Quote:
Originally Posted by
segovius 
Certain mindsets don't change that's for sure.
They certainly don't change. That is what SDW is pointing out precisely. No one is going to buy a protoscience that has become more about the grant dollars and attempts at control than being predictive. Shouldn't science have some predictive power rather than saying, please give us a virgin to throw into the volcano or you will die because your crops won't grow?
That mindset and the control it attempts are indeed the oldest thing around here.
Quote:
We could be in the midst of a nuclear fucking meltdown and the denialist voices will still be telling themselves - yes, that's all they're doing, programming themselves - that all is ok as they head down the mall to wander about like the Stepford Wives and buying whatever shite meets their gaze.
Yes and did you tell that to anyone taking their private jets into the various climate conferences to discuss this problem? Did you worry about this when all those wonderful rock stars and their fans get together to spew their gigantic volumes of carbon to celebrate their caring? Have you chastized your own offspring yet for breathing out and wanting stuff?
Quote:
They can't adapt. Soon they will be swept aside like the brontosauri they are.
I suspect you are wrong. Humans aren't like a rooted plant. When the climate has changed, they have certainly adapted and will continue to do so. The ones perishing are those who can't afford heat due to government regulation or who can't live life without the government dole. They are the ones getting ready to go extinct for these governments are no longer able to afford to buy their votes or live their lives for them.
Quote:
Excellent analogy actually: massive beasts with small brains who look fierce but aren't and make a lot of noise while trampling anything smaller underfoot all blissfully unaware.
Luckily the metaphorical meteorite is accelerating on its collision course as we speak.
Have Happy Holidays Sego.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
nvidia2008 
Nicely put.
I think not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
nvidia2008 
Yes, climate change is real, but cannot be demonstrated by short-term weather patterns except that if you take, as a whole, all kinds of more
erratic short-term weather patterns as evidence of climate change. Makes sense?
What makes sense is climate science being predictive and when it isn't, then it isn't science but something else, perhaps a worldview, philosophy or something different.
Those things can bring about change or influence as well. They can even be declared to be morally better or worse, etc. However don't call them science. Likewise any science that puts the earth at the center of what is happening and ignores the sun as the cause historically hasn't done very well and in hindsight, looks like a laughing stock. Suggesting that pattern will arrive here too makes plenty of sense.
As for "making sense" plenty of theories can explain 80% of phenomena but getting them truly accurate can require substantial revision. I can note that these planet-thingies are in a circular orbit. Then having to note it isn't around the Earth, and that they are ellipses rather than circles requires SUBSTANTIAL revision to the understanding. Global climate prediction is no different. It is ridiculous for people to claim these primitive models and and proxies are a true science yet. They are a proto-science at best and when the results aren't being used to improve understanding, but to attempt to alter lifestyles and control people, then the motives are laid bare.
Humans have survived much worse than anything predicted by global climate change. Historical climate variation has already occurred, driven purely by natural processes, on a wide variation and humans did just fine. Why are we supposed to believe this time will be different?
Are we supposed to believe that carbon isn't a zero sum game. Is the claim now that there is NEW carbon coming into the system? How come the sequestering of all this carbon didn't put us in danger? Why is it that only this right number, generated from some line drawn conveniently right before industrial life began is exactly the "right" amount of carbon dioxide? Sure history has shown massive variation from that but this is "right" for what reason again?
Quote:
The warning of climate change is not merely that "things are getting hotter oh my", but we are *fundamentally* f^cking up the global climatic system. The implications of which are impossible to fathom at this stage.
Sorry but "fucked up" isn't very predictive. It pretty much allows you to claim a platitude as a prediction. Here in So Cal the weather is always generally very nice, but the times it isn't, it always isn't in different ways. We are very glad for our 275 days of sun a year because the other days involve earthquakes, mudslides, fires and all sort of nastiness. Someone out there spins a giant cosmic wheel and it gets to suck in different ways a little bit each year. That isn't climate change and it has been that way for as long as history has been recorded here. Saying the weather is going to change, but we can't tell you how or why isn't science. The weather has always been changing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
nvidia2008 
And so the world will be better off in 15 years? Or are we always neither better-nor-worse-off as a planet, species, humankind, whatever?
I suspect that unless we are under a wonderful communistic/authoritarian government, that things will be much better for humans as a species in 15 years. That has been the trend for quite a while now and I see nothing to make it stop. I do see who has the power and the wealth possibly changing as Europe self destructs and the U.S and several other countries go head to head seeing who can find the middle ground on advancement and demography. However I see no cause for fatalism.