4 ms·

You linked a wikipedia reference section about climate change, suggesting people need to argue those points, and then immediately devolved into doomsaying with

You linked a wikipedia reference section about climate change, suggesting people need to argue those points, and then immediately devolved into doomsaying with a theoretical war with refugees after theoretical "massive" climate-change-caused disasters.

komali2 3y ago
I demonstrated that in order to dispute human-caused climate change, someone certainly has their homework set out for them! :) Then I shared why many of my generation don't believe we can turn away from this, not because of our technology, but because of our sociology, our politics. Similar to how people believe AI will "free people from labor" despite improvements in technology almost never reducing labor loads but instead just getting people fired.
- the_doctah 3y ago
  Remember when the ozone layer was what everyone was freaking out about? How'd that whole thing go?
  - defrost 3y ago
    A significant portion of the world took the threat seriously. Coordinated action was taken. The risk still persists. * A significant reduction in the consumption of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) has been achieved globally since 1986. This reduction has largely been driven by the 1987 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Montreal Protocol. * The largest historical extent of the ozone hole — 28.4 million square kilometres — occurred in September 2000. This area is equivalent to almost seven times the territory of the EU. * The 2023 ozone hole has been larger compared to 2022. https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/climate-change-mitigation-reducing-emissions/current-state-of-the-ozone-layer https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/climate-change-... You can answer your own rhetoricals you know.
    - the_doctah 3y ago
      I'm just helping you to realize these problems are in fact solvable and the wild disaster predictions aren't exactly productive.
      - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
        That is a fine line to walk. Since a lot of people that say it is 'solvable', and we'll 'adapt', seem to also be the same people saying we don't need to do anything, or argue against 'solving' the problem. Actually trying to block solutions. It goes like this, 'the problem is solvable', 'so we don't need to try and solve it'. Basically arguing for kicking the can down the road. 'Surely someone will solve this, so I don't have to, and furthermore, I'd really appreciate not being bothered with this anymore.'
  - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
    "Ozone" layer was a win. We found a problem, reported it, people believed the scientist, and we identified and adapted to solve the problem. We fixed it. Same with 'Acid Rain'. We don't hear about it. Because we identified a problem, believed the science, and fixed it. I'm continually dumfounded that we used to be able to adapt and fix things, but suddenly with "CO2", this one molecule that we've know was a green house gas for a 100 years now. Suddenly this is the thing people don't want to believe.

komali2 3y ago

I demonstrated that in order to dispute human-caused climate change, someone certainly has their homework set out for them! :) Then I shared why many of my generation don't believe we can turn away from this, not because of our technology, but because of our sociology, our politics. Similar to how people believe AI will "free people from labor" despite improvements in technology almost never reducing labor loads but instead just getting people fired.

the_doctah 3y ago
Remember when the ozone layer was what everyone was freaking out about? How'd that whole thing go?
- defrost 3y ago
  A significant portion of the world took the threat seriously. Coordinated action was taken. The risk still persists. * A significant reduction in the consumption of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) has been achieved globally since 1986. This reduction has largely been driven by the 1987 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Montreal Protocol. * The largest historical extent of the ozone hole — 28.4 million square kilometres — occurred in September 2000. This area is equivalent to almost seven times the territory of the EU. * The 2023 ozone hole has been larger compared to 2022. https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/climate-change-mitigation-reducing-emissions/current-state-of-the-ozone-layer https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/climate-change-... You can answer your own rhetoricals you know.
  - the_doctah 3y ago
    I'm just helping you to realize these problems are in fact solvable and the wild disaster predictions aren't exactly productive.
    - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
      That is a fine line to walk. Since a lot of people that say it is 'solvable', and we'll 'adapt', seem to also be the same people saying we don't need to do anything, or argue against 'solving' the problem. Actually trying to block solutions. It goes like this, 'the problem is solvable', 'so we don't need to try and solve it'. Basically arguing for kicking the can down the road. 'Surely someone will solve this, so I don't have to, and furthermore, I'd really appreciate not being bothered with this anymore.'
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  "Ozone" layer was a win. We found a problem, reported it, people believed the scientist, and we identified and adapted to solve the problem. We fixed it. Same with 'Acid Rain'. We don't hear about it. Because we identified a problem, believed the science, and fixed it. I'm continually dumfounded that we used to be able to adapt and fix things, but suddenly with "CO2", this one molecule that we've know was a green house gas for a 100 years now. Suddenly this is the thing people don't want to believe.