3 ms·

> Who cares? if everyone dies and you say "well it always changes" the answer is still "...and we could have done something about it and we didn't do enough."

> Who cares? if everyone dies and you say "well it always changes" the answer is still "...and we could have done something about it and we didn't do enough." I don't take a nihlist approach. I take a realistic approach. The changes will occur. What will we do about it? Go into a delusion that we can stop the change or take steps to prepare? > Well it was one bearing if it was like this in the past: it gives people a convenient argument for dismissing it now I'm not dismissing it. I'm saying it IS HAPPENING & nothing we do will stop it. So what are we going to do? Sacrifice to the gods to stop the inevitable? Good luck with that... I would prefer to mitigate these changes by hardening our infrastructure, utilize tech & social systems to improve quality of life, and address pollution like the toxic sludge byproduct to mine materials for your "renewable" equipment.

ajkjk 3y ago
No, you argued that it has happened before, which does not imply that the fact that it is happening now is not anthropogenic this time -- which it obviously is. If you can do work now to make "the planet getting very hot and messed up everyone's lives" take thousands of extra years, during which time it is more livable, why would you not? Obviously you would balance this against other economic and policy concerns, which everyone is, and it comes out way ahead because warming is very bad for everyone. "It has happened in the past, therefore turn your brain off and tell everyone else to stop thinking also." is not a "realistic" approach, it's a delusional one. It doesn't involve a realistic model of the present or the future. It's profoundly unconcerned with any sort of causal model of reality that makes predictions about the future and therefore analyzes what we ought to do based on their expected outcomes.
- briantakita3 3y ago
  [dead]

ajkjk 3y ago

No, you argued that it has happened before, which does not imply that the fact that it is happening now is not anthropogenic this time -- which it obviously is. If you can do work now to make "the planet getting very hot and messed up everyone's lives" take thousands of extra years, during which time it is more livable, why would you not? Obviously you would balance this against other economic and policy concerns, which everyone is, and it comes out way ahead because warming is very bad for everyone. "It has happened in the past, therefore turn your brain off and tell everyone else to stop thinking also." is not a "realistic" approach, it's a delusional one. It doesn't involve a realistic model of the present or the future. It's profoundly unconcerned with any sort of causal model of reality that makes predictions about the future and therefore analyzes what we ought to do based on their expected outcomes.

briantakita3 3y ago
[dead]