4 ms·
> they never seem to weigh any of the challenges against humanity's staggering ability to adapt and overcome. I'm not sure who the "they" you're referring to i
by PheonixPharts 3y ago
> they never seem to weigh any of the challenges against humanity's staggering ability to adapt and overcome.
I'm not sure who the "they" you're referring to is, but the fast majority of authors/researchers I've read on these topics are quite well aware.
The problem is the vast majority of this "adapt and overcome" has been based on two major things:
- Historically: a geologically remarkable period of climate stability
- More recent: abundant fossil fuels
Malthus was wrong because he failed to predict the Haber process. But currently the Haber process relies heavily on fossil fuels. We didn't produce astoundingly more food per acre then ever before in history because we are incredibly smart, but because we had ready access to hydrocarbons. The same logic follows for nearly all great inventions of recent eras
> Betting against humanity isn't a historically wise move.
I see this comment all the time but it's a very odd one. As far as species go humans are very, very young and survived very little, just about 300,000 years. Additionally, like I said, we've only existed as a species during one of the most stable climates in the history of the planet.
One final point on the "people always think the world is ending!" rhetoric. We've only really started seeing strong apocalyptic thinking in the last several hundred years. Let's say, for argument, that humans were wiped out in the next 100 years. Alien scientists visiting would see people thinking about the end times in the last 1/300,000 of the species' existence to be fairly prescient, even if they were off by several of their own species lifetimes.
On top of that the writing on this topic is not without merit historically. Revelations was written during the Siege of Jerusalem, when things were collapsing for the world of the author. Most medieval apocalyptic literature was written or based on the black death which wiped out between 30-50 percent of Europe. Hardly irrational beliefs that the world is ending based solely on existential anxiety.
There's also an obvious logical fallacy in all this thinking. Most of the time when people look up webMD they think they have cancer, and they don't most of the time. But it doesn't logically follow that they can't have cancer no matter how strong the evidence.
- jjoonathan 3y agoMy thesis was: > the truth is you just don't know You disproved: > it doesn't logically follow that they can't have cancer Good job, you really pwned that straw man. Also, I want to preserve this one for posterity, because I'm pretty sure it's hilariously wrong but I have better things to do than dig through the literature right now: > We've only really started seeing strong apocalyptic thinking in the last several hundred years.
- munificent 3y ago> - Historically: a geologically remarkable period of climate stability Homo sapiens survived the transition from the last ice age to today's climate.
- ericmay 3y agoI may be misremembering my ancient history here but didn’t Homo Sapiens arguably almost go extinct during the last ice age? As a related digression I think what people just keep forgetting about here isn’t like, we’ll survive. It’s we have all this nice stuff like avocados, grapes, heart surgery, and MacBook Pros, elephants, winter sports, houses, etc. and it sure would be nice to not lose that stuff for no good reason only to say “we’ll see we didn’t go extinct it wasn’t that bad”. The apparently abrupt changes the unnecessary lives lost, and what could be damaged or lost forever are what’s of concern. Less so just survivability.
- munificent 3y agoI agree 100% that we should do everything in our power to save as many people and as much technology as we can as we go through climate change. My point was just that claims that the entire species is going to go extinct are unlikely and, worse, counter-productive. The last thing we need is fatalism and people giving up hope.
- ericmay 3y agoI agree with you - I’m sorry I didn’t gleam your original intent from the previous post. Fatalism and nihilism are mind viruses.
- munificent 3y agoI'm sorry: my one sentence reply was definitely not clear. Agreed completely on fatalism and nihilism being mind viruses.
- Timon3 3y agoCould you explain how this transition is comparable to climate change in duration and amplitude? I can put a pot of water on my stove, but my hand in, warm the pot by 1°C, and I'll be fine. I can't do the same with an increase by 100°C.
- williamcotton 3y agoWe've only really started seeing strong apocalyptic thinking in the last several hundred years. Humans have been contemplating the end of the world and the promise of a subsequent paradise or judgement for thousands of years, evidenced by ancient religious and cultural texts. The Book of Daniel in the Old Testament, Zoroastrian eschatology, etc.