Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
Which author, Wikipedia? Your Humble Servant?
Let's try Edward Lorenz:
|
I didn't read the Wiki considering the attempt to humiliate the layperson.
The Lorenz quote is a witty way to say that complex systems are beyond our ability to accurately predict future outcomes.
Perhaps my objection to chaos is not allowing me to further ponder what is being said. My belief is there is no chaos; only sufficiently complex systems to befuddle mere humans. There is infinitely more we don't know than we do, so it's only natural to conclude that things happen because, random.
The impact of global climate change, our ability to shape its trajectory, and predictions of how it will affect other organisms, environments, human well-being, and economics (to name just a few of millions of considerations) is well outside our deductive ability. If every person devoted themselves to the study of various aspects of global climate change, we will still be missing the majority of the picture.
Some inductive predictions can be made based on past history which suggests the Earth goes through periods of warming and cooling, with various impacts to species.
This isn't to say that study of global climate change is worthless, only that despite our best efforts, we will still be wrong about the future.
Bulldozing rainforests concerns me more due to the direct loss of the rich biodiversity than the immeasurable impact on the outdoor thermostat.
Finally, it's human nature to resist change. In the past I have said things like home networks are stupid and will never be a thing, or internet on a phone is stupid and just a fad. People on this forum are convinced self-driving cars are the worst idea and will never catch on. My point is that it's natural for us to see a change in the climate and assume the worst. Is there equal funding for research on probable benefits of global warming? Doomsday profits get much more attention than those espousing a slow and steady general upward trend in well-being. What headline would quote my academic paper saying things next year will be mostly what they are this year, but ever-so-slightly better for most people?