4 ms·

Donning my armchair psychologist hat, I feel a lot of it is denialism and knee-jerk "Stupid government!" reaction to governments "lecturing" (in their view) abo

Donning my armchair psychologist hat, I feel a lot of it is denialism and knee-jerk "Stupid government!" reaction to governments "lecturing" (in their view) about climate change. Maybe the left-vs-right political question is too simplistic, I wonder what it would look like if the pollsters asked "Do you trust or distrust the current government?". Even with something that could kill you within 2 weeks, there were a lot of denialism. Something that could kill you in 50 years? A lot of people are probably thinking "If it's making my life harder now (higher prices for more climate-friendly options) for something 'they say' will kill us in the future, I'd rather focus on making my life more bearable now rather than save the future."

zackees 4y ago
[dead]
claytongulick 4y ago
> Even with something that could kill you within 2 weeks, there were a lot of denialism Or healthy skepticism, which seems to have been borne out. The numbers were not nearly as dire as we were told they would be, and the government intervention seems to have caused more trouble than it solved. > Something that could kill you in 50 years? For those of us who have been hearing this sort of dire warning our whole life, it does get a bit tiring. New York was supposed to have been under water by now, humans we're supposed to have died by the billions from overpopulation, etc... After ~50 years of being told that the world is going to end Real Soon Now, Donate Here! A bit of disgruntled cynicism is hardly unwarranted.
- scrollaway 4y ago
  You should not employ the same cynicism and skepticism towards random doomsayers as towards actual experts. I feel like this is such an obvious thing to say. And if you’re seeing “donate here!”, then you’re not listening to someone who is into the science of it. (You may be listening to a well meaning and trustworthy charity, though; but it could also be grifters) I’m pretty positive you’re retconning your past life. Because I remember the shit I was told 20 years ago and it’s on track: Summers of 40 degrees in France. Cold snaps in winter more frequent. Heat waves that are deadlier and more frequent. Swim gear in October. Stuff that wouldn’t have made sense back then. So, either you’re lying to yourself about your past life, or, you listened to the wrong people; in both paths you became a denier (sorry, skeptic). I listened to the right people, I ended up trusting the system. Sounds to me like, while this is overall a systemic problem, you carry some amount of personal, introspective responsibility.
  - claytongulick 4y ago
    I remember in the cold north east having winter days that would be swimsuit weather when I was a kid. My parents called it Indian summers. I remember hurricanes, droughts, etc... From what I've read, our overall incidents of severe weather haven't significantly increased. I've seen some studies that claim a decrease. Fwiw, the average temperature in France hasn't changed much (if any) since 1959 [1]. The past few years have been a bit warmer, but there were some colder ones before that. Temps are pretty much flat for as long as the four operating weather stations have been measuring. > So, either you’re lying to yourself about your past life, or, you listened to the wrong people; in both paths you became a denier It's so strange to me the sort of personal attacks I get on HN. Just for offering a counterpoint perspective. Does it make you feel validated or something? I hope it does, and that by being your target I could make you feel better. [1] https://www.worlddata.info/europe/france/climate.php https://www.worlddata.info/europe/france/climate.php
    - scrollaway 4y ago
      Via your link: > The average annual temperature was about 12.1 °C in the years after 1956 and about 14.2 °C in the last years before 2021. So in less than 66 years it has increased by about 2.1 °C. This trend only applies to the selected 4 weather stations in France. A considerably more comprehensive evaluation of the global warming has been provided separately <https://www.worlddata.info/global-warming.php https://www.worlddata.info/global-warming.php> If you're seeing this as "flat", then you need to learn how to read it. Just because the graph doesn't look impressive doesn't mean the data isn't significant. Averages in temperature are also often difficult to understand in the context of climate change, because when the averages are more extreme on both ends, then this can shift the annual average. (If I have ten days of 0 degrees, the average temperature is 0 degrees. If I have five days at -10 and five days at +10, the average is unchanged.) To put it simply, colder days more cold, hotter days more hot, average doesn't change a lot. > It's so strange to me the sort of personal attacks I get on HN. A lot of people arguing your point are either trolls or willfully blind, or worse. You are not in good company; this is coming from somebody who tends to assume good faith, as much as is reasonably possible. And being willfully blind is very easy when the data is complex and it takes explicit effort to understand it. Maybe this graph is easier for you to grok: https://xkcd.com/1732/ https://xkcd.com/1732/
- matttproud 4y ago
  Skepticism is about as cheap as cynicism.

zackees 4y ago

[dead]

claytongulick 4y ago

> Even with something that could kill you within 2 weeks, there were a lot of denialism Or healthy skepticism, which seems to have been borne out. The numbers were not nearly as dire as we were told they would be, and the government intervention seems to have caused more trouble than it solved. > Something that could kill you in 50 years? For those of us who have been hearing this sort of dire warning our whole life, it does get a bit tiring. New York was supposed to have been under water by now, humans we're supposed to have died by the billions from overpopulation, etc... After ~50 years of being told that the world is going to end Real Soon Now, Donate Here! A bit of disgruntled cynicism is hardly unwarranted.

scrollaway 4y ago
You should not employ the same cynicism and skepticism towards random doomsayers as towards actual experts. I feel like this is such an obvious thing to say. And if you’re seeing “donate here!”, then you’re not listening to someone who is into the science of it. (You may be listening to a well meaning and trustworthy charity, though; but it could also be grifters) I’m pretty positive you’re retconning your past life. Because I remember the shit I was told 20 years ago and it’s on track: Summers of 40 degrees in France. Cold snaps in winter more frequent. Heat waves that are deadlier and more frequent. Swim gear in October. Stuff that wouldn’t have made sense back then. So, either you’re lying to yourself about your past life, or, you listened to the wrong people; in both paths you became a denier (sorry, skeptic). I listened to the right people, I ended up trusting the system. Sounds to me like, while this is overall a systemic problem, you carry some amount of personal, introspective responsibility.
- claytongulick 4y ago
  I remember in the cold north east having winter days that would be swimsuit weather when I was a kid. My parents called it Indian summers. I remember hurricanes, droughts, etc... From what I've read, our overall incidents of severe weather haven't significantly increased. I've seen some studies that claim a decrease. Fwiw, the average temperature in France hasn't changed much (if any) since 1959 [1]. The past few years have been a bit warmer, but there were some colder ones before that. Temps are pretty much flat for as long as the four operating weather stations have been measuring. > So, either you’re lying to yourself about your past life, or, you listened to the wrong people; in both paths you became a denier It's so strange to me the sort of personal attacks I get on HN. Just for offering a counterpoint perspective. Does it make you feel validated or something? I hope it does, and that by being your target I could make you feel better. [1] https://www.worlddata.info/europe/france/climate.php https://www.worlddata.info/europe/france/climate.php
  - scrollaway 4y ago
    Via your link: > The average annual temperature was about 12.1 °C in the years after 1956 and about 14.2 °C in the last years before 2021. So in less than 66 years it has increased by about 2.1 °C. This trend only applies to the selected 4 weather stations in France. A considerably more comprehensive evaluation of the global warming has been provided separately <https://www.worlddata.info/global-warming.php https://www.worlddata.info/global-warming.php> If you're seeing this as "flat", then you need to learn how to read it. Just because the graph doesn't look impressive doesn't mean the data isn't significant. Averages in temperature are also often difficult to understand in the context of climate change, because when the averages are more extreme on both ends, then this can shift the annual average. (If I have ten days of 0 degrees, the average temperature is 0 degrees. If I have five days at -10 and five days at +10, the average is unchanged.) To put it simply, colder days more cold, hotter days more hot, average doesn't change a lot. > It's so strange to me the sort of personal attacks I get on HN. A lot of people arguing your point are either trolls or willfully blind, or worse. You are not in good company; this is coming from somebody who tends to assume good faith, as much as is reasonably possible. And being willfully blind is very easy when the data is complex and it takes explicit effort to understand it. Maybe this graph is easier for you to grok: https://xkcd.com/1732/ https://xkcd.com/1732/
matttproud 4y ago
Skepticism is about as cheap as cynicism.