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

US to rewrite its past national climate reports

france24.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 205 posts

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#131

Post by account42 »

paulsutter wrote: post #56
jacquesm wrote: post #22

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." Feynman -- In this case, nature will not just not be fooled, it will extract retribution, unfortunately also on those that weren't fooled in the first place.

The old reports were somehow protecting us? Carbon emissions can only be reduced by engineering and manufacturing advances

No you see, carbon emissions can also be reduced by moving production to china and not looking too hard how they do it. Yay for climate champion Europe!

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#132

Post by lenkite »

throwaway4496 wrote: post #32
jacquesm wrote: post #22

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." Feynman -- In this case, nature will not just not be fooled, it will extract retribution, unfortunately also on those that weren't fooled in the first place.

Nature has no feelings, there will be no retribution, things will work out just fine, it will just be tough for us, maybe even wiped out, but nature will prevail. life will find a way, look at places where humans get excluded, everything regenerates. It is not a crises of nature, it is a crises of habitat for us as species, and a bunch of other like us.

Lizzies love high temperatures - it will be the second coming of the Dinosaurs!

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#133

Post by account42 »

sligor wrote: post #16
jasonjayr wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Historical records, especially pre-record keeping are revised when new techniques and sciences discover better, more reliable ways of interpreting the physical geological evidence left in the world behind us. What is the basis of these revisions?

revision based on new findings is how science works revision based on ideology is how fascism works

And the best part is that you can tell which is which by whether you agree or not.

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#134

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

philipov wrote: post #36
jacquesm wrote: post #22

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." Feynman -- In this case, nature will not just not be fooled, it will extract retribution, unfortunately also on those that weren't fooled in the first place.

"Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Those who do learn from history are doomed to watch everyone around them repeat it."

The only thing that we learn from history is that no-one learns from history.

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#135

Post by jfengel »

akaosns wrote: post #125
jfengel wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't want to trust the priests, fine. Go do the work yourself. Or take no position at all. Actively rejecting the work of scientists based solely on ideology, that is religion, in the worst sense of the word. They're not heretics. They're just liars.

You could replace the word “scientist” with “priest” in your post and it would be no different. Rejecting or accepting based on ideology is wrong. And given we lack the technical ability to fully understand global warming, there is no objective truth here.

We don't fully understand cosmology therefore the universe does not exist?

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#136

Post by KingOfCoders »

wffurr wrote: post #70
KingOfCoders wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I always found environmental protection kind of funny, nature does not need protection, it will survive until Earth becomes finally uninhabitable [0], it's us that might not make it that long if we don't take enough care. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future

And how many other species will we take down with us?

Most probably, but nature doesn't care. We will probably destabilize many eco systems with our behavior and make them collapse.

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#137

Post by Hizonner »

paulsutter wrote: post #123
jacquesm wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a way, yes, they were: they forced us to contemplate the long term consequences of our short term actions. Denying that is the opposite of protecting us (and, eventually, our offspring, who will deal with the consequences in a way that we never will). Carbon emissions can first and foremost be reduced by reducing the combustion of fossil fuels . Everything else is just bookkeeping and icing on the cake.

> Carbon emissions can first and foremost be reduced by reducing the combustion of fossil fuels. Exactly! It can’t be reduced or increased by edits to federal PDF files that nobody reads Commercial efforts are the only solution, and will happen because new energy is cheaper and better. Photovoltaic and battery improvements are our best path forward. Industrial policy can help but we’ve never really had that in the US

If nobody reads them and they have no effect, why are they being rewritten?

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#139

Post by jaybrendansmith »

“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#140

Post by Ostrogoth »

akaosns wrote: post #125
jfengel wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't want to trust the priests, fine. Go do the work yourself. Or take no position at all. Actively rejecting the work of scientists based solely on ideology, that is religion, in the worst sense of the word. They're not heretics. They're just liars.

You could replace the word “scientist” with “priest” in your post and it would be no different. Rejecting or accepting based on ideology is wrong. And given we lack the technical ability to fully understand global warming, there is no objective truth here.

Objective truth doesn’t have to be a stark black and white dichotomy. You don’t have to have 100% understanding or knowledge to observe that the probability of evidence is pointing to a certain end result (in this case, humanity is causing rapid changes to earths environment). To state that there is no objective truth is nihilism.
Post reply on HN