Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

For me it’s easy to accept that climate change is happening but predicting what will unfold in the next 30-50 years seems nearly impossible. Humans have historically been bad at predicting what will happen even 20-30 years in the future. The media is even worse (https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-in...). Articles can be found from at least the sixties predicting the end of the earth in X years due to climate change. Can you really blame people for being skeptical given what they’ve been told over the years? On top of that, climate change isn’t the only existential threat that humanity faces. How do you rank its importance, and thus the level of focus and resourcing it gets, relative to other threats? I understand that we shouldn’t do nothing. I also understand that some of the extreme climate change proposals likely over estimate the magnitude of the problem.



Some of that was misinformation spread by Exxon, whose scientists predicted global warming fairly well (as a global average anyway) 40 years ago. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-... So the real science is not as fickle as was reported.


Look at it this way. In 1970 some scientists predicted how bad climate change will influence the Earth in 50 years.

50 years passed and their predictions in some areas match current state and in some preconditions failed because they did not think it will be THAT BAD.

Based on that I know it will be either what they say now or it will be way worse..

Ps. Im talking about the scientists which were hired by oil companies to create prediction maps.


I think a lot of proposals actually underestimate by far the magnitude of the problem.




Applications are open for YC Winter 2020

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: