Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The coffee machine has no implications on my current life span. It may be true, but who would waste their time caring about this?

Show me the /unanimous/ consensus that this is an immediate /existential/ issue. I don't believe such a thing exists. When attempting to understand the difference between those who care about an asteroid and climate change, which was the question, this is the critical point to concern yourself with.



Unanimous consensus is an impossible goal.

Overwhelming agreement among experts is as gold as standards get.

But FWIW, I don't think anyone believes that climate change is a quick duration species-existential event. Massive slow-roll geopolitical destabilization leading to societal collapse? That's definitely on the table.


> Unanimous consensus is an impossible goal.

I know this. I was responding to the OPs appeal to authority.

> Overwhelming agreement among experts is as gold as standards get.

What is this agreement? That it will eventually happen? That's not much of an agreement.

> I don't think anyone believes that climate change is a quick duration species-existential event.

Among those who "agree" is there a common timeframe that they estimate? Or do they all have varying opinions on this?

> That's definitely on the table.

We have nuclear weapons. In bunkers. Aimed at "targets." Everything is on the table. This isn't useful.


Hmmm… what level of agreement would constitute sufficient cause for massive change?

Eventually happen? What percentage of the Great Barrier Reef is gone?

How about this every single climate change skeptic I have offered this wager to has declined to take me up: if in the next calendar year, the average global temperature for a given month is below the average global temperature of that month in the year you were born I will pay you 10 times the amount you are willing to wager. If the opposite is true, that the month this year is warmer than the same month in the year you were born you must pay me the amount you are willing to wager.

Care to take that bet? Didn’t think so.


I don't believe you would have any trouble answering these questions for yourself, and I do not have any confidence that you are engaging earnestly.


by doubting, you've already ruled it out, haven't you? 95%+ is as good as it gets probably.

For starters, we know corals will be dead in the next few decades, home of 25% of all oceanic species.

The mass extinction event is underway and we aren't doing enough to stop it.


> by doubting, you've already ruled it out, haven't you?

So you are attempting to create an environment where reasonable doubt is impossible. This behavior is actually part of the reason I have doubts.

> we know corals will be dead in the next few decades

Do we?

> The mass extinction event is underway and we aren't doing enough to stop it.

This is a clever dodge of the original question. Can you explain to me when our current inaction reaches a point where no response will ever be able to overcome the drivers of this mass extinction? Do you have an estimate you can share?


Gotta be the acme of pedantic behavior to say "there's no proof climate change will kill ALL of us".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: