Hacker News Reader

Comment by jbmorgado | Hacker News Reader

I totally regard global warming and that it is caused by man as true from evidence presented by scientific research.

But trying to give single images as proof is actually a disservice to the all thing. It just helps science deniers to actually nitpick their way out of this.

EDIT: Grammar in single images.

View on HN

How is this "give a single image as proof"? It's not a single image, nor is it given as proof. The study involved lots of images tracking nearly a dozen different sites, and the changes observed are attributed to climate change (and even then only with the caveat of "possibly and likely"), not presented as proof of climate change.

Sorry, I was directly translating from my language to english and it could mean a different thing in english.

I mean that in the way as giving just an image (as in no other data like temperatures, CO2 levels, etc), makes it easier for science deniers to nitpick out of it.

You're right that the image is just one source of data. But... that's true of any one source of data. This data doesn't prove anything, it just contributes a bit more evidence (to an already enormous pile...).

It's not "an image". I gather that they've analyzed many images, and are extracting information about vegetation from them. The result is data.

It's really hard to see how it matters at this point. Just as the debate is really getting started we've ensured another 4+ years of not only stasis, but reversal. This, when we already have permafrost melting and releasing methane, and a system with 20+ year delays on inputs. The deniers have "won" in a broadly suicidal sense, barring some kind of technological or literal miracle.

Makes me sad to think about it.

There's always the unlikely but nonetheless possible political miracle, where people deem the system of governance to be failing and set about changing it. Admittedly the predictable conflicts that would result would themselves come with a significant environmental bill, but you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.

Take heart, the world is larger than America and much of the good we've already done will continue to ripple forward.

Adopting the attitude that we've already lost gives a sense of closure to a topic that still requires effort and attention.

For sure, "never say die" is great advice, and all.

But arguably, it really is too late, to avoid major disruptions for human civilization. So hey, now we can all agree that anthropogenic warming is happening. And dispute about how bad it will be. What we'll find, I suspect, is that exponentials are full of surprises.

I find it impossible to muster even a false sense of hope at this stage, and frankly if enthusiasm solved problems they'd all be solved. Throw some realistic hope my way that doesn't include, "First human nature needs to change" or something like that though, and I'll be there. I'm bad at faith, but I'm willing to pin hopes on analytically sound long shots, if they're all I have.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com