What would be more dangerous?

[Bhs1975]

Truth!! the minor warming we have seen in this current warming cycle will.... even if it were to somehow continue will only increase the growing season from 40N the cold would be much more impactful. 

It's also much easier to get warm with fire and cloths and shelter than it is to cool off when off the grid like a lot of the world's population.

[gallopinggertie]

8 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Tip....a true scientists never use the word denier. “Denier” is a clear slur—intended to smear anyone who questions science. Science of course is and should always be constantly questioned. It is also impossible to be skeptical” of climate. Climate just is...it is a physical system, not a belief or proposition.  

Anyone calling the rapid climate change we’re seeing “minor warming” like you did, is probably a bit daft. Sorry…but there comes a point when if you can’t see reality for what it is, maybe you should spend your time doing something other than constantly posting in this thread. 

[ChescoWx]

10 hours ago, gallopinggertie said:

Anyone calling the rapid climate change we’re seeing “minor warming” like you did, is probably a bit daft. Sorry…but there comes a point when if you can’t see reality for what it is, maybe you should spend your time doing something other than constantly posting in this thread. 

Silence the non-believer!!! ChescoWx is a heretic LOL!!!!

[WolfStock1]

IMO this poll is meaningless without a timeframe.

Are we talking 2-4 over the course of 30 years?  300 years?   3,000 years?  30,000 years?

It matters because the impacts for each would be vastly different, including the level of danger.

When it comes to climate change I like to use the analogy of an airplane's altitude.   What matters isn't so much how *far* the airplane changes altitude - but how *fast* it changes altitude.   Dropping 1,000 ft in two minutes generally isn't a problem.   Dropping 1,000 ft in two seconds is generally a big problem.    Same thing for nominal altitude.   Being at 0 ft Above Ground Level (AGL) is not a problem if that's where you were a few minutes ago, but it's a big problem if you were at 1,000ft AGL a couple seconds ago.   Thus why the whole "the earth has been at temperature X before" is a foolish and meaningless position w/regards to CC.

The poll is also meaningless without supplying additional conditions.   Is this all-else-being-equal?   Presumably so, but it would be nice to state as such.