Re:Glacier National Park to remove all 'glaciers will be gon...
by Mountain_Skies on Thursday January 09, 2020 @04:29PM
(#22006012)
Simple solution: stop making predictions with a degree of claimed accuracy that doesn't exist. There's no good reason to put a deadline such as 2020 on a prediction except as an attempt to imply a degree of certainty that doesn't exist. Climate change skeptics exist for many reasons and these poorly thought out predictions just feed into them.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Glacier National Park to remove all 'glaciers will be gon...
by Johnny555 on Thursday January 09, 2020 @04:33PM
(#22006062)
I think the reason is to imply the sense of urgency that does exist - whether the 7000 year old glaciers melt in one decade or two, that's still a warning that the climate is warming.
Re:Glacier National Park to remove all 'glaciers will be gon...
by awb on Thursday January 09, 2020 @04:37PM
(#22006105)
Right but OC's comment still stands: state the uncertainty rather than project certainty.
"Glaciers are projected to disappear between 2020 and 2030 based on current emission trends" would still be alarming.
Re:Glacier National Park to remove all 'glaciers will be gon...
by bavell on Thursday January 09, 2020 @04:45PM
(#22006228)
Exactly, you don't need to twist the facts to maintain the degree of urgency. Just needs the right framing.
"This glacier likely won't survive long enough for your kids/grandkids to see themselves"
Re:Glacier National Park to remove all 'glaciers will be gon...
by beerandt on Thursday January 09, 2020 @04:51PM
(#22006278)
Well if we're going to still claim it's science, there needs to be a measurable range stated.
Being over ambiguous just to be right can be just as misleading as overstating certainty. (Think Nostradamus type claims.)