Re:The world is awful, the world is much better, the world c...
by Winsaucerer on Thursday July 21, 2022 @09:43AM
(#32179289)
> But that analysis ignores the billions of people whose lives will likely end because of global warming.
...that number is not even remotely plausible. Where did you get billions from?
Example: 250,000 extra deaths estimated between 2030 and 2050. That means an extra 5 million deaths in that period (https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-cha...).
Another: 83 million extra deaths by 2100, and I suspect that's under the more pessimistic scenario (https://www.forbes.com/sites/dishashetty/2021/07/30/climate-...)
Action on climate change is very slow, but happening. Climate change is not going to be even remotely as close to as bad as you appear to think it will be.
Re:The world is awful, the world is much better, the world c...
by tsimionescu on Thursday July 21, 2022 @01:11PM
(#32181960)
Those numbers are assuming only natural causes. Under current scenarios, there is basically a guarantee of a hot war between nuclear powers at least in South Asia.
Re:The world is awful, the world is much better, the world c...
by Winsaucerer on Thursday July 21, 2022 @09:46AM
(#32179334)
Also, you're right, I did miss the point of the other person's post!
Similarly, the people who will survive the coming climate catastrophes may well live better lives than we do today, and thus some future Economist may well claim that it all turned out OK in the end. But that analysis ignores the billions of people whose lives will likely end because of global warming.