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

Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 121 posts

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#111

Post by ianai »

radicalbyte wrote: post #25
sambull wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dictator? I simply said the market/and economists can't price in damage to our environment and won't. If you feel any regulation on a corporation is being a dictator than maybe the answer is yes in your context. We've had to dictate the direction many times in the past when industry has become to exploitative of either labor or resources.

The market certainly can be regulated in such a way as to effectively price in the costs. If we can have companies following constructs such as Sarbanes-Oxley then they can most certainly follow the constraints of environmental constructs. Unless you mean that certain vested interests will bankroll politicians to cut regulation? Then yes, that is a very big problems (see: Koch industries buying their way out of envir…

So I don’t have the answer here. I do like Jay Inslee’s argument for simply making mandates to cut emissions and carbon usage. Ie mandating ever increasingly efficient fuel ratings on vehicles. He says that’s an easier policy change than forcing costs on people through laws or created markets that can be undone in a following cycle.

It’s all got to be on the table and considered though. The entire energy footprint of almost all of the industrial revolution through to current needs to be undone in some way. There’s an inherent requirement on the energy that must be expended in order to do that, by the laws of thermodynamics/physics.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#112

Post by bamboozled »

perfunctory wrote: post #110
bamboozled wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you actually think I can do? I feel pretty helpless and confused right now about how much an individual can actually do and why so little is being done globally. Current things I do / have done are: - Attend rallies occasionally. - Divested most of my money where applicable. - Invest in energy companies and tech. - I went vegetarian for 2 years. I do eat meat again now, but not a great deal and mostly fish an…

> I feel pretty helpless and confused If it helps, you are not alone. I felt helpless and frustrated for a long time myself. One thing that gives me hope at the moment is Extinction Rebellion. I realise it's not for everyone but I believe they are the best chance we have right now.

Thanks for getting back to me. In what way does Extinction Rebellion give you hope?

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#113

Post by perfunctory »

bamboozled wrote: post #112
perfunctory wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I feel pretty helpless and confused If it helps, you are not alone. I felt helpless and frustrated for a long time myself. One thing that gives me hope at the moment is Extinction Rebellion. I realise it's not for everyone but I believe they are the best chance we have right now.

Thanks for getting back to me. In what way does Extinction Rebellion give you hope?

I begin to think that mass civil resistance movement is the only way to achieve deep structural social change. And deep structural changes is what we need to avert climate change. Think about historical precedents. Women suffrage, civil rights, anti-war movement, gay rights. None of these changes were initiated by the government. I also think XR is correct in saying that traditional methods of campaigning of the last 30 years have failed. It's time to try something new. Civil disobedience. A nice feature of these tactics is that you don't need the majority. Apparently it takes 3.5% of the population to take part in sustained active resistance to bring about radical change [0].

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJSehRlU34w

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#114

Post by endorphone »

fzeroracer wrote: post #103
simonsarris wrote: post #8

Boy are characterizations like this getting tired. An actually accurate title would read something like: Farm and industry run-off in certain areas of the world is depleting oxygen in certain parts of the ocean. The vast majority of the issue isn't related to rising temps, it would still be there if there were no rising temps. It is the agricultural and industrial runoff in what I suspect are very, very specific part…

I'm getting tired of comments like these. Every single article about climate change or issues with the environment on HN always has someone swooping in to complain about sensationalism or something-or-other rather than talking about the actual article or the actions that can be taken. Then the rest of the HN post devolves into further nonsense because then the discussion becomes more about nitpicking rather than the…

This discussion was long excised from the front page yet my comments were multiply flagged (despite being absolutely benign given the scale of it), I got a warning from dang, etc. Somehow it was yielding significant traffic when it should have been seeing none.

I don't know where the brigade was drawn from, but this is simply incredible anti-intellectualism writ large. Seeing the pandering of this sort of behavior on HN is deeply disturbing. Seeing this guy's classic denialist post literally as the top moderated post on HN -- wow, I wouldn't trust this aggregate crowd on any topic.

It is one of those eye-opening moments that makes me seriously ask what I'm doing here. When we have to treat all "opinions" as if they carry weight, we are doomed.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#115

Post by endorphone »

magicalist wrote: post #108
dang wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crossing into personal attack will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong another comment is or you feel it is. Taking HN threads further into flamewar is also not ok. Would you please review the site guidelines and stick to the rules when posting here? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Taking HN threads further into flamewar is also not ok. I mean, where's the warning for insubstantial, ideological flamebait in the first place for the top post, dang? And the climate change post before that, and the one before that... They post these things based on their gut reaction to the headline , and now the discussion in here is about the OP and not the subject at hand.

This discussion somehow became brigaded by AGW deniers and you could see a stark turn in moderation, where an absolutely ignorant (not an attack, an observation) root post sits shining high on the mount despite being just embarrassing.

It is incredible and sad that HN is yet another tool for deniers and anti-science charlatans. And if dang thinks that's a personal attack, feel free to delete my attack friend -- the value of this site when it hosts such a cancerous collection of knuckledraggers approaches zero.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#116

Post by endorphone »

dang wrote: post #85
endorphone wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Warmer waters hold less oxygen. This is fundamental, scientific fact.. The article specifically mentions the relatively small problem of run-off, and then the broader problem of, you know, entire oceans. A relatively constant, albeit still problematic, issue with runoff is pretty mild compared to the potentially for extremely wide-scale change from climate, hence the alarmism. To snidely quote from the beginning of y…

Crossing into personal attack will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong another comment is or you feel it is. Taking HN threads further into flamewar is also not ok. Would you please review the site guidelines and stick to the rules when posting here? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The top post to a scientific report is an ignorant screed [not a personal attack -- literal, actual truth] lamenting how wrong everything is, attacking a journalist who did a completely fine job (classic denier playbook), how it has nothing to do with warming. When called upon it began grossly misrepresenting the study, etc.

This is the classic denier play book. Denier 101.

It sits high and mighty. It must be correct, right?

Congratulations, dang, you've moderated yourself a wonderful little AGW denier niche. All while we pretend that scientific reports are "political" lest we ruffle the feathers of idiots who want to imagine how things should be based upon their opinions.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#117

Post by chrchang523 »

endorphone wrote: post #114
fzeroracer wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm getting tired of comments like these. Every single article about climate change or issues with the environment on HN always has someone swooping in to complain about sensationalism or something-or-other rather than talking about the actual article or the actions that can be taken. Then the rest of the HN post devolves into further nonsense because then the discussion becomes more about nitpicking rather than the…

This discussion was long excised from the front page yet my comments were multiply flagged (despite being absolutely benign given the scale of it), I got a warning from dang, etc. Somehow it was yielding significant traffic when it should have been seeing none. I don't know where the brigade was drawn from, but this is simply incredible anti-intellectualism writ large. Seeing the pandering of this sort of behavior on…

You're mistaking anti-religious-authority behavior for "anti-intellectualism".

Climate change is a long-term issue we absolutely should deal with, but the consequences of not doing as much as ideal are, while large, still normalish-distribution-bad, not apocalypse-bad. Too much of the messaging around climate change to date has been apocalyptic. Realistically, anyone who wants to create a bubble of actually constructive discussion and action in this area in a public forum in 2019 should ban all apocalyptic terms/discussion on sight, to avoid triggering a huge number of people who are offended by bogus apocalyptic claims.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#118

Post by dang »

endorphone wrote: post #116
dang wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crossing into personal attack will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong another comment is or you feel it is. Taking HN threads further into flamewar is also not ok. Would you please review the site guidelines and stick to the rules when posting here? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The top post to a scientific report is an ignorant screed [not a personal attack -- literal, actual truth] lamenting how wrong everything is, attacking a journalist who did a completely fine job (classic denier playbook), how it has nothing to do with warming. When called upon it began grossly misrepresenting the study, etc. This is the classic denier play book. Denier 101. It sits high and mighty. It must be correct…

You broke the site guidelines. Someone else breaking them, or posting a bad comment, doesn't make it ok for you to break them too.

If you know more and have better information than someone else, you actually have a greater responsibility; breaking the rules by ranting, doing flamewar, calling names and so on, discredits the greater truth you're in possession of. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

I realize that's far from easy when you're surrounded by lies and distortions, but it's work we're all asked to do here.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#119

Post by fzeroracer »

chrchang523 wrote: post #117
endorphone wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This discussion was long excised from the front page yet my comments were multiply flagged (despite being absolutely benign given the scale of it), I got a warning from dang, etc. Somehow it was yielding significant traffic when it should have been seeing none. I don't know where the brigade was drawn from, but this is simply incredible anti-intellectualism writ large. Seeing the pandering of this sort of behavior on…

You're mistaking anti-religious-authority behavior for "anti-intellectualism". Climate change is a long-term issue we absolutely should deal with, but the consequences of not doing as much as ideal are, while large, still normalish-distribution-bad, not apocalypse-bad. Too much of the messaging around climate change to date has been apocalyptic. Realistically, anyone who wants to create a bubble of actually construct…

Climate change absolutely is apocalyptic-levels of bad, just not for the nations contributing the most to climate change yet. It seems to me that the people 'triggered' by 'bogus apocalyptic claims' are those that honestly, in my opinion, don't want to face the stark reality that many people are facing right now due to the way we treat our environment and would prefer to cover their ears and hope it goes away.

Banning that sort of discussion just means nations like Vanuatu get to continually be silenced.

Re: Climate change and nutrient pollution are depleting oxygen from oceans: study

#120

Post by Gibbon1 »

endorphone wrote: post #114
fzeroracer wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm getting tired of comments like these. Every single article about climate change or issues with the environment on HN always has someone swooping in to complain about sensationalism or something-or-other rather than talking about the actual article or the actions that can be taken. Then the rest of the HN post devolves into further nonsense because then the discussion becomes more about nitpicking rather than the…

This discussion was long excised from the front page yet my comments were multiply flagged (despite being absolutely benign given the scale of it), I got a warning from dang, etc. Somehow it was yielding significant traffic when it should have been seeing none. I don't know where the brigade was drawn from, but this is simply incredible anti-intellectualism writ large. Seeing the pandering of this sort of behavior on…

Point is dang, his boss, most of the people here viscerally hate the idea of collective action. Yet climate change is something that can only be tackled by good faith collective action.

So here we are.

Post reply on HN