6 ms·

You're not on point. They probably only started to 'physically lift up' because the climate warmed. It says so in the second line. /s I get that the human li

You're not on point. They probably only started to 'physically lift up' because the climate warmed. It says so in the second line. /s I get that the human lifespan is quite a short thing, but it's it so hard to conceive of nature itself being in continuous flux? Is it really anthropogenic global warming? The historical record indicates huge changes.. I tend to think it was ever thus, and that 'climate change' is better considered a a corporate marketing initiative to get the consumer to happily accept more expensive yet inferior products.

unlikelymordant 2y ago
Of course there has been 'climate change' and 'global warming' before, caused by things like large volcanic eruptions (deccan traps) or meteorites. But they have pretty universally coincided with mass extinctions. And when we say glabal warming is anthropogenic, we mean this time humans are causing the warming by emitting a lot of co2 (and methane and no2 etc). It is fairly unequivocal at this point. This time its entirely within our power to prevent another mass extinction, because this this time we are causing it. Why wouldnt we try?
oblio 2y ago
Let's assume you're right and I don't know, something major at the bottom of the food chain, like fitoplancton, dies en masse due to climate change. Will you just roll over and die like a dinosaur if you could do something about it?
- verisimi 2y ago
  Do you genuinely feel threatened?
  - oblio 2y ago
    Right now? No. But I also expect to live at least 30 more years and I want a nice world for my descendants, so yes. Also the fossil fuel economy is: 1. Polluting regardless of climate change, go behind an older bus and smell some fumes, see all the plastic littered about leading to things like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. 2. Ultimately unsustainable. We <<will>> run out of cheap fossil fuels, and biofuels take land away from agriculture and other land uses. Plus, technologically, the writing is on the wall. Why would we be stupid and not use the sun's energy and not create advanced batteries, which can be used for all sorts of amazing things? Just to perpetuate combustion engines which are a miracle of technology for how well their work considering their rudimentary principles?
    - verisimi 2y ago
      > Right now? No. But I also expect to live at least 30 more years and I want a nice world for my descendants, so yes. Everyone wants a nice world. But this misses the point of what I'm saying. If you give up lots of your money and resources to politicians and corporations, do you think you will get a nicer world? Even if that's what they promise? The climate change idea has been promoted since the seventies. For an example of broken promises, you should re-watch Al gore's first movie. People loved the film at the time. Count the number of failed predictions. Is it ok to shout fire in a crowded cinema? Is it ok if you are a politician, the fire is fake, and you have fire retardant blankets to sell? Or is that just business?
      - defrost 2y ago
        Why would anyone watch a film with a second rate USofA VP when they could read the IPCC report in full or even just start with something basic like Syukuro Manabe's 1967 Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Given Distribution of Relative Humidity ? It's 57 years old but still an absolute stonker of a paper, rightly considered the single most influential paper in climate research. (and only 19 pages). https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/24/3/1520-0469_1967_024_0241_teotaw_2_0_co_2.xml https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/24/3/1520-04... Heat equations aren't that hard and the changes made by humans to the atmosphere are on record in gas libraries dating back to the Cold War and available in real time high resolution by dedicated satellites today. There is no doubt in the matter of AGW anymore save in the minds of those challenged by math and susceptable to the FUD spread by denialists. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/ https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/
      - oblio 2y ago
        > Everyone wants a nice world. But this misses the point of what I'm saying. No, it doesn't. > If you give up lots of your money and resources to politicians and corporations, do you think you will get a nicer world? Even if that's what they promise? Ummm.. we're already doing that. The status quo is corporations, look at this: https://companiesmarketcap.com/largest-companies-by-revenue/ https://companiesmarketcap.com/largest-companies-by-revenue/ About 20% of those primarily work on fossil fuel extraction and distribution. On top of those there are about 15 ICE vehicle manufacturers that directly rely on fossil fuels for now, then a bunch of pharma companies that do the same (they would obviously get an exemption until we find a better solution). This premise that somehow combating climate change is a corporate plot while not combating climate change is a grassroots initiative is false. You're acting like we're a bunch of hippy libertarian hunter-scavengers doing our own things. We aren't. We live in societies quite tightly controlled by corporations. We should make them invest that money we already hand over into things which are SUSTAINABLE long term. > The climate change idea has been promoted since the seventies. It's not an "idea", it's a scientific theory with lots of data backing it. An "idea" is what Uncle Joe had last night when he decided to spend thousands of bucks on his huge truck to be able to roll coal. > For an example of broken promises, you should re-watch Al gore's first movie. People loved the film at the time. Count the number of failed predictions. Is it ok to shout fire in a crowded cinema? Is it ok if you are a politician, the fire is fake, and you have fire retardant blankets to sell? Or is that just business? You know what, I've decided that I not only HATE climate change, I also HATE: * micro plastics * Great Pacific Garbage patch and all the plastics thrown randomly into nature * particulate emissions from vehicles * including tire and road wear particulate emissions * loud vehicles everywhere in cities, taking up to 25% of ALL space in cities * heat islands due to said vehicles needing flat concrete/asphalt surfaces EVERYWHERE * etc. I don't want to return to the Stone Age, I love tech. But this current generation of tech is long overdue for getting trimmed around the edges. Walkability, bikeability, general liveability, electric bikes, electric mopeds, electric cars, induction hobs, electric ovens, heat pumps, good insulation for homes, higher density where there is demand for more housing, work from home, etc., etc., are ALL just good ideas for improving quality of life. Even if climate change doesn't happen. https://imgur.com/up6yu https://imgur.com/up6yu

unlikelymordant 2y ago

Of course there has been 'climate change' and 'global warming' before, caused by things like large volcanic eruptions (deccan traps) or meteorites. But they have pretty universally coincided with mass extinctions. And when we say glabal warming is anthropogenic, we mean this time humans are causing the warming by emitting a lot of co2 (and methane and no2 etc). It is fairly unequivocal at this point. This time its entirely within our power to prevent another mass extinction, because this this time we are causing it. Why wouldnt we try?

oblio 2y ago

Let's assume you're right and I don't know, something major at the bottom of the food chain, like fitoplancton, dies en masse due to climate change. Will you just roll over and die like a dinosaur if you could do something about it?

verisimi 2y ago
Do you genuinely feel threatened?
- oblio 2y ago
  Right now? No. But I also expect to live at least 30 more years and I want a nice world for my descendants, so yes. Also the fossil fuel economy is: 1. Polluting regardless of climate change, go behind an older bus and smell some fumes, see all the plastic littered about leading to things like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. 2. Ultimately unsustainable. We <<will>> run out of cheap fossil fuels, and biofuels take land away from agriculture and other land uses. Plus, technologically, the writing is on the wall. Why would we be stupid and not use the sun's energy and not create advanced batteries, which can be used for all sorts of amazing things? Just to perpetuate combustion engines which are a miracle of technology for how well their work considering their rudimentary principles?
  - verisimi 2y ago
    > Right now? No. But I also expect to live at least 30 more years and I want a nice world for my descendants, so yes. Everyone wants a nice world. But this misses the point of what I'm saying. If you give up lots of your money and resources to politicians and corporations, do you think you will get a nicer world? Even if that's what they promise? The climate change idea has been promoted since the seventies. For an example of broken promises, you should re-watch Al gore's first movie. People loved the film at the time. Count the number of failed predictions. Is it ok to shout fire in a crowded cinema? Is it ok if you are a politician, the fire is fake, and you have fire retardant blankets to sell? Or is that just business?
    - defrost 2y ago
      Why would anyone watch a film with a second rate USofA VP when they could read the IPCC report in full or even just start with something basic like Syukuro Manabe's 1967 Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Given Distribution of Relative Humidity ? It's 57 years old but still an absolute stonker of a paper, rightly considered the single most influential paper in climate research. (and only 19 pages). https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/24/3/1520-0469_1967_024_0241_teotaw_2_0_co_2.xml https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/24/3/1520-04... Heat equations aren't that hard and the changes made by humans to the atmosphere are on record in gas libraries dating back to the Cold War and available in real time high resolution by dedicated satellites today. There is no doubt in the matter of AGW anymore save in the minds of those challenged by math and susceptable to the FUD spread by denialists. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/ https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/
    - oblio 2y ago
      > Everyone wants a nice world. But this misses the point of what I'm saying. No, it doesn't. > If you give up lots of your money and resources to politicians and corporations, do you think you will get a nicer world? Even if that's what they promise? Ummm.. we're already doing that. The status quo is corporations, look at this: https://companiesmarketcap.com/largest-companies-by-revenue/ https://companiesmarketcap.com/largest-companies-by-revenue/ About 20% of those primarily work on fossil fuel extraction and distribution. On top of those there are about 15 ICE vehicle manufacturers that directly rely on fossil fuels for now, then a bunch of pharma companies that do the same (they would obviously get an exemption until we find a better solution). This premise that somehow combating climate change is a corporate plot while not combating climate change is a grassroots initiative is false. You're acting like we're a bunch of hippy libertarian hunter-scavengers doing our own things. We aren't. We live in societies quite tightly controlled by corporations. We should make them invest that money we already hand over into things which are SUSTAINABLE long term. > The climate change idea has been promoted since the seventies. It's not an "idea", it's a scientific theory with lots of data backing it. An "idea" is what Uncle Joe had last night when he decided to spend thousands of bucks on his huge truck to be able to roll coal. > For an example of broken promises, you should re-watch Al gore's first movie. People loved the film at the time. Count the number of failed predictions. Is it ok to shout fire in a crowded cinema? Is it ok if you are a politician, the fire is fake, and you have fire retardant blankets to sell? Or is that just business? You know what, I've decided that I not only HATE climate change, I also HATE: * micro plastics * Great Pacific Garbage patch and all the plastics thrown randomly into nature * particulate emissions from vehicles * including tire and road wear particulate emissions * loud vehicles everywhere in cities, taking up to 25% of ALL space in cities * heat islands due to said vehicles needing flat concrete/asphalt surfaces EVERYWHERE * etc. I don't want to return to the Stone Age, I love tech. But this current generation of tech is long overdue for getting trimmed around the edges. Walkability, bikeability, general liveability, electric bikes, electric mopeds, electric cars, induction hobs, electric ovens, heat pumps, good insulation for homes, higher density where there is demand for more housing, work from home, etc., etc., are ALL just good ideas for improving quality of life. Even if climate change doesn't happen. https://imgur.com/up6yu https://imgur.com/up6yu