6 ms·
No, more of an existence proof - the fact that people have been saying similar things since at least the 60’s should make us at least consider the possibility t
by ghufran_syed 5y ago
No, more of an existence proof - the fact that people have been saying similar things since at least the 60’s should make us at least consider the possibility that the reason for the current warnings are similar to the reason for the previous warnings. Sure, maybe all those other warnings were in good faith and happened to be wrong, while the current warnings are also in good faith and might turn out to be correct. But if you can’t even consider the possibility, then we’re in the realm of religion, not science.
Here’s a climate scientist who agrees about climate change, but disagrees about the urgency and nature of the actions justified, hopefully that doesn’t define him as “not in his right mind” -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg
- tsimionescu 5y agoMore realistically, all of those warnings were actually quite right, and catastrophic global warming is well on its way, with almost all recent years being the hottest that we know of. And about this Lomborg individual, I have no idea why anyone would listen to economists (people whose entire field is predicated on models which assume no major changes in the world) about what is necessary to combat catastrophic climate change - this what his think tank is all about.
- kossTKR 5y agoLomborg is not a climate scientist! Besides that he's been funded by the oil industry. No one agrees with him besides industry people. Don't post disinformation.