5 ms·

I would say overall that oil and fossil fuels have done far more good for humanity than harm. They enable us to feed our population. The global trade network h

I would say overall that oil and fossil fuels have done far more good for humanity than harm. They enable us to feed our population. The global trade network have lifted billions of people out of poverty. Global literacy is at the highest it has always been. Fossil fuels enable us to be able to accurately track and predict hurricanes. Basically, our whole modern economy is built on fossil fuels. The most valuable resource on earth is human knowledge and ingenuity. Thanks to our high population, reduction of poverty, and global education, that resource is the highest it has ever been.

vc9999 4y ago
That's not the point
rybosworld 4y ago
I'd be surprised if anyone tried to argue that fossil fuels have been anything less than instrumental in achieving our modern comforts. The issue is: 1. Oil companies knew about fossil fuel harm to the environment, and then lied about/tried to cover it up. They've directly played a role in climate misinformation. They've done that so well that we now have armies of people with no relevant knowledge on the topic arguing that climate change is a hoax. 2. If the danger of fossil fuels was acknowledged long ago, we could have prepared for it in advance. This would have eaten into profits, hence the motivation to deny it's a problem.
- edgyquant 4y ago
  I’ve met very few people who believe climate change is a hoax. The belief is that the climate is not static and that it’s better for humans to adapt (as they always have) than to commit economic suicide. This is unpopular online, but is the actual view of a majority of Americans imo. The reason climate activists are not getting anywhere with these people is that they are having an argument with the climate denier in their head.
  - rybosworld 4y ago
    "The belief is that the climate is not static and that it’s better for humans to adapt (as they always have) than to commit economic suicide." Whose belief? I don't understand how belief is relevant. "This is unpopular online, but is the actual view of a majority of Americans imo" Not true. Most Americans accept the scientific consensus - that recent changes in temperature are driven by human activities: https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/extreme-weather-poll-2022 https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/extreme-weather-poll-...
    - edgyquant 4y ago
      You didn’t read my comment because you aren’t engaging faithfully. I said that most people do believe it’s caused by humans but that humans will have to adapt to it as they have to multiple other changes in climate. I’m not kidding about you arguing with yourself here. This comment is actual proof
      - rybosworld 4y ago
        "You didn’t read my comment because you aren’t engaging faithfully." Except, I quoted most of your comment directly. "I said that most people do believe it’s caused by humans but that humans will have to adapt to it as they have to multiple other changes in climate." You absolutely did not say this.
  - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
    - rybosworld 4y ago
      This has been a lot more common in my experience. Driven primarily by folks realizing how wrong/ridiculous their views were years ago, and trying to rewrite history.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
ako 4y ago
Water has done more for humans than oil, but that doesn’t mean you can’t die if you drink too much.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y ago
  Correct. But that doesn’t mean you get to sue the water company for supplying you with water, even if they knew that it is possible to drink too much water and die.
  - lesuorac 4y ago
    But what if they switched the water supply and tried to cover up the health effects of that?
paganel 4y ago
> I would say overall that oil and fossil fuels have done far more good for humanity than harm. Without the oil and fossil fuels we wouldn't have had cheap and abundant fertilisers, that would have meant no Green Revolution, that means we wouldn't have been able (as a species, that is) to feed 8 billion people. Literally speaking hundreds of millions to billions of people wouldn't have been alive right now if it hadn't been for the industry of extracting hydrocarbons from underneath us. It's crazy to see how reactionary a lot of people have become when it comes to this subject, even apocalyptic.

vc9999 4y ago

That's not the point

rybosworld 4y ago

I'd be surprised if anyone tried to argue that fossil fuels have been anything less than instrumental in achieving our modern comforts. The issue is: 1. Oil companies knew about fossil fuel harm to the environment, and then lied about/tried to cover it up. They've directly played a role in climate misinformation. They've done that so well that we now have armies of people with no relevant knowledge on the topic arguing that climate change is a hoax. 2. If the danger of fossil fuels was acknowledged long ago, we could have prepared for it in advance. This would have eaten into profits, hence the motivation to deny it's a problem.

edgyquant 4y ago
I’ve met very few people who believe climate change is a hoax. The belief is that the climate is not static and that it’s better for humans to adapt (as they always have) than to commit economic suicide. This is unpopular online, but is the actual view of a majority of Americans imo. The reason climate activists are not getting anywhere with these people is that they are having an argument with the climate denier in their head.
- rybosworld 4y ago
  "The belief is that the climate is not static and that it’s better for humans to adapt (as they always have) than to commit economic suicide." Whose belief? I don't understand how belief is relevant. "This is unpopular online, but is the actual view of a majority of Americans imo" Not true. Most Americans accept the scientific consensus - that recent changes in temperature are driven by human activities: https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/extreme-weather-poll-2022 https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/extreme-weather-poll-...
  - edgyquant 4y ago
    You didn’t read my comment because you aren’t engaging faithfully. I said that most people do believe it’s caused by humans but that humans will have to adapt to it as they have to multiple other changes in climate. I’m not kidding about you arguing with yourself here. This comment is actual proof
    - rybosworld 4y ago
      "You didn’t read my comment because you aren’t engaging faithfully." Except, I quoted most of your comment directly. "I said that most people do believe it’s caused by humans but that humans will have to adapt to it as they have to multiple other changes in climate." You absolutely did not say this.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  - rybosworld 4y ago
    This has been a lot more common in my experience. Driven primarily by folks realizing how wrong/ridiculous their views were years ago, and trying to rewrite history.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

ako 4y ago

Water has done more for humans than oil, but that doesn’t mean you can’t die if you drink too much.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y ago
Correct. But that doesn’t mean you get to sue the water company for supplying you with water, even if they knew that it is possible to drink too much water and die.
- lesuorac 4y ago
  But what if they switched the water supply and tried to cover up the health effects of that?

paganel 4y ago

> I would say overall that oil and fossil fuels have done far more good for humanity than harm. Without the oil and fossil fuels we wouldn't have had cheap and abundant fertilisers, that would have meant no Green Revolution, that means we wouldn't have been able (as a species, that is) to feed 8 billion people. Literally speaking hundreds of millions to billions of people wouldn't have been alive right now if it hadn't been for the industry of extracting hydrocarbons from underneath us. It's crazy to see how reactionary a lot of people have become when it comes to this subject, even apocalyptic.