4 ms·

Last weekend I overhead two older gentlemen talking about climate change. They were both agreeing with each other that it's all 'cyclical' and that clearly ther

Last weekend I overhead two older gentlemen talking about climate change. They were both agreeing with each other that it's all 'cyclical' and that clearly there are businesses that stand to benefit from climate change research. This is in Canada btw. I don't know how you convince these people. Luckily, they're on their way out, but they still represent a large portion of the voting population for at least the next decade. Do we need more intense floods and forest fires every single year until they finally admit that maybe there's something to this climate thing?

agentultra 7y ago
Whether they believe it or not it's happening. I think we need stronger policies that cannot be swayed by public opinion or we're screwed. There's no room for error at this point.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  >I think we need stronger policies that cannot be swayed by public opinion I don't like where that path leads. I mean, you're not wrong that it would be able to solve the problem faster but I don't think the end justifies the means.
  - inflatableDodo 7y ago
    >"I don't like where that path leads." It led to not allowing the Californian public to vote both for tax cuts and increases in public spending, unless there is a budget surplus. It also led to the UK not having the death penalty.
  - ptah 7y ago
    not everything should be decided democratically. a balance with bureaucracy is good
    - abduhl 7y ago
      Is there a place where I can find the list of things that should be decided democratically versus not?
      - ptah 7y ago
        I wish there was such a place :) Looking at things on a case by case basis is the only way. I would definitely say that things like harmonising regulations across different countries in a trading bloc is best left to bureaucrats as an example
      - inflatableDodo 7y ago
        Is the list of things that should be decided democratically on the list of things that should be decided democratically?
ptah 7y ago
it's also a form of macho virtue signalling
dexen 7y ago
Here's a snarky reply, because I've laughed out loud upon reading your "they're on their way out" and the "we need stronger policies that cannot be swayed by public opinion" posted in one of responses. >how you convince these people. Four easy steps: - show them the hockey stick graphs from models, - show them the graphs from actual measurements, - point out 2019 is colder than 2016, and probably than 2017, as per the article, - point out the graph looks pretty close to a cluster of sine waves when watched at any scale Congratulations, now they are convinced for life. You can celebrate that with them by watching the 2006 An Inconvenient Truth for all the beautiful animations. Snark aside, the gist is: people who have been following news for some two decades or more don't generally get alarmed that easily.
- yongjik 7y ago
  > - point out the graph looks pretty close to a cluster of sine waves when watched at any scale Is this some kind of backhanded admission that you will never admit global warming ever, whatever happens to the global temperature? Any graph can be arbitrarily closely approximated by a series of sine waves, that's the basic idea of Fourier Transformation.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
Chardok 7y ago
Unfortunately the problem seems to be a Prisoner's dilemma for countries - curbing CO2 emissions without all other countries doing so puts said country at an economic disadvantage. It also puts a large onus on developing countries that don't have the established industry to easily convert to "greener" technologies/industries. Top that with most Western countries being in relatively low threatened areas comparatively and you get a large populace happy to remain ignorant. I'm convinced the only possible savior at this point would be a Superpower aggressively enforcing environmental regulations to the point of going to war over it, but that seems unlikely.
- chessturk 7y ago
  > I'm convinced the only possible savior at this point would be a Superpower aggressively enforcing environmental regulations to the point of going to war over it, but that seems unlikely. It could feasibly handled economically. I've wondered if a stronger world govt a century or so down the line saying eco friendly or tariffs. I can't speak to liklihood, but it seems feasible.
loons2 7y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq6fDa9JrzQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq6fDa9JrzQ Every generation or so, new Chicken Littles flail their wings as they discover new "science" that proves the sky is falling, or imminently set to. We who have seen this same scenario play out over and over about every subject under the sun are naturally skeptical. Indeed, it is lucky we're on our way out because Idiocracy is halfway here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy
- AlexandrB 7y ago
  Cool story. Do you have any peer-reviewed research that shows that the earth isn't warming at an unprecedented rate or should I just trust your "common sense" on this one?
  - perfunctory 7y ago
    Talking about peer-reviewed papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling#/media/File:PeerReviewedPapersComparingGlobalWarmingAndCoolingIn1970s.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling#/media/File:Pee...
  - southern_cross 7y ago
    If you had any idea of what the "data" behind most of these warming claims generally consists of, and which is used to generate the relevant peer-reviewed research papers, then you would probably hang your head in shame.
  - loons2 7y ago
    I don't need peer review because I'm not asserting anything. Perhaps more than halfway there.
- perfunctory 7y ago
  Are you talking about this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
southern_cross 7y ago
Well, if they're old enough then they probably either experienced first-hand (or heard first-hand accounts from even older folks) the relative cold of the 1970s, which was preceded by the relative heat of the 1930s, which was of course itself preceded by a relatively cool period. So there is a definite down/up/down/up cyclical nature there. And current flooding issues are generally nothing like what occurred before effective flood-control measures were put into place. And current forest fires are generally nothing like what occurred before effective fire-control methods were put into place. Being young, you've grown up in a fairly "controlled" world, so (much like anti-vax folks who don't understand what the world was like before vaccines came along), you have no life experience dealing with the world as it existed before those other controls were put into place.

agentultra 7y ago

Whether they believe it or not it's happening. I think we need stronger policies that cannot be swayed by public opinion or we're screwed. There's no room for error at this point.

dsfyu404ed 7y ago
>I think we need stronger policies that cannot be swayed by public opinion I don't like where that path leads. I mean, you're not wrong that it would be able to solve the problem faster but I don't think the end justifies the means.
- inflatableDodo 7y ago
  >"I don't like where that path leads." It led to not allowing the Californian public to vote both for tax cuts and increases in public spending, unless there is a budget surplus. It also led to the UK not having the death penalty.
- ptah 7y ago
  not everything should be decided democratically. a balance with bureaucracy is good
  - abduhl 7y ago
    Is there a place where I can find the list of things that should be decided democratically versus not?
    - ptah 7y ago
      I wish there was such a place :) Looking at things on a case by case basis is the only way. I would definitely say that things like harmonising regulations across different countries in a trading bloc is best left to bureaucrats as an example
    - inflatableDodo 7y ago
      Is the list of things that should be decided democratically on the list of things that should be decided democratically?

ptah 7y ago

it's also a form of macho virtue signalling

dexen 7y ago

Here's a snarky reply, because I've laughed out loud upon reading your "they're on their way out" and the "we need stronger policies that cannot be swayed by public opinion" posted in one of responses. >how you convince these people. Four easy steps: - show them the hockey stick graphs from models, - show them the graphs from actual measurements, - point out 2019 is colder than 2016, and probably than 2017, as per the article, - point out the graph looks pretty close to a cluster of sine waves when watched at any scale Congratulations, now they are convinced for life. You can celebrate that with them by watching the 2006 An Inconvenient Truth for all the beautiful animations. Snark aside, the gist is: people who have been following news for some two decades or more don't generally get alarmed that easily.

yongjik 7y ago
> - point out the graph looks pretty close to a cluster of sine waves when watched at any scale Is this some kind of backhanded admission that you will never admit global warming ever, whatever happens to the global temperature? Any graph can be arbitrarily closely approximated by a series of sine waves, that's the basic idea of Fourier Transformation.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

Chardok 7y ago

Unfortunately the problem seems to be a Prisoner's dilemma for countries - curbing CO2 emissions without all other countries doing so puts said country at an economic disadvantage. It also puts a large onus on developing countries that don't have the established industry to easily convert to "greener" technologies/industries. Top that with most Western countries being in relatively low threatened areas comparatively and you get a large populace happy to remain ignorant. I'm convinced the only possible savior at this point would be a Superpower aggressively enforcing environmental regulations to the point of going to war over it, but that seems unlikely.

chessturk 7y ago
> I'm convinced the only possible savior at this point would be a Superpower aggressively enforcing environmental regulations to the point of going to war over it, but that seems unlikely. It could feasibly handled economically. I've wondered if a stronger world govt a century or so down the line saying eco friendly or tariffs. I can't speak to liklihood, but it seems feasible.

loons2 7y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq6fDa9JrzQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq6fDa9JrzQ Every generation or so, new Chicken Littles flail their wings as they discover new "science" that proves the sky is falling, or imminently set to. We who have seen this same scenario play out over and over about every subject under the sun are naturally skeptical. Indeed, it is lucky we're on our way out because Idiocracy is halfway here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy

AlexandrB 7y ago
Cool story. Do you have any peer-reviewed research that shows that the earth isn't warming at an unprecedented rate or should I just trust your "common sense" on this one?
- perfunctory 7y ago
  Talking about peer-reviewed papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling#/media/File:PeerReviewedPapersComparingGlobalWarmingAndCoolingIn1970s.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling#/media/File:Pee...
- southern_cross 7y ago
  If you had any idea of what the "data" behind most of these warming claims generally consists of, and which is used to generate the relevant peer-reviewed research papers, then you would probably hang your head in shame.
- loons2 7y ago
  I don't need peer review because I'm not asserting anything. Perhaps more than halfway there.
perfunctory 7y ago
Are you talking about this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

southern_cross 7y ago

Well, if they're old enough then they probably either experienced first-hand (or heard first-hand accounts from even older folks) the relative cold of the 1970s, which was preceded by the relative heat of the 1930s, which was of course itself preceded by a relatively cool period. So there is a definite down/up/down/up cyclical nature there. And current flooding issues are generally nothing like what occurred before effective flood-control measures were put into place. And current forest fires are generally nothing like what occurred before effective fire-control methods were put into place. Being young, you've grown up in a fairly "controlled" world, so (much like anti-vax folks who don't understand what the world was like before vaccines came along), you have no life experience dealing with the world as it existed before those other controls were put into place.