3 ms·

There are plenty of resources on the topic and prior discussions on HN. People really don't want to rehash them because 1. it gets boring and 2. it leads to fl

There are plenty of resources on the topic and prior discussions on HN. People really don't want to rehash them because 1. it gets boring and 2. it leads to flamewars. You ask "do we have enough data". Well, the same data that gives us evidence of prior climate events is the same data that shows human emissions are climatologically significant. So if we have enough data to study random changes, we have enough to study the changes we are causing. If you want to take a stance against man-made climate change, you'll actually need to do your own research first and have a really good reason why it's wrong. Can you yourself list all the data sources that go into climatology and why they aren't adequate?

sillysaurusx 7y ago
I don't think I took a stance against anything. I think I asked a couple of questions. I had a longer comment prepared, but as you say, responding to accusations tends to get boring. If you want to have a conversation about this, though, it would be nice.
- pjc50 7y ago
  How much of the IPCC reports have you read? It would indicate where the appropriate starting point for the conversation is.
  - coldpie 7y ago
    For anyone coming to this conversation now, the IPCC Summary for Policymakers Report[1] is absolutely required reading before you can have any opinion on climate science. It's not a hard read, put aside an afternoon for it, you won't regret it. It's written by actual climate scientists, for an audience of laypeople. [1] https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/summary-for-policymakers/ https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/summary-for-policymakers/
- jiggawatts 7y ago
  You're on Y Combinator, not Facebook. It's not a conversation when you can educate yourself with literally any Google query on the topic. Your fingers aren't broken and your Internet works, so use the tools available to you. Try "climate change faq", "common climate change misconceptions", "evidence for anthropogenic climate change", etc, etc... Once you've read the top 10 results for each of those, come back and then we can have a conversation instead of an argument born out of wilful ignorance.
  - sillysaurusx 7y ago
    Oh, I'm on "Y Combinator", eh? Look sonny, I've been on HN since 2008. I guarantee you that people in the early days would have been nice about this topic. My options here are to sit quietly and let people take turns kicking me in the stomach merely for asking a question, or to exit the conversation. I'll do the latter. Have a good week.
    - nitrogen 7y ago
      As another long-time HN user and as someone myself who has previously held opinions which evidence eventually led me to change, I want to give you the benefit of the doubt. In this thread you've been responding more to the meta comments than to the actual data people have posted. In a hot-button topic like this, that leads people to believe you are acting in bad faith. Do you have any response to the IPCC report, or to the other comments about CO2 and temperature data?
  - dang 7y ago
    Please don't be a jerk on HN, regardless of how wrong or annoying you feel another comment is. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

sillysaurusx 7y ago

I don't think I took a stance against anything. I think I asked a couple of questions. I had a longer comment prepared, but as you say, responding to accusations tends to get boring. If you want to have a conversation about this, though, it would be nice.

pjc50 7y ago
How much of the IPCC reports have you read? It would indicate where the appropriate starting point for the conversation is.
- coldpie 7y ago
  For anyone coming to this conversation now, the IPCC Summary for Policymakers Report[1] is absolutely required reading before you can have any opinion on climate science. It's not a hard read, put aside an afternoon for it, you won't regret it. It's written by actual climate scientists, for an audience of laypeople. [1] https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/summary-for-policymakers/ https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/summary-for-policymakers/
jiggawatts 7y ago
You're on Y Combinator, not Facebook. It's not a conversation when you can educate yourself with literally any Google query on the topic. Your fingers aren't broken and your Internet works, so use the tools available to you. Try "climate change faq", "common climate change misconceptions", "evidence for anthropogenic climate change", etc, etc... Once you've read the top 10 results for each of those, come back and then we can have a conversation instead of an argument born out of wilful ignorance.
- sillysaurusx 7y ago
  Oh, I'm on "Y Combinator", eh? Look sonny, I've been on HN since 2008. I guarantee you that people in the early days would have been nice about this topic. My options here are to sit quietly and let people take turns kicking me in the stomach merely for asking a question, or to exit the conversation. I'll do the latter. Have a good week.
  - nitrogen 7y ago
    As another long-time HN user and as someone myself who has previously held opinions which evidence eventually led me to change, I want to give you the benefit of the doubt. In this thread you've been responding more to the meta comments than to the actual data people have posted. In a hot-button topic like this, that leads people to believe you are acting in bad faith. Do you have any response to the IPCC report, or to the other comments about CO2 and temperature data?
- dang 7y ago
  Please don't be a jerk on HN, regardless of how wrong or annoying you feel another comment is. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html