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

Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 62 posts

Re: Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

#31

Post by dpau »

swsieber wrote: post #27

There seems to be a huge assumption that when a species is exposed to higher than usual temperatures they'll be a collapse of said species. Certainly this holds true for some species, but all species? I'm a little skeptical. Basically the paper says that large groups of species will encounter higher temperatures than they have before (1850-2005, going by mean annual temperature, and higher defined by 5 years all abov…

It's not whether or not individual members of a species can survive if it's a little hotter. The problem is that climate change is destroying entire ecosystems in which these individuals exist. A polar bear can do ok in a zoo in San Diego, but polar bears will go extinct once their habitat in the Arctic disappears.

Re: Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

#32

Post by vlan0 »

drclau wrote: post #22
vlan0 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So how do we proceed from here? I don't think we do. Just in the USA alone, the number of people making extremely selfish decisions during the pandemic is quite alarming. People cannot make the choice for the greater good when the danger is staring them in the face. It does not give me a inkling of hope that we will do what is collectively beneficial for the masses when it comes to climate change. People are just to…

I think calling it selfishness is too simplistic. In my opinion, and this pandemic is a confirmation of sorts, people are just really bad at understanding dangers that are far away in physical distance or time. While Covid-19 was clearly a pretty big problem in China, in the Western Hemisphere we were virtually oblivious to the dangers. Hell, people still went on vacation to northern Italy while warnings were being r…

>I think calling it selfishness is too simplistic.

Probably. But whether it is people's inability to not realize their selfishness, or folks that actively work to benefit the few, the outcome will be the same.

>While Covid-19 was clearly a pretty big problem in China, in the Western Hemisphere we were virtually oblivious to the dangers. Hell, people still went on vacation to northern Italy while warnings were being raised.

There are reasons for that. The public in the US was not informed nearly as early as we should have been. Just look back to when folks dumped stock after the briefing in January. We've had folks like Michael Osterholm telling us for years this was coming. He also warned of our current scenario in the early COVID days. The point is, the information that pandemic risk has been increasing is not new and has been largely ignored.

>Nothing in our evolution has prepared us to deal with distant dangers like the ones we’re facing now.

Some of us are clearly able to comprehend and adapt. But it does seem that we collectively we are still too naive.

Re: Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

#33

Post by throwaway294 »

eloff wrote: post #25
throwaway294 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For COVID-19, that's real. For significant global warming or climate change from CO2 from human activities, there is no, none, nichts , nil, nada , zip, zilch, zero meaningful scientific evidence of anything real. The evidence is overwhelming that the whole concern, especially from the NYT, is a flim-flam, fraud, scam by various special interests to get money and power from everyone else. Plenty of details are in htt…

There is literally overwhelming evidence. Given that, I'm not sure what it would take to convince you that up is not down.

I gave my evidence in the two URLs to YC here, and those two have more good references, including some of the best.

I'm just a private citizen with no more skin in this game than anyone else, so I'm objective, open minded, and willing to learn.

So, of your "overwhelming" evidence, of which I claim there is none that is significant, let's see your three strongest.

By the way: I totally debunked the main piece of evidence, Al Gore's graph of CO2 and temperature from ice cores going back ~800,000 years.

Next, to be science, it has to make accurate predictions, and the predictions were among the worst in the history of science -- wildly wrong. Good science predicted black holes, the neutrino, and the Higgs boson and from some group theory and quantum mechanics can predict the spectral lines of molecules, but the climate science couldn't get future temperatures even close to right. I gave the reverence.

Pictures of swimming polar bears is not good evidence.

Pictures of Arctic ice melting in September is not good evidence; I want to see pictures of Arctic ice, wind velocities, and wind temperatures in February.

Pictures of coral reefs are a terrible way to measure temperature. When I was at the US National Bureau of Standards, we routinely measured temperatures to 0.01 C. Generally we can measure temperature quite accurately; pictures of coral reefs can't compete.

Pictures of glaciers meeting the sea are not good evidence.

Pictures of some one particular glacier in Greenland melting are not good evidence.

We HAD CO2 concentrations go up from 1940 to 1970, and temperatures went down, and that contradicts that higher CO2 concentrations yield higher temperatures.

I gave the reference to MIT's Professor R. Lindzen's comment that the warming since 1900 cannot be CO2 warming.

Droughts, animal deaths, COVID-19 are not good measurements of temperature.

Now, you do have three good pieces of solid scientific evidence for human sources of CO2 causing significant global warming?

Re: Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

#34

Post by stephc_int13 »

The original paper is talking about "abrupt ecological disruption", but the NYT article title is "Wildlife Collapse From Climate Change Is Predicted to Hit Suddenly and Sooner"

I've read the paper, and if I understood correctly the hypothesis is that because there are less usual seasonal variations of temperatures near the equator, ecosystems in this area are more susceptible to be disrupted by global warming.

Talking about disruption seems safe from a scientific point of view, but collapse is almost synonymous with extinction, this is quite a leap...

Re: Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

#35

Post by eloff »

throwaway294 wrote: post #33
eloff wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is literally overwhelming evidence. Given that, I'm not sure what it would take to convince you that up is not down.

I gave my evidence in the two URLs to YC here, and those two have more good references, including some of the best. I'm just a private citizen with no more skin in this game than anyone else, so I'm objective, open minded, and willing to learn. So, of your "overwhelming" evidence, of which I claim there is none that is significant, let's see your three strongest. By the way: I totally debunked the main piece of evide…

I could come up with 300 given enough time. But it's not my job to convince people who are unable to evaluate evidence rationally. You can't cherry pick three things out of three hundred. All your objections are strawmen - nobody claims a picture of a melting glacier is evidence of climate change. Now the satelite data showing Greenland and Antarctica losing ice at an unprecedented rate is good evidence. I want to say just take an honest look at the whole of the evidence, not just things that agree with your bias. I don't think you will though. Good luck with that attitude with anything in life - it has a way of punishing people whose mental model of the world drifts too far from reality.

Re: Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

#36

Post by pstuart »

vkou wrote: post #21
pstuart wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no love for the DNC but I think that their interests go no deeper than currying favor for their corporate patrons. "Ordinary" democrats by and large do care about climate change. On the other side of the aisle, it's easy to see disregard for the science in both leadership and party members. Among that population is a significant chunk that is deeply religious and looking forward to the apocalypse. I may get ha…

The problem is this: What ordinary corporate patrons want is incompatible with avoiding climate collapse at this point. Maybe we could have pulled it off if we started in the 00s, but the cure is going to be far more painful today, after we wasted two decades. Ordinary corporate patrons aren't interested in higher energy costs, much higher transportation costs, and economic contraction. They aren't interested in gett…

It's always about the profits, we just have to make it more profitable to do the right thing, eh?

Of course this may be a wee bit easier said than done. But the first place to start is the "marketplace of ideas."

Re: Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

#37

Post by yters »

mellow2020 wrote: post #16
yters wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So on top of environmental collapse we can have social collapse as well? Sounds like a recipe for success.

Standing up is the opposite of collapse. Failure to stand up is required for the collapse to go ahead.

Why do you think rebellion is synonymous with standing up?

Re: Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

#38

Post by yters »

cultus wrote: post #19
yters wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So on top of environmental collapse we can have social collapse as well? Sounds like a recipe for success.

A social collapse would coincide with an economic collapse and lower emissions. Honestly, speaking as a former climate change-adjacent geophysicist, I'd take it. It is becoming fairly clear we will have revolutions. At some point, things will deteriorate to the point it will happen. Normalcy bias is a hell of a drug, and we are all sniffing it really hard. The ruling class is unwilling and unable to solve this or any…

Why do you prefer that outcome? Social and economic collapse could cost millions of lives, and mostly among the poorest parts of the world.

Re: Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

#39

Post by throwaway294 »

eloff wrote: post #35
throwaway294 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I gave my evidence in the two URLs to YC here, and those two have more good references, including some of the best. I'm just a private citizen with no more skin in this game than anyone else, so I'm objective, open minded, and willing to learn. So, of your "overwhelming" evidence, of which I claim there is none that is significant, let's see your three strongest. By the way: I totally debunked the main piece of evide…

I could come up with 300 given enough time. But it's not my job to convince people who are unable to evaluate evidence rationally. You can't cherry pick three things out of three hundred. All your objections are strawmen - nobody claims a picture of a melting glacier is evidence of climate change. Now the satelite data showing Greenland and Antarctica losing ice at an unprecedented rate is good evidence. I want to sa…

You attacked me, your up and down.

A local community college, when the epidemic is over, should be able to give you a course in remedial reading sufficient for you to read and understand my posts I referenced.

For your 300 pieces of evidence, I asked for only three. So, you were unable to give even three and, instead, attacked my "rationality".

Rationality? I hold a Ph.D. in applied math from a world class research university, and have published peer reviewed research in several technical area.

Let's see your three best pieces of evidence.

Re: Wildlife collapse from climate change is predicted to hit suddenly and sooner

#40

Post by yters »

perfunctory wrote: post #13
yters wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So on top of environmental collapse we can have social collapse as well? Sounds like a recipe for success.

Rebellions are sometimes the only recipe for success. Think about Women's suffrage movement, civil rights movement, anti war movements etc.

I agree civil movements and bloodless revolutions through the political process are good. Violent overthrows are bad, AFAIK almost always resulting in a much worse regime than the one being overthrown. The USA's founding is a fortunate divergence from the norm. More recently, look at the Bolshevik revolution, resulting in over 100 million dead.
Post reply on HN