Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by systemvoltage | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

systemvoltage

Climate catastrophy arguments needs more scrutiny. The error bars are huge.

https://twitter.com/birdhillcap/status/1541812452760776705

https://twitter.com/AlexEpstein/status/1541768533004148738

https://twitter.com/luisbaram/status/1523671791062843393

https://twitter.com/AlexEpstein/status/1529809797582815244

There is a bigger problem. Those who scrutinize climate change are punished by the society even though we need legit scientists and people that debunk overarching claims. You could accept CC arguments but still be a critic of some of the insane claims going on today.

It's like the early COVID days. Can't criticize. Can't speak against the mob. Can't do science without scrutiny.

View on HN

> Climate catastrophy arguments needs more scrutiny.

Right, so your sources for this is a few Twitter posts. Let's take a look.

The first one is a supposed quote from Al Gore, but he never said that. Even if he did, Al Gore getting something wrong would hardly disprove anything about climate science.

> Those who scrutinize climate change are punished by the society

You're parroting untrue claims. How about some self-awareness?

I didn’t spend more time looking for more and I’m not interested in defending myself.

The main general point still stands. All I’m asking for is some scrutiny. By the time information reaches from scientists to reporters and policy makers, there is a lot of malaise and omission of inconvenient truths.

We need more checks and balances. Climate alarmicism is getting out of control. It's become a religion. Scientists that want to report inconvenient results are terrified.

Edit: I found some more: https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/50-years-of-failed-doomsday-e...

No, climate alarmism is not out of control. It is barely loud enough to hear. Did it even get mentioned at G7?

The inconvenient truth is that far too little is happening, and doing enough would be overwhelmingly cheaper. Quibbling has outsize impact interfering with action.

I feel like it is the opposite. I just bought Levi's jeans. There is so much sustainable/green washing on the labels, it is insane.

I've heard from friends who believe that we should depopulate the planet by 100x. Anti-human arguments all over the media.

You are in a bubble.

I second systemvoltage's lived experience. I've seen the same across two continents.

Sure, it could be a bubble, just big enough of a bubble to envelope the entire West.

Greenwashing is not evidence of anything happening. It is by definition something trotted out in place of something happening.

> I didn’t spend more time looking for more and I’m not interested in defending myself.

You just want to throw out accusations without evidence and you're complaining about "climate alarmicism" not getting enough scrutiny?

> Scientists that want to report inconvenient results are terrified.

This is an oft-repeated claim by people engaged in climate denialism, but it's a lie. A conspiracy theory without evidence. Where are all these terrified scientists? Who has been sanctioned for presenting contrary views?

A friend of mine was a climate sceptic. He started a PhD looking at glaciers and ice cores. He was expecting to experience some friction pushing back against the climate orthodoxy, but after looking through the data he changed his mind. He realised our models of the climate were consistent with the evidence.

Consider: if your "terrified scientists" theory was incorrect, and actually scientists did believe that the standard models are correct, wouldn't that state of affairs look identical to what is actually occurring today?

I think CC movement is 70% legit and 30% bullshit. The public is mostly deluded on either side, those that support it and those who oppose it.

I am also not a climate skeptic. I just think that we need more scrutiny. The push back I get from people is insane like the strawman you've conjured up.

The big issue is that counter arguments to climate change typically tend to be used as a justification for inaction, as flawed as that reasoning is. We're already at well over three decades of climate inaction.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com