Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
news.slashdot.org
Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
1–10 of 15 posts
Re: Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
#2Alarmist nonsense. I would be interested to see how he justifies the belief that “It is still possible to limit global temperature rise to 1.5C.”
Even if all the rich countries stop all emissions, poor countries will continue emitting for a long time. I haven’t seen any climate plans which explicitly consider this.
In the same way the west falsely hoped that Chinese growth would lead to Democracy, we are assuming that western efforts to reduce emissions will be copied by others.
This is all moot anyway, since the West isn’t going to stop emissions anytime soon.
Re: Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
#3Alarmist nonsense. I would be interested to see how he justifies the belief that “It is still possible to limit global temperature rise to 1.5C.” Even if all the rich countries stop all emissions, poor countries will continue emitting for a long time. I haven’t seen any climate plans which explicitly consider this. In the same way the west falsely hoped that Chinese growth would lead to Democracy, we are assuming tha…
How alarming does something have to get before talking about how alarming it is is no longer "alarmist nonsense"? At this point seeing the word "alarmist" in reference to climate change is indistinguishable from parody, because it's become painfully obvious that the claims made were real, the effects we're seeing are real, and we have done very little to put the brakes on what we've been told is probably a runaway process.
Re: Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
#4Alarmist nonsense. I would be interested to see how he justifies the belief that “It is still possible to limit global temperature rise to 1.5C.” Even if all the rich countries stop all emissions, poor countries will continue emitting for a long time. I haven’t seen any climate plans which explicitly consider this. In the same way the west falsely hoped that Chinese growth would lead to Democracy, we are assuming tha…
So your solution is to sit on your hands and do nothing. You may be an anti environmental shill or a simple defeatist, either ways you’re wrong. China and India are both furiously building nuclear reactors that will over time reduce their emissions. Both those countries are also massively building up their solar power generation.
Re: Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
#5Alarmist nonsense. I would be interested to see how he justifies the belief that “It is still possible to limit global temperature rise to 1.5C.” Even if all the rich countries stop all emissions, poor countries will continue emitting for a long time. I haven’t seen any climate plans which explicitly consider this. In the same way the west falsely hoped that Chinese growth would lead to Democracy, we are assuming tha…
How alarming does something have to get before talking about how alarming it is is no longer "alarmist nonsense"? At this point seeing the word "alarmist" in reference to climate change is indistinguishable from parody, because it's become painfully obvious that the claims made were real, the effects we're seeing are real, and we have done very little to put the brakes on what we've been told is probably a runaway pr…
That's why it's nonsense: there is no limit to when a "worrying" problem becomes "alarming" or global "warming" becomes "boiling", it's just language designed to induce fear with no link to anything tangible. Calling climate change an "emergency" does nothing to help, it merely stokes pointless political discussions over what adjectives are best.
I think the opposite about climate claims being 'real.' The majority of climate claims I see are merely conjecture that often turns out to be exaggerations. We definitely see real effects, but nothing near the catastrophes most activists predict or attribute.
Listening to this debate [0] really opened my eyes. Take for example the claim that "Climate change will cause worse storms and infrastructure damage." Most of the increasing damage from storms is from humans building in environments like flood plains, a minor part of that effect is from climate.
Or take the claim that "Climate change will cause food shortages." Some models predict warming poles will increase available farmland! [1]
I'm not saying that the current situation is good, but I think the downsides are overblown and the accuracy of the models used for these predictions are overstated. The amount of resources redirected to climate change are huge, so I reject the idea that we are doing very little.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Gk9gIpGvSE [1] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
Re: Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
#6Alarmist nonsense. I would be interested to see how he justifies the belief that “It is still possible to limit global temperature rise to 1.5C.” Even if all the rich countries stop all emissions, poor countries will continue emitting for a long time. I haven’t seen any climate plans which explicitly consider this. In the same way the west falsely hoped that Chinese growth would lead to Democracy, we are assuming tha…
So your solution is to sit on your hands and do nothing. You may be an anti environmental shill or a simple defeatist, either ways you’re wrong. China and India are both furiously building nuclear reactors that will over time reduce their emissions. Both those countries are also massively building up their solar power generation.
I don't mean to suggest apathy. I mean that whatever solutions we come up with need to be realistic and take into account geopolitical. The east may be building lots of nuclear and renewable but their emissions are still rising much faster than the west. I hope that changes but I don't see any reason to believe that.
Re: Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
#7Alarmist nonsense. I would be interested to see how he justifies the belief that “It is still possible to limit global temperature rise to 1.5C.” Even if all the rich countries stop all emissions, poor countries will continue emitting for a long time. I haven’t seen any climate plans which explicitly consider this. In the same way the west falsely hoped that Chinese growth would lead to Democracy, we are assuming tha…
So your solution is to sit on your hands and do nothing. You may be an anti environmental shill or a simple defeatist, either ways you’re wrong. China and India are both furiously building nuclear reactors that will over time reduce their emissions. Both those countries are also massively building up their solar power generation.
Their argument is just the next gen of climate change deniers.
We've gone from "there's no problem" to "ok maybe there's a problem but we can't do anything." Next step is "maybe we could have done something but the worst effects are already locked in so it's not worth the pain now."
The goal is always the same: do absolutely nothing
Re: Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
#8Alarmist nonsense. I would be interested to see how he justifies the belief that “It is still possible to limit global temperature rise to 1.5C.” Even if all the rich countries stop all emissions, poor countries will continue emitting for a long time. I haven’t seen any climate plans which explicitly consider this. In the same way the west falsely hoped that Chinese growth would lead to Democracy, we are assuming tha…
So your solution is to sit on your hands and do nothing. You may be an anti environmental shill or a simple defeatist, either ways you’re wrong. China and India are both furiously building nuclear reactors that will over time reduce their emissions. Both those countries are also massively building up their solar power generation.
Why does somebody automatically have to be a "shill" for anything just because they make a coherent argument contrary to yours? Aside from being a transparently stupid and dishonest way to shut down debate through ad hominem, it's absurdly binary on how it categorizes agreement with you as correct and anything else as automatically mendacious.
Could your arguments not by the same silly logic not then make you a shill for the extremely media-savvy, multibillion dollar system that's currently pushing specific and often politicized arguments about how climate change is a looming catastrophe? Whether they're wrong or not, I don't yet know and would prefer to debate on evidence more than politics, but if organized, well-financed effort to move a certain agenda is a hallmark of shills existing, then there must be shills for Big Climate too.
Re: Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
So your solution is to sit on your hands and do nothing. You may be an anti environmental shill or a simple defeatist, either ways you’re wrong. China and India are both furiously building nuclear reactors that will over time reduce their emissions. Both those countries are also massively building up their solar power generation.
Why does somebody automatically have to be a "shill" for anything just because they make a coherent argument contrary to yours? Aside from being a transparently stupid and dishonest way to shut down debate through ad hominem, it's absurdly binary on how it categorizes agreement with you as correct and anything else as automatically mendacious. Could your arguments not by the same silly logic not then make you a shill…
[dead]
Re: Era of Global Boiling Has Arrived, UN Chief Says
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
So your solution is to sit on your hands and do nothing. You may be an anti environmental shill or a simple defeatist, either ways you’re wrong. China and India are both furiously building nuclear reactors that will over time reduce their emissions. Both those countries are also massively building up their solar power generation.
Their argument is just the next gen of climate change deniers. We've gone from "there's no problem" to "ok maybe there's a problem but we can't do anything." Next step is "maybe we could have done something but the worst effects are already locked in so it's not worth the pain now." The goal is always the same: do absolutely nothing
I don't deny climate change or want to do nothing. In fact I currently spend most of my timing working on solutions. I do resent hollow words like "climate boiling" instead of actions or cogent plans for action.
Instead of making guesses at my views, you're welcome to engage with my argument. I'm open to being convinced either way. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36902582