Hacker News Reader

TLDR: They seem to be talking about global levels over time and also mention that indoor levels can be higher, depending on how well air is exchanged with outdoor air.

Probably good to be thinking about the latter, and in my well-insulated place, I often leave some windows cracked to help with this.

Over periods of centuries, presumably evolution would ameliorate most or all of the problem with global changes.

View on HN

"evolution would ameliorate most or all of the problem" is a funny way of saying that "a lot of people are going to die younger (or have fewer children) because of this". That's the only way evolution works.

It doesn't need to be a lot younger or a lot fewer. The effect will almost certainly be virtually undetectable, especially when compared to many other evolutionary forces (e.g., diet, particulates in air, lack of exercise, social policies, etc.).

If you want to improve global quality of life, CO2 levels are almost certainly not the right place to start.

Natural selection is only a subset of all evolutionary processes, which are much broader than that.

CO2 levels are rising far quicker than any possible evolutionary response.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com