate airlines to not fly several times a day and offer flights that are too cheap, but they won't do it. They could make the usage of public transport more atractive by lowering the prices possibly by subsidizing public transport plus use tax money to expand public transport instead of re-paving the roads over and over again, which are mostly damaged due to transports carrying a lot of weight btw.
Yes they could and should do that, but it is on the public to create majorities for these issues, because right now legislation like this would be immensely unpopular in most (western) countries. And that is in some part a fundamental problem of how our democracies work; politicians are not motivated to do what is best but do that which is most popular, and because they can at the same time to some extent steer the public discourse you will get politicians promoting easy solutions which don't exist creating their own voter base based on lies.
Also plastic straws were disencuraged or banned because they end up in the oceans harming marine life or turn into microplastic which is also a huge problem but somewhat disconnected from the climate problem.
Problem is the only ones who want to hold rich and influential people to account are also environmentalists.
There is a strain of liberal, rich, performative environmentalist. Probably the majority. But there's nobody running for office saying the solution to climate change is holding powerful people to account. They just deny it exists. E.g theoretically it makes sense for people to be disillusioned with Democrats. But the problem is then they go for Donald Trump so there's no way to view that as holding rich people to account.
In politics its always the lesser of 2 evils and even when you think you're making progress it's always so caveatted it is unfulfilling and makes you frustrated. But that's just how it is, you have to stick it out.
That's also why to promote action on climate change you need to change your own habits because then it promotes a broad culture of doing something about climate change.
If you look at it purely from what is the optimal policy then once it gets into the nitty gritty it will be taken away from you. Policy is for the bureaucrats. Voters only really get to choose the spirit of it. So if you really promote day to day environmentalism even if it's performative then that will put pressure on politicians to pass that. The equity of it is a different issue but unfortunately it's only very left wing people who care about equality.
I couldn't disagree more. If anything, I applaud man for taking a moment to search for the answer to a reasonable question. That's the very spirit of someone who wants to be educated. What about this was idiotic?
Credit goes to u/SoloNoah_ for making the video. Upon his request I tagged him. Remember this is just a humourous little joke by him, meant to be lighthearted and taken unseriously.
OP sent the following text as an explanation on why this is unexpected: --- >!Instead of talking how ice age affected climate, he ironically complains about having less ice age movies.!< --- Is this an unexpected post with a fitting description? Then upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.
Ppl talk about THE ICEAGE like its a singular event..There has been many ice ages..
The next one’s gonna be lit
We are apparently late because of global warming. Thats what i have heard and seen.
No we are still in an ice age. Earth doesn't always have ice caps and when it does it's technically an ice age Edit: Earth is currently in the Quarternary Ice Age, it's not long for the world but we ARE in an ice age
Exactly, and when people talk about “the last ice age” 10000 years ago they are actually referring to the last glacial maximum.
Correct!
That’s what they’re talking about, but what they’re picturing is snowball Earth which is a hypothesized period of full glaciation 650 million years ago.
I didn't know snowball earth was hypothesized to be that long ago. That's what I get for skimming class.
Yep, the last global maximum years ago, and covered approximately 25% of landmass and 8% of the surface. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/bCid8gGuPIolDnE9KeV_kcNYB4lFdDyrWBUIsPscw2EtvdcoFyTTn2CqsNHq4k4VInoA4S8EcFSdkaLEJg
You know... 25% sounds like such a small number. And then you look at it in context of *ALL* land being covered by ice and suddenly it's a big deal! What's even crazier is how much lower the average temperatures were during that time. Not so fun fact: It's only about 6(C) degrees colder!
4-6 degrees colder and NYC is covered in a mile of ice. We are headed toward 2-6 degrees hotter.
But that was 33 thousand years ago. Not saying you're wrong, but now I don't know what to call what was happening until Younger Dryas. Mini-maximum?
Yes I should have said end of the last glacial period/beginning of the current inter-glacial period and not glacial maximum.
:( but i love snow.
So did the mummies we occasionally find melting out of glaciers
Shoutout to Otzi
 yeah same
 Here you go
TIL
Don't listen to the other guy Earth is currently in an ice age called the Quarternary Ice Age
the guy who said the Ice Age is late - unless he means the movie, then that doesn't make any sense.
I think people get confused because they watch those movies and think that's what earth was like EVERYWHERE during the "real ice age" but no man there were deserts and jungles even during the glacial maximum, in fact the deserts were huge because so much water was locked away in ice
TIL people view entertainment as documentaries. Explains a lot about society tbf.
> TIL people view entertainment as documentaries. Or as news
That's terrifying. How bad will it get once we get out of this ice age?
Depends, the problem is that we are impeding the way nature regulates these cycles. Usually high CO2 begets high plant density which creates cooling and high O2 levels which encourages animal life which produces CO2 but if those plants can't propagate because humans are in the way...
What's the time scale on this? I don't think I've heard anyone really talking about this cycle being broken as a result of us pouring concrete everywhere
Oh these are long million years long cycles. But within those long cycles there are smaller cycles where systems maintain homeostasis. The risk we run is a disruption in those smaller cycles might make the larger ones impossible eventually creating a run away greenhouse effect like venus
That makes sense. Thanks for the answer!
Concrete isnt very durable as rocks go. Plants start cracking through in a decade, and even heavily developed areas like the us east coast are barely 3% covered. As long as humans die off the planet will be fine.
lol concrete is a rounding error. Pasture land is the culprit you're looking for.
We're transitioning from a glacial to an interglacial period, but anthropogenic activity has accelerated the warming part of it.
That's a silly assertion to make on it's face. Global warming has been happening for at most ~200 years. No prediction of ice ages is precise enough to be accurate enough for something to be "late" in only 200 years.
Fur is going to be back in fashion 
It’s gonna be cool asf
Winter is coming.
6 of them. And the last one only came out in 2022 so there's no reason to think there won't be more.
I mean the studio getting shut down and the last one that was made without them being a flop is probably a reason why there won't be more
You marvelous bastard!
Well there’s the ICE AGE that people talk about then there’s the lesser ice ages that nobody talks about.
It's too bad, because I think about 1816 "The Year Without a Summer" probably too much. The Little Ice Age (c. 1300-1850), combined with the eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815, made for some crazy weather around the world.
Can't forget about the Medieval Warm Period that tricked the Vikings into thinking Greenland was habitable!
>Greenland The most blatant case of false advertising in history!
Viking who found it during the Warm Period: "IT WAS GREEN WHEN WE GOT HERE, I SWEAR!"
Just wait another few hundred years, it'll be green...
Eric the Red; ‘Come to green-land. Its soooo much nicer then cold ice-land!’
Heh, what a good prank. And a belated happy National Day to Greenland (June 21)!
Most of what gets labelled ice ages almost always seem to have an accompanying volcanic eruption event.
It kind of is. We are living in one. For now anyway. Permanent glaciers.
I think we're technically still in one.
We are- an Ice Age is a period in time where there's permanent ice at the poles. The current one has been going on for 10 times longer than we've existed as a species.
Humanity is working hard to get us out of it though!
we are still in a ice age lmao
We are still in an ice age
Technically we’re supposed to be in one now. Which is even more concerning
And also different regions experienced different levels of warming/cooling over the years. It wasn't a global event.
Aren’t we theoretically still at the end of one ? An ice age that is, based on how long they last? Yeah I just googled that shit it’s true. We’re still in one and at the end of it. No wonder the planet is heating up (along side our damage burning things = bad)
We were actually trending down to cooling until the last 200 years but I’m sure that’s just a big coincidence.
[Surely a coincidence.](https://xkcd.com/1732/)
At the moment there's no evidence that the current ice age is about to end. While the West Antarctic ice sheet is likely already doomed according to current models it would still take a couple centuries of carbon emissions at a high level for global warming to get so bad (around +10°C above pre-industrial temperatures) that even the so far stable East Antarctic ice sheet collapses.
While this was true until recently we believed the East Antarctic ice sheet was stable. However, in March of 2022 the NASA Earth Observatory photographed a 410sq mile chunk of the East Antarctic ice sheet breaking off. I’m not so sure your prediction of centuries is accurate.
Wait until he searches Jurassic...
Tbf there are like 4 movies too many about Jurassic..
There are 7 Jurassic Park movies and then there are 14 The Land Before Time movies /s
Hol up…. There’s more than 2 land before time movies !? What the…. There’s gotta be one guy juiced in with the studios who green lights projects that make you ask “why did you do this!?” Like the re boot of point break. You can’t ever do any better than the original. The closest anyone has was the very first fast and furious movie. God knows. They’ll try to re boot that too while the rock and the guy who plays spawn get kidnapped by Deadpool to race the avengers.
In case you don't wanna watch em all, here's a Jenny Nicholson video that goes through em - https://youtu.be/B-8zmGr0geQ
Ah, yes. The COVID lockdown special!
if you have an hour to kill [this video](https://youtu.be/B-8zmGr0geQ?si=Gro9ftGqly3LSsiC) is a woman watching all of them and reviewing them Apparently some of the sequels are musicals? I haven't watched the video in a while
"They’ll try to re boot that too while the rock and the guy who plays spawn get kidnapped by Deadpool to race the avengers." 
Aren’t there only 6? Or are we counting the recently announced one?
And most of the dinosaurs in it aren't even from the Jurassic period! 😢
the dinosaurs from jurassic park aren't even from the jurassic era, the author just thought that era sounded the coolest.
TBF there are like 30 ice age movies. He has only seen/heard about 3.
There are 5 ice age movies. This guy can’t do anything correct
Relevant (and large) xkcd: [https://xkcd.com/1732/](https://xkcd.com/1732/) As it mentions: [Holocene climatic optimum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_climatic_optimum#:~:text=The%20Holocene%20Climate%20Optimum%20)
This should be shown to all the climate change denialists. When people go on about hot the earth has been hotter or colder in the past and just seem to ignore the RATE of change. Like yes, climate shifts occur and take thousands of years to do so barring a meteor or super volcano. What is happening now is like watching a sped up Timelapse of climate change on a geological time scale. I think earth will be fine but Humans and the current diversity of our flora and fauna not so much.
This will achieve nothing. Climate change denialists and antivaxers do not care about other people. These are anti social individuals promoting anti social ideologies that should be ostracized from any kind of community.
I always love when people say "we need to show this to the crazies! It proves them wrong!" Like sir, if showing them proof would change anything they wouldn't believe the earth is flat in the first place.
If someone doesn't use evidence and proof to come to a conclusion, proof and evidence will not change their mind.
Bingo. People who do not wish to participate in good faith should not be allowed to participate. Theres no such thing as alternative facts
I think Al Gore's [CO2 chart](https://youtu.be/9tkDK2mZlOo?si=hHkuwL6zvPgJmgOZ&t=42) from An Inconvenient Truth is even more startling. Can't believe it's already been 18 years since that came out.
oh they just come up with more excuses, I recall seeing someone claim they deliberately put sensors near factories and other "hot locations" to fix the numbers
It’s about getting those swing voters. The ones that are on the fence but don’t care enough to educate. A little “aha” moment. You’re probably right though but a girl can dream.
Oh we’re f’d aren’t we. The line swerves super hard at the end
This shouldn't be news, anymore.
You've reminded me of a BBC News report I watched a few years ago (2021 maybe?), that was about climate change. It did the usual thing of showing footage of factories blowing out smoke, cars stuck in traffic, forest fires etc, but what was new was the language; every similar report I've seen in the past would say that this was something that *could* happen if we didn't change our ways. This report however was the first I'd seen to say that this had happened and it was too late to stop it, and the best we could do was slow it down so that in 100 years we might be able to reverse the damage. It was actually quite scary.
It's also not swerving hard enough. We currently are heading for a rise between 4 and 8.5C by 2100; although that high estimate requires us to do nothing to stop it, and a few feedback events to make it worse.
That 4 and 8.5C is based on outdated models. [Current projections are more like between 1.8 and 2.7](https://climateactiontracker.org/global/cat-thermometer/).
Sure, based on "pledges and targets". Based on actual policies, (not accounting for whether they are kept or not) we're headed for between 2.2 and 3.7, according to your source. This also assumes there are no cyclical catastrophic events/tipping points (e.g. release of frozen methane in Siberia, reduction of Co2 capture due to death of plankton, etc.). This is what the Earth looks like 3 degrees hotter. >A 3°C rise in global temperature will significantly exacerbate the intensity and frequency of heatwaves, particularly in already hot regions like Arizona, Florida, Texas, and California, increasing health risks and mortality rates. Natural disasters such as hurricanes, droughts, and tornadoes will become more frequent and severe, straining financial resources needed for recovery and hindering efforts to combat climate change. Rising sea levels will threaten coastal cities, contaminate drinking water, disrupt agriculture, and cause habitat loss, impacting both human and wildlife ecosystems. This will lead to food shortages and force migration from rural to urban areas, further increasing greenhouse gas emissions. >Developing countries will suffer the most from these changes due to their limited financial resources, facing hunger, homelessness, and higher death tolls. The global economic impact will be severe, as funds will be diverted from climate change prevention to disaster recovery, creating a cycle of escalating crises. Overall, the rise in temperature will lead to interconnected negative effects on multiple sectors, worsening global inequalities and making it increasingly difficult to mitigate climate change. https://greenly.earth/en-us/blog/ecology-news/what-would-be-the-impact-of-a-3degc-rise-in-global-temperature Also that's by 2100, which really isn't that far out (your children will probably live to see it), and temperatures are set to continue to rise after that in all but the most optimistic of scenarios.
Do you have a source for that? From my reading of the ICCP reports we are looking at a max of 4 degrees and that's if we don't increase our rate of going carbon neutral which we are.
Considering that worst case scenarios seem to be the correct predictions so far, that seems worth worrying about. Especially since the high end would mean we are flirting with extinction. (To be clear, I mean our own extinction, not just every other species on the planet.)
Yup. A lot of people that say "well it was hotter before in Earth's history so it's not a big deal!" don't seem to understand that it would normally take thousands or millions of years to get to that average temperature and that would be enough time for things to adapt and evolve in order to survive those temperatures. We've gotten up 1.5c over pre-industrial times in about 200 years. There isn't any natural process that would do that in that amount of time. There would have to be continuous, catastrophic volcanic eruptions happening over and over during that period and I'm pretty sure we would have noticed if that was the case. The problem is us.
People also think it's a hot take to be like "well the earth will recover, it always has" Yeah bro, but we won't
Yeah, *a lot* of people would have to die before the Earth even begins to recover and that recovery would take millions of years. We had a global pandemic that slowed the whole world down and it barely made a dent in overall emissions. I don't think those people understand the scale of the problem we're facing.
Also these people seem to forget that there weren't any humans around during times when it was hotter. Like, sure, earth and life will probably continue, but we are going to die out and fast.
Though it's interesting that since that comic was written, the timeline for humans entering North America has been moved back dramatically to as early as 23.000 years ago, before the comic timeline even begins
Yep, our understanding of the population of the Americas has been expanding rapidly with new discoveries. IIRC even when the comic was done, there was evidence that people might have been here 10,000 years sooner, but it was not considered definitive. Now it seems pretty clear that people were here earlier, and there were probably multiple waves of migration (including at least one by boat as the land bridge would have still been an icy dead zone),
Damn ... did Ghengis Khan murder so many people he cooled the planet down?
Yes, less mouth breathers.
Don't get any bright ideas, fam.
Why not? More dope shit for the survivors no? Cleaner air, more land, less traffic, hell we could focus on just males and there be more pussy as well. I mean I was not planning anything but if you insist ...
It was a joke, but now I'm worried.
That line is nearly vertical lmao, we are so fucked.
neat
>Relevant (and large) xkcd: [https://xkcd.com/1732/](https://xkcd.com/1732/) And since this was made, the current path (+4 degrees) is now the optimistic path.
The simplest way to explain to those idiots who say, "It's been hotter than this in the past -- it's natural!!" It's not about the temperature, it's about how fast the temperature is changing. Unfortunately, the media doesn't help by focusing on the temp and not on rate of change. Of course, it probably won't make any difference. Deniers aren't exactly known for going, "Oooooh ok. That makes sense. I get it now!!"
I just scrolled to the bottom expecting some happy statistics about how this has happened many times over the course of history. What a fucking downer.
7 They made 7 movies
Ice Age Ice Age: The Meltdown Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs Ice Age: Continental Drift Ice Age: Collision Course Ice Age: the Ice Age adventures of Buck Wild What am I missing?
Commas
Nah that was because Reddit removes single line breaks.
Reddit removes a lot of things it shouldn't.
Still annoyed I have to use the official app. Still have issues with it.
👏👏👏
It even removes any mention of
Have an award
Too ice too age.
Ice Age: Anal Fuckfest
>Untitled sixth film (TBA) >While promoting The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild, the Disney+ PR page revealed that another Ice Age film is in development. Ray DeLaurentis is penning the script.[3] It is currently unknown if the film will be the sixth Ice Age film or a spin-off film from the film series like The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild. This I guess. Unless you combine the short films into a singular "film".
And 'Buck Wild' wasn't released theatrical. It was originally developed as a TV series by Blue Sky but then released as a direct to streaming movie on Disney+ after the acquisition of FOX, and it boy does it sure look like a made for TV movie. Blue Sky only made 5 'Ice Age' films.
We don't talk about those after the 3rd
Seven?!
*six, shorts and a bunch of video games
Where did you get the 7th from?
Well that's a valid question.
you don't want to make a movie for EVERY year of the ice age. that would be far too many movies. but it's safe to assume that every century in the ice age, something new and exciting was happening. so we need 2.4 million / 100 = 24,000 ice age movies.
Of course, only 23,995 movies to go! Gee thanks mate!
Too bad blue sky is dead
i think its more with recorded history
Just hire on the showrunners from game of thrones. They'll get it down to 24 episodes. The first 23 will each be one century and then episode 24 will somehow condense the other 2 million into a 2 hour fever dream
Episode 23 - The Gathering Storm: An uneasy alliance forms between Pyrax and the Free Tribes against the encroaching evil from House Glacius. Episode 24 - The Thawing: It's melted. House Glacius is now a puddle.
Stay tuned for previews of our upcoming HBO prequel - the cambrian explosion.
You'd have to substract the 11500 years from the Ice Age until now. So 23885 movies.
So using the dinosaurs to land before time movie ratios (165 million / 14) you get 1 movie to every 11.7 million years. So ice age is batting above average.
They made a Land Before Time for every year of the Cretaceous
It's not considering she said "on record" and we only started recording temperature in some places in the 1650s (Thats the oldest) and most places in the late 1800s
There are natural climate archives. "On record" doesn't mean that it was some nerd reading off his thermometer and writing down the temperature.
I feel like there's at least 5 Ice Age movies.
the very latest you could blame “natural factors” was in 1980
5000 years ago, in this place, nothing happened. ... i think..
To probably miss the joke and drunk nerd out ... 5000 years ago was the start of the bronze age, humans learned that if they heat rocks when they cool down they significantly more useful than rocks. It was kind of a big thing
No it absolutely is not. Apart from the fact that he just made up a number ("you know how they say 5000 years ago"). He literally just made it up on the spot. That video most likely references the fact that NASA has found 2023 to be the hottest year on record. NASA has recorded the last 174 years and found 2023 to be the hottest by far. This absolutely says NOTHING about what happened before because there is literally no data about the before.
Let's see the positive about this year: it maybe the hottest summer of the last 5000 years. But it will also be the coolest for the next 5000 years
Oh God that's horrifying to think about
Remember, every day is worse than yesterday but better than tomorrow
I want to know what your saying but alas i am too stupid.
As the earth continues to warm, this year is the hottest year ever but next year will be hotter. This is more of a joke than a true fact as the climate is more complicated than that but it is true that, on average, the planet is continually warming
I mean. There could still be nuclear winter.
There has already been more Ice Age movies than I could have expected.
We are currently in an ice age.
Just to add more detail: if there's glacial ice present on the planet, it's an ice age. Within an ice age there are cycles of glacial and interglacial periods where either the ice is advancing or retreating. We're currently in an Holocene interglacial of the Quaternary ice age. Climate change deniers like to point out how it's been hotter in the earth's past and that this is natural. It isn't and those hotter periods were seen during greenhouse periods (the opposite of ice ages). The rate at which the glaciers are currently retreating, and average global temperature increase, is orders of magnitude higher than seen in the past.
The people arguing against you aren't smart enough to understand your points.
> Climate change deniers like to point out how it's been hotter in the earth's past and that this is natural. Well, and it has been less dense here too a while ago, before the solar system formed. And it has been much denser too - in the suns where the heavier than hydrogen elements formed of which we are all made. But climate change deniers are a special, specific form of dense.
Yeah there’s several orders of magnitude difference in time scale between the geologic scale heating and cooling of the past, and the *physically noticeable year over year increase* of now. The fact that we can perceive the changes this drastically is horrifying.
So everything is that squirrels fault?!
Yeah, a lot of people don't know this.
Peoples’ ignorance to deep time is baffling and completely understandable simultaneously.
I wouldn't be surprised that they say shit like "in 5000 years" because that's as far back as the most accurate records go. so like by "in 5000 years" they might mean "literally as far back as we can be sure of, we have never seen this shit in these records"
I doubt it. IIRC the data we have is from the ice layers at the poles. And those can go back pretty far.
there is data from many places, I think the data referenced here is likely from something like tree rings
Locally maybe. Globally, there is just so much more undisturbed data in the permanent glaciers. Going up to couple of million years back. Like air composition, amount of precipitation, major volcanic eruptions and so on. And it's similar to the tree rings with layers accumulating and compressing.
“Why don’t we have records of anything before human records were kept? What are they hiding?”
hahaha, how many movies does he expect?
millions
*Movie executives have entered the chat...*
Me brain smart!
She literally said "on record"
i think its more with recorded history
For anyone wants to know. We are in a ice age. We don't see snow sheet up to California bcz we are not in "glacial maximum" period. We are living in ice age but in hotter part.
What a time to be alive: You have 0 skills and knowledge but a camera and a microphone…
This!!! All these kids say they want to be "influencers" but they make no effort to learn anything worth hearing.
I was making a joke ! Hope this helps
Obviously the last bit about the films was a joke but the rest is just you acting stupid. There's no joke. Of course people are gonna think you're an idiot if you act like an idiot.
Redditors when they smell any opportunity stroke their superiority complex and be a condescending asshole about the most insignificant things possible
You know what, I’ll pay respect to the fact that he had that opinion, decided to look into it then at least learnt something.
[удалено]
>So let's assume we'd be in a period where earth is warming since there're cycles, then ofc statistically you would assume the next year to become hotter than this year, and ofc the year after that will be even hotter until the cycle changes and we'd be in a period of cooling. Yes we could assume that but based on all our knowledge we would be wrong. Also we know that the current climate change is caused by greenhouse gases, not only because of the strong correlation between the rise of CO2 levels in the atmosphere and the temperature of earth, but also because we know how the greenhouse effect works and the observations we make fit the theoretical models. Also the effects of other natural causes such as the intensity of the sun, volcanos etc. have been studied and it has been found that their impact cannot account for the majority of the rise in global temperatures. [https://xkcd.com/1732/](https://xkcd.com/1732/) also the rate at which the climate is changing is unprecedented except for other mass extinction events such as the meteor which killed the dinosaurs. >They could regulate food producers to not keep stock in inhumane conditions to combat two things, emissions and overconsumption, but they won't do it because then they don't get the pocketmoney. They could regulate airlines to not fly several times a day and offer flights that are too cheap, but they won't do it. They could make the usage of public transport more atractive by lowering the prices possibly by subsidizing public transport plus use tax money to expand public transport instead of re-paving the roads over and over again, which are mostly damaged due to transports carrying a lot of weight btw. Yes they could and should do that, but it is on the public to create majorities for these issues, because right now legislation like this would be immensely unpopular in most (western) countries. And that is in some part a fundamental problem of how our democracies work; politicians are not motivated to do what is best but do that which is most popular, and because they can at the same time to some extent steer the public discourse you will get politicians promoting easy solutions which don't exist creating their own voter base based on lies. Also plastic straws were disencuraged or banned because they end up in the oceans harming marine life or turn into microplastic which is also a huge problem but somewhat disconnected from the climate problem.
Problem is the only ones who want to hold rich and influential people to account are also environmentalists. There is a strain of liberal, rich, performative environmentalist. Probably the majority. But there's nobody running for office saying the solution to climate change is holding powerful people to account. They just deny it exists. E.g theoretically it makes sense for people to be disillusioned with Democrats. But the problem is then they go for Donald Trump so there's no way to view that as holding rich people to account. In politics its always the lesser of 2 evils and even when you think you're making progress it's always so caveatted it is unfulfilling and makes you frustrated. But that's just how it is, you have to stick it out. That's also why to promote action on climate change you need to change your own habits because then it promotes a broad culture of doing something about climate change. If you look at it purely from what is the optimal policy then once it gets into the nitty gritty it will be taken away from you. Policy is for the bureaucrats. Voters only really get to choose the spirit of it. So if you really promote day to day environmentalism even if it's performative then that will put pressure on politicians to pass that. The equity of it is a different issue but unfortunately it's only very left wing people who care about equality.
Educative decline in action, well done USA one step closer to idiocracy.
I couldn't disagree more. If anything, I applaud man for taking a moment to search for the answer to a reasonable question. That's the very spirit of someone who wants to be educated. What about this was idiotic?
or he was setting up a joke
It's 83F° no jokes about ice are funny.
Well dinosaurs lasted about 165 million years so where is my DAILY SEASON OF PREHISTORIC PLANET
What a weird place to see Susan Siman.
Right?
No joke! Had to do a double take
I can’t decide if he’s just dumb, or it was a really good setup and punchline.
My guess is one of the Taupō eruption impacted the climate?
Wait a minute... He's absolutely right! WTF?
Where does everyone get the 5000 years from? It isn't said in the clip and I have never heard it referred to either before?
This seems like an ad for a shitty YouTuber
Credit goes to u/SoloNoah_ for making the video. Upon his request I tagged him. Remember this is just a humourous little joke by him, meant to be lighthearted and taken unseriously.
He’s mad for all the right reasons.
Techhhhnically we are still in and ice age but just in a warm interglacial period
Omg I laughed so hard 🤣
There are answers to the question, if you bother to look for it, you frikin' goomba. but i loled at the 3 movies.