4 ms·

125 years is still a very small amount of time to assess climate, and the quality of the data 125 years ago isn’t very good. Considering all “solutions” to the

125 years is still a very small amount of time to assess climate, and the quality of the data 125 years ago isn’t very good. Considering all “solutions” to the “problem” of climate change involve a radical remaking of society, it’s not unreasonable or unserious to ask for more data.

fwip 7y ago
You're having a totally different discussion than all the people you replied to. Nobody above you said "this is destroying the planet and we need to guillotine the oil barons." You introduced the idea of "we don't know what normal is" when it wasn't relevant. This is the wettest 12 months in the US on record. This is almost certainly because the global temperature has gone up significantly in the last century+. If you want to talk about this, talk about this - don't waste time attacking imaginary points you think other people are implying.
sbov 7y ago
Reminds me of the an article a while back talking about how via studying tree rings and sediment, that scientists think California experienced back-to-back 200 year droughts starting around the year 850.
- traeregan 7y ago
  Isn’t a back-to-back 200 year drought a 400 year drought?
yongjik 7y ago
If anyone is suggesting we spend taxpayer money to prepare for extreme wet seasons, then yes, we may need more data on that. On the other hand, it is beyond doubt that global warming is happening and getting worse. Ergo, we have to seriously cut down our CO2 emission. In the year 2019, anybody who's asking for more data on that is just willfully stalling discussion. Stop getting hung up on "radical remaking of society," because that's going to happen anyway. Whether we like it or not, society is going to be radically remade when we lose Miami and New Orleans to the sea.
flukus 7y ago
> Considering all “solutions” to the “problem” of climate change involve a radical remaking of society, it’s not unreasonable or unserious to ask for more data. We need to replace our energy sources with renewable and/or nuclear ones, we do not have to radically remake society.

fwip 7y ago

You're having a totally different discussion than all the people you replied to. Nobody above you said "this is destroying the planet and we need to guillotine the oil barons." You introduced the idea of "we don't know what normal is" when it wasn't relevant. This is the wettest 12 months in the US on record. This is almost certainly because the global temperature has gone up significantly in the last century+. If you want to talk about this, talk about this - don't waste time attacking imaginary points you think other people are implying.

sbov 7y ago

Reminds me of the an article a while back talking about how via studying tree rings and sediment, that scientists think California experienced back-to-back 200 year droughts starting around the year 850.

traeregan 7y ago
Isn’t a back-to-back 200 year drought a 400 year drought?

yongjik 7y ago

If anyone is suggesting we spend taxpayer money to prepare for extreme wet seasons, then yes, we may need more data on that. On the other hand, it is beyond doubt that global warming is happening and getting worse. Ergo, we have to seriously cut down our CO2 emission. In the year 2019, anybody who's asking for more data on that is just willfully stalling discussion. Stop getting hung up on "radical remaking of society," because that's going to happen anyway. Whether we like it or not, society is going to be radically remade when we lose Miami and New Orleans to the sea.

flukus 7y ago

> Considering all “solutions” to the “problem” of climate change involve a radical remaking of society, it’s not unreasonable or unserious to ask for more data. We need to replace our energy sources with renewable and/or nuclear ones, we do not have to radically remake society.