Antarctica is thawing, now green with plant life!

[AiliailiA]

Most of the world's population live in the Tropics. Upsides for Europeans and North Americans are basically "the rich get richer" and fuck most of humanity.

Is this even true?

It used to be, maybe I'm out of date.

In any case, the net-negative effects extend beyond the tropics, and supposed postives like a longer growing season in Michigan (or Germany) only benefit a tiny minority.

[Jamzmania]

Is this even true?

It used to be, maybe I'm out of date.

In any case, the net-negative effects extend beyond the tropics, and supposed postives like a longer growing season in Michigan (or Germany) only benefit a tiny minority.

If you say so.

[Longweather]

The plants are good, but seriously, this also means global warming is worsing, and definitely true, not false as some alternative facts claim. Also, aren't you all worried about the rising sea level of the world from the melting of the ice

Yes, it's why I advocate interrogating the Dutch to learn the secrets of their dikes and other forms of flood control. The fact that my country's government hasn't made this a priority keeps me up at night.

[The Novakian Empire]

Oh fuck.

[Torsiedelle]

As a proud ethnic Antarctican, I am proud to be able to look forward to the restoration of my people's Empire.

Also, Antarctic villas.

[Karamiko]

My factbooks are slowly coming true!

[Imperializt Russia]

This is only the case if the rate of increase is, or will remain, linear.

It is unlikely to.

Give me a good reason to believe it will significantly change.

Climate change operates on a series of feedback loops. For example, why major warming effects only began in the latter half of the twentieth century, rather than say, 1800.

My point was solely that the increase of plant coverage would be very unlikely to be linear, and likely has not been linear to today.

[AiliailiA]

It used to be, maybe I'm out of date.

In any case, the net-negative effects extend beyond the tropics, and supposed postives like a longer growing season in Michigan (or Germany) only benefit a tiny minority.

If you say so.

There's a graphic around showing world population by latitude (and longitude), it's quite well known but it's based on year 2000 data.

I found a more recent one:

http://www.datagraver.com/case/world-population-distribution-by-latitude-and-longitude-2015

and here's their graphic with the tropics marked and colored-in:

... and counting pixels (which is sloppy I know) that's 43% of the world's population in the tropics, and 57% outside the tropics to North or South. So yeah, it wasn't true what I said.

If you want a precise figure ... here's the data of every square kilometer of Earth ... you do the math.

[Risottia]

Gradually becoming green with plant life.

Time to move and graze Antarctica with my presence.

I wonder if we can cultivate hops, barley, etc. there. It would be nice to have a beer produced with all the ingredients grown in antarctica

Also, time to move away from any low lying country, feet will get wet

*hastily builds a wall on the Alps to keep out those welfare-leeching Dutch refugees*

[Gig em Aggies]

Gradually becoming green with plant life.

Time to move and graze Antarctica with my presence.

I wonder if we can cultivate hops, barley, etc. there. It would be nice to have a beer produced with all the ingredients grown in antarctica

Also, time to move away from any low lying country, feet will get wet

*hastily builds a wall on the Alps to keep out those welfare-leeching Dutch refugees*

*has trump build a wall around Antarctica and makes Antarctica pay for it.

[Arcturus Novus]

Well, fuck.

[San Marlindo]

Give me a good reason to believe it will significantly change.

Climate change operates on a series of feedback loops. For example, why major warming effects only began in the latter half of the twentieth century, rather than say, 1800.

My point was solely that the increase of plant coverage would be very unlikely to be linear, and likely has not been linear to today.

Prove it. Show me a statistic which indicates the rate of increase in plant coverage is growing significantly greater with each passing year.

[Imperializt Russia]

Climate change operates on a series of feedback loops. For example, why major warming effects only began in the latter half of the twentieth century, rather than say, 1800.

My point was solely that the increase of plant coverage would be very unlikely to be linear, and likely has not been linear to today.

Prove it. Show me a statistic which indicates the rate of increase in plant coverage is growing significantly greater with each passing year.

I will not, because that is not what I ever claimed.

[Notbotswana]

Apparently, thanks to global warming, vast sums of land will now be much more habitable and arable. Thanks global warming!

The growing season in Michigan will become similar to Kentucky and massive chunks of Canada will be agriculturally viable.

Oh really? Don't you need good soils to be "agriculturally viable" ? Most of Canada has Spodosols, Inceptisols, Gelisols.

[UKCS]

Oh lovely, another way for us to die. Just when I thought I could stop being miserable.

[Imperializt Russia]

Apparently, thanks to global warming, vast sums of land will now be much more habitable and arable. Thanks global warming!

The growing season in Michigan will become similar to Kentucky and massive chunks of Canada will be agriculturally viable.

I suspect you may have taken this from either a biased or somewhat scientifically illiterate source.

NASA projects that much of the southern US, currently where much of American agriculture hails, will experience reduced habitability and drought conditions that may range between "second dustbowl" and "megadrought".

[Wallenburg]

The growing season in Michigan will become similar to Kentucky and massive chunks of Canada will be agriculturally viable.

Oh really? Don't you need good soils to be "agriculturally viable" ? Most of Canada has Spodosols, Inceptisols, Gelisols.

Don't interrupt their unscientific musings with facts!

[Jamzmania]

The growing season in Michigan will become similar to Kentucky and massive chunks of Canada will be agriculturally viable.

I suspect you may have taken this from either a biased or somewhat scientifically illiterate source.

NASA projects that much of the southern US, currently where much of American agriculture hails, will experience reduced habitability and drought conditions that may range between "second dustbowl" and "megadrought".

We're going to have more water but at the same time experience drought?

[Imperializt Russia]

I suspect you may have taken this from either a biased or somewhat scientifically illiterate source.

NASA projects that much of the southern US, currently where much of American agriculture hails, will experience reduced habitability and drought conditions that may range between "second dustbowl" and "megadrought".

We're going to have more water but at the same time experience drought?

Yes. Some regions will become wetter, and others drier. It is highly likely that areas we rely on for crops - typically the warmer parts of countries - will suffer drought and cooler parts of countries will become wetter (but also maybe become better for planting crops).

Just like how record cold weather this winter and last winter in some parts of the US was kind of irrelevant, because they were caused by record war weather elsewhere.

The climate is extremely complicated.

[AiliailiA]

More rainfall some places, less in others, you'd think it would even out.

Unfortunately, where there has been sufficient rainfall for a long time topsoil has developed. That's the prime farming land, flattish, topsoil, seasonal rain. Severe drought pretty much destroys the topsoil, too much rain washes it away.

And where there was insufficient rainfall for a long time, deserts (or near-deserts) have developed. Generous rain there doesn't make it good farming land ... it's not useless, soil develops slowly and it can be helped along with recycled food waste (perhaps even plastics), and even the poorest sandy soil can grow something with artificial fertilizers. But in no way is a "blooming desert" enough to replace the aforementioned farming land.

[Victoria and Vacuna]

The impact of it will be enough to raise sea levels by a few hundred feet, and I don't know how fast the ground will rebound but I'm confident it can't be much faster than the water on top of it will melt and rejoin the ocean.
So any fantasies about real neonazi antarctic bases on an Antarctica that's a newly rising string of half-frozen tundra islands are irrelevant nonsense. Especially since it will have few positive impacts on my life.

[Victoria and Vacuna]

War weather? My noodle is tangled

Did Samo misspell? I can't tell.

[Southeastern Xiatao]

As long as we don't find the Tsalal then were fine!

[AiliailiA]

The impact of it will be enough to raise sea levels by a few hundred feet, and I don't know how fast the ground will rebound but I'm confident it can't be much faster than the water on top of it will melt and rejoin the ocean.
So any fantasies about real neonazi antarctic bases on an Antarctica that's a newly rising string of half-frozen tundra islands are irrelevant nonsense. Especially since it will have few positive impacts on my life.

All of the Antarctic ice will not necessarily melt. That's a rather extreme projection of global climate change, it only happens if we keep burning fossil fuels like we are doing for several decades. We might not, and we might also take some measures to reverse the effects of what we've done already.

It's 80 metres That would have negative impacts on most people's lives.

[Frank Zipper]

Might lead to some interesting paleontological discoveries.