Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf]

#71

Post by ilove_banh_mi » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 9:35 PM UTC

rebuilder wrote: post #47

cagenut wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, since this is a community in which many fancy themselves engineers, ground yourself in the numbers. The main ones being: - number of gigatons emitted to date - rate of ongoing emissions - change in the rate of ongoing emissions - what total emissions numbers correspond to what PPM in the atmosphere - what ppm in the atmosphere correspond to what degrees of C warming (in various timeframes) here is a nic…

I'm starting to wonder if telling people what they can personally change in their lives is actually counterproductive. The gains to be had there are not that great. Sure it's good to minimize energy use as you outline. But where does it leave you in terms of tonnes of CO2/year? AFAIK the Paris accord goals (inadequate as they are) imply a target of around 1500 kg of CO2 per capita yearly. Homeless people achieve that…

I think recycling is also a misleading and false virtue, at least for most people I've encountered in the US. I've watched the thought-process: I'm recycling pizza boxes and tens of Amazon boxes every week, therefore I'm doing my part, therefore the environment will do well, and I don't need to do anything else or more.

Re: Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf]

#72

Post by umvi » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 9:37 PM UTC

jimjansen1 wrote: post #41

ilove_banh_mi wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there are scientists who deny past or present climate change. Do you mean to disparage the many scientists who research the causes of past climate change, and who hypothesize that the current changes are, like all past changes, caused by other factors than the man-made, industrial-age rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide?

There is overwhelming consensus that the current rate of climate change, which by the way is totally unprecedented in history, can be from no other source than anthropogenic CO2. You can read the research and see how thoroughly and completely every possible confounding variable was accounted for. The scientists who claim "current changes are, like all past changes, caused by other factors than the man-made" are not t…

Let them be wrong then. But science is not a democracy. You can have overwhelming expert consensus and still be completely wrong. You can get experts to hold a vote and agree some new idea is complete garbage but that vote does not change immutable truth. It's happened countless times in history.

For example, Ignaz Semmelweis (from wiki):

> Despite various publications of results where hand washing reduced mortality to below 1%, Semmelweis's observations conflicted with the established scientific and medical opinions of the time and his ideas were rejected by the medical community. Semmelweis could offer no acceptable scientific explanation for his findings, and some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands and mocked him for it. In 1865, Semmelweis suffered a nervous breakdown and was committed to an asylum, where he died at age 47 of pyaemia

Re: Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf]

#73

Post by jibal » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 9:38 PM UTC

yongjik wrote: post #38

ArchTypical wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I lump climate change deniers into the same category as flat-earthers > there are no inconsistencies in my testimonies against the government, against the fossil fuel industry I lump climate change blamers into the same category. The moment you start talking about individual country (or any specific body) per capita and cumulative, you're making a political statements that someone is responsible and needs to be acc…

> "so it's up to you to try to fix it but we're not gonna even suggest how ..." More like "So you deserve a larger responsibility for fixing this and we're suggesting, maybe start with stop mining coal and not electing a president who calls climate change a Chinese hoax?" but sure, same thing.

You know that you won't get anywhere with these climate science deniers, who have no intellectual honesty ... they're not worth the aggravation. (And the response to my comment is exactly what I'm talking about.)

Re: Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf]

#74

Post by ams6110 » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 9:40 PM UTC

randyrand wrote: post #51

I've long been in the camp that we worry about climate change more than makes rational sense. I'm not saying we should ignore it, but we often overstate. It's worth remembering that the effects on QoL will be completely eclipsed by technological progress within that period and that the timescales that GW happen over (50+ years) are long enough that most people will hardly ever notice it. Gradual relocation will be ou…

I think very few people actually worry about it. That's not representative of the people who post here, but just looking around at how people live and the cars they drive and the homes they build and businesses running 24x7 with all the lights on, parking lots lit up all night after stores are closed, towns wasting many kilowatt hours on Christmas lighting, etc. I see no real evidence that anyone but a small minority of people are even thinking about it, much less worrying.

Re: Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf]

#75

Post by skosch » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 9:41 PM UTC

apo wrote: post #63

The problem with many discussions around global warming is not scientific, but cultural. Advocates of change often take a sanctimonious attitude toward anyone expressing the slightest doubt. Have a look at the episodes of the Netflix series "Bill Nye Saves the World" on climate change. If you can watch without cringing, congratulations. I can't. Or take this interview Nye did with Tucker Carlsen: https://www.youtube.…

If this was 1980, then I'd be right with you. But it's 2018.

We've had 40 years of unmistakable data, and at this point, anyone pushing this "the science isn't settled" talking point – adopted from the tobacco industry – either has a vested interest in denialism or simply falls really far left on the Dunning-Kruger curve.

Re: Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf]

#76

Post by ArchTypical » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 9:41 PM UTC

jibal wrote: post #73

yongjik wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "so it's up to you to try to fix it but we're not gonna even suggest how ..." More like "So you deserve a larger responsibility for fixing this and we're suggesting, maybe start with stop mining coal and not electing a president who calls climate change a Chinese hoax?" but sure, same thing.

You know that you won't get anywhere with these climate science deniers, who have no intellectual honesty ... they're not worth the aggravation. (And the response to my comment is exactly what I'm talking about.)

There's no denial, as much as it is what you would ironically believe. There is likely intellectual dishonesty, which was my point.

Re: Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf]

#77

Post by PhasmaFelis » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 9:42 PM UTC

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #65

logjammin wrote: post #3

I'm in my thirties. I don't have kids, but want them. I don't want to admit to them that I did nothing about global warming when it counted. The thing is that I don't know what I should do; it seems so big, so intractable. Articles like these stir me to action, but what action? Where's the mass movement on this? Where's the group, the party, the leadership?

I think many people signal that they are against global warming, but very few are ready to give up any thing. Many people I know just think not using polyethylene is the only required thing(which emits less CO2 than reusable bag, even counting reusing), or at most using bicycles for intracity travel. I think here is few of the (hard)things you can do which actually does effect according to my research: - Don't travel…

IIRC something like 70%-80% of CO2 emissions are industrial, not personal. By all means do whatever you can, but the idea that global warming is all about our individual habits is essentially a smokescreen. If we want to fix this, the most important thing is to force corporations and governments to take action.

Re: Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf]

#78

Post by robotrout » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 9:43 PM UTC

jimjimjim wrote: post #44

vladimirralev wrote: post #13

I invite everybody to watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaiZ5BHaUMY A calm, collected, scientific representation of both sides.

Should people eat broken glass? let's hear from both sides!

There are many scientists that believe solar forcing is responsible for temperature increases on Earth, Mars, Triton, Jupiter, and Pluto.

While CO2 promoters point out the fact that solar irradiance changes are relatively small over time, they ignore that those same irradiance changes correspond to changes in solar magnetism, which means changes in cosmic ray incidence on planetary atmospheres. It is well known that cosmic rays effect cloud formation.

It's really not as clear cut as you have been taught.

Re: Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf]

#79

Post by jjoonathan » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 9:44 PM UTC

randyrand wrote: post #51

I've long been in the camp that we worry about climate change more than makes rational sense. I'm not saying we should ignore it, but we often overstate. It's worth remembering that the effects on QoL will be completely eclipsed by technological progress within that period and that the timescales that GW happen over (50+ years) are long enough that most people will hardly ever notice it. Gradual relocation will be ou…

Yesterday's false cry of "Wolf!" is the worst enemy of action today. Will today's cry of "Wolf!" inhibit action tomorrow? It pays to be correct -- and hurts to be incorrect.

FWIW I'm convinced that it's serious this time, but history abounds with examples of breathless malthusian doomsday predictions that failed to pass.

Re: Climate Change in a Nutshell: The Gathering Storm [pdf]

#80

Post by Brakenshire » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 9:45 PM UTC

apo wrote: post #67

Brakenshire wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who cares what Bill Nye says or thinks.

Science has very few recognizable public faces. Nye, and Niel Tyson are two of them. When these people say something about science, for better or worse, they speaks for science in many people's minds.

A lot of people would take advice from someone who played a doctor on tv. Bill Nye is a childrens entertainer. His opinions I’m sure are not well founded, but it simply doesn’t matter. His opinion either way should be totally irrelevant to your judgment of the case.