Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
Here's my response to someone on another forum yesterday.
If I listened to a nuclear proliferation expert say that if we don't urgently intervene in Iran's uranium enrichment program, they will have a nuclear warhead in a decade, do I interpret that to be a doomsday observation?
If I listen to an expert epidemiologist say that infection is a more urgent matter than nuclear proliferation, do I believe them?
If I listen to an expert in artificial intelligence say that AI is the biggest threat to humanity, do I believe them?
If I listen to an expert in marine biology explain how dwindling fish populations is the biggest problem humanity faces, do I believe them?
If I listen to an astronomer explain that solar flares are the biggest threat to humanity, do I believe them?
What you're not understanding is that every expert makes their area of expertise into the most important topic, because they have to. Just because I'm not constantly running around with my hair on fire because humanity faces a near infinite number of threats doesn't mean I don't believe in the problems.
Rather, I think that reflects more on others susceptibility to be manipulated into believing any particular thing is the biggest problem. I don't begrudge people for their perception of what threats are most concerning to them. Just don't impose it on me. I'm not required to worry at any particular level about any particular threat.
We're not going to achieve any arbitrarily chosen level of drastic CO2 reduction globally in the next decade. Lots of solvable problems are still on the list though. We could probably do something meaningful about global starvation, for instance. There's a good argument to be made for massive investments from governments around the world to develop next-gen nuclear power generation. If we solve the cheap, abundant, and low polluting energy production problem, that positively impacts basically everything on the list of problems.
Peterson starts out by saying global temperature seems to be rising and that humans have some responsibility for that. You disagree with that?
You acknowledge increased growth in one breath, and then proceed to talk about decreased growth. Which is it? Somehow only weeds will grow better, but absolutely everything we value will suffer? What is the scientific explanation for only plants valued by humans suffering, but all other plants thriving? I haven't read that study yet.
Overfishing is not attributable to global warming.
We're not talking about an eviction notice requiring trees to vacate next month, we're talking about gradual temperature increase over hundreds of years. Trees can respond over hundreds of years.
Besides all that, we're not hunter/gatherers, we're agrarians. We put the food plants where we want them immediately.
I haven't seen that dystopian sci-fi yet. Doesn't sound like an interesting plot-line by itself.
|
* The climate problem challenge is associated with ' anthropogenic carbon' not 'some' of it. So, in that context I disagree with him.
* The idea that you could do anything meaningful about starvation, on a planet of increasing population, while food production is falling challenges logic.
* I thought you told us that you have libertarian leanings? The thought that you would accept any intrusion by big government into free market capitalism seems like an about-face.
* Increased atmospheric carbon isn't creating another 'green revolution' quite the contrary. The trees which would be sequestering carbon are being killed by insects of a warming world, and have become, any many cases, 'fuel'.
* Commercially produced 'plants' are being destroyed by climate-related events.
* I'm not saying that all other plants will thrive.
* A decline in the fisheries produces the same phenomena, by default , as overfishing.
* I recommend that you speak to a botanist that's researched extinction, and see how quickly a tree could possibly adapt to a geometrically-warming world. We're talking about 'rapid' warming, never experienced while humans have been on the planet.
* You can plant a plant wherever you choose, however it's not guaranteed to grow there anymore.