3 ms·

Arctic is indeed shrinking. 15000 years ago (or so) there were miles of ice on top of the place I'm currently sitting.

jackmott 9y ago
These posts that pretend or imagine they have a deeper understanding of the science than the rest of us are super irritating. The writers of the economist article know, climate scientists know, and hackernews readers all know that the climate has been colder and hotter in the past over geologic time scales. We all know this. It is not correct to imply that the current warming is just a continuation of the usual inter-glacial cycles. It isn't, the rate of change is completely different by orders of magnitude, and the causes are observably different.
- dTal 9y ago
  It's like being in an elevator whose cable has snapped and is in freefall, and saying there's nothing to worry about because the elevator goes up and down all the time and it's perfectly normal.
- Turing_Machine 9y ago
  What's "super-irritating" is that you guys keep trotting out the same predictions in an attempt to induce panic, even though those predictions have failed time after time. See up-thread, where scientists were predicting an "ice-free Arctic" for 2013. And 2019. And now 2040. I believe there were predictions for the Arctic to be "ice-free" by 2000 as well, but a quick Google isn't turning up a solid reference. Yes, the earth has been colder than it is now. Many times. It's also been warmer than it is now. Many times. "It isn't, the rate of change is completely different by orders of magnitude" That is simply not correct. There is plenty of evidence that ice ages can occur over a time scale of less than a hundred years, and some evidence that it can happen on a decadal scale. Heck, some of us are old enough when the threat of an ice age was the scare story.
  - antisthenes 9y ago
    You posted a bunch of headlines by journos, not scientists and expect us to take that as some holy grail of evidence that GW isn't happening. That's nor surprising, considering you're a libertarian, but from the perspective of people who live in the real world, it's lunacy.
    - Turing_Machine 9y ago
      "You posted a bunch of headlines by journos" So what? The whole thread is predicated on an "article by a journo". "expect us to take that as some holy grail of evidence that GW isn't happening" Please don't put words in my mouth. Thanks. Far from "expecting you to take it as a "holy grail of evidence", I'm pointing out that these sensationalist scare articles have been around for a long, long time (at least since the time of Malthus in the 1700s), and yet the promised doomsday has never occurred. And far from saying that climate change "isn't happening", I explicitly said "Yes, the earth has been colder than it is now. Many times. It's also been warmer than it is now. Many times." Do you guys feel any guilt at all when you grossly misrepresent someone else's statements, or does the warm glow of virtue you get from Proper Thinking counteract it? "considering you're a libertarian" You act like that's some kind of pejorative.
      - m52go 9y ago
        Big props for taking one for the team. Becoming critical of "climate change" just happened to me recently. I've been critical of the usual suspects like foreign policy, finance, media, etc. for a while, but climate change was a sacred cow. Then I read this. https://www.fairobserver.com/more/environment/forgotten-sun-climate-catastrophe-called/ https://www.fairobserver.com/more/environment/forgotten-sun-... Before anyone accuses me of bringing scientism onto HN, realize that never did I call climate change a "hoax." Most intelligent people critical of climate change don't either. Obviously, it's happening...to some degree. I'm merely critical of the mainstream perspective of its causes and effects. And I'm not sure one can ever be too critical in science.
        9y ago

These posts that pretend or imagine they have a deeper understanding of the science than the rest of us are super irritating. The writers of the economist article know, climate scientists know, and hackernews readers all know that the climate has been colder and hotter in the past over geologic time scales. We all know this. It is not correct to imply that the current warming is just a continuation of the usual inter-glacial cycles. It isn't, the rate of change is completely different by orders of magnitude, and the causes are observably different.

dTal 9y ago
It's like being in an elevator whose cable has snapped and is in freefall, and saying there's nothing to worry about because the elevator goes up and down all the time and it's perfectly normal.
Turing_Machine 9y ago
What's "super-irritating" is that you guys keep trotting out the same predictions in an attempt to induce panic, even though those predictions have failed time after time. See up-thread, where scientists were predicting an "ice-free Arctic" for 2013. And 2019. And now 2040. I believe there were predictions for the Arctic to be "ice-free" by 2000 as well, but a quick Google isn't turning up a solid reference. Yes, the earth has been colder than it is now. Many times. It's also been warmer than it is now. Many times. "It isn't, the rate of change is completely different by orders of magnitude" That is simply not correct. There is plenty of evidence that ice ages can occur over a time scale of less than a hundred years, and some evidence that it can happen on a decadal scale. Heck, some of us are old enough when the threat of an ice age was the scare story.
- antisthenes 9y ago
  You posted a bunch of headlines by journos, not scientists and expect us to take that as some holy grail of evidence that GW isn't happening. That's nor surprising, considering you're a libertarian, but from the perspective of people who live in the real world, it's lunacy.
  - Turing_Machine 9y ago
    "You posted a bunch of headlines by journos" So what? The whole thread is predicated on an "article by a journo". "expect us to take that as some holy grail of evidence that GW isn't happening" Please don't put words in my mouth. Thanks. Far from "expecting you to take it as a "holy grail of evidence", I'm pointing out that these sensationalist scare articles have been around for a long, long time (at least since the time of Malthus in the 1700s), and yet the promised doomsday has never occurred. And far from saying that climate change "isn't happening", I explicitly said "Yes, the earth has been colder than it is now. Many times. It's also been warmer than it is now. Many times." Do you guys feel any guilt at all when you grossly misrepresent someone else's statements, or does the warm glow of virtue you get from Proper Thinking counteract it? "considering you're a libertarian" You act like that's some kind of pejorative.
    - m52go 9y ago
      Big props for taking one for the team. Becoming critical of "climate change" just happened to me recently. I've been critical of the usual suspects like foreign policy, finance, media, etc. for a while, but climate change was a sacred cow. Then I read this. https://www.fairobserver.com/more/environment/forgotten-sun-climate-catastrophe-called/ https://www.fairobserver.com/more/environment/forgotten-sun-... Before anyone accuses me of bringing scientism onto HN, realize that never did I call climate change a "hoax." Most intelligent people critical of climate change don't either. Obviously, it's happening...to some degree. I'm merely critical of the mainstream perspective of its causes and effects. And I'm not sure one can ever be too critical in science.
      - 9y ago