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

Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

thewalrus.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 179 posts

Re: Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

#81

Post by zokier »

Levitz wrote: post #67
perfunctory wrote: post #16

Too bad the author is not offering any alternative. It's not good enough to just say "stop doing X". It would be nice if it's followed by "Do Y instead". Maybe I missed it, but the only thing I found in the whole article that resembles a counterproposal is a single sentence in the end - "... policy flows from conversation and debate instead of force." So we are supposed to have more conversation and debate? Sounds li…

The subtext under the headline seems direct enough: >When it comes to the climate crisis, new normals convey a single, grim message: instead of acting, get used to it The idea is to stop calling things "The new normal" since that implies acceptance. Fight instead. Don't go along with the idea that the world has to be like this.

Problem is that afaik things are not going get better; climate change is going to hit us bad. The fight is now mostly just trying to manage how bad it is going to be, especially in 2100s and further.

Re: Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

#82

Post by Timon3 »

swader999 wrote: post #63
Timon3 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are hard limits on how much heat a human can take. We cannot adapt beyond, except for literally never going outside again.

Which is the norm and always has been in places like Arizona in the summer. I didn't go out for more than an hour at a time in Tucson in the summer when I lived there. Anything longer and you seriously thought about and prepared for it. This has always been the way humans lived in these areas.

And what do you do if it's not just in the summer, but the whole year? What if it's parts of the earth where a lot of poor people live?

Re: Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

#83

Post by ip26 »

swader999 wrote: post #17
op00to wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn’t just the fire. It’s the strange weather patterns that bring smoke down to areas that have never seen conditions like that. Was the warm ocean keeping the jet stream from its typical shape?

Smoke in New York from Canadian boreal fires happened in the May 2010 fire and the May 1870 Saguenay fire. In 1870 parts of Europe were covered in smoke from the Canadian fire. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saguenay_Fire

1870, 2010, 2023, ????

Re: Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

#84

Post by andyjohnson0 »

perfunctory wrote: post #16

Too bad the author is not offering any alternative. It's not good enough to just say "stop doing X". It would be nice if it's followed by "Do Y instead". Maybe I missed it, but the only thing I found in the whole article that resembles a counterproposal is a single sentence in the end - "... policy flows from conversation and debate instead of force." So we are supposed to have more conversation and debate? Sounds li…

> Too bad the author is not offering any alternative. It's not good enough to just say "stop doing X". It would be nice if it's followed by "Do Y instead".

It's entirely reasonable to just say "stop doing X" when X is (a) causing significant harm and (b) helping people to deny its harmful reality. There is no requirement to come up with an alternative.

But in fact, of course, the author does suggest an alternative. As the article says "When it comes to the climate crisis, new normals convey a single, grim message: instead of acting, get used to it". So they're saying don't do that. Don't get used to it. Don't acquiesce. Face the problem, don't normalise it. Its a plea for action at a personal level, not a policy level.

Re: Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

#85

Post by op00to »

bequanna wrote: post #71
op00to wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn’t just the fire. It’s the strange weather patterns that bring smoke down to areas that have never seen conditions like that. Was the warm ocean keeping the jet stream from its typical shape?

These weather patterns aren’t new or all that strange. This set of conditions periodically occur over time. The difference is that now people have hyper awareness of uncommon but normal weather events. Cue confirmation bias.

The Omega Block is a "strange" weather pattern compared to the usual configuration of the jet stream. It is unusual and surprising. I didn't say it was new, rare, or uprecedented.

It's possible for a weather event to be "normal" (something we see from time to time) but also triggered or more likely ehanced by anthropogenic climage change. Hurricanes aren't anything new, and devastating hurricanes earlier and later in the season aren't even "new". The fact that we've seen it before doesn't mean that humans aren't making it worse.

It doesn't need to be raining locusts for things to be really messed up.

Re: Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

#86

Post by ceejayoz »

swader999 wrote: post #60
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source? Evidence? When someone says "X", and provides a source for their position, saying "no, Y" with no source, evidence, or even argument is rightly viewed as a very weak reply. Saying "no, Y, according to source Z" is a bit better, but it still leaves you with dueling sources and no reason why the reader should believe your source. A really strong reply is "no, Y, see source Z to explain what's wrong with the sou…

1-3mm a year is totally fine. Triple it even, it's not going to wipe out humanity or be the root cause of anything really bad. If it really gets warm, you'll see a lot more snow deposited in the higher latitudes, less rise. Obama's, Clinton's, Al Gore all have fabulous ocean front mansions. Here's some sauces: https://www.clo.nl/en/indicators/en022909-sea-level-dutch-co... https://research.csiro.au/slrwavescoast/sea-…

> Obama's, Clinton's, Al Gore all have fabulous ocean front mansions.

I see people make this argument sometimes, but all it probably indicates is "mega-rich people can absorb a monetary loss", not "they don't believe it exists".

Re: Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

#87

Post by PheonixPharts »

While I agree with the title, I think the author misses the real reason not to refer to the "New Normal". David Wallace-Wells sums it up pretty well:

> It is tempting to look at these strings of disasters and think, Climate change is here... this is how California governor Jerry Brown first described the state of things in the midst of the state's wildfire disaster: "a new normal"

> The truth is actually much scarier. That is, the end of normal; never normal again. We have already exited the state of environmental conditions that allowed the human animal to evolve in the first place, in an unsure and unplanned bet on just what that animal can endure.

This is where climate change, from a human perspective, is so different than any other disaster we've dealt with prior. From earth quakes to even something as extreme as nuclear war, these events represent a single, high magnitude disruption of the status quo, which then leads to the return of a new stability. Once the change has occurred adaption can begin.

Climate change will continue to get worse throughout our lives, the lives of our children after us, and most certainly their children as well. We won't reach a new point of stability which we can call the "new normal" for multiple generations. You'll never get "used to it" during your life time. As soon as people get used to smoky skies, hotter summers and drier winters, the next challenges will starting to occur and they'll be more extreme.

Re: Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

#88

Post by Etrnl_President »

perfunctory wrote: post #16

Too bad the author is not offering any alternative. It's not good enough to just say "stop doing X". It would be nice if it's followed by "Do Y instead". Maybe I missed it, but the only thing I found in the whole article that resembles a counterproposal is a single sentence in the end - "... policy flows from conversation and debate instead of force." So we are supposed to have more conversation and debate? Sounds li…

Conversation and debate have served us for easily 30,000 years.

Re: Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

#89

Post by bequanna »

op00to wrote: post #85
bequanna wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These weather patterns aren’t new or all that strange. This set of conditions periodically occur over time. The difference is that now people have hyper awareness of uncommon but normal weather events. Cue confirmation bias.

The Omega Block is a "strange" weather pattern compared to the usual configuration of the jet stream. It is unusual and surprising. I didn't say it was new, rare, or uprecedented. It's possible for a weather event to be "normal" (something we see from time to time) but also triggered or more likely ehanced by anthropogenic climage change. Hurricanes aren't anything new, and devastating hurricanes earlier and later in…

> It doesn't need to be raining locusts for things to be really messed up.

Fair enough, but what is the metric for calling something "due to climate change"?

Because it seems to me that currently the blame for every drop of rain that falls above (or below) average is directly ascribed to the evil people in the suburbs driving their cars.

Re: Stop Calling Each New Disaster “The New Normal”

#90

Post by letsawaytoday »

pif wrote: post #78
Levitz wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The subtext under the headline seems direct enough: >When it comes to the climate crisis, new normals convey a single, grim message: instead of acting, get used to it The idea is to stop calling things "The new normal" since that implies acceptance. Fight instead. Don't go along with the idea that the world has to be like this.

Concerning climate change, the world is going to be like this. All models are clear that global warming cannot be reversed. No "turning green" will lower average temperatures enough in our lifetime. Thus, acceptance is capital, because only acceptance of reality can lead to sensible solutions. As a side note, screaming "It's too late: hurry up!" is really an idiot way to advocate your cause, whatever your cause may b…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN