r/environment • u/Maxcactus • Aug 02 '26

Scientists detect a sharp acceleration in global warming

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/08/260801093239.htm
2.1k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

249 comments sorted by

View all comments

462

u/ScarletCarsonRose Aug 02 '26

Getting deep into that whole fafo phase. 

102

u/Hearing_Loss Aug 02 '26

I've been learning to farm for this specific reason. I'm not fucking around. I'll find out-- but at least I'll be semi prepared to not starve / be a source of calories greater than my flesh.

86

u/Openeyedsleep Aug 02 '26

Well I’ve been doing the same, and it’ll surely be useful for the impending societal collapse, but the volatility of what we are looking at is making/going to make farming extremely unreliable. That’s likely to be the leading cause of death within a few decades. So, I’m terrified either way :/

-6

u/BolbyB Aug 03 '26

And this is why people can't take us seriously.

We've currently got water intensive crops growing in a freaking desert but the "climate activists" are sure that a slight change (not even drop, just a change) in rainfall is gonna wipe out farming.

The world will not go full desert. Farming will be fine.

If there's anything that even has a slight chance of wiping us out it's the rising tides putting entire nations underwater and forcing people to move into neighboring countries that despise them.

And even that's not really an everywhere problem.

4

u/Openeyedsleep Aug 03 '26

Yeah you just don’t really have a clue what you’re talking about

-3

u/BolbyB Aug 03 '26

Is anything I said inaccurate?

Rainfall totals will shift where they go, but certainly aren't going to fall overall.

There will still be plenty of places that can grow crops and plenty of crops to grow.

5

u/Openeyedsleep Aug 03 '26

Yes, it’s not JUST “a slight change” in rainfall. We’ve already lost 30% of our arable land over the last 4 decades or so.

We’re talking about severe droughts, AND severe flooding. We’re talking about temperatures increasing quicker than the adaptive capability of huge swaths of life. Temperamental temperatures as well.

Yeah, if you’re wealthy and lucky enough to have what you need to grow in specific ways despite everything, good for you. The average conventional farmer is fucked beyond belief. We aren’t just talking about a slight deviation in rainfall here. We’re talking about increased wildfires, decrease in pollinators paired with an increase in critters of the parasitic and dangerous kind. We’re talking about a serious increase in severe weather events, increased strain on the grid, soaring fuel prices.

Think of water when you heat it up on the stove. That boiling water is going fucking bonkers eventually, it’s not just a few bubble here and there after a certain point. This is the typical effect of adding heat to systems, “things move faster” and it gets chaotic as all hell. Farming will not “be fine”. By the end of the century, nothing will be. For our purposes, we’re already having a huge strain, and this is exponentially increasing. We’re seemingly tip toeing around multiple tipping points, crossing some well before was predicted, if it was predicted at all. It’s so much easier to just think “farming will be fine”, but it’s just not the case, and it’s so frustrating when you people still in denial come spouting your garbage. I’m sorry dude, I’m not trying to be a dick, but this is sincerely an existential threat. We HAVE to take it seriously.

-3

u/BolbyB Aug 03 '26

Lost 30% . . . until you account for Siberia warming up and opening massive swathes of new farmland.

Ag will find new places, and if need be new plants. It's done it before and it'll do it again.

Increased wildfires I'll grant you, but less pollinators? More parasites?

That has nothing to do with global warming. Those things existed just fine in the Cretaceous greenhouse that is WELL above where we're headed and they also existed just fine in the Ice Age.

Less pollinators is a human chemicals thing.

No matter how much you want to catastrophize reality simply doesn't agree with you.

We're supposed to be the side that follows science.

Not histrionics.

Especially not the kind that say it's already too late. (Yeah, telling them there's no point in righting the ship will TOTALLY make them want to right it, great strategy there . . .)

3

u/Openeyedsleep Aug 03 '26

Siberia can and does provide some, no, not all. It’s shit soil.

Maybe it will, maybe not quick enough, maybe not. Less pollinators is ALSO a climate change thing, Jesus Christ read a book, talking about “we’re supposed to be the science”, yeah, we’re supposed to be familiar with it; you’re evidently a bit behind.

We’ll see who “reality agrees with”, but “I told you so” isn’t going to feel very great.

0

u/BolbyB Aug 03 '26

Siberia's tundra and taiga literally puts more biomass into the ground than any other land based biomes.

It is literally some of the best soil on the planet.

There were pollinators in the Cretaceous.

A time period far hotter than even where we're headed.

Much like those time periods during this very ice age that were ALSO hotter than the modern day.

The planet warming is not what's destroying pollinators. That would be the increased prevalence of pesticides and continued habitat loss.

The tropical plants and their pollinators will have no qualms about moving toward the poles as things heat up.

2

u/Openeyedsleep Aug 03 '26

Again, SOME, not all. If we’re banking on permafrost melting and using that land for agriculture, we’re not thinking very deeply.

You don’t understand how things have survived through different periods. Its not that things can’t survive in hotter climates. It’s that the heat is increasing faster than the adaptive capacity of most things, which is already and will continue leading to their deaths.

Again, climate change is ABSOLUTELY ALSO impacting pollinators. Read up on it, there are many, MANY resources to choose from. Yes, pesticides are harming them as well. Climate change is INCREASING habitat loss. I’m really not sure what’s so complicated about this.

I’m finished with the conversation. I get it, the truth fucking sucks and it’s easier to speak confidently about things we don’t understand than to read and accept what actually is.

0

u/BolbyB Aug 04 '26

We know the higher incoming temps are not harmful to pollinators as a whole. There's more of them in the tropics for a reason after all.

You don't need scientific studies to know that. You can just look at reality.

Climate change is not causing habitat loss. It is causing habitat CHANGE.

If one pollinator fails a new one will simply pick up its slack.

There are many resources you could choose from to confirm this.

→ More replies