6 ms·

>climate change deniers >climate change is a problem Do you "deny" that climate change can have non-problematic effects? Can a temperature increase in one ar

>climate change deniers >climate change is a problem Do you "deny" that climate change can have non-problematic effects? Can a temperature increase in one area be beneficial? Can a drought in one area mean more water in another area?

masklinn 10y ago
Beneficial effects for humanity? Yes, the rate of change we're heading for is way too high for anything humanity depends on to handle it, including our infrastructure.
r00fus 10y ago
Insofar as it's part of many runaway processes modeled [1] [2], no I don't think so. Or to put it in more stark: whatever minor benefits exist are outweighed by the massive risks to mid-long term survival of the human race. Some think we can simply out-evolve/adapt these changes. That, to me, stinks of hubris. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect
- imjustsaying 10y ago
  What evidence is there that there could be a runaway greenhouse effect on any non-astronomical timescale?
  - hackuser 10y ago
    Look up the IPCC reports; they have the answers to your questions.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - imjustsaying 10y ago
      "For instance, a “runaway greenhouse effect”—analogous to Venus-- appears to have virtually no chance of being induced by anthropogenic activities" (p. 90) http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session31/inf3.pdf http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session31/inf3.pdf
      - hackuser 10y ago
        Thanks; that's useful. A couple notes: * It's from 2009 * It's not an official report or conclusion, but appears to be more of a discussion aimed at "scoping" the next report. Still, it's far better than what previously informed our discussion here.
  - Confusion 10y ago
    There is no sense in rehashing the same old 'climate change 101' arguments and data here. If you were truly interested in, and knowledgeable on, the subject, you would know exactly what evidence there is and we would be discussing the merits of the evidence. As it is, you cannot be distinguished from the average parrot or troll. Anyone who does not at least agree that there is evidence that is worrying and worth discussing does not know enough about the subject to be having opinions and posing suggestive questions about it. If you don't at least start with: hey, I understand you are not a total idiot and I understand how it may seem like there is strong anthropogenic climate change going on, but here is why I think that that is not the case, then discussion is pointless.
nameless912 10y ago
The general scientific consensus is that any localized benefits are far outweighed by global detriments, such as rising sea levels, mass crop failure, animal extinction, etc.
- imjustsaying 10y ago
  I like to carefully consider a consensus of any group which primarily depends on a single source, in this case government grants, for its paychecks. Evidence-based consensus is good, and I am primarily interested in the evidence. What evidence is there that rising sea levels will cause more harm than benefit? What evidence is there that there can't be more crop production at more northern, theoretically then warmer, altitudes? What evidence is there that there can't be increased animal diversity as previously colder areas become more habitable to different species?
  - dd36 10y ago
    Borders don't conveniently move. Uninhabitable deserts aren't a good thing.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    > Thank you for telling us the consensus of people who literally depend on government grants for their paychecks. It's a loose, circumstantial, conspiratorial aspersion, which has nothing to do with the facts of climate change. Maybe they could make more by providing credibility to the oil and gas industry. Again, look up IPCC reports. We're not a forum of climate scientists. I believe gravity also exists; I haven't read the papers myself and don't have time to find them.
  - aliakhtar 10y ago
    You would not be using the internet were it not for research done by scientists on government grants, moron. Nor would your or your loved ones' lives be saved next time you're in the hospital.
    - imjustsaying 10y ago
sesqu 10y ago
Excess water is not beneficial. It isn't associated with social instability like drought is, but it does lead to loss of harvest.
mannykannot 10y ago
The corner cases are not significant in comparison to the majority cases, and it is not rational to pretend otherwise.

masklinn 10y ago

Beneficial effects for humanity? Yes, the rate of change we're heading for is way too high for anything humanity depends on to handle it, including our infrastructure.

r00fus 10y ago

Insofar as it's part of many runaway processes modeled [1] [2], no I don't think so. Or to put it in more stark: whatever minor benefits exist are outweighed by the massive risks to mid-long term survival of the human race. Some think we can simply out-evolve/adapt these changes. That, to me, stinks of hubris. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect

imjustsaying 10y ago
What evidence is there that there could be a runaway greenhouse effect on any non-astronomical timescale?
- hackuser 10y ago
  Look up the IPCC reports; they have the answers to your questions.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - imjustsaying 10y ago
    "For instance, a “runaway greenhouse effect”—analogous to Venus-- appears to have virtually no chance of being induced by anthropogenic activities" (p. 90) http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session31/inf3.pdf http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session31/inf3.pdf
    - hackuser 10y ago
      Thanks; that's useful. A couple notes: * It's from 2009 * It's not an official report or conclusion, but appears to be more of a discussion aimed at "scoping" the next report. Still, it's far better than what previously informed our discussion here.
- Confusion 10y ago
  There is no sense in rehashing the same old 'climate change 101' arguments and data here. If you were truly interested in, and knowledgeable on, the subject, you would know exactly what evidence there is and we would be discussing the merits of the evidence. As it is, you cannot be distinguished from the average parrot or troll. Anyone who does not at least agree that there is evidence that is worrying and worth discussing does not know enough about the subject to be having opinions and posing suggestive questions about it. If you don't at least start with: hey, I understand you are not a total idiot and I understand how it may seem like there is strong anthropogenic climate change going on, but here is why I think that that is not the case, then discussion is pointless.

nameless912 10y ago

The general scientific consensus is that any localized benefits are far outweighed by global detriments, such as rising sea levels, mass crop failure, animal extinction, etc.

imjustsaying 10y ago
I like to carefully consider a consensus of any group which primarily depends on a single source, in this case government grants, for its paychecks. Evidence-based consensus is good, and I am primarily interested in the evidence. What evidence is there that rising sea levels will cause more harm than benefit? What evidence is there that there can't be more crop production at more northern, theoretically then warmer, altitudes? What evidence is there that there can't be increased animal diversity as previously colder areas become more habitable to different species?
- dd36 10y ago
  Borders don't conveniently move. Uninhabitable deserts aren't a good thing.
- hackuser 10y ago
  > Thank you for telling us the consensus of people who literally depend on government grants for their paychecks. It's a loose, circumstantial, conspiratorial aspersion, which has nothing to do with the facts of climate change. Maybe they could make more by providing credibility to the oil and gas industry. Again, look up IPCC reports. We're not a forum of climate scientists. I believe gravity also exists; I haven't read the papers myself and don't have time to find them.
- aliakhtar 10y ago
  You would not be using the internet were it not for research done by scientists on government grants, moron. Nor would your or your loved ones' lives be saved next time you're in the hospital.
  - imjustsaying 10y ago

sesqu 10y ago

Excess water is not beneficial. It isn't associated with social instability like drought is, but it does lead to loss of harvest.

mannykannot 10y ago

The corner cases are not significant in comparison to the majority cases, and it is not rational to pretend otherwise.