3 ms·

Honest question. How do we morally differentiate human-caused climate change from natural climate change (I.e: Ice ages naturally come and go) I get that that

Honest question. How do we morally differentiate human-caused climate change from natural climate change (I.e: Ice ages naturally come and go) I get that that human-led climate change means that humans are mucking things up (which sucks). But if humans cause large swings in climate that would happen naturally, then it’s not like what we’re causing is unique right? It’s just natural phenomenon from unnatural causes. It seems to me, that humans are rightfully worried about existence. But even large-mass-scale extinction is a natural repeating phenomenon. So I say long live the next species (which I can only assume is sharks with freakin’ laser beams attached to their heads https://youtu.be/INFavIUmhcE https://youtu.be/INFavIUmhcE)

ALittleLight 3y ago
What does morality have to do with it? If the climate is changing in a way that's bad, we need to do something about it. We'd need to do something about it even if it were natural. The problem with climate change is not moral, it's that it will make it harder for people to live and kill people and so on.
bobthepanda 3y ago
Speed. This climate change is happening faster than any other climate change event short of a volcanic eruption or a meteor, both of which also generally result in mass death. (Krakatoa is associated with years of famine.) It is easier to adjust over hundreds of years than decades or less.
neom 3y ago
Sure... earth's climate has naturally fluctuated throughout its history. However, the current rate of change is unprecedented in human history... The key difference between natural climate change and human-induced climate change is the speed at which it's happening. Natural climate changes, like ice ages, occur over thousands of years, giving ecosystems time to adapt. Climate change we're experiencing now is happening over years leaving little time for adaptation. The question of morality isn't about whether climate change is unique to human activity, but about our responsibility as stewards of the planet. Our actions are causing harm to ecosystems, wildlife, and our own communities at a rate that is far from normal. The planet might have experienced similar changes in the distant past, the rapidity of current changes and the harm they're causing is what makes this a moral (and our) issue... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37882129 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37882129
Scarblac 3y ago
It's like pushing someone down a staircase he was walking down anyway. Same thing right? It's the insane speed of human caused climate change that's causing the mass extinctions.
- thehappypm 3y ago
  Climate change isn’t really the root cause of the extinctions. It’s far more caused by habitat destruction.
Lutger 3y ago
> But if humans cause large swings in climate that would happen naturally, then it’s not like what we’re causing is unique right? It is unique in several ways. In a moral sense it is unique in that we knowingly caused it and failed to take action. In a historical sense, extinctions on this scale are so rare they are almost unique. What is unprecedented however is the rate of change. This is important because species aren't able to adapt anymore when the climate changes so rapidly.
rurp 3y ago
> large-mass-scale extinction is a natural repeating phenomenon Most people consider the death of their descendants and loved ones a poor outcome that they would like to prevent... Yes things are self correcting in the sense that if we muck things up badly enough our society will collapse and something else will come after. But that kind of mass destruction will be horrifically bad for an awful lot of people.
tippytippytango 3y ago
The moralizing is from people using shame as a strategy to affect public policy and/or gain power, I don’t think it’s much deeper than that. Shame can be very effective as most people are hard wired to respond to shame. The issue is that shame can be shunted into minor things to resolve it, buying a carbon neutral Apple Watch, Tesla or recycling can dissipate the shame for an individual leaving us with a problem and no real solution. I personally think we will survive the climate catastrophe. It might be a Black Death type event, horrific and painful for everyone. But a wiser breed of humans will emerge on the other side.

ALittleLight 3y ago

What does morality have to do with it? If the climate is changing in a way that's bad, we need to do something about it. We'd need to do something about it even if it were natural. The problem with climate change is not moral, it's that it will make it harder for people to live and kill people and so on.

bobthepanda 3y ago

Speed. This climate change is happening faster than any other climate change event short of a volcanic eruption or a meteor, both of which also generally result in mass death. (Krakatoa is associated with years of famine.) It is easier to adjust over hundreds of years than decades or less.

neom 3y ago

Sure... earth's climate has naturally fluctuated throughout its history. However, the current rate of change is unprecedented in human history... The key difference between natural climate change and human-induced climate change is the speed at which it's happening. Natural climate changes, like ice ages, occur over thousands of years, giving ecosystems time to adapt. Climate change we're experiencing now is happening over years leaving little time for adaptation. The question of morality isn't about whether climate change is unique to human activity, but about our responsibility as stewards of the planet. Our actions are causing harm to ecosystems, wildlife, and our own communities at a rate that is far from normal. The planet might have experienced similar changes in the distant past, the rapidity of current changes and the harm they're causing is what makes this a moral (and our) issue... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37882129 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37882129

Scarblac 3y ago

It's like pushing someone down a staircase he was walking down anyway. Same thing right? It's the insane speed of human caused climate change that's causing the mass extinctions.

thehappypm 3y ago
Climate change isn’t really the root cause of the extinctions. It’s far more caused by habitat destruction.

Lutger 3y ago

> But if humans cause large swings in climate that would happen naturally, then it’s not like what we’re causing is unique right? It is unique in several ways. In a moral sense it is unique in that we knowingly caused it and failed to take action. In a historical sense, extinctions on this scale are so rare they are almost unique. What is unprecedented however is the rate of change. This is important because species aren't able to adapt anymore when the climate changes so rapidly.

rurp 3y ago

> large-mass-scale extinction is a natural repeating phenomenon Most people consider the death of their descendants and loved ones a poor outcome that they would like to prevent... Yes things are self correcting in the sense that if we muck things up badly enough our society will collapse and something else will come after. But that kind of mass destruction will be horrifically bad for an awful lot of people.

tippytippytango 3y ago

The moralizing is from people using shame as a strategy to affect public policy and/or gain power, I don’t think it’s much deeper than that. Shame can be very effective as most people are hard wired to respond to shame. The issue is that shame can be shunted into minor things to resolve it, buying a carbon neutral Apple Watch, Tesla or recycling can dissipate the shame for an individual leaving us with a problem and no real solution. I personally think we will survive the climate catastrophe. It might be a Black Death type event, horrific and painful for everyone. But a wiser breed of humans will emerge on the other side.