How do We Survive Climate Change?

There is no longer a debate anywhere on earth that Climate change is occurring, the only debate is to why it is occurring.

And I basically think this debate is irrelevant. The reason it is irrelevant is that the next 300 years to 500 years will be horrific for life on earth now whether you believe climate change is caused by human activities upon earth or not.

It doesn't matter at all at this point because unless we survive as a human race the next 300 to 500 years there won't be any humans left on earth at all.

If you study computerized climate models from universities and study groups you can see that what is expected will likely kill off possibly 1/4 to 1/2 of the present level of the human race starting about the end of this century.

The real question is: "How many people will survive the next 100 to 300 to 500 years?

In the past warlords would have wars to reduce populations and so they could have the cream of the crop of the young women as their own.

Those days are long gone here on earth.

So, most places are much more civilized than that now.

So now, the question is: "Will you and your family survive what is coming?"

Because, the future is definitely not the past. It will no longer be big wars that thin out the human race. It will be starvation caused by drought and starvation caused by floods that take all the topsoil away along with many people and their homes. It will be caused by rising oceans that bring hurricanes and Cyclones further inland all over the earth.

It will devastate coastal cities as far inland as low elevation (under 10 to 25 feet to 50 feet in elevation exists worldwide on the coasts). As the ocean rises there will be storms that reach up to 75 feet or more elevation wise into areas around the world.

Droughts will devastate regions like the Southwest U.S. while floods wash away areas surrounding the Mississippi and other river regions in the U.S. Nuclear power plants might also be washed away so to speak as well in these floods with disastrous consequences for everyone downstream. And It wouldn't matter whether these power plants were operational or retired because most of the real radiation there cannot be moved because it is embedded in pipes and cement permanently there only to be undermined by flooding and weather some day. So, literally everyone downstream from ANY nuclear power plant on earth will be in trouble some day.

So, what can you do to survive Climate Change? Watch things like the Weather Channel so you know when to get underground (if tornadoes are coming) or get in your car and run (if flooding and tornadoes are coming) or move if something bad happens upstream at a nuclear power plant or move if drought becomes severe where you live.

This is going to be extremely hard on people with established businesses and farms worldwide. Sometimes, only the younger generations will be capable of moving without going bankrupt. But, sometimes even then the younger people will help their elders reestablish in those newer safer places around the world.

So being capable of mobility when serious changes occur will tend to help everyone survive better whatever comes.


Because the damage done by the human race since we starting farming and burning more is no longer preventable for at least the next 300 to 500 years even if we all changed the ways we do everything right now. This is why this debate is no longer useful.

Figuring out how to survive the damage already done is the only useful thing now. If a train is coming at you and you are standing on the tracks does it matter whether the train is on time or not? No. It doesn't. It only matters whether you get off the tracks before you die.

Later: I was thinking more about what will happen to old nuclear power plants? The most likely thing that will happen is one of two things: Either nothing will happen which will cause radiation poisoning of people downstream as time passes and people might not know about nuclear radiation then. or
the second outcome from more advanced cultures technically that can afford it would be robots being built now to withstand radiation for up to 50 years that could literally jackhammer nuclear sites apart and store them in radiation proof containers that could be loaded on trucks or trains and taken out to sea in ships and dumped into the deepest oceans like the U.S. has scuttled broken or outmoded nuclear submarines off the San Francisco Coast near the Farallon Islands for the last 50 years or so.

Farallon Islands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farallon_Islands‎

Wikipedia

The Farallon Islands, or Farallones (from the Spanish farallón meaning "pillar" or "sea cliff"), are a group of islands and sea stacks in the Gulf of the Farallones, ...

‎History - ‎Geology - ‎Geography - ‎Fauna and flora

 

However, I think a better place for nuclear radiation would be in the core of the earth away from the mantle. However, trying to get it there might be a real problem too. Even if you put it in water form or it already was in water form sending it down into the core might be difficult. And what if it eventually came up as magma into volcanoes? However, by then it likely would mix around a lot and be less of a problem because magma that touched humans would kill them if in the molten state. So, the deep ocean and the core seems to be the most cost effective place to put old nuclear radiated substances from running nuclear power plants.  Sending nuclear radiated materials into space away from earth I don't think ever will be cost effective, especially if you sent it into the sun which is an ongoing thermonuclear hydrogen bomb going off 24 hours a day as it turns hydrogen into helium and heavier elements.