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

The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 198 posts

Re: The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

#181

Post by dangerface »

egberts1 wrote: post #2

Here are some of the many of Los Angeles Times’ newspaper headlines that they used to help with their circulations: 1966 - Oil gone in 10 years 1968 - Overpopulation will spread worldwide 1969 - Everyone will disappear in a Cloud of Blue Steam in 1989 1970 - World will use up its natural resources by 2000 1970 - Urban citizens will require gas mask by 1985 1970 - Nitrogen buildup will make all lands unusable 1970 - D…

It doesn't look like the la times ever used the headline "Everyone will disappear in a Cloud of Blue Steam in", the only results in google was for an Alex Jones book or something

Re: The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

#182

Post by gwbas1c »

The problem is so deep, even I don't understand it. All I can say is that when we can get Republicans to stop denying climate change, and work with Democrats on the issue, they will figure out how to solve it very quickly.

---

I went to a debate between a well-established Republican, Randy Hunt, (who was rumored to replace Senator Warren if she was picked for VP,) and a first-time running Democrat.

The Democrat's response to climate change was to just put solar panels all over the place. He had no knowledge about how we need to store energy for when the sun goes down; no knowledge about how there's more sunlight in the summer, but we need more energy in the winter, ect, ect.

Randy spoke about working with MIT for energy storage, and promoted a local project to build the USA's largest offshore windfarm.

Even though I'm a D, I voted for Randy. When the D's supporters knocked on my door, I told them straight up that I live in a carbon neutral home, drive two electric cars, and that Randy (the R) understood how to battle climate change much more than their candidate.

But even worse, a year later I met some of the D's friends. They had no clue about how renewable energy works, and couldn't comprehend why I'd vote against a D. I tried to point out why you just can't put solar panels everywhere, but their eyes glazed over.

Re: The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

#183

Post by civilized »

gwbas1c wrote: post #182

The problem is so deep, even I don't understand it. All I can say is that when we can get Republicans to stop denying climate change, and work with Democrats on the issue, they will figure out how to solve it very quickly. --- I went to a debate between a well-established Republican, Randy Hunt, (who was rumored to replace Senator Warren if she was picked for VP,) and a first-time running Democrat. The Democrat's res…

Makes sense at one level, but I wonder if partisan voting patterns overwhelm the potential positive contribution of any one Republican.

I genuinely don't know here.

Re: The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

#184

Post by nawgz »

vasco wrote: post #16

> Nothing matters as much as our bone-headed, mass-suicidal march toward extreme-weather oblivion. Not COVID-19, not the invasion of Ukraine, not even “The Godfather.” Says a reporter living in Los Angeles, the 49th most expensive city in the world to live in. For a lot of people, what they need to talk about is how they're getting their next meal, how they're going to make rent, or survive a current war. Maybe go to…

His audience is first-world readers, who have time to digest the material, and then in the face of the ugly implications upon their own action, respond with snark about how plenty of humans are facing more urgent crises so we shouldn't worry about the destruction of our planet.

Your point isn't what you think it is.

Re: The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

#185

Post by sofixa »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #117
bmmayer1 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in Ukraine yesterday. That is 100% untrue. When you're in a war zone, even if you're in the country but far from the action, the only thing you can think about is your immediate survival and the survival of your friends and family. Literally nothing else matters.

Thanks for editing your comment for additional clarity. There isn't much one can do about anything if they survive until the next day, but that does not mean they don't care about non-immediate concerns. Flight 571 survivors were not pro-cannibalism , they did what they had to in order to survive in terrible circumstances. People in poverty and conflict definitely still care about their familys' futures.

> Flight 571

TIL. That was a terrifying read..

Re: The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

#186

Post by beepbooptheory »

YATA1 wrote: post #159
beepbooptheory wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the human toll of all those things aren't really all that meaningful when it is not visually apparent to an outside observer. Which does make this a good example of what is going in general, you are right!

>I guess the human toll of all those things aren't really all that meaningful Hilarious emotional appeal strawman. You can't even stay on topic after being proven wrong. Remember, New Orleans isn't underwater and it's past 2020. >when it is not visually apparent to an outside observer. I'm old enough to remember seeing all the pictures and videos of the aforementioned hurricanes. Don't project your ignorance on every…

Thank you for being so patient and kind. I am pretty slow in my thinking (low IQ), so it really helps when someone, point by point, explains to me why I am wrong in a compassionate and unassuming way. And I am glad I could entertain you with my stupidity along the way :).

I will work on not talking out of place, and not being so worried about climate change, but I do understand that I am in this position in the first place because of my moral and rational faults.

My best wishes to you and your loved ones, may you continue to find peace and stay dry (well, as you explained, you'll probably stay dry either way, still, the sentiment still stands).

Re: The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

#187

Post by morninglight »

vasco wrote: post #16

> Nothing matters as much as our bone-headed, mass-suicidal march toward extreme-weather oblivion. Not COVID-19, not the invasion of Ukraine, not even “The Godfather.” Says a reporter living in Los Angeles, the 49th most expensive city in the world to live in. For a lot of people, what they need to talk about is how they're getting their next meal, how they're going to make rent, or survive a current war. Maybe go to…

The author may be correct.

However, if this is an existential problem that threatens all of mankind, why is her article locked behind a paywall?

Re: The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

#188

Post by School-Cotton »

egberts1 wrote: post #155
dpedu wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. While I agree with the premise here I decided to track down some of these articles by putting some of them into a search engine. I found a subset of this list here, with links to sources. But most of the sources aren't LA Times: https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/50-years-of-failed-doomsday-e... But others, I couldn't find at all: - 4G cell tower causes cancers. I'm not sure what to think about this list. I would be…

I did say “some” but LA Times too did chime in with The Guardians (UK). https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cellphone-5g-health-2...

You said "these are some of..." not "some of these are...".

"X1, X2, X3 are some of Y" means that {X1, X2, X3} is a subset of Y. "Some of X1, X2, X3 are Y" means that {X1, X2, X3} intersects Y. But you said the former!

Re: The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

#189

Post by goodgoblin »

all2 wrote: post #124
goodgoblin wrote: post #82

I'm sorry, but this is utterly unhinged. There is no evidence of weather patterns of any kind, much less indications that we are about to face "extreme-weather". What caused the weather which led to the dust-bowl? What caused the ice-age? The climate of the earth has changed for millions of years w/o humans, and while certainly greenhouse gases impact the current trends, they aren't cause for apocalyptic concern. I r…

The dust-bowl wasn't specifically weather, it was farming practices (and apparently a drought). > The Dust Bowl was a period of severe dust storms that greatly damaged the ecology and agriculture of the American and Canadian prairies during the 1930s; severe drought and a failure to apply dryland farming methods to prevent the aeolian processes (wind erosion) caused the phenomenon. from Wikipedia

thank you - I thought someone might make a comment like this, which is why I added the qualifier ("weather which led to the dust-bowl") to distinguish it from the human factors - but hey - it's cool - and I love that you used the word "aeolian" - thats a really cool word :)

my point was just that weird weather has been happening for a long time, and if you think about it, if the weather people can't predict whether it will rain or not 2 weeks from now, how can they possibly predict there will be more or less storms 5 years from now, 10 years, etc?

Re: The only thing we should be talking about is the climate crisis

#190

Post by goodgoblin »

magpi3 wrote: post #123

Honest question: is there any chance that this does NOT end in an attempt at climate engineering, i.e. shooting shit into the atmosphere to cool the planet? I just can't imagine world nations are going to accept the catastrophic consequences that are incoming. Eventually, when things look bleak enough, it will become politically viable to propose such strategies. Obviously it is not at the current moment. But a cynic…

this would be a really bad idea -- b/c if you shoot too much into the atmosphere - you'd basically have an ice age - right?

It's just scary b/c we don't have a "QA" planet to test it on :)

Post reply on HN