Hacker News Reader

Comment by tzs | Hacker News Reader

Are we?

First, weren't those past changes much slower, thus giving much more time to adapt?

Second, wasn't the world much more sparsely populated, meaning that if your area's ecosystem changed it was often feasible to migrate to a most hospitable currently unoccupied area?

Third, if they did migrate to someplace that was already occupied and those already there objected, nobody had weapons of mass destruction. At worst, one group would genocide the other, but it wouldn't spread beyond the disputants.

If a climate change induced resource problem leads to war in our times there are weapons of mass destruction, and those wars could be very devastating and draw in others.

View on HN

The climate change that contributed to the fall of the Roman empire was relatively quick [1].

[1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/how-climate-ch...

I will also ask you to provide an example of a scientifically demonstrated consequence of climate change we don't know how to deal with.

Climate change is a fact of life and we have always had to deal with it. Nature doesn't give us an environment we make dangerous, nature gives us a dangerous environment we then make safe.

I am personally more concerned about a lot of other things before climate change even enters my list.

> I will also ask you to provide an example of a scientifically demonstrated consequence of climate change we don't know how to deal with.

You'll have to define "deal with". How many billions dead is a success?

It's gonna be a bitch not getting anything to eat because Earth won't grow our crops anymore because we done fucked up all of its life support systems and it's just too damn hot outside.

More CO2 = higher crop yields.

Higher temperature = more arable land.

Your beliefs are not scientifically valid.

I would suggest you consider that issue may be more complicated than a single variable. While it make for great back and forth on an HN thread and wonderful, cathartic gotcha moments, (perhaps I also feel this urge), it really is a complicated issue, and pretty much all signs point to climate change as being a very disruptive, likely cataclysmic change to the entire planet. Ecosystems don't respond to rapid, catastrophic changes well. Loss of biodiversity--losing a link in the food chain--tends produce shockwaves through the entire system, which can lead to collapse.

E.g. https://phys.org/news/2015-06-tide-pools-rapid-die-off-sea.h...

Yes it's more complicated than a single variable something you too should keep in mind.

So many adjectives, so few facts.

Higher temperatures also lead to desertification, smaller land area through sea level rise, and more extreme weather events. It's a complicated situation to predict, and it would be wrong to say it comes with no opportunities, but it looks like averting the situation, even partially, is going to be far less painful than dealing with the effects.

That certainly depends on what you are going to do to prevent it.

You actually think you are contributing to the demise of the entire human race. You are so lost in apocalyptic despair that you are not thinking rationally.

So much technology, the pace of development accelerating exponentially, so much having happened in just the last 100 years compared to the past thousands of human history, and all you can see is death and destruction looming.

The real problems facing humanity are the ones that have always been, and always will be, with us.

Get a grip. Go outside, take a deep breath of some fresh air, and try to enjoy the few years you have on this beautiful planet. Try to make a difference where you are, when you are. The rest isn't up to you or anyone else.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com