What country would be the safest to life in when global warming is at its full affect?

Question

What country would be least affected by global warming?

Answer 1

The bahammas or Bermuda would be perfectly safe under any conditions.

Answer 2

Realistically it'll be a developed country as those will have resources to deal with the problems global warming causes.

Pretty much the whole developed world is probably going to do alright and manage to survive global warming, it's the developing world where the big problems will occur.

Answer 3

If global warming was real then probably the most northern or southern countries would be safest.  But I don't believe it's ever going to happen.  This whole thing is proof that science and political agendas don't mix well.

Answer 4

that's two questions.

What country would be the safest to life in when global warming is at its full affect?

iceland. egalitarian, the people are used to sticking together in adverse conditions, and very difficult for the climate refugees to reach.

What country would be least affected by global warming?

probably smallish mountainous islands (eg newer volcanic) not too close to equator but warm already, with a good remaining forest cover.

Answer 5

Global warming is at its full effect just before the beginning of the following ice age. So you would want to have your great great grandchildren living in a tropical area close to the coast. By then the rising ocean levels will long since have stopped rising and be ready to go back down as the ice rebuilds in the ice age.

All through the warming period, it is not expected that areas under the equatorial sun will be dangerously warm. and the hot deserts are close to their long term maximum temperatures.

What is likely is that areas now considered temperate may become more like our hot deserts.

Where should one avoid? Areas that are likely to be flooded, not just because of rising oceans but also because of torrential rains. Places that may not be able to feed you because of widespread drought, areas close to the arctic where escaping methane  may kill you.

Just stop trying to be safe because of where you are or are not.

Look at how large numbers of people may live better,

Answer 6

I wouldn't worry about it. Al Gore scared you young ones and he should be whipped.

Exaggerations about sea level rise: Gore claims that potential melting of ice sheets in Greenland and West Antarctic will force the "evacuation" of millions of people to escape sea level rise of 6 meters (20 feet). This flatly contradicts even the worst-case scenarios described by the scientific community. Most research indicates that such melting, even if it could occur, would take 1,000 to 5,000 years; the minimum timescale described by any researcher for such melting is still centuries. Even the United Nations' IPCC, source of the "consensus" analysis which still overestimates future warming, only predicts sea level rise of 0.1 to 0.8 meters (4 to 30 inches) in the next 100 years.

Reliance on worst-case scenarios: An underlying problem is that Gore seizes upon worst-case scenarios and presents them as fact--sometimes omitting important qualifiers. Much of the claims about the consequences of future global warming rely on climate models that Gore calls "evermore accurate", but significant questions about the reliability of these models remain, and the effects cited by Gore presume that the worse-case predictions of these models are the correct ones. More generally, climate change should be considered at the regional or local level, where impacts would variously be positive or negative--especially depending on how we choose to respond. Gore consistently discusses the most negative impacts, and even minimizes the possibility of positive change.

False claims about scientific views on global warming: Gore asserts that the scientific community is in essentially unanimous agreement with his interpretation of global warming, and dismisses skepticism of global warming as an energy industry conspiracy. Not only are such claims false, they severely misrepresent the very process of science. Gore cites a flawed editorial from a science journal to claim that all published research agrees with the "consensus" view on global warming; in reality, much published research contradicts Gore's position on global warming, and a recent survey of climate scientists found the community fairly split on the claim that there is an imminent threat from human-caused global warming. Despite the abundance of scientific research contradicting his position, Gore instead concentrates on refuting a handful of skeptical claims from outside the scientific community--and can't even get the facts right on those. To add insult to injury, Gore repeatedly impugns the motives of scientists and non-scientists who question his "consensus" on global warming. Rather than confront the scientific facts, he stereotypes the critics and dismisses them based on imagined motives.

Answer 7

probably a country in the middle of a large land mass, b/c of the rising water  

Answer 8

All of them would be safe, as fairy-tales do not exist.

Answer 9

Global warming will not have the same effects on the whole planet: while some of it will be warm others will be very cold, anyway I think none of the countries will be safe at all.

Answer 10

It will not happen for a VERY long time so our generation and the next several to come have nothing to worry about. For all time climate has changed we don't need to freak out.