Hacker News Reader

Comment by barbasosi | Hacker News Reader

Neat, I did not know civ2 had implemented the global warming mechanic.

Anyone who wants a game thats in the same vein, i can somewhat recommend Humankind. But it doesn't really have climate change mechanics, more like 'IPCC naming and shaming' since factions will hate on factions that pollute, even in the medieval era..

I would have appreciated that global warming was a thing that needs to be researched, since the phenomenon has only been discovered relatively late (in terms of the entire span of human civilization).

View on HN

> I would have appreciated that global warming was a thing that needs to be researched, since the phenomenon has only been discovered relatively late (in terms of the entire span of human civilization).

In terms of the entire span of human civilization, yes. But in terms of the age of our modern, industrial societies not so much. It was discussed by Fourier in the 1820, the greenhouse effect was well described by Tyndall in the 1860s (he knew about the effect of methane, carbon dioxide, and water vapour), and its increase due to human activity was explored by Arrhenius in the 1890s.

Just a reminder that we did know about global warming. We've been knowing for a long time.

>Just a reminder that we did know about global warming. We've been knowing for a long time.

That is not really correct and very nitpicky. We also know, that volcanic activity that releases those greenhouse gases were actually cooling down planet with catastrophic consequences to humanity that halted economic development. Not to mention, that there is also observation, that cities have higher temperature than in countryside(on average 2 degrees higher in north - 4-5 degrees hotter in south), where cows are generating methane gas. The scourge of 21st century is that human infested urban environment that has constantly hotter temperature than environment around it finally have reached significant enough coverage, so that it is now affecting rest of the planet.

Also, it is worth mention that there is a theory of Nuclear Winter, which is completely avoided in Civilization games.

All the greatest scientists in late 1970s were talking about coming of a new Ice Age. All the science fiction from that era is full of Ice age related stories. So, at the moment global warming is complete bonkers theory, that will fly out of the window as soon as there will be a sufficient volcanic activity level. So far there is also observation, that volanic activity has been going down while global warming has gone up.

The current theory of Global warming is very politicized. The data that lead to this theory was fabricated and opponents to this theory were silenced. And constructive criticism about reasons why there is a global warming is not possible. It is not as much as a theory, as it is a religion with belief system for something that has different natural causes. Besides there is some belief, that there will be high temperatures in equator, that render those regions void of life, while the reality is that highest rise of temperature is going to be around poles and that in turn will improve living conditions to people that are living there now.

The main reason why there exist theory about global warming is because it was a reaction to actions of Arabic Gulf countries in 1980s that halted economy of USA by creating fuel shortage. Suddenly Ice Age theory became defunct overnight...

Though, there are of couse good side effects to this new religion - fuel powered cars are cause for lead poisoning and ending usage of them will be better to health along with other enviromental changes.

When Sid Meyer was making his game, it was not yet known, that lands that are now under ice, would be rebounding and main body of that water will flow to equator(because of planets rotation and shape) to flood things more around equator than lands that are near poles. I did not knew about that either, but I always wanted to build some city on that Earth map in first Civilization, that was turning ocean tiles into land tiles in northern pole because of a bug.

> All the greatest scientists in late 1970s were talking about coming of a new Ice Age.

Careful — what was reported in general news was (and is) different from the work of the actual scientists. This is even true when the the news is reporting on a specific scientific report.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/06/that-70s-myth-did-cl...

> All the science fiction from that era is full of Ice age related stories. So, at the moment global warming is complete bonkers theory, that will fly out of the window as soon as there will be a sufficient volcanic activity level.

You can’t use sci-fi to draw conclusions about anything except the culture in which it rises.

Climate research explicitly includes “what do volcanoes do?” as well as other, mostly larger, sources of aerosol cooling. Indeed, this is a subset of “can we do geo-engineering to mitigate the effects?” research.

> The current theory of Global warming is very politicized.

It has indeed been politicised, but in the opposite way you claim: the scientific consensus is basically “totes real”, the reporting makes average Jo think it is “scientists disagree”.

> The data that lead to this theory was fabricated and opponents to this theory were silenced.

Explain.

> And constructive criticism about reasons why there is a global warming is not possible. It is not as much as a theory, as it is a religion with belief system for something that has different natural causes.

Anyone paying attention knows 90%-ish of it is natural, because of the temperature difference between us and the moon. The other 10% is the problem.

> Besides there is some belief, that there will be high temperatures in equator, that render those regions void of life, while the reality is that highest rise of temperature is going to be around poles and that in turn will improve living conditions to people that are living there now.

It does indeed appear to be mostly around the poles. Where the ice is. Which is indeed great if you live in what’s currently an icy wasteland, not so much if you live on the coast literally anywhere else. Will also mess with the thermo-haline circulation, I don’t know the current consensus on how much it will mess with it, but that’s the thing keeping Western Europe warmer than Newfoundland-Nova Scotia right now.

Let me repeat my words: "All the greatest scientists in late 1970s were talking about coming of a new Ice Age." Different theories of global warming at that time were only theories and not that significant and are not even comparable to that heavy weight of the whale what is understood under "Global warming" today.

>You can’t use sci-fi to draw conclusions about anything except the culture in which it rises.

I can draw conclusion about culture of that age - just like I can draw conclusions of my own on this culture of modern era, which sure will also raise questions to future generations. However my conclusions about human behaviours has nothing to do with the volcanic activity, that will prove theory of Global warming wrong.

My main point here is that Sid Meyer during the creation of his game probably had no idea about those early global warming papers and "research" that you are so eager to point in that publication from earlier times - including earlier centuries, but clearly the idea about global warming was in the air in 1980s for completelly different reasons. Since I did not live in US, I can't recollect any talks about global warming in 1980s - this really exploded in my region only in 2000s(not much after it became a thing in US), when effects of global warming could be seen and when Al Gore was pioneering the usage of this question to gain political power.

>Explain.

The wiki part is not that interesting as background story of childish - even Hitler Nazi behaviour of scientists, where the one who provided that chart(without any proof) and who later could not admit that he was wrong about calculations(that this whole model was based upon) and who caused grief to anyone else who opposeed him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_graph

>The other 10% is the problem.

Providing numbers like these are what I call a religious belief.

> even Hitler Nazi behaviour of scientists,

Rounding up millions and forcing them into slave labour camps and working them to death in weapons factories in a futile effort to conquer the Soviet Union?

No?

Then have you considered the possibility that it’s the “it’s not real” campaigners who are politicising this?

> However my conclusions about human behaviours has nothing to do with the volcanic activity, that will prove theory of Global warming wrong.

Volcanic activity is already accounted for. Human activity vastly exceeds its effects.

> Providing numbers like these are what I call a religious belief.

What would you consider “not religious”?

I’m basing 90%-ish on the size of change we are concerned with preventing versus the magnitude of the difference between the earth and the moon:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Average%20temperature%2...

Though frankly, as you’ve already gone for argument by reductio-nazi-absurdum, I’m honestly expecting you to dispute the temperature of the moon at this point.

Nazis and Soviets had ability to destroy lives of people even without sending them to labor camps. Not sure what you had in mind, but people in British weapon factories also were worked and driven to death.

>Volcanic activity is already accounted for. Human activity vastly exceeds its effects.

Be real. That is neither possible according to modern human technological advances, nor is true.

>What would you consider “not religious”?

Anything that is not based on belief.

>I’m basing 90%-ish on the size of change we are concerned with preventing versus the magnitude of the difference between the earth and the moon

Well, that is interesting and unique take upon the global warming, but somehow without dipping into this deeper I don't think, that this approach is effective to describe global warming or is even taken into account. This only reflects, that you are a human being and have independent thinking, but I would not waste that on something that is waste of time... unless you are serious on making career on this.

>Though frankly, as you’ve already gone for argument by reductio-nazi-absurdum, I’m honestly expecting you to dispute the temperature of the moon at this point.

Are you ok? You decided to be white knight because I responded to someones else comment that he was picking out and declaring, that we knew about global warming forever, which is not so. People in northern hemisphere would specifically ignore memories about gradual warming or warmer periods and remember about cold winters and tell about them for other generations - it is just how it happened, and they would not tell about something good, that gave them slightly better tan, but they would tell about those winters that killed their cattle and how they survived through it.

Dude, just calm down - arguing is one thing, but I do not deserve your personal attack on me - only because I have my own opinion about this scam and also about the people who use it to gain personal benefits out of it.

Of course Sun sunspot maximum is coming closer and there is also link to that people get crazy during that period... anyway - this is way off the topic of Sid Meyers Civilization, when people were not as batshit crazy about nothing as now.

It's only really possible to move the needle on global warming with an industrial-scale society. The medieval era could just about manage deforestation, but to achieve climate change the sheer volume of coal to move is huge.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com