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

Oceans hit highest temperature on record

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 696 posts

Re: Oceans hit highest temperature on record

#351

Post by blooalien »

asdfman123 wrote: post #224
derriz wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Foreign state actors? We have government agents frequenting this website to sew anti-US sentiment? Really? Could you identify some of them? Or at least one or two of the obvious ones?

Yes, I could. But to be serious, there's endless evidence that it's going on, and if you don't believe it I'm not the one with my head in the sand. (That's a common English idiom meaning "not paying attention," for the foreign state actors out there.)

> (That's a common English idiom meaning "not paying attention," for the foreign state actors out there.)

It's even worse than "not paying attention". It's knowing the truth of the situation and actively avoiding acknowledging it to yourself or anyone else. Hiding your head in the sand and shouting "It's not really happening, it's not really happening!" despite knowing that it is indeed happening.

Re: Oceans hit highest temperature on record

#352

Post by red75prime »

consumer451 wrote: post #320
pfisch wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, we need a global consensus for geoengineering. Why? Does china or the us need a consensus before taking existential risks like making ai? Or detonating a nuke that had a tiny chance of setting the atmosphere on fire? Or attacking random countries with almost no rationale or plan? This kind of thinking is why the EU is screwed. No other major power cares that much because they aren't at the same level of ris…

> Why? Well, let's say we use sulfur. For the sake of argument, let's say it's not the EU, but some private SV-funded org. So, what is the legal/geopolitical liability for that? What if >99% scientific consensus says that that org's upper atmo sulfur injection led to the most insane monsoon/desertification half-century in 1 billion's people area, in known history? What then? What if the EU's geoengineering dropped Ru…

> What if >99% scientific consensus says that that org's upper atmo sulfur injection led to to the most insane monsoon/desertification

That's unrealistic. Climate models aren't good enough to predict the regional-level consequences of large-scale interventions (not to mention that scientists are people, and they might be averse to creating an international flashpoint).

Realistically, it will create/exacerbate international tensions. The monsoon/desertification will be linked to geoengineering with or without scientific consensus and whether or not they were really caused by geoengineering.

As the climate models improve by incorporating active intervention data it will be possible to decrease adverse consequences.

It's a risky approach, but, when the consequences of climate change will become undeniably bad, some countries/individuals might try.

But, yeah, I agree with you in the end.

Re: Oceans hit highest temperature on record

#353

Post by DoctorOetker »

markdown wrote: post #227
DoctorOetker wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That BBC documentary shows or exposes very shallow thinking skills at this timestamp 6m42s: https://youtu.be/_xZCh8eDZFc?si=AHyDPgoDucsCRllS&t=402 They claim the panama canal is continuously fed by freshwater for the canal locks (which segment the canal into sections with different water levels, and which enable ships to be raised or lowered to the next water level during travel along the canal). It's 2026, why are h…

Wow, guy on internet solves problem within seconds. And you didn't even have to visit the site. Incredible.

If you have studied physics, its easy to see water locks can be operated with near zero energy consumption.

What site? I was commenting on a youtube video.

If you misattribute my comment as replying to something else, thats your superficial attitude not mine...

Re: Oceans hit highest temperature on record

#354

Post by jpleyden98 »

imperio59 wrote: post #265
cdrnsf wrote: post #7

Meanwhile governments are electing to either do nothing or actively make the problem worse (particularly in the case of the US — expanding fossil fuel extraction, pushing data center build out and attacking renewables like wind).

China is the biggest problem. US Carbon emissions are going down, China's are exploding.

This just isn't true. Chinas emissions peaked back in 2024.

Re: Oceans hit highest temperature on record

#355

Post by ColdStream »

stevenwoo wrote: post #59
elorant wrote: post #22

Meanwhile, canned sardines went 20% up in the last month in Greece. And that's while we have plenty of local production. I can't imagine what it would be in countries where they import everything. Give it a few years and all fish food prices could go up substantially.

It hasn’t gone up yet here in California but I see from the boxes I usually eat that these are sourced from Vietnam (in spite of Monterrey being a short trip away) so these could come from China (one of the usual tariff bypass mechanisms) and hence anywhere in the world (ghost fleets) and possibly not reflect real world ecosystem pressure until multiple fishery collapse.

Multiple fishery collapses are probably incoming in the next decade or so. For as much as we have and do catch from the ocean, it is as a whole a fairly nutrient bare place by comparison to the land. Its scale and exploitation beyond recovery has allowed it to look far more prosperous than it really is.

Re: Oceans hit highest temperature on record

#356

Post by defrost »

nostrebored wrote: post #322
pfisch wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, we need a global consensus for geoengineering. Why? Does china or the us need a consensus before taking existential risks like making ai? Or detonating a nuke that had a tiny chance of setting the atmosphere on fire? Or attacking random countries with almost no rationale or plan? This kind of thinking is why the EU is screwed. No other major power cares that much because they aren't at the same level of ris…

There’s something odd about the concentration of true believers in ai xrisk and climate change catastrophism. They are both technopessimist in a way that is seen as progressive. Stopping progress in AI would make people’s lives immeasurably worse, while stopping fossil fuel consumption would kill billions of people. But it seems like a particular kind of risk aversion that is blind to upside. I’m curious why this cal…

> Stopping progress in AI would make people’s lives immeasurably worse

They'd be, like, living in conditions of last decade, deprived of personalised targeted AI-slop? The horror.

Is that immeasurably because it's a change too small to measure, or because it's too vast to comprehend? Maybe you're overstating this just a tad.

Re: Oceans hit highest temperature on record

#357

Post by Fricken »

nostrebored wrote: post #322
pfisch wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, we need a global consensus for geoengineering. Why? Does china or the us need a consensus before taking existential risks like making ai? Or detonating a nuke that had a tiny chance of setting the atmosphere on fire? Or attacking random countries with almost no rationale or plan? This kind of thinking is why the EU is screwed. No other major power cares that much because they aren't at the same level of ris…

There’s something odd about the concentration of true believers in ai xrisk and climate change catastrophism. They are both technopessimist in a way that is seen as progressive. Stopping progress in AI would make people’s lives immeasurably worse, while stopping fossil fuel consumption would kill billions of people. But it seems like a particular kind of risk aversion that is blind to upside. I’m curious why this cal…

Everybody alive today will die. We're mortal, that's just how it goes. So with or without fossil fuels, billions of people will die regardless, that much is baked in. It's a moot point.

As a species, however, we can persist indefinitely so long as our lifestyles are sustainable. If it's not sustainable it's a joke.

Go free solo El Cap or something before telling me you're cool taking those kinds of risks on behalf of all humanity.

Re: Oceans hit highest temperature on record

#358

Post by ColdStream »

forinti wrote: post #106
nehal3m wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do care. I see a species ending disaster hanging over the future. I recycle, I have solar panels, a heat pump, an EV (that I leave on my driveway whenever my bicycle will do the job). But the planet is being ruined by greed on an unfathomable scale and aside from doing what I can and voting for parties that see the problem, I feel like there’s not a god damn thing I can do about it.

The UN sustainability index once listed Cuba as the only sustainable economy. Another year it was Ecuador. Cuba might be eligible again because of the embargo. My point is that you can't convince folks in rich countries to be truly sustainable and you can't convince the rest to not aim for a higher standard of living. Putin said something like that and he was right. And we keep coming up with ideas to make it worse:…

Bingo. A lot of what passes for solutions are fairly anemic. We will swap out any technology for a similar less intensive alternative but the instant we have to actively change our lifestyle it is largely ignored.

It isn't because people are malicious, it is that people tend to normalize the conditions they are raised in even if they are wildly exceptional.

Re: Oceans hit highest temperature on record

#359

Post by ericd »

HumblyTossed wrote: post #214
YZF wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solar energy is the fastest growing source of energy in the US. That's because it's also the cheapest source of energy. So markets are working. https://abcnews.com/US/solar-generates-energy-coal-us-1st-ti... "Solar and storage provided 90% of all new power added in the U.S." is mind blowing. How about we give the US credit for this? Fossil fuel extraction is not the problem. The problem is fossil fuel usage. Given th…

I'm in the US and _I_ don't want us to get credit. Even the worst of people do something good every now and then. But if you reward that, they won't change.

The self-flagellation has gotten too extreme. Photovoltaics were invented in the US, and the US helped subsidize it to the point where they were an economically viable source of energy.

Re: Oceans hit highest temperature on record

#360

Post by worik »

markdown wrote: post #281
YZF wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solar energy is the fastest growing source of energy in the US. That's because it's also the cheapest source of energy. So markets are working. https://abcnews.com/US/solar-generates-energy-coal-us-1st-ti... "Solar and storage provided 90% of all new power added in the U.S." is mind blowing. How about we give the US credit for this? Fossil fuel extraction is not the problem. The problem is fossil fuel usage. Given th…

> Instead of politics and blame we need to focus on markets and let them take care of the problem. The problem is politics and banana republic levels of corruption (aka lobbying) preventing chinese evs to enter the market. If you opened the automotive market to competition ie: > focus on markets and let them take care of the problem. then the need for fossil fuels would decline.

"banana republic levels of corruption"

That is such an understatement

Post reply on HN