The Science of Climate Change | HHMI BioInteractive Video

[@nobodyimportant9204]

These are the kinds of videos we need more of. During the part where the correlation is shown between temperature and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere over time, there's a great explanation of how ice cores are used to determine CO2 concentration in the past, but there isn't any explanation for how ice cores are used to calculate temperature estimates. Maybe you could show it in a follow-up video?

[@laturista1000]

Sadly the people with all the trillions of dollars. Soros, Rockefellars, Waltons, Zuckerberg, Bezos, are still hoarding their wealth and buying and building more mansions and boats. Their actions don't match their words. And most of us poor folk don't know what to do anymore. Do we stop existing?

[@TWIST3DS1ST3R1]

William Happer a real scientist says otherwise.

[@AA-eq5wk]

This infrastructure and Build Back Better are not only a disaster for the environment, that are racist. Manmade climate change, unnatural extinction, threats to wildlife, ecosystem collapse, pollution in all forms, pandemics, mass human migration, wars over territory and resources, social inequalities, human starvation, human obesity, factory farming, inflation, unemployment are ALL a direct result of TOO MANY HUMANS competing for survival, with growing tech and transportation/shipping needs, on a finite world. The solution is not to ramp up heavy industry, adding further environmental damage and exploiting developing world slave/child labor, with so called green energy. NO.. the solution is for folks to drastically limit their consumption across the board, which would limit the associated waste; as well as addressing the exponentially increasing human overpopulation that is driving demand beyond planetary capacity by having fewer children or NO children at all. @

[@jeyaprabhasanjaypragash5828]

I had goosebumps throughout the video, let's work together guys ❤

[@TheMrCougarful]

Scientist here. This was well done, initially. The recommendation to "transition to renewables" and "use soil to draw down CO2" comes to us straight from the fossil fuels industry. I will allow for the moment that this was an oversight, but do know the fossil fuels sector is promoting the continued use of their products combined with some vague promise to "fix it later, somehow, a century from now". This advice is lethal for life on Earth, human life included. The only practical solution is to leave all fossil fuels in the ground for all time.

[@shalizzle793]

Whether that’s at all practical from a policy standpoint, both international and domestic, goes into what they said. They outright said fossil fuels need to be eliminated and soon, and obviously it’s preferable to do so right now. As a political scientist I can tell you that’s not going to happen.

[@guanacopower2249]

@A11A111 You hit the nail on the head. For decades we have spent billions looking for technical, “scientific “ solutions. When the answer has been in front of us. I wish I had a solution on how to sustainably manage population growth.

[@SIRCAM73]

Love this channel, thanks for educating us. Subscribed!

[@biointeractive]

Awesome, thank you!

[@dianneabaya1927]

But then, the transition required to reduce co2 production also requires burning to create these renewable technologies for the sustainability of our environment. I think, the most effective way to actually reduce co2 production is to rest from the undustrial-technology era. We must give more improtance in the life of our planet,Earth, than the comfort we can experience living here in the planet. Let us not be selfish for we are not the only human beings to experience life and therefore we must share it's beauty to the future generations by being careful of everything we decide now.

[@crystaldemoura8977]

agreed! ...and quit using AI for any search or just to play around. AI searches and "toys" cost 10X the power as a normal browser search! Of course, big tech and AI companies won't tell you this as they quickly and quietly back out of all of their promises to be carbon neutral by 2030. Ha! what hypocrites!

[@joelvanwinkle5976]

Thanks you really helped me do my college report on climate change.

[@jtop_7001]

Had to watch this for ecology

[@samlair3342]

The good news about global warming is that it’s not being caused by increasing solar output or any other natural cause, and also that mankind generally understands that it’s the ‘amplified greenhouse effect’ which is the source of increasing temperatures. With this in mind, it behooves us to rapidly advance and apply our scientific knowledge to the point that burning fossil fuels to produce electricity will become as antiquated as burning whale oil for light. Quote: “Anxiety must go. It must be replaced by faith and solemn confidence in the outworking of the divine plan.” Note: As sunlight (photons) is warming the surface of the Earth, surface heat energy is also radiating away from our planet in the form of ‘infrared radiation’ which passes freely thru the atmospheric gases of nitrogen and oxygen that do not absorb heat. Indeed, if it weren’t for greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide that ‘do interact’ strongly with infrared energy and ‘impede the escape’ of Earth’s radiant heat, then the planet would be perpetually frozen solid. Thankfully, even though greenhouse gases comprise only 4/10ths of one percent of the atmosphere, they are so powerful that they maintain a ‘blanketing effect’ by constantly ‘absorbing and releasing’ the infrared heat energy over and over, again and again. In doing so, they gyrate wildly, thus causing them to vigorously collide with other atmospheric molecules which, in turn, collide with other air molecules, imparting the kinetic energy of motion throughout the atmosphere - and this vibratory state registers as temperature. For more, search: ‘CO2 infrared radiation quantum level’ ‘Amplified greenhouse effect’ For the big picture, search: Marcott reconstruction chart

[@DebayanRaha]

Very informative video. 👍

[@biointeractive]

Glad it was helpful!

[@bigtex1238]

Loved it 👍🏻

[@biointeractive]

Thank you 😁

[@BlGGESTBROTHER]

Wait a sec...how does the graph they show at the 11 minute mark prove temperature rises are correlated to co2 levels? If you look there were huge temperature spikes 850-750k years ago when co2 levels were much lower than they are today.

[@hosnimubarak8869]

[citation needed]

[@witoman]

It's an anomaly relative to the most recent 700 k years history. Maybe further back than 700 k years, the measurement procedure they use produces more variation. It is astounding that we have valid data that far back to begin with. Pretty tight correlation for the past 700 k years, don't you think?

[@al6243]

I mean overall the trend there is still pretty clear despite that anomaly, like the correlation of temperature and CO2 levels around 800k, 600k, 500k, 400k, 300k, 200k, 100k, and in between each of them excluding the 850k-750k.

[@shalizzle793]

Because it’s multivariate. Car crash deaths correlate pretty heavily and negatively to wearing seatbelts (the more seatbelts worn, the fewer car crash deaths). If more people started driving cars that exploded upon impact, car deaths could rise even if seatbelt usage was rising, the graph you’re looking at just doesn’t display anything more than the X and Y axis

[@TWIST3DS1ST3R1]

Climate change is not real. It's a political wedge so the rich get richer. William Happer is a real scientist check him out

[@bradbowers352]

The hottest decade ever???? How could they possibly know that??

[@seanhickey8851]

since tracking / using ice core samples which go back hundreds of thousands of years. They are obviously estimates because nobody had a thermometer and data tracking thousands of years ago.

[@wind-leader_jp]

Rather than explaining that temperatures have risen because the amount of carbon dioxide has increased, I think it would be more convincing to explain that CO2 and CH4 vibrate due to solar radiation. As a result, they retain thermal energy for a long time. Unlike a struck cymbal, vibrating CO2 can continue to vibrate for a long time with almost no friction. When you add in the image of CO2 flowing into the Arctic released by a NASA agency, you can imagine that the Arctic has warmed several times. After all, the North and South Poles are constantly exposed to solar radiation in the summer.

[@i.novitsky9291]

#CreativeSociety #GlobalCrisis #Time4Truth🌏📢🌍📣🌎🕊🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@TWIST3DS1ST3R1]

2010 was the hottest decade. Why can't these under educated people do their homework. Oh that's right they would rather cause fear and panic.

[@knuttella]

why nobody talks about nuclear? it's part of the solution and without it we might not make it as a species in a long enough horizon

[@shalizzle793]

Nuclear should be combined with solar and wind energy and is probably a part of what they were discussing as an alternative, even if unmentioned. But when water used for cooling becomes too warm and power plants take so long to produce, nuclear isn’t going to be “the savior” but merely contribute to it.

[@dakotalake9084]

How would you like nuclear waste to be buried in front of your house?

[@sudhakarreddy1453]

@@dakotalake9084the waste produced by a coal fired power plant is much more radioactive than the waste produced by the nuclear power plants. And we have a control on the waste produced by the nuclear power plant but not coal fired ones.

[@elderzimriah]

I was forced to watch this for a grade.

[@michaelkatz715]

Did you get a good grade? 😊

[@whatthehelludoin]

same

[@beccas_archives]

Real

[@ozwasp]

CO2 is driven by temperature in glacial cycles, not the other way around (warmer oceans expel CO2).... Correlation is not causation and if there is target fixation, then other variables won't be considered... A better approach would be to look at historic events in the geologic record, rather than making predictions - the PETM event 56M years ago is a better way to look at the current situation. There was approximately 30 times the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere compared with what humans have released and temperatures rose 5-8C.... From this you can see that while CO2 would have an impact (say 0.25C) , there must be other factors to contribute to a 1C rise (ie land clearing and natural variations)

[@pltskampung]

indonesia still going on coal mining & deforestation for pulp paper & palm oil industry

[@unkelfukkenskot7447]

Those G•d-damned Indonesians! I knew it wasn't us. Thanks for the info. 🙏

[@leeolmeda3595]

PY attention. Thank you

[@guardiadiego1137]

🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰

[@monoyara2573]

please make how reduced mealanin in skin?My is dark.please!

[@jorgerojas5937]

I do not beleived and climate changed.

[@wolfenstein722]

Just watched this again and at 0:55 he states that humans are have a profound impact on the planet but what he doesn’t say is that the Americans are have the highest profound impact on the planet, there’s a difference...!

[@guardiadiego1137]

Actually, European countries started the gas emission by burning fossil fuel. Where do you think industry revolution has started?

[@unkelfukkenskot7447]

@@guardiadiego1137 Those G•d-d•mned Europeans! I knew it wasn't us. Thanks for the info. 🙏

[@elderzimriah]

@@guardiadiego1137 agreed and I would add that if you look at the emissions between countries the US is one of the lowest in CO2 emissions.

[@mrp9023]

​@@elderzimriahthe US is one of the highest emitters of CO2, where on earth did you get that from 😅

[@YahirGarciaChannel]

Americans are humans, by the way.

[@wolfenstein722]

Remember, the calendar has had a day added in February, for the leap year, for years, so we have moved the calendar so that it does not line up with the seasons anymore. At a minimum, we need to move two months from the beginning of a new year, to put this back to a reasonable alignment with the seasons!

[@wolfenstein722]

OK stop, video paused at 1 minute 51 second, forest fires in the US are insignificant when compared to deforestation but the US ignores deforestation, in fact, I don’t believe the word ‘deforestation’ in in their dictionaries. Also, the pronunciation of ‘anti’ is not correct by the US, you do not pronounce the ‘i’, it’s just ‘ant-tea’ not ‘ant-i’. It just makes you sound thicker when you pronounce it wrong!