4 ms·

Im sure the IPCC authors didn't forget their climate science 101 material. Moreover, we can tackle multiple problems concurrently, no need to make it appear we

by brnt 4y ago

Im sure the IPCC authors didn't forget their climate science 101 material. Moreover, we can tackle multiple problems concurrently, no need to make it appear we can only ever do one thing. And as it so happens, climate change tends to correlate extremely well with war and famine. It certainly appears a climate solution is going to help many other big problems along as well.

alfor 4y ago
Yes we can, but what are those problems, what is the cost involved, what are we willing to sacrifice? There is many other goals that are largely ignored because "climate" is very very popular. I like the work of Bjorn Lomborg on that front. When we rank the problems and solution climate is not at the top.
alfor 4y ago
[flagged]
- imtringued 4y ago
  IPCC is absurdly conservative. If you have an issue with their numbers then you‘ve fallen for pseudo science.
PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
> climate change tends to correlate extremely well with war and famine and migration.
- alfor 4y ago
  Does it? We have fewer and fewer death because of climate (most death of climate is because of cold) We have a proxy war in Ukraine that has nothing to do with climate We have a famine in Sri Lanka that was caused by the green movement The narrative of climate is the cause of all problems isn’t reasonable anymore.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
    Robust institutions disagree on whether heat or cold is more significant: > Extreme heat and extreme cold both kill hundreds of people each year in the U.S., but determining a death toll for each is a process subject to large errors. In fact, two major U.S. government agencies that track heat and cold deaths--NOAA and the CDC--differ sharply in their answer to the question of which is the bigger killer. https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/Which-Kills-More-People-Extreme-Heat-or-Extreme-Cold https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/Which-Kills-More-People-Ex... And while it may indeed be that cold is a more significant source of death, these numbers are hardly trivial: 2003 heatwave, Europe: 72,000 2022 heatwave, Europe: 20,000 and for the future: > In the course of this century, the percentage of the European population dying from cold temperatures will steadily decrease, while the percentage of the population dying from heat will increase. The latter increase will start to exceed the reduction of cold-weather related mortality in the second half of this century, especially in the Mediterranean. As a result, mortality in Europe related to non-optimal temperatures will start to increase by the end of the century in a moderate scenario of climate change, and already by the middle of the century in the high-end scenario of climate change. Derived from: Martínez-Solanas et al., 2021. Lancet Planetary Health 5: e446–54 There is no serious narrative that claims that climate change is the current cause of all problems. There is no serious narrative that can refute the obvious point that if climate chnage predictions play out, it will add greatly to all existing problems.
- revelio 4y ago
  No it doesn't, that's just people trying to tie together two hobby-horses. Nobody is migrating to Europe or America because of climate change, they're migrating because of wealth and war.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
    If you live in an agricultural area and can't get sufficient water for irrigation anymore, the distinction between climate change, wealth and war is pretty immaterial. Do you seriously think that if, in say 30 years, substantial chunks of the tropics-to-tropics range of latitude have become too hot/dry for mass agriculture, that people will not be trying to migrate? I haven't seen anyone claiming that there is currently mass migration due to climate change. But I haven't seen anyone claiming that previous climate change events (anthropogenic or not) were not accompanied by mass migration (even if the absolute numbers of people were smaller due to total population)
    - revelio 4y ago
      You used the present tense in the post I replied to. But as you say, currently it's not true and there is no correlation between climate change and migration, because the climate hasn't actually changed anywhere near enough in any location to cause people to move. > I haven't seen anyone claiming that previous climate change events (anthropogenic or not) were not accompanied by mass migration What climate change events were you thinking of? Medieval warm period? I don't think there's any record of anything that we'd call a mass migration, any time in history beyond the past few hundred years. Not unless you count migrations that took place over tens of thousands of years as mass migration.
      - PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
        > the climate hasn't actually changed anywhere near enough in any location to cause people to move. Where I live (near Santa Fe, NM), human civilization has moved in and out several times over the last, say, 5000 years, always correlated with the arrival of long term drought conditions. The last big movement was during the megadrought of the late 1300's, and apparently involved migrations of between 300 and 1000 miles. Similar patterns are well known to archaeologists and anthropologists across the planet. Also "and migration" doesn't have any tense or time context and even the GP's wording ("X tends to correlate with Y") is also largely free of any implied time period.

by brnt 4y ago

alfor 4y ago

Yes we can, but what are those problems, what is the cost involved, what are we willing to sacrifice? There is many other goals that are largely ignored because "climate" is very very popular. I like the work of Bjorn Lomborg on that front. When we rank the problems and solution climate is not at the top.

alfor 4y ago

[flagged]

imtringued 4y ago
IPCC is absurdly conservative. If you have an issue with their numbers then you‘ve fallen for pseudo science.

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago

> climate change tends to correlate extremely well with war and famine and migration.

alfor 4y ago
Does it? We have fewer and fewer death because of climate (most death of climate is because of cold) We have a proxy war in Ukraine that has nothing to do with climate We have a famine in Sri Lanka that was caused by the green movement The narrative of climate is the cause of all problems isn’t reasonable anymore.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
  Robust institutions disagree on whether heat or cold is more significant: > Extreme heat and extreme cold both kill hundreds of people each year in the U.S., but determining a death toll for each is a process subject to large errors. In fact, two major U.S. government agencies that track heat and cold deaths--NOAA and the CDC--differ sharply in their answer to the question of which is the bigger killer. https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/Which-Kills-More-People-Extreme-Heat-or-Extreme-Cold https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/Which-Kills-More-People-Ex... And while it may indeed be that cold is a more significant source of death, these numbers are hardly trivial: 2003 heatwave, Europe: 72,000 2022 heatwave, Europe: 20,000 and for the future: > In the course of this century, the percentage of the European population dying from cold temperatures will steadily decrease, while the percentage of the population dying from heat will increase. The latter increase will start to exceed the reduction of cold-weather related mortality in the second half of this century, especially in the Mediterranean. As a result, mortality in Europe related to non-optimal temperatures will start to increase by the end of the century in a moderate scenario of climate change, and already by the middle of the century in the high-end scenario of climate change. Derived from: Martínez-Solanas et al., 2021. Lancet Planetary Health 5: e446–54 There is no serious narrative that claims that climate change is the current cause of all problems. There is no serious narrative that can refute the obvious point that if climate chnage predictions play out, it will add greatly to all existing problems.
revelio 4y ago
No it doesn't, that's just people trying to tie together two hobby-horses. Nobody is migrating to Europe or America because of climate change, they're migrating because of wealth and war.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
  If you live in an agricultural area and can't get sufficient water for irrigation anymore, the distinction between climate change, wealth and war is pretty immaterial. Do you seriously think that if, in say 30 years, substantial chunks of the tropics-to-tropics range of latitude have become too hot/dry for mass agriculture, that people will not be trying to migrate? I haven't seen anyone claiming that there is currently mass migration due to climate change. But I haven't seen anyone claiming that previous climate change events (anthropogenic or not) were not accompanied by mass migration (even if the absolute numbers of people were smaller due to total population)
  - revelio 4y ago
    You used the present tense in the post I replied to. But as you say, currently it's not true and there is no correlation between climate change and migration, because the climate hasn't actually changed anywhere near enough in any location to cause people to move. > I haven't seen anyone claiming that previous climate change events (anthropogenic or not) were not accompanied by mass migration What climate change events were you thinking of? Medieval warm period? I don't think there's any record of anything that we'd call a mass migration, any time in history beyond the past few hundred years. Not unless you count migrations that took place over tens of thousands of years as mass migration.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
      > the climate hasn't actually changed anywhere near enough in any location to cause people to move. Where I live (near Santa Fe, NM), human civilization has moved in and out several times over the last, say, 5000 years, always correlated with the arrival of long term drought conditions. The last big movement was during the megadrought of the late 1300's, and apparently involved migrations of between 300 and 1000 miles. Similar patterns are well known to archaeologists and anthropologists across the planet. Also "and migration" doesn't have any tense or time context and even the GP's wording ("X tends to correlate with Y") is also largely free of any implied time period.