Climate System Change. “Too Late” or NOT “Too Late”? // Published on Jun 19, 2016
Which is correct regarding the abrupt climate system change that humanity has set into motion? What does this phrase “Too Late” really mean anyway. Too late for whom, and in what way.
Humanity occupies the entire spectrum of views, from outright ignorance and climate denial to the view that all 7.4 billion humans will die in the next 15 years and humanity will go extinct. Not only that, each subgroup has no tolerance for the views of others.
What does it all mean? For a start, we need to ask what people mean by “Too Late”!
Please support my work, and these videos with a Donation at here. Easy to use PayPal Feature.
Paul Beckwith, Climate System Scientist 
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/climate/
LikeLike
For those people who accept the probability of Near Term Human Extinction, a good guide to what you can do to cope is https://www.northatlanticbooks.com/shop/love-in-the-age-of-ecological-apocalypse/
LikeLike
Greets Paul,
As I’ve tweeted to you previously, love your work, your knowledge, your clean direct manner of delivery. Have watched many of your videos. Greatly appreciate your courage.
Still do. But re “Too Late”, I’m confused. I hear what you’re saying, but you posted a video on 4.21.2014 that stated that by 2032? or thereabouts: “The vast majority of humankind is dead.” Was that statement was tied to?: If we continue on this path.
Been fighting since 1981 re our species suicidal stupidity, SS; (not saying I don’t have my own SS or that I’m not full of wrong in myriad ways), but wondering where you’re at on this. Are we talking that it’s not too late to save (arbitrary #’s) say 3 million people out of 7+ billion?
As you know, self-organized criticality is when-not-if physics for non-equilibrium systems. Knowledge can forestall this relatively rare but repeating phenomenon. Obviously, I don’t know the future, but think the data lines are ugly. Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman says he’s very pessimistic about human behavioral response-abilities to our mess. Etc.
I’ve recently decided to give up, stop raging, fighting (ain’t wholly there yet), under the Too Late banner, and attempt to be sweet as our demise draws near.
At my age, I’m not romantic about fighting and killing through the anarchy of collapse, of little or no food, etc. As reported in this excerpt from Yale historian Timothy Snyder’s “Bloodlands” … Dr. Snyder is writing about Stalin’s starvation of millions in the Ukraine in the 1930s:
“The good people died first. Those who refused to steal or to prostitute themselves died. Those who gave food to others died. Those who refused to eat corpses died.”
So, understand no one has all the answers, but can you be more specific about what you think is salvageable? In this talk you asked about the mechanism of extinction. In the 2014 video you mentioned the oceans going anaerobic and emitting lethal hydrogen sulfide gas as a possible mechanism. Again, not trying to attack at all. As evo-psychologist Robert Kurzban wrote: “The very constitution of the human mind makes us massively inconsistent.” Know that’s true of me and others. So, what say thee?
Thanks Paul,
Best to Thee.
LikeLike
There is one action which could single-handledly change the course of anthropocentric climate change, and that is dealing with the ANTRHOPO aspect of things. We need to bring the human population down to under a billion. We CAN achieve this by PAYing, SUBSIDIZing, VALUEing spaying and neutering of people. We can attach our third world aid to this, we can attack our domestic policies to this.
– Then we can also end all corporate subsidies of fuel-related industries and financial services. Two of the most toxic human practices.
LikeLike