281–290 of 884 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, but are they wrong?
They are correct: Daily Sea Surface Temperature (notice the new paradigm started in 2023 and extending into 2024): https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/ Daily Surface Air Temperature: https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/?dm_id=world Daily Sea Ice Extent (click on "Show Southern Hemisphere", also showing concerns of being low in 2023): https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/seaice/ The most shocking is the…
I no longer worry. I'm extremely pessimistic about the impending climate change. I believe Sabine isn't pessimistic enough about what to anticipate. Consider the tundra methane emissions and the explosive release of methane-hydrates from the oceans, along with water vapor, a potent greenhouse gas. The disaster looming over all ecosystems (a mass extinction event) that will happen in decades and the doom-phase could l…
This might just be the same thing as apocalyptic religious predictions, I think? But environmentalism this time?
In fact religious belief in apocalypse might contribute to the apathy about climate policy from the voters, people can either conflate the two or think the religious apocalypse is nearer so no need to address the climate catastrophe: https://www.newsweek.com/shocking-number-americans-believe-l...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not really taboo, it's just straight-up a racist right-wing talking point. Treat it as a software optimisation problem - should you go after a large number of very minro problems, or take an axe to the single large problem that dominates your metrics? https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/20/richest-...
From my observations the current rightwing meme is that women in rich countries haven't had sufficient numbers of children and measures to drive increased population should be put in place. This is congruent with removing women's bodily autonomy, banning abortion and banning or restricting birth control of all types.
The people I know on the right have nothing against birth control. They are just against abortion exept for exceptional circuimstances, because by that point the relevant parties had their chance with birth control. To them, abortion shouldn't be an escape hatch from bad life choices.
It's taboo to say this, but people worldwide have had far too many children, and I believe that overpopulation is the root of the sustainability crisis, including climate change and pollution. And that taboo is probably rooted in evolutionary psychology, people have a genetically driven tendency to criticize those who advocate having less children? So could there be an instinctual drive behind it? https://www.flashpa…
It’s not taboo. It’s regularly discussed and supported in mainstream media.
In fact, nowadays I'm beginning to hear the opposite: "please have more kids". I'm in Europe atm (I'm south-american) and I'm shocked to see that natives, by and large, just do NOT have kids, or at most 1. All cultural incentives that promoted having kids seem to have been vilified. I find it kind of sad honestly...
@dang Is it just my impression that HN is drifting rigtwards on this topic? I remember HN being more in favour of proactive action against anthropic climate change. This thread feels dominated by attitudes reflecting inaction.
Aging userbase? People get to a certain age, realise they'll probably outlive problems then just start campaigning for whatever will give them the best rest of their life. Seems to kick in quite early now too, like 35.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue is the global population. Obviously, that's the metric that matters for global issues like the climate and environment. The global population is still increasing. Furthermore, as poor countries develop this is compounded by increased consumption (both resources and energy) per capita. In that respect, "richest 1% account for more emissions than poorest 66%" should be interpreted as very worrying when the po…
I never understand this argument of overpopulation. How can you be OK with reducing population but at the same time worry about global warming? To have that position you basically need to reconcile two positions that to me aren't really compatible, unless someone explains it to me. Either it's fine for Earth to not have humans and just exist peacefully with the rest of the ecosystem until another lifeform takes over.…
There is no consistent way environmentalists can argue their way out of this particular point you made:
> But if you care primarily about the humans, then how can the answer be to have less of them? And pick and choose who gets to reproduce?
Some stupid hacker just deleted over 2 Peta Bytes of Russian climate research data dating back decades. Data that was collected from satellites around the world for decades for processing. This affects us all if we don't have data. We are rapidly going back to the stone age...
Same has also happened with this hackernews post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39162856 (I didn't visit the link shared in this post either) and looks like this post didn't get 'as much' traction on HN as compared to the above one. However, the video shared in this post also came up on top on youtube.
Looks like HN is a good place to boost your content on YT, if it gets pushed to the top!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never understand this argument of overpopulation. How can you be OK with reducing population but at the same time worry about global warming? To have that position you basically need to reconcile two positions that to me aren't really compatible, unless someone explains it to me. Either it's fine for Earth to not have humans and just exist peacefully with the rest of the ecosystem until another lifeform takes over.…
Your belief seems to be that the value of humanity scales relative to the number of living humans. I disagree - I don't think one billion humans would be 1/10th as valuable as ten billion humans, provided we got to one billion just by deciding to have fewer kids. Killing humans is morally wrong in everything except weird edge cases, but having two children instead of three is not killing anyone. The bulk of what I va…
To somebody else it means just living life.
There is no way to objectively argue superiority of one over the other except from a religious worldview.