4 ms·

In fact, some of them do: https://twitter.com/bouckap/status/675226198704848898/photo/1 https://twitter.com/bouckap/status/675226198704848898/photo/... (There

by js8 11y ago

In fact, some of them do: https://twitter.com/bouckap/status/675226198704848898/photo/1 https://twitter.com/bouckap/status/675226198704848898/photo/... (There are serious reasons to believe that AGW is one of the causes of the Syrian conflict.)

jessaustin 11y ago
Is that guy a wealthy warming enthusiast? Has he sold his beach properties? The tweet seems to be about something else. EDIT: are you a GWB apologist? It's difficult to believe that Daesh would have arisen without the Lesser Bush's misadventures in Iraq. In fact, if there had been two degrees cooling since 2003 and everything else had gone the same, it seems a pretty good bet that Daesh would still be with us.
- js8 11y ago
  > Is that guy a wealthy warming enthusiast? No, the point was, when the s* (like drought) hits the fan, the refugees will be the ones trying to get properties in Canada. Rich people with money savings can do that anytime; they're no better than other humans, also discount the future pretty aggressively.
  - jessaustin 11y ago
    Discounting is rational behavior. No one lives forever. However, the predictions we hear seem pretty certain about events of the next few decades. Plenty of people will live that long. If they're certain, why don't they act like it? How is attributing any particular human calamity to the climate different than attributing any particular storm to the climate? Pinker has argued persuasively that war and similar disasters have decreased significantly over recent periods. In that context one might think that the fortunes of Syrian refugees have more to do with politics and the media than with the climate. After all there were millions of refugees from violence within Africa during any decade of the twentieth century. They just weren't wealthy enough to make it to Europe. And in relative terms they were still fewer than refugees in earlier times, say 250 or 1000 years ago. How many fewer refugees would there have to be, for the changing climate to be credited for the decrease, rather than blamed for journalists' coverage of refugees?
    - js8 11y ago
      First of all, wealthy people typically have multiple properties, in different places. So it's not like they are going to be homeless if they lose their villa in Florida. Second, they probably already risk hurricanes and tsunamis. Third, the predicted sea level rise is about 1 meter (if we don't count the land ice, which is unpredictable), so you can probably deal with that on one house (but much harder on city or nation scale). In short - if you're rich, you're still better off than others in case of global catastrophe, so there is little you can make in preparations. But I am an expert in habits of wealthy people, this is just a guess. I agree with Steve Pinker, but if you actually read the book, it's not without caveats. Regarding attribution, we can somewhat attribute the drought to climate change (because we know from models that there is expected to be more of it) and so the conflict; it's not the sole cause, but it's a factor. I have no doubts there are going to be more mass migrations due to climate change.

by js8 11y ago

jessaustin 11y ago

Is that guy a wealthy warming enthusiast? Has he sold his beach properties? The tweet seems to be about something else. EDIT: are you a GWB apologist? It's difficult to believe that Daesh would have arisen without the Lesser Bush's misadventures in Iraq. In fact, if there had been two degrees cooling since 2003 and everything else had gone the same, it seems a pretty good bet that Daesh would still be with us.

js8 11y ago
> Is that guy a wealthy warming enthusiast? No, the point was, when the s* (like drought) hits the fan, the refugees will be the ones trying to get properties in Canada. Rich people with money savings can do that anytime; they're no better than other humans, also discount the future pretty aggressively.
- jessaustin 11y ago
  Discounting is rational behavior. No one lives forever. However, the predictions we hear seem pretty certain about events of the next few decades. Plenty of people will live that long. If they're certain, why don't they act like it? How is attributing any particular human calamity to the climate different than attributing any particular storm to the climate? Pinker has argued persuasively that war and similar disasters have decreased significantly over recent periods. In that context one might think that the fortunes of Syrian refugees have more to do with politics and the media than with the climate. After all there were millions of refugees from violence within Africa during any decade of the twentieth century. They just weren't wealthy enough to make it to Europe. And in relative terms they were still fewer than refugees in earlier times, say 250 or 1000 years ago. How many fewer refugees would there have to be, for the changing climate to be credited for the decrease, rather than blamed for journalists' coverage of refugees?
  - js8 11y ago
    First of all, wealthy people typically have multiple properties, in different places. So it's not like they are going to be homeless if they lose their villa in Florida. Second, they probably already risk hurricanes and tsunamis. Third, the predicted sea level rise is about 1 meter (if we don't count the land ice, which is unpredictable), so you can probably deal with that on one house (but much harder on city or nation scale). In short - if you're rich, you're still better off than others in case of global catastrophe, so there is little you can make in preparations. But I am an expert in habits of wealthy people, this is just a guess. I agree with Steve Pinker, but if you actually read the book, it's not without caveats. Regarding attribution, we can somewhat attribute the drought to climate change (because we know from models that there is expected to be more of it) and so the conflict; it's not the sole cause, but it's a factor. I have no doubts there are going to be more mass migrations due to climate change.