Live data from Hacker News

US set for punishing temperatures as ‘heat dome’ to settle over country

theguardian.com

41–50 of 160 posts

Re: US set for punishing temperatures as ‘heat dome’ to settle over country

#41

still, I see no serious action being taken to tackle the climate crisis. Current governments are just putting some dates by which we’ll stop doing x or y, but in really almost nothing concrete is done to stop the worst scenarios.

Whatever current event you're concerned about, have you looked for historical precedent? Suppose you were to discover that the same kind of event had happened in, say, the early 1900s, and/or the late 1800s, before humans had emitted any appreciable amount of CO2. Would that change your opinion about whether we're in a crisis?

you gotta explain the logic to me that should make anyone less concerned about climate crises just because people also used to die of them 200 years ago.

We're not reinventing any phenomena because we're emitting CO2, we're just putting the foot on the gas pedal, both literally and metaphorically. Same argument occasionally crops up during the pandemic. Yes, we've had them before, but that doesn't make this one any less bad, and interacting with animals that spread zoonotic diseases any less dangerous

Re: US set for punishing temperatures as ‘heat dome’ to settle over country

#42

still, I see no serious action being taken to tackle the climate crisis. Current governments are just putting some dates by which we’ll stop doing x or y, but in really almost nothing concrete is done to stop the worst scenarios.

Whatever current event you're concerned about, have you looked for historical precedent? Suppose you were to discover that the same kind of event had happened in, say, the early 1900s, and/or the late 1800s, before humans had emitted any appreciable amount of CO2. Would that change your opinion about whether we're in a crisis?

Generally, those who believe in science don't look for anecdotes to form opinions from.

Re: US set for punishing temperatures as ‘heat dome’ to settle over country

#43
post #20

For the first time in my life, I experienced a massive heat wave, torrential rainfall and flooding, a forest fire and hail, all within a single month. I am NOT looking forward to what's coming in a few years.

This is likely just the introductory act. We'll be begging to go back to this era of floods and fires once the resulting & hard-hitting droughts + famines + wars + mass migrations + mass extinctions + etc. take their tolls (and some of them have already started to).

Re: US set for punishing temperatures as ‘heat dome’ to settle over country

#44
post #26
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No effect of global warming will be a historic first. It's about the frequency of events and the rate of change.

That example says nothing about frequency or rate of change.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/climate-change-heat-wave-pacifi...

> In addition, the World Weather Attribution team also found that climate change made this heat wave at least 150 times more likely and nearly 4 degrees hotter than it would have been before humans began warming the climate back in the 1800s.

Re: US set for punishing temperatures as ‘heat dome’ to settle over country

#45
post #35
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, you'd want some actual climate scientist to do a statistical analysis. But just dismissing it with "it has happened before" is too simple too.

It's quite sad that this forum, usually one of the most civil and thoughtful places on the internet, is full of climate change deniers with pathetic arguments that even they must see the issues with.

It seems like you're actually being uncivil and unthoughtful, and actually upset because other people have different viewpoints, which you are calling "climate change denial", when I doubt anyone here actually denies that the climate is changing.

Re: US set for punishing temperatures as ‘heat dome’ to settle over country

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever current event you're concerned about, have you looked for historical precedent? Suppose you were to discover that the same kind of event had happened in, say, the early 1900s, and/or the late 1800s, before humans had emitted any appreciable amount of CO2. Would that change your opinion about whether we're in a crisis?

you gotta explain the logic to me that should make anyone less concerned about climate crises just because people also used to die of them 200 years ago. We're not reinventing any phenomena because we're emitting CO2, we're just putting the foot on the gas pedal, both literally and metaphorically. Same argument occasionally crops up during the pandemic. Yes, we've had them before, but that doesn't make this one any l…

Well, if the current events tell us we're in a crisis, were we also in a crisis a century ago? Two centuries ago? Three centuries ago? We can look in history books and see the same kinds of events happening back then. If they indicate a crisis now, don't they also indicate the crisis was happening back then?

Re: US set for punishing temperatures as ‘heat dome’ to settle over country

#49
post #20

For the first time in my life, I experienced a massive heat wave, torrential rainfall and flooding, a forest fire and hail, all within a single month. I am NOT looking forward to what's coming in a few years.

As a comment I read said, the fear isn’t that this is the new normal, the fear is that it isn’t, and worse is to come.

Re: US set for punishing temperatures as ‘heat dome’ to settle over country

#50
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's quite sad that this forum, usually one of the most civil and thoughtful places on the internet, is full of climate change deniers with pathetic arguments that even they must see the issues with.

It seems like you're actually being uncivil and unthoughtful, and actually upset because other people have different viewpoints, which you are calling "climate change denial", when I doubt anyone here actually denies that the climate is changing.

"climate change denial" has become a term that has a more nuanced meaning that what the literal words say. It for example also includes viewpoints that deny that human influence is the main driver of climate change ("the climate has always been changing"), or the viewpoints that the effects of climate change are not bad, or even desirable ("CO2 is good for plants").
Post reply on HN