Voluntary Human Extinction Movement

[Dmitry1983]

They will be good places to live

No, they will not be ....

Why? Antarctica was green millions of years ago and dinosaurs lived there.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Why? Antarctica was green millions of years ago and dinosaurs lived there.

Again you keep making this naive assumption that because in the past place, X was good when it was warm that means it will be good now. That's not the way climate works.

[Dmitry1983]

Pointing out earth had varied temperatures in the past due to gradual natural shifts does not mean rapid artificial shifts are good for us.

Can't species just move to higher latitudes? Even trees can move naturally at 2.5 miles/year.

https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Aether/...%20cities.
Melting permafrost will degrade infrastructure across 70 percent of Russia’s landmass

Areas with permafrost are very sparcely populated.

Droughts, floods, and extreme weather events will make parts of Russia less habitable and economically productive.

But areas that are currently extremely cold will become more habitable in the future.

https://www.euronews.com/green/2021/11/0...n-kalmykia

Higher temperature means more water evaporation from oceans and more rainfall on land. So deserts will likely shrink. Sahara's green periods strongly correlate with warm interglacials.

[Dmitry1983]

Why? Antarctica was green millions of years ago and dinosaurs lived there.

Again you keep making this naive assumption that because in the past place, X was good when it was warm that means it will be good now. That's not the way climate works.

How do you know the way climate works? There is strong scientific evidence that warmer wetter climate is good for life. Aren't atheists supposed to trust the evidence?

[The Architect Of Fate]

Can't species just move to higher latitudes? Even trees can move naturally at 2.5 miles/year.

Flooding isn't the only issue 

Areas with permafrost are very sparcely populated.

That won't be the case if more people move to those places 

But areas that are currently extremely cold will become more habitable in the future.

The cold isn't the only thing that can render a place unhabitable

Higher temperature means more water evaporation from oceans and more rainfall on land. So deserts will likely shrink. Sahara's green periods strongly correlate with warm interglacials.

That simply isn't always the case 2. Once again pointing to natural climate conditions of the past is a bad method of comparing it to now 3. More intense rainfall can be a negative too.

[The Architect Of Fate]

How do you know the way climate works ?

We have studied climate change consistently and the negatives are well known 

There is strong scientific evidence that warmer wetter climate is good for life

There is evidence under certain conditions at certain times warmer wetter climates CAN be good for life and they also can be bad for life. It's not perfect either or the situation. And depending on climate conditions you may not get either.

Aren't atheists supposed to trust the evidence?

I do which is why reject your claims and accept the science that this is a net negative.

[Dmitry1983]

Can't species just move to higher latitudes? Even trees can move naturally at 2.5 miles/year.

Flooding isn't the only issue 

I mean that species can move closer to North and South poles. Only equatorial regions will probably become uninhabitable.

That won't be the case if more people move to those places

But people would move there only if those places will become MORE habitable.

The cold isn't the only thing that can render a place unhabitable

In case of Russia cold is the primary cause of low habitability

More intense rainfall can be a negative too.

It was very positive for Sahara.

[Dmitry1983]

How do you know the way climate works ?

We have studied climate change consistently and the negatives are well known

If you studied it consistently you would know that mammals flourished during PETM when temperature was 10 degrees Celsius higher.

under certain conditions at certain times

Average Earth's temperature was 6 degrees Celsius higher for the last 500 million years and life was doing just fine so generally warmer wetter climate is good for life.

Aren't atheists supposed to trust the evidence?

I do which is why reject your claims and accept the science that this is a net negative.

Scientists say that warmer wetter climate is a net positive.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

You really expect any of those to become superpowers?

Boru

They will be good places to live

Which has fuck all to do with Russia regaining superpower status.

Boru

[The Architect Of Fate]

I mean that species can move closer to North and South poles. Only equatorial regions will probably become uninhabitable.

Nope, eventually, these effects will harm species even in the farthest regions of the earth. This also assumes these species can make it there. 

But people would move there only if those place will become MORE habitable.

Not necessarily. They may move there during a more habitable period only to then suffer the later drawbacks, by the way, permafrost affects things well outside its immediate region so even not living in the permafrost regions will be affected.

In case of Russia cold is the primary cause of low habitability

Now it is and in the future,  other factors will be the cause.

It was very positive for Sahara.

Under the climate conditions of the time by the method of warming that caused it. It can't be used as a comparison to now....