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

Sea Change – The Pacific's Perilous Turn

apps.seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 179 posts

Re: Sea Change – The Pacific's Perilous Turn

#71

Post by Mithaldu »

lutusp wrote: post #43
revscat wrote: post #7

Like many who visit HN, I am an atheist. I am coming to believe, however, that the production of CO2 is the greatest sin, in the religious sense, that exists today. It dwarfs all other problems -- Syria, terrorism, the NSA, class and economic disparity, all of them. Being technologists we tend to assume (hope?) that some solution will present itself before it is too late. I am growing increasingly pessimistic that su…

> Being technologists we tend to assume (hope?) that some solution will present itself before it is too late. I have some bad news: * The problem isn't pollution and CO2 release, at last not directly. The problem is the number of people doing the polluting and CO2 releasing. * A solution would be to have a smaller worldwide birthrate. Easy to say. * But any solution to the above point is very likely to collide with e…

Please watch this video:

http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_and_the_magic_washing_...

In it Hans Rosling explains how something simple as making people able to use a washing machine to clean their clothes, will ultimately reduce population growth.

This is because the knock-on effects of that are that women are more able to educate themselves, more able to keep their kids alive as a result of education and thus the family has no need to reproduce massively.

The key is not to educate people about overpopulation, but to educate them effectively in how to remove the need for high reproduction while increasing their life quality.

Re: Sea Change – The Pacific's Perilous Turn

#72

Post by baddox »

revscat wrote: post #7

Like many who visit HN, I am an atheist. I am coming to believe, however, that the production of CO2 is the greatest sin, in the religious sense, that exists today. It dwarfs all other problems -- Syria, terrorism, the NSA, class and economic disparity, all of them. Being technologists we tend to assume (hope?) that some solution will present itself before it is too late. I am growing increasingly pessimistic that su…

I'm surprised to see such a baseless apocalyptic prophesy follow the phrase "I am an atheist."

Re: Sea Change – The Pacific's Perilous Turn

#73

Post by indefatigable »

yetanotherphd wrote: post #37

The most important component of a strategy to reduce CO2 emissions is a carbon tax, which is economically equivalent to a cap-and-trade system. However, people involved in tech seem to be especially prone to what I call a "problem solving" bias: discrete problems require discrete solutions, and we just have to figure out if the right solution is solar, nuclear, or the Savory Institute. The (correct) economic point of…

Giving politicians the authority to levy a carbon tax is an absolutely terrible idea, and it has nothing to do with how I feel about China.

Re: Sea Change – The Pacific's Perilous Turn

#75

Post by jessaustin »

mikeyouse wrote: post #49
rickjames28 wrote: post #32

Like many who visit HN, I am an atheist. I am coming to believe, however, that the production of CO2 is the greatest sin, in the religious sense, that exists today Yes, global warming has become the religion of leftists.

This is such a ridiculous statement. Leftists like Bill Gates, Newt Gingrich, John Hunstman, Frederick Smith, Susan Collins, Tim Pawlenty? Cap and Trade was a free-market republican idea originally [1], but now that it's being advocated by the 'Leftists', it's become much more politicized. A plurality of scientists agree that steps should be taken, the FUD denial is all paid for by a dozen companies who stand to prof…

Cap'n Trade was, is, and will always be a guaranteed frenzy of corrupt corporatist rent-seeking. Both varieties of Coke-and-Pepsi Repubmocrat eat from that trough. I actually wish they'd pass a carbon tax, only to forestall the disaster that Cap'n Trade would be.

Re: Sea Change – The Pacific's Perilous Turn

#76

Post by baddox »

revscat wrote: post #57
JonFish85 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think humanity will survive into the 22nd century Well that's a dumb thing to say. Have you been going to barbecues with Harold Camping? It'll be a different place in 87 years, sure. But humanity will be doing just fine, unless some whackjob launches off some nuclear weapons.

I don't know who that is. Insofar as humanity's long-term survival goes, though, no I do not think it is by any means a sure thing. The rate of CO2 emissions increases every year, parallel to the population. The "whackjobs" that are attacking are those who produce and profit from fossil fuels production and consumption. They already exist, and are not some far off, imaginary threat.

Where are you getting this data?

Re: Sea Change – The Pacific's Perilous Turn

#77

Post by indefatigable »

mikeyouse wrote: post #49
rickjames28 wrote: post #32

Like many who visit HN, I am an atheist. I am coming to believe, however, that the production of CO2 is the greatest sin, in the religious sense, that exists today Yes, global warming has become the religion of leftists.

This is such a ridiculous statement. Leftists like Bill Gates, Newt Gingrich, John Hunstman, Frederick Smith, Susan Collins, Tim Pawlenty? Cap and Trade was a free-market republican idea originally [1], but now that it's being advocated by the 'Leftists', it's become much more politicized. A plurality of scientists agree that steps should be taken, the FUD denial is all paid for by a dozen companies who stand to prof…

Most scientists agreed that fire involved phlogiston not so very long ago.

Re: Sea Change – The Pacific's Perilous Turn

#78

Post by jessaustin »

MartinCron wrote: post #67
jessaustin wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laugh away, but I'm not religious at all, and the same bullshit that turned me away from religion also turns me away from atheism.

No one group of humans has a monopoly of being 100% free from bullshitters. There's a large group of mostly silent atheists who are perfectly reasonable, just as there are groups of less-silent lunatics.

True enough, but this observation cuts both ways. There are also large groups of mostly-silent religious people who are perfectly reasonable, to a point. Like the atheists, however, many religions allow the prudentialists, perfectionists, and guilt-trippers to shit all over the place. No thanks, to both of them.

Re: Sea Change – The Pacific's Perilous Turn

#79

Post by callmeed »

revscat wrote: post #7

Like many who visit HN, I am an atheist. I am coming to believe, however, that the production of CO2 is the greatest sin, in the religious sense, that exists today. It dwarfs all other problems -- Syria, terrorism, the NSA, class and economic disparity, all of them. Being technologists we tend to assume (hope?) that some solution will present itself before it is too late. I am growing increasingly pessimistic that su…

As a non-atheist (christian), it's nice to have common ground on this view. It's a shame IMO that U.S. christians are so closely linked with anti-environmentalism (and the republican party, but that's for another day) but stewardship of the earth is clearly called for in both the old and new testaments.

Re: Sea Change – The Pacific's Perilous Turn

#80

Post by yetanotherphd »

indefatigable wrote: post #73
yetanotherphd wrote: post #37

The most important component of a strategy to reduce CO2 emissions is a carbon tax, which is economically equivalent to a cap-and-trade system. However, people involved in tech seem to be especially prone to what I call a "problem solving" bias: discrete problems require discrete solutions, and we just have to figure out if the right solution is solar, nuclear, or the Savory Institute. The (correct) economic point of…

Giving politicians the authority to levy a carbon tax is an absolutely terrible idea, and it has nothing to do with how I feel about China.

I believe that the idea that China is obstructing a global carbon tax (among supporters of such a tax) mainly comes from racism and is not supported by the facts. However, people oppose global/national carbon taxes for a number of reasons unrelated to racism. I'm not sure why you are concerned with the authority to levy a carbon tax, since (1) such a tax would almost certainly be beneficial and (2) politicians already have essentially unlimited legal authority to raise taxes of any sort.
Post reply on HN