Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 105 posts

Re: Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

#51

Post by Turing_Machine »

emodendroket wrote: post #48
Turing_Machine wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See the link I posted above. Before this storm, the last hurricane of Category 3 or greater to strike the United States was Wilma, in 2005. The last Category 5 storm to strike the United States was Andrew, in 1992.

I'm sure the various people losing a collective $75 billion in effects of Hurricane Sandy will be pleased to know that it wasn't a "major storm."

Hurricane Sandy was expensive because it struck a densely populated region, not because it was a particularly strong storm.

Re: Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

#52

Post by emodendroket »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #51
emodendroket wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure the various people losing a collective $75 billion in effects of Hurricane Sandy will be pleased to know that it wasn't a "major storm."

Hurricane Sandy was expensive because it struck a densely populated region, not because it was a particularly strong storm.

So what?

Re: Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

#53

Post by jabv »

ackfoo wrote: post #2

Harvey was a hurricane. It could have occurred anywhere on the Gulf Coast. There is no direct relationship between climate change and any particular named storm. To argue otherwise is to destroy one's credibility. The problems that exacerbated the disaster of Harvey are indeed linked to climate change, but not in the simple-minded way that Naomi Klein makes out. The economic factors that lead to high-density construc…

I appreciate your call to take a cause seriously by making changes in one's personal life.

That said, every time I read someone advise "stop having babies" to combat climate change, I am reminded of the South Park episode wherein the overzealous hunters claim that deer overpopulation will cause some deer to die, so they need to kill the deer to prevent overpopulation and future deer deaths.

Re: Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

#54

Post by Turing_Machine »

emodendroket wrote: post #52
Turing_Machine wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hurricane Sandy was expensive because it struck a densely populated region, not because it was a particularly strong storm.

So what?

1) The definition of "major hurricane" is one of Category 3 or greater. Sandy was only a 1.

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutgloss.shtml#m

2) The actual topic of discussion here is whether climate change makes hurricanes worse. Unless you have some evidence that climate change was responsible for Sandy's track, its connection with the topic is dubious at best. Do you have such evidence?

Edit: No, they're not "more frequent", either.

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/All_U.S._Hurricanes.html

Re: Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

#55

Post by DennisP »

bmmayer1 wrote: post #42
DennisP wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like saying it's lazy to use lung cancer cases to bolster arguments against smoking, since there's no way to prove that a particular case of cancer was caused by smoking.

As long as you are comfortable with cigarette companies pointing to cancer-free smokers and saying "See! Smoking doesn't cause cancer!"

Which they did for a while, but we didn't respond by abandoning the entire line of argument, which would have been silly.

Re: Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

#56

Post by emodendroket »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #54
emodendroket wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what?

1) The definition of "major hurricane" is one of Category 3 or greater. Sandy was only a 1. http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutgloss.shtml#m 2) The actual topic of discussion here is whether climate change makes hurricanes worse. Unless you have some evidence that climate change was responsible for Sandy's track, its connection with the topic is dubious at best. Do you have such evidence? Edit: No, they're not "more freque…

It is not just whether it makes them worse but also whether it makes them more frequent. If the country is experiencing more highly damaging storms who cares whether they're category 3 or not?

Re: Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

#57

Post by reitanqild »

mercurysmessage wrote: post #23
DarkKomunalec wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> stop having babies Most of the west has already drastically reduced the number of babies. All that happened is we were told we need immigration instead.

I don't know why you insist on spreading this ignorance all over HN, this really isn't the place for your rhetoric.

Actually the following facts are true:

- western families have fewer kids

- some politicians - at least in some countries in the West - tells people we need immigration

You might not like it and as usual correlation doesn't prove causation.

That still doesn't give you the right to be uncivil here.

Re: Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

#58

Post by dwaltrip »

geiseric wrote: post #40
dogruck wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strange how difficult it is to get a non-political unbiased view of man-made climate change, isn't it?

If in fact climate change is man made. There is strong evidence that this is a natural cycle. Are humans contributing greenhouse gasses? Yes, but what effect are they having? We don't really know, contrary to those who say they do. We have an idea, but climate prediction is still difficult and imperfect. So NO! The science isn't final.

Human CO2 contribution and the basic warming effect are well understood.

Nature absorbs more CO2 than it emits, but not enough to offset the amount we are putting out. Thus, the global CO2 concentration has been rising over the past 100+ years, especially in recent decades.

A higher CO2 concentration blocks more thermal radiation from exiting through Earth's atmosphere into space. When this energy is blocked, it stays on Earth, raising the temperature.

Using models that have made successful predictions in recent decades, we can predict that we are in for at least another 1 degree Celsius raise in global temperature, and very likely more if we don't work hard to counteract the issue (and stop emitting so much CO2).

This temperature increase will have very real, significant consequences, and we saw it coming many years ago. There is a reason all other developed countries in the world don't deny climate change.

Re: Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

#59

Post by DarkKomunalec »

polotics wrote: post #47
geiseric wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If in fact climate change is man made. There is strong evidence that this is a natural cycle. Are humans contributing greenhouse gasses? Yes, but what effect are they having? We don't really know, contrary to those who say they do. We have an idea, but climate prediction is still difficult and imperfect. So NO! The science isn't final.

You are using a straw man: science is never final. We however do really know what effect CO2 has, you even use the term "greenhouse gases", that's the effect right there in the name. You state "strong evidence", please post links to this I have a few debunking minutes left for today. Thank you

> science is never final

Why not wait till we're (more) certain? What's the worst that could happen? Catastrophic, runaway climate-change? I say we risk it - at least the science will have been settled...

FUD works both ways.

Re: Harvey Didn't Come Out of the Blue. Now Is the Time to Talk about Climate Change

#60

Post by mercurysmessage »

reitanqild wrote: post #57
mercurysmessage wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why you insist on spreading this ignorance all over HN, this really isn't the place for your rhetoric.

Actually the following facts are true: - western families have fewer kids - some politicians - at least in some countries in the West - tells people we need immigration You might not like it and as usual correlation doesn't prove causation. That still doesn't give you the right to be uncivil here.

Uncivil? The uncivil one is the the one who spends most of his time on HN spouting ignorant anti-immigration rhetoric.
Post reply on HN