
U.S. $23 trillion will be lost if temperatures rise four degrees by 2100 - adrian_mrd
https://phys.org/news/2018-08-trillion-lost-temperatures-degrees.html
======
richpimp
I'm reminded of a scene in an admittedly crappy movie, The Day the Earth Stood
Still. No, not the awesome original, but the recent one with Keanu Reeves.
Super quick plot synopsis, an alien is sent to Earth to wipe out humanity
because we as a species are doomed to destroy the planet due to our
insufferable nature. There's a point in the film where a scientist is arguing
for keeping humanity alive, and emphasizing that humanity can change for the
better, but only when at the very precipice of calamity.

That quite succinctly sums up my view of our species. The only thing that will
cause us to change is to have the utter ruin of our civilization right before
our feet. Unfortunately, in regards to climate change, it will likely be too
late once people realize that things have to change. Mind you, the earth will
be fine. Humans on the other hand...

~~~
eej71
I would think that any pessimistic prediction from 1918 about the year 2000
would be just as inaccurate about our own pessimistic predictions for 2100.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
Why would you think that? I see no reason for thinking that beyond blind
optimism and wishful thinking.

It's not as if climate change is a surprise. E.g. there's this prediction from
1912:

[https://www.livescience.com/63334-coal-affecting-climate-
cen...](https://www.livescience.com/63334-coal-affecting-climate-century-
ago.html)

Vested-interest attempts at FUD aside, contemporary evidence for change should
be well known now, and history has a lot to say about the destructive effects
of natural climate change on previous civilisations.

~~~
eej71
The belief is rooted in the overall success of the industrial revolution and
our post industrial world. We have fewer wars. healthier lives, longer lives,
a larger educated class of people, and a level of wealth that is slowly but
surely becoming available to everyone.

I certainly don't expect you to agree with the optimism - but to describe it
as blind (as though its not rooted in recent success) or wishful (as if its a
magic trick that will end soon) is a bit off base.

------
pmontra
Sadly it could be $230 trillion but people alive in 2100 are not voting in
elections in 2018 and too few people are caring now about what will be going
on after they're dead.

~~~
devoply
We need to focus on building a civilization that lasts millions of years.
Currently we're focusing on building a civilization that could go extinct at
any given time.

~~~
rmah
Why? This is a serious question, not an snarky quip. Why should we try to
build a civilization that lasts a very very long time (i.e. thousands of
years)?

~~~
gg5ever
I think that's a tough question. Here's how I justify it to myself, and I
think most people share these values. You can tell they share them because
they don't want to die or suffer.

If you grant that conscious existence has value, then the continued existence
of the human race is worthwhile.

If you grant that life has value, then preventing the destruction of eath's
environment is worthwhile.

If you don't value those things, it's difficult to make a compelling argument.
However, I would argue that consciousness matters because it's the only thing
that can create "meaning" to existence. And life matters because it's the only
thing (we know of) that produces consciousness.

