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

US Study Projects How 'Unequivocal Warming' Will Change Americans ...

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 37 posts

Re: US Study Projects How 'Unequivocal Warming' Will Change Americans ...

#11

Post by gruseom »

Alex3917 wrote: post #9
mynameishere wrote: post #4

Not sure why it would lower crop production. Also not sure why maple syrup is worth mentioning.

"Not sure why it would lower crop production." The conditions that crops need aren't based on average temperature, but rather they're based on the minimum temperature, the maximum temperature, and how long it takes to go from very cold to very warm and vice versa. With global warming the climate zones don't just shift north, but rather you get these situations where certain crops just won't grow at all. For example,…

so we're just going to have major food shortages

That's a non sequitur. If certain things don't grow as well, it doesn't follow that nothing will.

Re: US Study Projects How 'Unequivocal Warming' Will Change Americans ...

#12

Post by jzachary »

pragmatic wrote: post #8

Just in time for one of the coldest summers on record. It's hard for people to fathom the thought of global warming while their local weather is in fact colder. Jared Diamond's Collapse is a good reference. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_(book) What did the Easter Islander who cut down the last tree and doom the island think as he used his stone axe? While I remain skeptical about global climate change, I can…

I don't about where you live, but along the Gulf Coast region, it is hotter and drier than normal.

Re: US Study Projects How 'Unequivocal Warming' Will Change Americans ...

#13

Post by Alex3917 »

gruseom wrote: post #11
Alex3917 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Not sure why it would lower crop production." The conditions that crops need aren't based on average temperature, but rather they're based on the minimum temperature, the maximum temperature, and how long it takes to go from very cold to very warm and vice versa. With global warming the climate zones don't just shift north, but rather you get these situations where certain crops just won't grow at all. For example,…

so we're just going to have major food shortages That's a non sequitur. If certain things don't grow as well, it doesn't follow that nothing will.

"That's a non sequitur."

In my explanation, but not in reality.

Re: US Study Projects How 'Unequivocal Warming' Will Change Americans ...

#14

Post by anon-e-moose »

jshen wrote: post #10
anon-e-moose wrote: post #2

On the other hand, a lot more people die from cold, so if you decrease that, it could be a net win... http://discovermagazine.com/2007/sep/global-warming-the-grea... Let me be even more sarcastic and snide... maybe people who are afraid of global warming are close minded and afraid of change...

Wanting to avoid death, disease, and destruction is not the same as a general fear of change.

And you could make a similar point about almost any other time someone is said to be afraid of change... that's why I'm making fun of it.

Re: US Study Projects How 'Unequivocal Warming' Will Change Americans ...

#15

Post by lilsis »

pragmatic wrote: post #8

Just in time for one of the coldest summers on record. It's hard for people to fathom the thought of global warming while their local weather is in fact colder. Jared Diamond's Collapse is a good reference. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_(book) What did the Easter Islander who cut down the last tree and doom the island think as he used his stone axe? While I remain skeptical about global climate change, I can…

I do not believe that human contribution to global warming is significant.

Water vapor is responsible for 95% of the greenhouse effect, yet somehow it is never brought up in global warming discussions. Why is this?

We've raised CO2 concentrations 100 ppm to 370 ppm... a concentration that's tiny in comparison to the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere... after all, we're on a giant ball of water.

I subscribe to the theory of giant ball of nuclear fire leads to warmer temperatures -> increase in ocean temperatures -> release of dissolved CO2 & increase in water vapor -> greater greenhouse effect

I don't hate the environment and obviously we should be reducing our impact, but cleaner air and water should be cause enough.

If anyone can explain to me why my reasoning is flawed I'll be happy to champion the idea that global warming is primarily driven by man... it would actually make my life easier to embrace it as fact. However, as it stands now, it seems to me a rather arrogant proposition.

Re: US Study Projects How 'Unequivocal Warming' Will Change Americans ...

#17

Post by jshen »

anon-e-moose wrote: post #14
jshen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wanting to avoid death, disease, and destruction is not the same as a general fear of change.

And you could make a similar point about almost any other time someone is said to be afraid of change... that's why I'm making fun of it.

changing jobs or moving to a new city is not remotely the same as the consequences of global warming. Sorry, it just isn't.

Re: US Study Projects How 'Unequivocal Warming' Will Change Americans ...

#18

Post by randallsquared »

Alex3917 wrote: post #9
mynameishere wrote: post #4

Not sure why it would lower crop production. Also not sure why maple syrup is worth mentioning.

"Not sure why it would lower crop production." The conditions that crops need aren't based on average temperature, but rather they're based on the minimum temperature, the maximum temperature, and how long it takes to go from very cold to very warm and vice versa. With global warming the climate zones don't just shift north, but rather you get these situations where certain crops just won't grow at all. For example,…

For example, grape vines have certain mechanisms to protect the buds during winter, but these mechanisms get disabled as soon as you get the first warm snap. The problem is that if it then gets cold again you lose all the buds, so no grapes.

But in fact, we know that grapes were grown at more northerly areas in the British Isles in warmer historical times. If it has been done, it's too late to suggest it's impossible.

Re: US Study Projects How 'Unequivocal Warming' Will Change Americans ...

#19

Post by pj »

jshen wrote: post #10
anon-e-moose wrote: post #2

On the other hand, a lot more people die from cold, so if you decrease that, it could be a net win... http://discovermagazine.com/2007/sep/global-warming-the-grea... Let me be even more sarcastic and snide... maybe people who are afraid of global warming are close minded and afraid of change...

Wanting to avoid death, disease, and destruction is not the same as a general fear of change.

I read the post you are replying to as a jab at those who believe change leads to death and destruction. We could move the cities inland. We could optimize buildings to keep people cooler. We could find more efficient forms of energy to enable more indoor climate control.

The current stress right now is to stop climate control. We humans believe we can stop climate control, but what if we can't? What if it actually is due to sun spots and beyond our control? It seems like it would make sense to adapt to the change rather than try to stop the change.

Re: US Study Projects How 'Unequivocal Warming' Will Change Americans ...

#20

Post by davidw »

randallsquared wrote: post #18
Alex3917 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Not sure why it would lower crop production." The conditions that crops need aren't based on average temperature, but rather they're based on the minimum temperature, the maximum temperature, and how long it takes to go from very cold to very warm and vice versa. With global warming the climate zones don't just shift north, but rather you get these situations where certain crops just won't grow at all. For example,…

For example, grape vines have certain mechanisms to protect the buds during winter, but these mechanisms get disabled as soon as you get the first warm snap. The problem is that if it then gets cold again you lose all the buds, so no grapes. But in fact, we know that grapes were grown at more northerly areas in the British Isles in warmer historical times. If it has been done, it's too late to suggest it's impossible…

The British Isles (as long as you don't stray too far north in Scotland, at least) aren't all that cold in terms of minimum temperatures (my guess is that it doesn't get that much colder than it does here in northern Italy). They're just damp. And don't get that hot in summer. And once you get any sort of trade happening, you're far better off with Italian wine anyway, so why bother.

Global warming is off topic for HN anyway. Few people here that I know of are climate scientists, and most people seem to make up their mind along political lines rather than scientific ones anyway, so discussions are unproductive at best.

Post reply on HN