3 ms·

> The most commonly cited risks of climate change are natural disasters: fiercer wildfires and hurricanes, bigger floods and longer droughts. But one of the mos

> The most commonly cited risks of climate change are natural disasters: fiercer wildfires and hurricanes, bigger floods and longer droughts. But one of the most striking recent effects of global warming has been unusually mild weather in many parts of the world. maybe if it was framed first as the massive and irreversible ecosystem disruption which it is, people would take more notice. the result of this could easily be loss of essential plankton at the bottom of it all, just like loss of insects and plant pollinators due to pesticides. it's always sea level rise this and coastal floods that. i'm fucking sick of this idiotic reductionist rhetoric. there will be far bigger problems which cannot be solved by relocating 3 miles inland. Carlin was spot on: "The planet'll shake us off like a bad case of fleas."

TeMPOraL 7y ago
> it's always sea level rise this and coastal floods that. i'm fucking sick of this idiotic rhetoric. The true picture is closer to "sea level rise, coastal floods, changes of average temperature -> a chunk of the planet suddenly becoming uninhabitable -> mass migration -> lots of suffering, starvation, death, possibly war". But maybe this chain of reasoning has too many steps for a regular person to follow. Maybe the communication needs to focus on "no more food X in stores once average temperature in place Y goes above Z degrees"?
- roenxi 7y ago
  > Maybe the communication needs to focus on "no more food X in stores once average temperature in place Y goes above Z degrees"? Lots of people suffering and dying due to famine is the normal state of affairs. China has suffered more than 100,000,000 deaths due to famine since the year 1800 [0]. That is a lot of deaths. I'd put it that pre-industrial conditions are probably a greater risk factor for famine than post-industrial global warming. Indeed, I suggest running out of fossil fuels is a higher risk factor than global warming. With enough cheap energy we could switch to something like hydroponics and air conditioning for all in the next 100 years. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > I'd put it that pre-industrial conditions are probably a greater risk factor for famine than post-industrial global warming. I'd agree, except that I omitted the last links in the chain. So let me complete it: sea level rise, coastal floods, changes of average temperature -> a chunk of the planet suddenly becoming uninhabitable -> mass migration -> lots of suffering, starvation, death, possibly war -> possible total collapse of supply chains, global economy -> humanity regresses to pre-industrial times, except this time on a thoroughly broken planet and with no way of reindustrializing for thousands of years. Worth noting here is that unused technology, like muscles, atrophies, and that we've mined out all the dense energy sources that were accessible with anything simpler than present-era technology.
    - roenxi 7y ago
      Your chain is a bit long and speculative now though; and many links in it have become independent of global warming. Your new links have more probable causes than Global Warming. This current pandemic has done more to global supply chains than the next 50 years of global warming is likely to.
- truculent 7y ago
  > possibly war I like your optimism!
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    I'm usually not that optimistic, but trying to cope with the COVID-19 situation made me significantly less cynical. It's as if my mind avoids certain patterns of thought that could disrupt my fragile emotional stability at the moment.
- bjourne 7y ago
  > Maybe the communication needs to focus on "no more food X in stores once average temperature in place Y goes above Z degrees"? Exactly this. Climate change means no bananas and no coffee in the future. You like bananas and coffee so you want to help combat climate change. It is cynical, but Western people care more about their bananas and coffee than a few hundred million Bangladeshis and Indians becoming climate refugees.
yongjik 7y ago
I think, if "the sea will literally rise and destroy many costal cities" is not scary enough, it's not the problem with the rhetoric, but people. Some people are determined to not worry about global warming. It's time we politely left these people behind in their echo chamber. You don't invite a creationist to discuss pandemic response.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

> it's always sea level rise this and coastal floods that. i'm fucking sick of this idiotic rhetoric. The true picture is closer to "sea level rise, coastal floods, changes of average temperature -> a chunk of the planet suddenly becoming uninhabitable -> mass migration -> lots of suffering, starvation, death, possibly war". But maybe this chain of reasoning has too many steps for a regular person to follow. Maybe the communication needs to focus on "no more food X in stores once average temperature in place Y goes above Z degrees"?

roenxi 7y ago
> Maybe the communication needs to focus on "no more food X in stores once average temperature in place Y goes above Z degrees"? Lots of people suffering and dying due to famine is the normal state of affairs. China has suffered more than 100,000,000 deaths due to famine since the year 1800 [0]. That is a lot of deaths. I'd put it that pre-industrial conditions are probably a greater risk factor for famine than post-industrial global warming. Indeed, I suggest running out of fossil fuels is a higher risk factor than global warming. With enough cheap energy we could switch to something like hydroponics and air conditioning for all in the next 100 years. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  > I'd put it that pre-industrial conditions are probably a greater risk factor for famine than post-industrial global warming. I'd agree, except that I omitted the last links in the chain. So let me complete it: sea level rise, coastal floods, changes of average temperature -> a chunk of the planet suddenly becoming uninhabitable -> mass migration -> lots of suffering, starvation, death, possibly war -> possible total collapse of supply chains, global economy -> humanity regresses to pre-industrial times, except this time on a thoroughly broken planet and with no way of reindustrializing for thousands of years. Worth noting here is that unused technology, like muscles, atrophies, and that we've mined out all the dense energy sources that were accessible with anything simpler than present-era technology.
  - roenxi 7y ago
    Your chain is a bit long and speculative now though; and many links in it have become independent of global warming. Your new links have more probable causes than Global Warming. This current pandemic has done more to global supply chains than the next 50 years of global warming is likely to.
truculent 7y ago
> possibly war I like your optimism!
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  I'm usually not that optimistic, but trying to cope with the COVID-19 situation made me significantly less cynical. It's as if my mind avoids certain patterns of thought that could disrupt my fragile emotional stability at the moment.
bjourne 7y ago
> Maybe the communication needs to focus on "no more food X in stores once average temperature in place Y goes above Z degrees"? Exactly this. Climate change means no bananas and no coffee in the future. You like bananas and coffee so you want to help combat climate change. It is cynical, but Western people care more about their bananas and coffee than a few hundred million Bangladeshis and Indians becoming climate refugees.

yongjik 7y ago

I think, if "the sea will literally rise and destroy many costal cities" is not scary enough, it's not the problem with the rhetoric, but people. Some people are determined to not worry about global warming. It's time we politely left these people behind in their echo chamber. You don't invite a creationist to discuss pandemic response.