The Nobel Peace Prize 2019 • Hacker News Board

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#41

Post by lonelappde » Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 12:55 PM UTC

krona wrote: post #37

Tepix wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course. She is creating a lot of attention for the mismatch between scientists' (in particular IPCC) insights and recommendations and politicians (in)actions and failure to reach the goals they set themselves. > what actions does she recommend She recommends we listen to the science. Nothing more, nothing less.

She recommends we listen to the science. Consensus is a probability distribution. Greta talks about the 'findings' of approximately 4% of the IPCC scientists conclusions, on one extreme of the consensus. Obviously none of the models are available to examine, so we'll take their word for it, like a child would.

Care to explain what you are talking about?

I'm going on a limb here to be charitable despite the anti-credibility marker in your last sentence.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#42

Post by goatinaboat » Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 12:56 PM UTC

mraison wrote: post #36

goatinaboat wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If she wants to make a difference her next speech will be delivered in Beijing, not Denver. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... for why.

I assume you're looking at overall CO2 emissions rather than per-capita emissions. The page you linked shows fossil CO2 emissions per capita: China: 7.7t CO2/cap/yr USA: 15.7t CO2/cap/yr Denver seems like a good place to give a speech. Of course, country size does matter, but it's unfair to simply compare total emissions when there's such a huge difference in population size.

I assume you're looking at overall CO2 emissions rather than per-capita emissions.

I’m looking at the page I linked. Per-capita is basically irrelevant, the issue is the total emissions under the control of any one government. Or should China not act until they match the US per-capita but with 3-4x the population?

Further the US and European trends are already downwards. China’s is dramatically upwards.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#43

Post by Bantros » Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 12:56 PM UTC

peter303 wrote: post #7

I will see Greta in Denver Friday afternoon at a climate rally. She is young and a voice of her generation. Many future possibilities for her and repairing the climate crisis. I respect the Nobels decision to award the prize to this peace broker. So many global issues that need attention.

Would be about as pointless her receiving it as when they handed it to Obama

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#44

Post by mraison » Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 1:17 PM UTC

goatinaboat wrote: post #42

mraison wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume you're looking at overall CO2 emissions rather than per-capita emissions. The page you linked shows fossil CO2 emissions per capita: China: 7.7t CO2/cap/yr USA: 15.7t CO2/cap/yr Denver seems like a good place to give a speech. Of course, country size does matter, but it's unfair to simply compare total emissions when there's such a huge difference in population size.

I assume you're looking at overall CO2 emissions rather than per-capita emissions. I’m looking at the page I linked. Per-capita is basically irrelevant, the issue is the total emissions under the control of any one government. Or should China not act until they match the US per-capita but with 3-4x the population? Further the US and European trends are already downwards. China’s is dramatically upwards.

> the issue is the total emissions under the control of any one government

Total emissions definitely matter (no need to give speeches in Palau even if per-capita emissions are much greater than in the USA), but considering this number without regard to the population size is completely unrealistic and insensitive.

For China's overall emissions to get to the same level as the USA, that means a Chinese citizen would be expected, on average, to emit less than half of what a US citizen emits.

Would you expect a Chinese citizen to only eat half of what a US citizen eats, just because there are more people in their country ? Of course not.

China's trend is dramatically upwards because a big chunk of the population is still getting out of poverty. Of course CO2 emissions are increasing.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#45

Post by Symmetry » Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 1:22 PM UTC

mraison wrote: post #36

goatinaboat wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If she wants to make a difference her next speech will be delivered in Beijing, not Denver. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... for why.

I assume you're looking at overall CO2 emissions rather than per-capita emissions. The page you linked shows fossil CO2 emissions per capita: China: 7.7t CO2/cap/yr USA: 15.7t CO2/cap/yr Denver seems like a good place to give a speech. Of course, country size does matter, but it's unfair to simply compare total emissions when there's such a huge difference in population size.

If you're concerned with how guilty each individual consumer in a country should feel look at per capita emissions. If you're interested in stopping climate change effectively look at total emissions.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#46

Post by jswizzy » Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 1:22 PM UTC

peter303 wrote: post #7

I will see Greta in Denver Friday afternoon at a climate rally. She is young and a voice of her generation. Many future possibilities for her and repairing the climate crisis. I respect the Nobels decision to award the prize to this peace broker. So many global issues that need attention.

I don't think she really has done enough to deserve it. To me it seems like it is forced and just pushed to lend creditably to an obvious political puppet. The poor girl is being used and obvious is abused by her parents.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#47

Post by lonelappde » Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 1:24 PM UTC

goatinaboat wrote: post #33

peter303 wrote: post #7

I will see Greta in Denver Friday afternoon at a climate rally. She is young and a voice of her generation. Many future possibilities for her and repairing the climate crisis. I respect the Nobels decision to award the prize to this peace broker. So many global issues that need attention.

If she wants to make a difference her next speech will be delivered in Beijing, not Denver. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... for why.

There is more than one source of pollution in the world, Greta's English is better than her Mandarin, and much of China's pollution is in service of industrial exports.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#48

Post by Tenoke » Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 1:24 PM UTC

peter303 wrote: post #7

I will see Greta in Denver Friday afternoon at a climate rally. She is young and a voice of her generation. Many future possibilities for her and repairing the climate crisis. I respect the Nobels decision to award the prize to this peace broker. So many global issues that need attention.

I am not denouncing her work in ecology activism, but in what way has she contributed to Peace specifically, except for second-order effects?

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#49

Post by tgv » Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 1:25 PM UTC

jswizzy wrote: post #46

peter303 wrote: post #7

I will see Greta in Denver Friday afternoon at a climate rally. She is young and a voice of her generation. Many future possibilities for her and repairing the climate crisis. I respect the Nobels decision to award the prize to this peace broker. So many global issues that need attention.

I don't think she really has done enough to deserve it. To me it seems like it is forced and just pushed to lend creditably to an obvious political puppet. The poor girl is being used and obvious is abused by her parents.

I also think she hasn't done enough to deserve the Nobel peace prize, but used and abused? That's not a very honest frame.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#50

Post by lonelappde » Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 1:26 PM UTC

jansan wrote: post #34

draugadrotten wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and 30 years earlier, another girl, 12 year old Severn Cullis-Suzuki, said the same thing in the UN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOp5ATk_rlM

...and 30 years ago this infamous news article was published: https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0 At that time we had only 10 years to fix the problem, now scientists graciously give us 12 years.

10 years to start, not to finish, is what the article said.

Fortunately, we did something in those 10 years, as the article pleaded.

wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol