3 ms·

I actually think the people who think they'll be exempt are basically right. It's not like a tornado is going to pick your house up (unless, unfortunately that

I actually think the people who think they'll be exempt are basically right. It's not like a tornado is going to pick your house up (unless, unfortunately that is exactly what happens). Sure, there are going to be hotter hot spells, and more extreme cold spells, but that's not seriously something that a New Yorker can't deal with. What is going to happen is poor people, foreign people, are going to starve to death and drown trying to get to safety, and the problem won't be climate challenge, it'll be illegal immigrants. It's not going to happen first to middle-america. It's going to happen to Mexico, North Africa, the Middle East. And we're not going to say "hey, this is a universal issue created by emissions that our countries benefitted from". It's going to be talk about economic migrants, or how we can't afford to help them because we have problems at home. Bold prediction: Shipping them to Rwanda isn't going to be sustainable.

jacquesm 4y ago
This is probably correct. But we are the cause, those 'poor people' predominantly are at the back of the bus and we are condemning them to that fate.
- ptero 4y ago
  Not necessarily. Those poor people, today, are malnourished and lack access to the many benefits that higher energy use brings. And some of the same things that the top billion of the population has been enjoying for decades. Telling them that they cannot get this (energy to bring water to the fields instead of hand-carrying it, tractors to work the fields) and, by the way, it is for their own benefit may not be very convincing. I think those poor people just got on the bus and think they are OK with where this bus is heading. And would club someone who tries to grab the wheel and put the bus in a ditch. My 2c.
dkjaudyeqooe 4y ago
Poorer people are always worse off, that's true, but we're talking about global climate change and its effects can devastate anyone on the planet. The climate is a complex system into which more and more energy is being input. That's more likely to produce sudden, drastic and unpredictable changes. It's not just simply going to get hotter. So it's entirely possible that huge swathes of the US become largely uninhabitable, due to, say, drastic increases in rain or violent weather. It's entirely possible that most current agriculture could become impractical in the US. The politics of climate change has very likely made scientists too conservative in their predictions as to not seem hysterical, but looking at how quickly the climate is changing right now, extreme outcomes seem very likely.
- SilverBirch 4y ago
  What I'm really saying is that the obvious direct effects of climate change are likely going to be blamed on people. It's going to get to the point where a poor person can't live in Mumbai - literally, you can't survive exposure to the temperatures that are going to happen. But when those people move north to escape the heat, their migration is going to be blamed on all the things we blame current migration on, rather than the reality that they'd likely die if they stayed where they were. Oh and guess how many poor people there are in Mumbai.
  - dkjaudyeqooe 4y ago
    I think in those circumstances it won't be so much migration but war. It's more likely the affected country will just invade a cooler, less well armed country and take what they need. This very issue has been raised by the US military as a security threat going forward.

jacquesm 4y ago

This is probably correct. But we are the cause, those 'poor people' predominantly are at the back of the bus and we are condemning them to that fate.

ptero 4y ago
Not necessarily. Those poor people, today, are malnourished and lack access to the many benefits that higher energy use brings. And some of the same things that the top billion of the population has been enjoying for decades. Telling them that they cannot get this (energy to bring water to the fields instead of hand-carrying it, tractors to work the fields) and, by the way, it is for their own benefit may not be very convincing. I think those poor people just got on the bus and think they are OK with where this bus is heading. And would club someone who tries to grab the wheel and put the bus in a ditch. My 2c.

dkjaudyeqooe 4y ago

Poorer people are always worse off, that's true, but we're talking about global climate change and its effects can devastate anyone on the planet. The climate is a complex system into which more and more energy is being input. That's more likely to produce sudden, drastic and unpredictable changes. It's not just simply going to get hotter. So it's entirely possible that huge swathes of the US become largely uninhabitable, due to, say, drastic increases in rain or violent weather. It's entirely possible that most current agriculture could become impractical in the US. The politics of climate change has very likely made scientists too conservative in their predictions as to not seem hysterical, but looking at how quickly the climate is changing right now, extreme outcomes seem very likely.

SilverBirch 4y ago
What I'm really saying is that the obvious direct effects of climate change are likely going to be blamed on people. It's going to get to the point where a poor person can't live in Mumbai - literally, you can't survive exposure to the temperatures that are going to happen. But when those people move north to escape the heat, their migration is going to be blamed on all the things we blame current migration on, rather than the reality that they'd likely die if they stayed where they were. Oh and guess how many poor people there are in Mumbai.
- dkjaudyeqooe 4y ago
  I think in those circumstances it won't be so much migration but war. It's more likely the affected country will just invade a cooler, less well armed country and take what they need. This very issue has been raised by the US military as a security threat going forward.