3 ms·

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

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

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