Originally posted by Starlight
View Post
Well if you asked me to create a list of most severe threats to humanity it would mostly be things we're not in a position to do anything about (involving outer space - like gamma ray bursts, the sun going out, giant meteors hitting earth), but probably climate change and nuclear war and possibly pandemics would be the 2-3 highest of the list of serious threats we're in a position to do something about.
So yes, it is a serious threat, like nuclear war is, and needs to be considered carefully, seriously, and rationally, and steps need to be taken to ensure worst-case scenarios don't come to pass.
I guess I don't see a problem with people over-hyping the threat because the downsides of taking it too seriously are infinitesimal in comparison to the downsides of not taking it seriously enough. Were there people in the 50s and 60s who took the threat of nuclear war too seriously, and scared themselves silly with the thought of it and had panic attacks about it? Sure. Probably. Were those people who were too worried about nuclear war, overall, truly a problem for the world? Not really. A few overanxious people is a pretty small price to pay for erring on the side of caution. Actually having a large scale nuclear war would have been utterly catastrophic by comparison.
I see climate change the same way. A few people hyperventilating about the threat? Doesn't really matter in the greater scheme of things. Climate change actually occurring on a large scale? Devastating. Whole countries could become uninhabitable, and entire populations of peoples would be forced to migrate on a scale we haven't seen in recorded human history, which would probably then lead to wars over habitable territory on a scale we haven't seen before (perhaps nuclear war in the worst case scenario). And even in countries least affected, the economic meltdown as previously arable land becomes unfit for purpose and the previously most-expensive seaside real-estate goes to zero in value, could cause economic depressions and job losses the likes of which we haven't seen before. If the oceans continue to acidify due to increased CO2 in them, pretty much all marine life will die, which will mean that any and all peoples, economies, and countries who make a living on fish or primarily eat fish will starve or go bankrupt. Hopefully, none of that will happen. Personally, I am optimistic about the future and don't think it will happen, because I think humanity will do a good enough job of recognizing the danger and acting to prevent the worst case scenarios.
But it doesn't seem to me to be a huge problem if AOC says we need to start addressing the issue within 12 years and it turns out that that is factually incorrect and that actually only need to start addressing the issue within 112 years. If we act in haste to address the issue more speedily than we absolutely needed to, there is nothing wrong with that. Finishing your homework assignment early isn't bad. Leaving it til the last minute is. Makes me scratch my head as to why you would care so much about people being too worried about climate change. There seem very few downsides to being too worried, and obvious downsides to being not concerned enough if that leads the world to not act in time.
So yes, it is a serious threat, like nuclear war is, and needs to be considered carefully, seriously, and rationally, and steps need to be taken to ensure worst-case scenarios don't come to pass.
I guess I don't see a problem with people over-hyping the threat because the downsides of taking it too seriously are infinitesimal in comparison to the downsides of not taking it seriously enough. Were there people in the 50s and 60s who took the threat of nuclear war too seriously, and scared themselves silly with the thought of it and had panic attacks about it? Sure. Probably. Were those people who were too worried about nuclear war, overall, truly a problem for the world? Not really. A few overanxious people is a pretty small price to pay for erring on the side of caution. Actually having a large scale nuclear war would have been utterly catastrophic by comparison.
I see climate change the same way. A few people hyperventilating about the threat? Doesn't really matter in the greater scheme of things. Climate change actually occurring on a large scale? Devastating. Whole countries could become uninhabitable, and entire populations of peoples would be forced to migrate on a scale we haven't seen in recorded human history, which would probably then lead to wars over habitable territory on a scale we haven't seen before (perhaps nuclear war in the worst case scenario). And even in countries least affected, the economic meltdown as previously arable land becomes unfit for purpose and the previously most-expensive seaside real-estate goes to zero in value, could cause economic depressions and job losses the likes of which we haven't seen before. If the oceans continue to acidify due to increased CO2 in them, pretty much all marine life will die, which will mean that any and all peoples, economies, and countries who make a living on fish or primarily eat fish will starve or go bankrupt. Hopefully, none of that will happen. Personally, I am optimistic about the future and don't think it will happen, because I think humanity will do a good enough job of recognizing the danger and acting to prevent the worst case scenarios.
But it doesn't seem to me to be a huge problem if AOC says we need to start addressing the issue within 12 years and it turns out that that is factually incorrect and that actually only need to start addressing the issue within 112 years. If we act in haste to address the issue more speedily than we absolutely needed to, there is nothing wrong with that. Finishing your homework assignment early isn't bad. Leaving it til the last minute is. Makes me scratch my head as to why you would care so much about people being too worried about climate change. There seem very few downsides to being too worried, and obvious downsides to being not concerned enough if that leads the world to not act in time.
Comment