5 ms·

I wish someone would tell me exactly what it is I should be worried about. I get that there will be consequences to climate change that's how it's always been,

I wish someone would tell me exactly what it is I should be worried about. I get that there will be consequences to climate change that's how it's always been, but nature throws that at us all the time and have always been doing that. If anything we've just become better and better at dealing with it. So I wish someone could provide anything other than speculation here.

SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
What level of evidence are you willing to accept? And how can we do anything BUT speculate on future events?
- ThomPete 8y ago
  You don't have to speculate if you can prove it scientifically. Yet this discussion is being had AS IF we are debating what is scientifically true when in fact we are debating which interpretation of the science we should prioritize. If someone can demonstrate scientifically to me that it's a cataclysmic event and that humans have no way of dealing with it you have my attention. Other than that I prefer to worry about the current generations issues not panicking and rushing to conclusions making absurd political decisions like we are doing today, btw decisions that won't actually solve the very problems they are claiming to deal with.
  - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
    So the fact that, while the evidence and scientific consensus is overwhelmingly in favour of climate change causing issues for our planet, and let me be clear it's the mainstream scientific consensus, as we don't have a "this is how it's going to kill us" smoking gun, and we might somehow magically figure out how to save ourselves, it's a non issue? Do places like Flint Michigan not make you think that maybe your hope in the collective power of mankind is a little misplaced? It's well within our means to solve that particular problem, but no one can be bothered.
    - ThomPete 8y ago
      There is a scientific consensus that climate is changing that it is heating up. After that it becomes more and more speculative. There is not scientific consensus that we are all doomed or even close to being doomed. There is a higher risk of zero that it will be cataclysmis but so is there of an astroid hitting earth and a supernova wiping us all out. But it's mostly speculation and this conversation would be much more useful also for future generation if we didn't as we see in this thread here completely panic at every sensationalist headline and start asking ourselves some more constructive questions. Again give me a concrete scientifically demonstrated consequence of those issues that we don't know how to deal with. I have asked my times in this thread yet all I got back was downvotes. Doesn't that tell you something? We will always have to deal with nature whether, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanos, floods, water rising some places and disappearing other places. Sahara used to be green. Lets' stop panicking and start rationalizing.
      - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
        So if you look at the list of consequences on a page like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change#Human_health_outcomes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change#Human_health_ou..., you don't see any concerns? And could you please define "don't know how to deal with" - what are the indicators that we should start to deal with something, and what is a successful example of "dealing with"? In the case of a catastrophe, what defines a failure and success for you?
        ThomPete 8y ago
        No. These are things that humans have always had to deal with and we are much better at dealing with them today. The list of deaths related to extreme weather is down not up. http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/hazstats/resources/weather_fatalities.pdf http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/hazstats/resources/weather_fatali... With don't know how to deal with it i mean show me something that we can't deal with. Drought, flood, etc. but which is also demonstrated to happen not just speculated can happen. We can't solve problems we can't see. We have to solve the problems we can see and do that in a way that doesn't just throw everything out
dwaltrip 8y ago
Since the dawn of civilization, what equivalent event has nature thrown at us? Also, it's important to be clear. We are throwing this one at ourselves.
- ThomPete 8y ago
  Where do you want me to start. Earthquakes, tsunamis, animals, forest fires, bad crops, flooding, undrinkable water, tornados, storms I could go on. It's really quite fascinating just how many people which I assume are normally rational thinking beings have decided to throw out any sense of critical thinking when it comes to nature and climate. It's like Scientology. Lots of talk about science and then when you dig into it the actual science does not lead you to conclude what is claimed.
  - graeme 8y ago
    Yes, those are the usual things. Climate change will result in much more bad crops, more heat waves, worse storms and storm surges + rising oceans, lack of water due to glaciers melting. You seem to have trouble distinguishing between "there was a fairly stable set amount of problems" and "there will be an increase in problems" We were used to certain operating conditions for earth, and they're shifting rapidly.
    - ThomPete 8y ago
      Again you are making the same mistake as most other here. You are speculating not actually demonstrating this to be true. You have no base for the claim that there are going to be more problems just like you have no base for knowing if we are going to be better to deal with those that come. We have more crops than ever and we are better at making sure they survive than ever in ever more hostile environments. You are only looking at one side of this discussion and forgetting the other.
      - dwaltrip 8y ago
        It's not wild speculation. The current best scientific models predict a future climate that will likely cause many of these increased problems.

SketchySeaBeast 8y ago

What level of evidence are you willing to accept? And how can we do anything BUT speculate on future events?

ThomPete 8y ago
You don't have to speculate if you can prove it scientifically. Yet this discussion is being had AS IF we are debating what is scientifically true when in fact we are debating which interpretation of the science we should prioritize. If someone can demonstrate scientifically to me that it's a cataclysmic event and that humans have no way of dealing with it you have my attention. Other than that I prefer to worry about the current generations issues not panicking and rushing to conclusions making absurd political decisions like we are doing today, btw decisions that won't actually solve the very problems they are claiming to deal with.
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
  So the fact that, while the evidence and scientific consensus is overwhelmingly in favour of climate change causing issues for our planet, and let me be clear it's the mainstream scientific consensus, as we don't have a "this is how it's going to kill us" smoking gun, and we might somehow magically figure out how to save ourselves, it's a non issue? Do places like Flint Michigan not make you think that maybe your hope in the collective power of mankind is a little misplaced? It's well within our means to solve that particular problem, but no one can be bothered.
  - ThomPete 8y ago
    There is a scientific consensus that climate is changing that it is heating up. After that it becomes more and more speculative. There is not scientific consensus that we are all doomed or even close to being doomed. There is a higher risk of zero that it will be cataclysmis but so is there of an astroid hitting earth and a supernova wiping us all out. But it's mostly speculation and this conversation would be much more useful also for future generation if we didn't as we see in this thread here completely panic at every sensationalist headline and start asking ourselves some more constructive questions. Again give me a concrete scientifically demonstrated consequence of those issues that we don't know how to deal with. I have asked my times in this thread yet all I got back was downvotes. Doesn't that tell you something? We will always have to deal with nature whether, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanos, floods, water rising some places and disappearing other places. Sahara used to be green. Lets' stop panicking and start rationalizing.
    - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
      So if you look at the list of consequences on a page like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change#Human_health_outcomes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change#Human_health_ou..., you don't see any concerns? And could you please define "don't know how to deal with" - what are the indicators that we should start to deal with something, and what is a successful example of "dealing with"? In the case of a catastrophe, what defines a failure and success for you?
      - ThomPete 8y ago
        No. These are things that humans have always had to deal with and we are much better at dealing with them today. The list of deaths related to extreme weather is down not up. http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/hazstats/resources/weather_fatalities.pdf http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/hazstats/resources/weather_fatali... With don't know how to deal with it i mean show me something that we can't deal with. Drought, flood, etc. but which is also demonstrated to happen not just speculated can happen. We can't solve problems we can't see. We have to solve the problems we can see and do that in a way that doesn't just throw everything out

dwaltrip 8y ago

Since the dawn of civilization, what equivalent event has nature thrown at us? Also, it's important to be clear. We are throwing this one at ourselves.

ThomPete 8y ago
Where do you want me to start. Earthquakes, tsunamis, animals, forest fires, bad crops, flooding, undrinkable water, tornados, storms I could go on. It's really quite fascinating just how many people which I assume are normally rational thinking beings have decided to throw out any sense of critical thinking when it comes to nature and climate. It's like Scientology. Lots of talk about science and then when you dig into it the actual science does not lead you to conclude what is claimed.
- graeme 8y ago
  Yes, those are the usual things. Climate change will result in much more bad crops, more heat waves, worse storms and storm surges + rising oceans, lack of water due to glaciers melting. You seem to have trouble distinguishing between "there was a fairly stable set amount of problems" and "there will be an increase in problems" We were used to certain operating conditions for earth, and they're shifting rapidly.
  - ThomPete 8y ago
    Again you are making the same mistake as most other here. You are speculating not actually demonstrating this to be true. You have no base for the claim that there are going to be more problems just like you have no base for knowing if we are going to be better to deal with those that come. We have more crops than ever and we are better at making sure they survive than ever in ever more hostile environments. You are only looking at one side of this discussion and forgetting the other.
    - dwaltrip 8y ago
      It's not wild speculation. The current best scientific models predict a future climate that will likely cause many of these increased problems.