
How Apocalyptic Is Now? - jajag
https://unherd.com/2020/05/are-we-living-through-an-apocalypse-now/
======
mathdev
Interesting predictions. However, they do not fit the facts on the ground, at
least here in Poland, which is some weeks ahead of the US with respect to the
development of the epidemic.

(I'm relieved that) people have gotten sick and tired of the restrictions,
about 50% (and growing every day) are not wearing the masks inside anymore, or
bother with the distancing, despite official requirements. All restaurants and
bars are opening up on Monday, my favourite one described the prior atmosphere
as a "psychosis of fear".

It's interesting what happens when the second wave of infections occurs, which
is becoming more and more likely. It's hard to imagine the population will be
as fearful and obedient as the first time, should the government try to impose
another lockdown.

If, as Nassim Taleb believes, the lockdown was bottom-up, demanded by the
people rather than imposed by the government, a repeat seems unlikely. Perhaps
that's why the stock market is surging?

~~~
netcan
Got a link for the taleb commentary?

~~~
mathdev
[https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1258931279317405696](https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1258931279317405696)
and there are more tweets on that if you scroll the feed.

~~~
Inthenameofmine
I fund it fascinating that in "developed" or "fully western" countries it is
the youth that is disregarding the lockdown measures. In Kosovo/Albania it is
the precise opposite. An acquaintance of mine in China told me that it is the
genX and older generation there too that seems to not understand the gravity.
How come this big difference?

~~~
mythrwy
Maybe older generations spend less time reading internet hysteria (or news or
whatever you'd like to call it)?

------
PaulDavisThe1st
I take exception to this analysis:

"The numbers killed in terrorist incidents may be small. But the threat is
endemic, and the texture of everyday life has altered profoundly. Video
cameras and security procedures in public places have become part of the way
we live."

The author writes about this as if our response to terrorism is some sort of
deterministic feature of the natural world. Instead, however, our response is
series of distinct policy choices, none of which were ever inevitable and all
of which are subject to change (even if that change is hard to accomplish).

The security theater in (particularly US) airports is not a deterministic
consequence of terrorism - it's the result of the policies of the GW Bush
administration. The widespread use of CCTV cameras in the UK is not a
deterministic response to crime and/or terrorism - it's the result of several
governments worth of explicit policy, as evidenced by the remarkably lower use
of such cameras in other nations affected by similar phenomena.

Talking about "what has happened" as if it was inevitable, and not the result
of choices made by the powerful is dangerous and dampens the possibility of a
belief in other outcomes.

~~~
dredmorbius
There is a diffeerence between modes of threat. A visible threat vs. an
invisible one, an undirected threat vs. a directed one.

Some years ago I realised that there are in fact _two_ uses of the term
"invisible* in Adam Smith's _Wealth of Nations_. Among oths I find the
significance of the more well-known one to be greatly overstated. But the
other seems notable on several counts:

"Regularity, order, and prompt obedience to command are qualities which, in
modern armies, are of more importance towards determining the fate of battles
than the dexterity and skill of the soldiers in the use of their arms. But the
noise of firearms, the smoke, and _the invisible death to which every man
feels himself every moment exposed as soon as he comes within cannon-shot, and
frequently a long time before the battle can be well said to be engaged, must
render it very difficult to maintain any considerable degree of this
regularity, order, and prompt obedience,_ even in the beginning of a modern
battle. In an ancient battle there was no noise but what arose from the human
voice; there was no smoke, there was no invisible cause of wounds or death.
Every man, till some mortal weapon actually did approach him, saw clearly that
no such weapon was near him. In these circumstances, and among troops who had
some confidence in their own skill and dexterity in the use of their arms, it
must have been a good deal less difficult to preserve some degree regularity
and order...

Smith, _WoN_ , Book V, Chapter 1

[https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_V/...](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_V/Chapter_1)

That is, it's the loss of certainty and security which _of itself_ is
exceptionally disruptive of order.

Terrorism is (generally) rare, but is specifically directed so as to inflict
maximal disruption.

Disease, especially epidemics, are trust attacks. We cannot be know with any
certainty what otherwise innocent and trivial encounters or activities might.
have major consequence. Entirely unaware individuals may be exposing others to
grave harm. Paranoia is prudence.

~~~
PaulDavisThe1st
I don't disagree with any of that. But I also don't see what it has to do with
my point that our response to _any_ threat is often a matter of policy
choices, rather than something predestined. (and of course, sometimes it
isn't).

You can see this even with the case of sars-cov-2, where different policy
decisions about the response have contributed to (or resulted in?) different
impacts around the world. I imagine we will see it going forward too, just as
we do with differing responses to terrorism.

~~~
dredmorbius
Sure. As it happens, that's not the element I was reponding to.

But to address it: There's a strong argument tp be made that how soccieties
choose to address their challenges has a major impact on outcomes. That's the
major premise and subtitle of Jared Diamond's _Collapse8. Others disagree
seeing that outcome as inevitable (Tainter, on whom aDiamond draws
extensively).

A more interesting approach tries to understand what the dynamics at play are.
William Ophuls, though decidedly pessimistic, holds out hope and draws no
final conclusions, though he explores the question(s) in detail, particularly
in _Plato's Revenge _, though also in earlier works, notably_ Ecology and the
politics of scarcity _.

_ Why* certain political responses (including thatre, denial, scapegoating,
and distraction) are frequently recurrent can prove illuminating.

------
_aleph2c_
When our immune system is over-fit to the wrong kind of thing, we call that an
allergy. People who have been raised with animals or who have had to fight off
parasites tend to have less allergies. I think this idea holds for our
society; our societal immune system needs to be tested too, otherwise we
attack ourselves (identity politics, the culture wars...) So I disagree with
the author, I think we will be better off when this is done. We will go back
to the bars and we will enjoy our lives more, we will think about our long
term goals and make better efforts to get to them.

~~~
lowwave
Herd immunity

------
asaegyn
Always amuses me how the apocalypse of Inidgenous Americans never seems to
make the cut...

~~~
buzzkillington
Winners don't talk about the people they murdered to win. Same thing about
Australia, Canada and less so New Zealand.

It is also hilarious that the USSR is the only country apart from Japan to
successfully industrialize and avoid a colonial genocide from a Western power.

If you could pick a place to live being a Russian in Moscow 1919 would give
you a much better chance of surviving compared to being an Indian in Manhattan
in 1624, Toronto in 1787 or Melbourne in 1835.

~~~
selimthegrim
Russia was a Western power as far as Central Asia and the Caucasus were
concerned

~~~
buzzkillington
If having an empire is the definition of being Western than you need to
include the Ottomans too. At which point the word means nothing.

------
ceilingcorner
Comparing the coronavirus to the Russian Revolution is so overblown, I can't
believe an academic would suggest it with a straight face. This fear-mongering
really needs to stop.

------
diminish
Russian civil war was also the result of the 400 years of continuous tsarist
expansion (among many other reasons); absorbing that much occupied land from
baltics to pacific, and a lot of diverse people should be hard.

dramatically the ruling family (romanovs) among the 3 most successful
expansionist dynasties next to english & spanish were totally annihilated at
the end by their own people.

~~~
phreeza
Should Djenghis Khan and his successors not also be on that list?

~~~
keiferski
Genghis and his descendants certainly conquered a huge area, but the empire
quickly broke apart after Möngke (Genghis' successor) died, into the
Ilkhanate, Yuan dynasty, Chagatai Khanate, and Golden Horde. Most of these
didn't last more than a century, but more relevantly, the Mongols weren't
particularly interested in spreading their culture and largely kept their
language a private matter. Subsequently Mongolian (the language) basically
doesn't exist outside of Mongolia/Inner Mongolia (China) and culturally there
is far less influence as compared to say, the Russian or Spanish empires.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_the_Mongol_Empire](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_the_Mongol_Empire)

~~~
keiferski
Just a minor clarification/correction: Möngke wasn’t the direct successor to
Genghis: there were two other leaders in between.

------
lcall
Really, if one is thinking about the end of the world, it is good to prepare,
but we don't have to fear as we can be OK. In my belief system we have living
prophets (comparable to Noah with the ark, etc etc), and they provide much
good advice and support for us in these times. But yes, it is good to be
humble & wise, to learn, and to prepare. I've put notes on what/why and how I
reliably learned for myself, at my simple site (deals w/ climate change but
applies to the rest of it...). I am just me and can be wrong, but am very
confident in this case:
[http://lukecall.net/e-9223372036854581820.html](http://lukecall.net/e-9223372036854581820.html)

(ps: I realize this will seem wacko to most, but I'd appreciate it if you skim
my reasoning, I worked hard to make it skimmable while saying in detail how I
came to these conclusions, and add a reasoned comment, with any downvotes.
Thanks.)

------
benjaminwootton
Unherd.com have had some of the best journalism of the crisis so far. In
particular some of the interviews with epedimiologists:

[https://youtu.be/bfN2JWifLCY](https://youtu.be/bfN2JWifLCY)
[https://youtu.be/6cYjjEB3Ev8](https://youtu.be/6cYjjEB3Ev8)
[https://youtu.be/bl-sZdfLcEk](https://youtu.be/bl-sZdfLcEk)

~~~
buboard
Indeed and they are lining up new ones next week

[https://mobile.twitter.com/freddiesayers/status/126132013778...](https://mobile.twitter.com/freddiesayers/status/1261320137787019269)

------
blumomo
The author is wrong. Apocalyptic in religions means revelations, not
necessarily end of the world. It rather means the revelation of what is good
and what is evil. It will become clear to people even if they didn’t know that
good and evil existed (religious people know that without an apocalypse).
Given that, the article bases on a wrong foundation so that the author
naturally reaches wrong conclusions. In today’s world some people and
especially people in power do lie a lot, which has severe consequences in the
bad conditions we‘re living right now. The wake people know that those lies
will be disclosed very soon, hence we should see an apocalyptic with Christian
eyes, who see the revelation in that the poor politics concerning Covid will
not last for very long and we will be shown the truth as part of the
revelation (=apocalyptic).

------
yogthos
The article seems to completely forget about climate change. The current
pandemic is going to look like a tiny speed bump in a few years when we start
seeing regular deadly heat waves, crop failures, and other natural disasters.
Billions of people are going to be displaced, and we'll see wars for the
remaining livable land. The effects of climate change are all around us
already, and they're happening much faster than any of the models predicted:

* new research indicates that parts of the Amazon and other tropical forests are now emitting more CO2 than they absorb [https://e360.yale.edu/features/why-carbon-cycle-feedbacks-co...](https://e360.yale.edu/features/why-carbon-cycle-feedbacks-could-drive-temperatures-even-higher)

* one billion people will suffer from “unliveable” heat within 50 years, study finds [https://e360.yale.edu/digest/one-billion-people-will-suffer-...](https://e360.yale.edu/digest/one-billion-people-will-suffer-from-unliveable-heat-within-50-years-study-finds)

* potentially fatal bouts of heat and humidity on the rise, study finds [https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/may/08/climate-...](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/may/08/climate-change-global-heating-extreme-heat-humidity)

* study finds ocean ecosystems likely to collapse in 2020s and land species in 2040s unless global warming stemmed [https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/apr/08/wildlife...](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/apr/08/wildlife-destruction-not-a-slippery-slope-but-a-series-of-cliff-edges)

* studies show drought and heat waves will cause massive die-offs, killing most trees alive today [https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24042020/forest-trees-cli...](https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24042020/forest-trees-climate-change-deforestation)

* multiple overlapping crises could trigger 'Global Systemic Collapse' [https://www.sciencealert.com/hundreds-of-top-scientists-warn...](https://www.sciencealert.com/hundreds-of-top-scientists-warn-combined-environmental-crises-will-cause-global-collapse)

* 246 academics call on government to act now to avoid global collapse [https://www.nationalobserver.com/2020/02/04/opinion/246-acad...](https://www.nationalobserver.com/2020/02/04/opinion/246-academics-call-government-act-now-avoid-global-collapse)

* Planet's largest ecosystems collapse faster than previously forecast [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-15029-x](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-15029-x)

World's oceans are also acidifying to a similar rate
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification#Rate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification#Rate)
as the Permian extinction (but again in 100 years instead of 20k-60k), with an
anoxic event
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anoxic_event#Consequences](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anoxic_event#Consequences)
locked in after 1,000ppm or 360 gigatons
[https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170920182116.h...](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170920182116.htm),
which we will reach by 2100 at the latest. So that's whatever's left wiped
out.

And here's what's currently happening with food production. Two different
groups of 200+ scientists and academics, separately from each other, each
warned of near-term global collapse:

* [https://www.sciencealert.com/hundreds-of-top-scientists-warn...](https://www.sciencealert.com/hundreds-of-top-scientists-warn-combined-environmental-crises-will-cause-global-collapse)

* [https://www.nationalobserver.com/2020/02/04/opinion/246-acad...](https://www.nationalobserver.com/2020/02/04/opinion/246-academics-call-government-act-now-avoid-global-collapse)

Examples of record-breaking crop failures currently happening:

* [https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/06/midwe...](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/06/midwest-rain-climate-change-wrecking-corn-soy-crops/)

* [https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/19/extreme-heat-wave-hits-us-fa...](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/19/extreme-heat-wave-hits-us-farmers-already-suffering-from-flooding.html)

* [https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/15/austr...](https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/15/australia-to-import-wheat-for-first-time-in-12-years-as-drought-eats-into-grain-production)

* [https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/20/crop-fai...](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/20/crop-failure-and-bankruptcy-threaten-farmers-as-drought-grips-europe)

* [https://www.zerohedge.com/health/historic-midwest-blizzard-h...](https://www.zerohedge.com/health/historic-midwest-blizzard-has-farmers-seeing-massive-crop-lossesas-devastating-weve-ever)

* [https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-02/low-rice-crop-lead...](https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-02/low-rice-crop-leads-to-sunrice-job-losses/11566748?pfmredir=sm)

* [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people/climate-change-could-cut-fruit-production-almost-third-study/)

* [https://phys.org/news/2019-12-climate-whammy-corn-belt.html](https://phys.org/news/2019-12-climate-whammy-corn-belt.html)

* [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/11/12/britain-facing-p...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/11/12/britain-facing-potato-shortage-failure-dredge-rivers-led-flooding/)

* [https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2019-08-01-drou...](https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2019-08-01-drought-dam-drive-mekong-river-to-lowest-level-in-100-years)

* [https://phys.org/news/2020-01-atlantic-circulation-collapse-...](https://phys.org/news/2020-01-atlantic-circulation-collapse-british-crop.html)

* [https://phys.org/news/2019-12-climate-threat-global-breadbas...](https://phys.org/news/2019-12-climate-threat-global-breadbaskets.html)

* [https://phys.org/news/2019-12-large-atmospheric-jet-stream-g...](https://phys.org/news/2019-12-large-atmospheric-jet-stream-global.html)

Scientific studies projecting future crop failures:

* Schlenker and Roberts, 2009. Nonlinear temperature effects indicate severe damages to US crop yields under climate change. PNAS, 106(37), pp.15594-15598 [https://www.pnas.org/content/106/37/15594.full](https://www.pnas.org/content/106/37/15594.full)

* Mora et al, 2015. Suitable days for plant growth disappear under projected climate change: Potential human and biotic vulnerability. PLoS bio, 13(6), p.e1002167 [https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/jou...](https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002167)

* Schauberger et al, 2017. Consistent negative response of US crops to high temperatures in observations and crop models. Nature Comms, 8, p.13931. [https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms13931](https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms13931)

* Sakschewski et al, 2014. Feeding 10 billion people under climate change: How large is the production gap of current agricultural systems?. Ecological modelling, 288, pp.103-111 [https://booksc.xyz/book/30274837/03002c](https://booksc.xyz/book/30274837/03002c)

* Liang et al, 2017. Determining climate effects on US total agricultural productivity. PNAS, 114(12), pp.E2285-E2292 [https://www.pnas.org/content/114/12/E2285?collection=](https://www.pnas.org/content/114/12/E2285?collection=)

News articles about projected crop failures:

* UN says passing 2C will have a 'very high projected risk' of global food supply instabilities [https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/news/climate-change-could-trigg...](https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/news/climate-change-could-trigger-global-food-crisis-new-u-n-ncna1040236)

* UN says passing 2C would cause 'multi-breadbasket failure' [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/08/climate/climate-change-fo...](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/08/climate/climate-change-food-supply.html))

* UN says passing 2C would cause 60% of global wheat to be subjected to 'Severe Water Scarcity (SVS)' drought events [https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/09/26/new-research-wa...](https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/09/26/new-research-warns-severe-climate-related-droughts-could-threaten-60-global-wheat)

Given that our response to the pandemic has been to largely ignore the science
and try to get back to business as usual and we're still largely pretending
that climate change isn't happening, I don't really have much hope for
continued existence of human civilization.

~~~
oneiftwo
How anyone can continue to place so much faith into dogmatic science, after
the global and nearly universal failure of these same institutions to properly
prepare for and handle covid, is beyond me.

This post is pure fear porn. Environmentalists have been making these same
doomsday predictions since literally the 60s and deadlines continue to come
and go without incident.

Look, the papers that predict what's more likely to happen aren't sexy, so
they don't get read much if they're published at all. The truth is that based
on all of our evidence regarding the speed of climate change in the past, if
there's any change from human emissions it will be slow and take on the order
of 100+ years, during which time the only measurable indicator will be an
increased rate of turnover and spending for infrastructure projects, maybe a
slight uptick in immigration, as we have a bigger storm or a bigger flood here
and there.

That doesn't even mention the potential benefits to climate change - there's
nothing that says that the earth won't potentially have more fertile land area
if the permafrost thaws, for example. But such an attitude is clearly not
popular among alarmists.

~~~
yogthos
The scientists did not fail to prepare for the pandemic, and the countries
that had scientists in the driving seat handled the pandemic very well. For
example, Vietnam currently has no deaths from covid-19 precisely because
scientists were in charge. Meanwhile, countries like US, who dismissed the
scientists have the highest death toll in the world.

Climate change denialists don't seem to grasp the concept of basic risk
assessment. We don't know exactly what will happen, however we definitely know
what could potentially happen. Claiming that just because the scientists might
be wrong there's nothing to worry about is the height of insanity. You're
essentially advocating for playing Russian roulette with our biosphere.

People who actually study the climate are the ones who have the best idea of
what will happen. Period. These people are unanimously telling the rest of us
that all the best available evidence suggests that horrific things will
happen.

And now we're seeing these things starting to happen, and we're seeing them
happen at a faster rate than was expected. Yet, idiots who have absolutely
zero understanding of this domain continue to insist that there's nothing to
worry about because they read something on Facebook that one time.

~~~
oneiftwo
>Vietnam currently has no deaths from covid-19 precisely because scientists
were in charge

Vietnam was prepared because they, like Taiwan, knew from the start that China
was lying and took proactive steps that western countries failed to take.

>Yet, idiots who have absolutely zero understanding of this domain continue to
insist that there's nothing to worry about because they read something on
Facebook that one time

I'm a geoscientist. The fact that climate dogma is righteous dogma doesn't
mean it isn't dogma. You claim that none of us have the qualifications to
question climate change, but somehow we are equipped to call "deniers" idiots?

>People who actually study the climate are the ones who have the best idea of
what will happen. Period. These people are unanimously telling the rest of us
that all the best available evidence suggests that horrific things will
happen.

Except if you actually read an IPCC report (not the made for headlines
summaries, dig in a page or two) you'll see that in reality scientists are far
less certain, and all this world ending talk is literally worst case. And
historic data tells us that even the most rapid historic climate changes
happened over scales comparable to human lifespans.

>You're essentially advocating for playing Russian roulette with our biosphere

There's a grand irony here - once again, like the reopen controversy, the
people have chosen the side of the majority of "scientists" and hunkered down,
shaming others with worst case threats while ignoring that _mitigation is also
enormously expensive_ and pretending that anyone questioning the lockdown is a
_denier_. Your dogma leaves no room for shades of gray.

I'm out of room to explain for the billionth time so I'll keep it short -
climate change is one of the softest of sciences because it is purely model
and backtest driven. That leaves a massive gap in capabilities to be nicely
filled with unquestionable dogma. The fact that those ignorant Republicans
don't understand climate change doesn't mean that the learned and capable
among us shouldn't be free to question the narrative.

Look at how poorly we understand nutrition - that's arguably at least as
rigorous of a science as climate change yet the difference here is at least
the conclusions are falsifiable. Meanwhile the food pyramid has been
dangerously incorrect for decades.

You put too much faith in modern institutions.

~~~
yogthos
>Vietnam was prepared because they, like Taiwan, knew from the start that
China was lying and took proactive steps that western countries failed to
take.

I keep seeing this nonsense repeated, but China reported cases very early on.
[https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/27-04-2020-who-
timeline...](https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/27-04-2020-who-timeline---
covid-19)

The only difference was that Vietnam and Taiwan took it seriously and
prioritized people's lives over the economy. Meanwhile, Western governments
largely chose to do the opposite. This is the exact same pattern we're seeing
with climate change denial as well. The institutions are prioritizing short
term profits while ignoring the science.

>I'm a geoscientist. The fact that climate dogma is righteous dogma doesn't
mean it isn't dogma. You claim that none of us have the qualifications to
question climate change, but somehow we are equipped to call "deniers" idiots?

Being a geoscintist does not make you a climatologist. It's amazing to me that
people who are experts in one domain think that gives them the authority to
talk about other domains.

I'm deferring to the domain experts PRECISELY because I know this knowledge is
outside my area of expertise. I'm calling the deniers idiots because you seem
to think that you know better than people actually studying the field. I'm
sure you'd be pretty appalled if I started telling you my notions about how I
think geoscience works based on my extensive computer science knowledge.

>And historic data tells us that even the most rapid historic climate changes
happened over scales comparable to human lifespans.

That's because historically things like mass scale industrial production did
not exist. Humans are not operating on geological time, and it's surreal that
this has to be explained to somebody calling themselves a scientist.

>There's a grand irony here - once again, like the reopen controversy, the
people have chosen the side of the majority of "scientists" and hunkered down,
shaming others with worst case threats while ignoring that mitigation is also
enormously expensive and pretending that anyone questioning the lockdown is a
denier. Your dogma leaves no room for shades of gray.

All I can tel you is that US accounts for roughly a third of the deaths
worldwide while the number of deaths and reported cases continues to grow
exponentially. So, yeah this is a perfect analogy for climate change denial.
In both cases business interests are prioritized over science with similar
results.

>I'm out of room to explain for the billionth time so I'll keep it short -
climate change is one of the softest of sciences because it is purely model
and backtest driven.

Your capacity to deny facts is absolutely stunning. We're no longer talking
about predictions here. We're talking about actual events that are happening
around us. Sounds like people like you will continue denying there's a problem
as you're boiled alive in your own juices.

>You put too much faith in modern institutions.

I'm doing the opposite of that. I believe scientists and experts in the domain
over the idiots who think that we should risk the fate of humanity to keep the
growth economy going.

~~~
oneiftwo
>Being a geoscintist does not make you a climatologist. It's amazing to me
that people who are experts in one domain think that gives them the authority
to talk about other domains.

I literally consume the same data. It's a sister field. We have the same
problems with the exact same uncertainty because we use the same instruments
for collection. My opinion is valid but that doesn't matter because anyone who
take a position remotely critical of climate science can expect an immediate,
vicious, purely dogmatic response.

>I keep seeing this nonsense repeated, but China reported cases very early on.
[https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/27-04-2020-who-
timeline...](https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/27-04-2020-who-timeline..).

>The only difference was that Vietnam and Taiwan took it seriously and
prioritized people's lives over the economy

It's easy to dismiss other peoples' arguments as "nonsense" when you
misrepresent them. The question isn't whether China reported cases or not.
It's the fact that China deliberately underreported cases and contributed to
an underestimation of the pandemic by laymen and professionals alike who are
too naive to understand the dishonesty typical of authoritarian regimes like
the CCP. The peoples who have been dealing with China for millennia hold no
such delusions.

>The ability to deny facts is absolutely surreal. We're no longer talking
about predictions here. We're talking about actual events that are happening
around us

This is only true if you cherry pick your literature. I'll remind you our
discussion is about _future predictions_ of which only catastrophic outcomes
are suitable for (one sided) discussion. The fact that some minority of models
agree with current measurements does not resolve the uncertainty regarding the
predictions that spawned this entire discussion.

You underestimate the complexity and chaotic nature of science. Certainty in
doomsday climate predictions is hubris.

~~~
yogthos
>I literally consume the same data. It's a sister field. We have the same
problems with the exact same uncertainty because we use the same instruments
for collection. My opinion is valid but that doesn't matter because anyone who
take a position remotely critical of climate science can expect an immediate,
vicious, purely dogmatic response.

Again, as somebody who works in a complex field I know perfectly well that
it's rare that somebody has broad expertise outside a fairly narrow domain.
People who think they do are typically suffering from Dunning-Kruger effect.
You also keep using the word dogmatic in a weird way that makes question
whether you even know what it means.

>It's easy to dismiss other peoples' arguments as "nonsense" when you
misrepresent them. The question isn't whether China reported cases or not.
It's the fact that China deliberately underreported cases and contributed to
an underestimation of the pandemic by laymen and professionals alike who are
too naive to understand the dishonesty typical of authoritarian regimes like
the CCP.

It's easy to dismiss nonsense when it is demonstrably nonsense. China was
dealing with a novel virus and had no idea what to expect from it. There was
no evidence that this was some novel influenza based on a handful of cases, or
that it could easily spread between humans. However, China did report it on
the 2nd of January, and the world had all the same information we had now at
the start of January. It's really not surprising that you're a conspiracy
theorist in general though.

The fact that China had absolutely no warning and has less deaths than US now
really shows the difference between countries that trust science and those
that do not.

>This is only true if you cherry pick your literature.

There's a unanimous consensus in the field, but I'm sure oneiftwo knows better
because he's a "geoscientist".

>The fact that some minority of models agree with current measurements does
not resolve the uncertainty regarding the predictions that spawned this entire
discussion.

Show me a single model that's predicting things happening faster than what's
observed. If there's anything the models can be faulted on is being too
conservative with their predictions.

>You underestimate the complexity and chaotic nature of science. Certainty in
doomsday climate predictions is hubris.

I do no such thing. I just understand the basic concept of risk assessment.
Gambling our entire civilization on "I hope all the models are wrong and
everybody in the field is overreacting" is complete and utter idiocy.

Continued existence of the human race is what's at stake here, and anybody who
thinks we shouldn't err on the side of caution when it comes to that is a
dangerous idiot.

------
naveen99
Agree with the thesis. Change just accelerated. we are as likely to go back to
our careless attitude about respiratory infectious disease as we are to doing
surgeries without masks and gloves.

------
partomniscient

      I am the son, and the heir....
      of an apocolypse that is criminally vulgar.
      I am the son and heir....
      of nothing in particular.
    

It actually kind of fits.

------
nil-sec
I am sorry but this is a ridiculous thesis. This will be over eventually,
either by developing a vaccine or by mutation into a more benign strain.
Nobody in their right mind will practice social distancing just because they
are used to it. No system that goes against basic human drives is stable.
Right now there is a risk, benefit balance but once that risk is gone, what
exactly will balance this? Laws? They are already in conflict with the
constitution, good luck justifying any of this if there is no deadly pathogen
around.

~~~
Shared404
>They are already in conflict with the constitution...

PATRIOT Act would like a word.

------
eternalban
unherd’s LockdownTV series — see “Interviews” section in main page — is
balanced (in terms of view points) and highly recommended.

On YouTube:
[https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMxiv15iK_MFayY_3fU9loQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMxiv15iK_MFayY_3fU9loQ)

------
netcan
IMO, trying to understand historical processes in terms of political theories
is more noise than signal.

Medieval english king alfred kept a chronicle of his time. Viking invasions
such. His "political theories" were religious: righteous christians, pagans,
heretics, divine justice & such. That's how they understood _their_ history.

Biblical "chronicles" like the book of kings, judges & such offer a similar
take. Sin & righteousness determine wars, invasions, usurpations & coups....
apocalyptical or otherwise.

Move into the French, American & derivitive revolutions of 1700-1800s: Reason,
Industrialism, Enlightenment Philosophy & such. revolutions. Political
theories. Liberty. Rights. etc. Instead of righteous & piety, radical liberals
would build free & just societies.

So... French liberty culminates in a pretty vicious and vindictive early
republic which soon crowns an emperor. American liberty did not seem overly
bothered by an institution of slavery that was vast and cruel enough to make a
pharaoh uneasy. Liberty didn't apply to native americans and often "person"
meant just male landowners.

Meanwhile the theoretically opposite British, with their anti-liberal
constitutional monarchy... Not really less "liberal" in practice, from a
historical perspective.

Liberal or conservative commentators from the period (even modern ones) seem
to think everything is derivative of the political theories battling it out.
It's not that different from ancient judeans or medieval saxons interpreting
every event via their religious lens.

IRL, the relationship between political theories, practice, & history is
chaotic & uncorrelated.

Liberalism, socialism, communism, etc.... theory does not generate into
reality, hardly ever.

------
brenden2
It's a shame that HN has become full doomer. The virus is nowhere near as bad
as the clickbait factories want you to believe because fear is such a good
profit generator for them.

