7 ms·

So how deep into the consequences are we going to get before the debate over its reality ends?

amiramir 9y ago
Apparently climate change is hard to reason about due to our cognitive biases. I know that Kaheman has lost a little luster of late I still buy this: "Kahneman won the 2002 Nobel prize in economics for his research on the psychological biases that distort rational decision- making. One of these is “loss aversion”, which means that people are far more sensitive to losses than gains. He regards climate change as a perfect trigger: a distant problem that requires sacrifices now to avoid uncertain losses far in the future. This combination is exceptionally hard for us to accept, he told me."[0] That said, I think that the thing that will make people change their behavior is not so much how bad it gets but the economics. If it's cheaper to use renewables than burning fuels then people will switch. Thinking about one's short-term economic choices ($1 < $2) is mostly simpler than thinking about global issues that are at odds with one's cognitive biases, and one's choices to ignore scientists. [0] https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329820-200-understand-faulty-thinking-to-tackle-climate-change/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329820-200-understa...
czechdeveloper 9y ago
Until it can be told that it's too late to do anything anyway.
- jackmott 9y ago
  that argument started in early 2000 and continues to grow. it is a dumb argument but you can be sure that is where the rhetoric is heading.
  - tertius 9y ago
    Ah, the point of no return, i.e. the genesis of global warming alarmism. One of the biggest PR blunders for climate change. For all those who are pro-climate change, please stop saying "we've reached the point of no return." It doesn't help people change, which is what your goal should be. Shaming people is all good fun, but it doesn't help your end goal.
titzer 9y ago
I fear that an entire generation of older Americans simply will not accept climate change is real. The question is how much political power they will have in the coming years. We might still be having these debates in a decade. Sadly.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- _jal 9y ago
  This is how humans work, and the same is said about science. Both advance one grave at a time.
- eduren 9y ago
  Its not just a generational issue, its also a religious one. A massive barrier to acceptance is admitting that humans have the ability to render earth uninhabitable, something that God either A) wouldn't allow to happen, or worse B) is allowing to happen because its part of the end times. Why try to fix the problem if we aren't the masters of our own destiny?
  - graphitezepp 9y ago
    I hate how real I think this probably is. Anecdotally there is massive crossover between religious individuals and climate change deniers among people I know.
    - sampo 9y ago
      And only 33% of people in the world are Christian. Other religions might have an even larger fraction of climate change deniers.
      - 0xfeba 9y ago
        I doubt it correlates as well. American Christian 'leaders' (specifically Evangelicals) have strategically married their religion and conservative talking points. It (climate change belief) is not as associated with identity in other cultures.

Apparently climate change is hard to reason about due to our cognitive biases. I know that Kaheman has lost a little luster of late I still buy this: "Kahneman won the 2002 Nobel prize in economics for his research on the psychological biases that distort rational decision- making. One of these is “loss aversion”, which means that people are far more sensitive to losses than gains. He regards climate change as a perfect trigger: a distant problem that requires sacrifices now to avoid uncertain losses far in the future. This combination is exceptionally hard for us to accept, he told me."[0] That said, I think that the thing that will make people change their behavior is not so much how bad it gets but the economics. If it's cheaper to use renewables than burning fuels then people will switch. Thinking about one's short-term economic choices ($1 < $2) is mostly simpler than thinking about global issues that are at odds with one's cognitive biases, and one's choices to ignore scientists. [0] https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329820-200-understand-faulty-thinking-to-tackle-climate-change/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329820-200-understa...

czechdeveloper 9y ago

Until it can be told that it's too late to do anything anyway.

jackmott 9y ago
that argument started in early 2000 and continues to grow. it is a dumb argument but you can be sure that is where the rhetoric is heading.
- tertius 9y ago
  Ah, the point of no return, i.e. the genesis of global warming alarmism. One of the biggest PR blunders for climate change. For all those who are pro-climate change, please stop saying "we've reached the point of no return." It doesn't help people change, which is what your goal should be. Shaming people is all good fun, but it doesn't help your end goal.

titzer 9y ago

I fear that an entire generation of older Americans simply will not accept climate change is real. The question is how much political power they will have in the coming years. We might still be having these debates in a decade. Sadly.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
_jal 9y ago
This is how humans work, and the same is said about science. Both advance one grave at a time.
eduren 9y ago
Its not just a generational issue, its also a religious one. A massive barrier to acceptance is admitting that humans have the ability to render earth uninhabitable, something that God either A) wouldn't allow to happen, or worse B) is allowing to happen because its part of the end times. Why try to fix the problem if we aren't the masters of our own destiny?
- graphitezepp 9y ago
  I hate how real I think this probably is. Anecdotally there is massive crossover between religious individuals and climate change deniers among people I know.
  - sampo 9y ago
    And only 33% of people in the world are Christian. Other religions might have an even larger fraction of climate change deniers.
    - 0xfeba 9y ago
      I doubt it correlates as well. American Christian 'leaders' (specifically Evangelicals) have strategically married their religion and conservative talking points. It (climate change belief) is not as associated with identity in other cultures.