News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2 by anigbrowl on Saturday April 22, 2017 @05:06PM (#14174797)
On a species level we'll probably survive it, but that doesn't mean it won't be disastrous at the individual level. Suppose, for example, that a natural disaster reduces the human population by 50$ over a few decades. Humanity survives, but the deaths of 3-4 billion people would be pretty awful.
Re:We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2 by akvadrako on Sunday April 23, 2017 @07:23AM (#14177682)
Over the next few decades, over 4 billion people will certainly die, regardless of global warming. Whatever kills them, death isn't usually pleasant.

I don't see why death from climate change is worse than death by any other means.

Maybe you mean that we should minimise the number of deaths, which implies our ideal global population isn't much less than the current level. That's debatable.

Re:We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2 by anigbrowl on Monday April 24, 2017 @05:40PM (#14188586)
I made it clear that I was considering a catastrophic population decline. Nitpicky arguments about death never being pleasant seem like an elaborate way to avoid addressing that and I don't know why you would bother.
Re:We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2 by akvadrako on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @10:21AM (#14203166)
That was not my point; I thought it was your point. You said people will die and that would be awful, not the decline in population.

I highly doubt the population will decline by so much, but there is nothing inherently bad about it. Even one billion people is plenty for a healthy global society.

Re:We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2 by mark-r on Saturday April 22, 2017 @11:33PM (#14176325)
Reducing the human population by 50% will undoubtedly reduce our CO2 output by 50% as well. It does speak to one possibility of how equilibrium could be restored. A rather drastic solution to the problem, and one which most would hope to avoid.
Re:We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2 by riffic on Saturday April 22, 2017 @05:39PM (#14174974)
>On a species level we'll probably survive it

This is an arrogant assumption. Another assumption, one I find more realistic, is that we're driving full-speed towards the cliff.

Re:We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2 by anigbrowl on Monday April 24, 2017 @05:48PM (#14188652)
If a cautiously qualified probabilistic statement is your idea of arrogance then you might want to adjust your disapproval thresholds. I've been making pro-environment arguments since the 1980s and I don't care to be lectured to about some imaginary complacency that I don't actually feel, thank you.

I'm really quite annoyed by your comment because I've already been through years of climate deniers telling me how 'arrogant' I am ot think humans could change the climate/derail God's plan/whatever, so I don't need pro-environment people calling me arrogant for a cautious assertion lifted out of its context, where I went on to talk about the likelihood of disastrous outcomes in the same sentence.

Re:We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2 by iand on Saturday April 22, 2017 @05:58PM (#14175058)
If this is true then I presume you are devoting all your waking hours to preventing it?
Re:We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2 by akvadrako on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @10:36AM (#14203320)
I'm sure somebody else will take care of it.