4 ms·
> If you understand "prediction" to mean "any bullshit made up by anyone" then yes. I don't have to go that far, really! The IPCC models are systematically obs
by palata 2y ago
> If you understand "prediction" to mean "any bullshit made up by anyone" then yes.
I don't have to go that far, really! The IPCC models are systematically observed to be optimistic. 4 degrees is not particularly pessimistic.
> That's societal collapse. That's really really bad. But you were talking about species level collapse.
Even nitpicking here doesn't work. If you lose 90% of your population, as a species, it's collapsing.
I understand the point you are trying to make: "it's not clear that the humans species will disappear, just most humans". And I'm not saying it's clear. I'm saying it is a risk. Because we are not wild animals. Most humans, if you don't give them prepared food in a plastic bag, can't survive. And we're talking about surviving in a much harder world (4 degrees means that growing crop is harder in many ways).
But again it is a moot point. What's the point of going around saying "Guys don't be scared, we won't disappear as a species. Most of us here will die, still, but that's not as bad".
Now, let me address your nitpick: We as a society are on the verge of collapsing, and we as a species as well. With a non-zero risk that the entire species will go extinct.
- krisoft 2y ago> What's the point of going around The point is to be accurate. > Guys don't be scared, I didn’t say to not be scared. There is such a thing as surviving something, but wishing that you didn’t. > Now, let me address your nitpick You said we are about to go extinct. I think we are not. If that is a nitpick i don’t know what is material disagreement.
- palata 2y ago> You said we are about to go extinct You want to be accurate, please also be when it doesn't work in your favour. Let me quote what I said: > We, as a species, are on the verge of collapsing on Earth I said "on the verge of collapsing", not "about to go extinct".
- krisoft 2y ago“We literally are failing to survive on Earth.”
- palata 2y agoOh, right. Yep, that's not particularly accurate. I meant it more as "instead of losing resources focusing on mars, we should focus on the Earth because there is a lot to do". Again, I would argue that we are, right now, building the conditions of a collapse, meaning that many (most?) humans may not survive it. It's not just climate change, it's essentially all the planet's limits we know. Did you know that we have probably already lost the Amazon? But well, what's the point of arguing, you agree that it's really, really, really bad. Sorry if you don't like my wording, I'll try to do better next time ;-).