Live data from Hacker News

Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

thecompost.io

161–170 of 340 posts

Re: Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

#161
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you literally don't believe the raw numbers coming from sensors all over the world there is no room for doubting that the climate is changing. There can, and has been, plenty of discussion as to the reasons, but for at least thirty years now the consensus has been that human activity is responsible for the vast majority of the effects we've seen.

Following the consensus is a fine choice if you're trying not to get lynched by the mob, but it really has very little to do with science. The scientific method does not say, "get everyone you think is smart to vote on it, if they all agree, it must be true". I really wish lay people would quit turning science into a religion and scientists into priests.

the scientific method is about hypotheses and experiments. we're running a global experiment now, with potentially disastrous consequences, which can't be repeated, and you're saying you're fine to wait for its outcome because it's unscientific to do otherwise, basic thermodynamics notwithstanding, and you dare to tell others that science is turning into a religion, where in fact you have an irrational approach to the problem at hand which you're rationalizing as 'scientific method'.

i'm afraid that in fact your stance on climate warming is a question of your identity instead of logical thought.

Re: Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

#162
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Governments will not oblige their citizens to make steps on their consumption if it means reducing their comfort It's interesting though that they will oblige them to wars. This is generally not a true statement. Government is not entirely segregated from the citizenry. It is, in some form, representation of society (even in a dictatorship).

If half of the media tells it's a hoax, why would the population want to endure inconvenience for it. Denialism has a real effect.

It got the anti-environment pro-coal Liberals reelected in Australia last weekend, for sure. That, and fear of taxes for the stupidly rich.

Re: Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

#163
post #94
post #5

Not news of course, but worth restating. Credulous 'scepticism' about the fundamentals of the climate collapse threat has been largely driven by corporate propaganda campaigns. Those campaigns were themselves constructed by people who weren't 'sceptics' -- they believed AGM was happening -- but considered their short-term profitability more important. Climate collapse 'sceptics' were nearly all gulls.

This is one way to look at it. My view is that climate change is a world problem. Governments will not oblige their citizens to make steps on their consumption if it means reducing their comfort and their economic power. Steps should be taken in advance so that once green deals are put in place, countries can implement those effortlessly. We often hear that some countries don't make enough efforts, but 1. Other count…

> Governments will not oblige their citizens to make steps on their consumption if it means reducing their comfort and their economic power.

The effects climate change has and will have are doing that for them.

Re: Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

#164
post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that consensus is trivial. Probably 100% agree that the climate is changing which is the question people agreed on. Even so-called skeptics agree on that. It's all the other questions that have much more uncertainty and less consensus. The use of that number is the kind of outright political manipulation that's so prevalent in this debate. Keep in mind we aren't even talking about scientifically demonstrated…

>> In 10 years the climate catastrophim we see today will be laughed at. Just wait and se. That is very unlikely.

Not really once you realize how much of the fearmongering is completely baseless.

There is literally no scientifically demonstrated consequence of climate change that we don't know how to deal with today let alone in 10-40-100 years from now.

Re: Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

#165
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you literally don't believe the raw numbers coming from sensors all over the world there is no room for doubting that the climate is changing. There can, and has been, plenty of discussion as to the reasons, but for at least thirty years now the consensus has been that human activity is responsible for the vast majority of the effects we've seen.

The climate has always been changing. That's the problem. We have been in a "long trend" global warming period for at least 20,000 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Maximum Much of the world was under ice 20K years ago. And the earth has generally warmed since then and melted much of the ice ( with occasional refreezes ). And the "consensus" that human activity is responsible is utter nonsense. Feel f…

No one denies that the climate changed before and that it's a natural thing. The problem is that in 100 years we went from slow changes to 10 times the amplitudes ever recorded. The questions isn't "Do these cycles exist ?" it's "Are we sure we want to trigger one early ?"

Greenhouse effect is a very well studied effect. CO2 / other gases level are a very well studied field. CO2/other gases dramatically increased since the industrial revolution. Are you also denying that ?

When you study something you have to look at the settings in which it happens and look at the time frame. Sure changes happened 10k+ years ago, that's not invalidating anything related to our role in the current change.

> Thinking humans are responsible for global warming is like thinking humans are responsible for the rise and decline of tides because we drink water.

You won't win anyone over with such nonsensical arguments.

https://www.climatecentral.org/news/the-last-time-co2-was-th...

https://theconversation.com/the-three-minute-story-of-800-00...

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/global-warming/last-2000-years

https://xkcd.com/1732/

Re: Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If half of the media tells it's a hoax, why would the population want to endure inconvenience for it. Denialism has a real effect.

It got the anti-environment pro-coal Liberals reelected in Australia last weekend, for sure. That, and fear of taxes for the stupidly rich.

And now Labor is careening in the same pro-coal direction. Sad!

Re: Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, and there's the Extinction Rebellion stuff in the UK. Here in Australia we're kind of complacent/lazy, not often giving a stuff about anything except sports, celebrities, and limitless acquisition of consumer crap. But there is a bit of the school strike stuff happening. It's all a bit marginal though, isn't it? People might object to the 'quasi religious' aspect of what you're talking about. I'd make the point…

I can only speak out of my bubble here, but I believe the Fridays for Future movement and resistance against the copyright reform really shook the German youth and the whole country as a consequence. I have a feeling things are actually moving: A few days ago a mid-sized German YouTuber has published a 1 hour long video harshly criticizing the major German party CDU, not for its support of the copyright reform, but l…

I hope you're right. I really have my doubts, but have seen enough life not to be too confident in my predictions.

Re: Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

#168
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a fan of "believe" or dogma of any kind myself. I tend to go on likelihood. I ask myself is it more likely that the 97% are correct or the 3%?

I think Bayes theorem might be worthwhile here. Besides, going with the majority or authority as a principal is almost the definition of dogma. That's not likelihood in any rigorous sense.

When weighing up the likelihood of something it is valid to consider the opinions of experts. Dogma is believing what an authority says is incontrovertibly true. I am not saying that man made climate change is incontrovertibly true, only incontrovertibly highly likely. It is true that the view of the great majority of the experts in a field has authority, particularly in regards to science, but it is an justifiable authority, not one for example one built solely on tradition.

Re: Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

#169
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you literally don't believe the raw numbers coming from sensors all over the world there is no room for doubting that the climate is changing. There can, and has been, plenty of discussion as to the reasons, but for at least thirty years now the consensus has been that human activity is responsible for the vast majority of the effects we've seen.

The climate has always been changing. That's the problem. We have been in a "long trend" global warming period for at least 20,000 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Maximum Much of the world was under ice 20K years ago. And the earth has generally warmed since then and melted much of the ice ( with occasional refreezes ). And the "consensus" that human activity is responsible is utter nonsense. Feel f…

You are mistakenly conferring the correlation between long and short term trends I think. The reason for long term trends is (as far as I know) somewhat uncertain and might be having an effect, but the short term trend is mostly attributed to humans doing things and can be shown to massively correlate to events (like the industrial revolution in the UK, massive oil consumption etc).

The consensuses you mention were in their time not a 'consensus' and dubious at best and already recognized by the contemporaries of the time.

> This trend started long before humans started using oil

Correct to a certain extend (see other post for sources), they started using (very broadly as greenhouse gas emissions concern) agriculture/herding first, wood, and coal. Oil as a source of greenhouse gasses is mainly 20th century thing.

Re: Exxon knew that fossil fuels were influencing the climate in 1978

#170
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freeman Dyson

He's a physicists. Why would he have any idea about climate? He's just a person with an opinion not a dissenting scientist. And if his work suffered as a result of voicing such opinion then it was only to be expected. If you voice stupid opinion regarding domain you know almost nothing about and prop it up with your work reputation it's only fair if that reputation takes a hit.

The climate is a physical phenomenon.
Post reply on HN