Re:The meat industry blocked the IPCC’s attempt to recommend...
by revelio on Wednesday March 29, 2023 @04:22AM
(#35354172)
>> we only have scientific consensus of the overwhelming majority
Of who? Climatologists? They're biased and when they email each other privately they express grave doubts, stress over their own bias and dishonesty and point out that there is no consensus. Outside of climatology there's even less consensus. So claims of consensus aren't true, but consensus of people heavily biased by financial and career concerns is deeply unconvincing anyway.
>> we all should make at least good faith attempts to stop whatever we're doing currently or change it so that it doesn't make the situation worse
No? Come on, "stop whatever we're doing" is being treated as equivalent to shutting down large parts of civilization with no alternatives in sight, it's stupid to do harmful things if they aren't necessary. And all the concrete proposals are deeply harmful, even if you ignore the massive mental health impact that climate pseudo-science is having on young people.
>> we do have straight pollution problems right in front of us. Toxic substances sifting into
Sure, and those problems are probably more important to focus on than climate stuff, the fields and underlying research claims are different in these cases.
>> many measures to reduce that thing would also help against very obvious problems we also have
If it were true, nobody would care indeed, but most climate proposals are extreme and harmful. Just look at geo-engineering for an example of where this can lead.
Of who? Climatologists? They're biased and when they email each other privately they express grave doubts, stress over their own bias and dishonesty and point out that there is no consensus. Outside of climatology there's even less consensus. So claims of consensus aren't true, but consensus of people heavily biased by financial and career concerns is deeply unconvincing anyway.
>> we all should make at least good faith attempts to stop whatever we're doing currently or change it so that it doesn't make the situation worse
No? Come on, "stop whatever we're doing" is being treated as equivalent to shutting down large parts of civilization with no alternatives in sight, it's stupid to do harmful things if they aren't necessary. And all the concrete proposals are deeply harmful, even if you ignore the massive mental health impact that climate pseudo-science is having on young people.
>> we do have straight pollution problems right in front of us. Toxic substances sifting into
Sure, and those problems are probably more important to focus on than climate stuff, the fields and underlying research claims are different in these cases.
>> many measures to reduce that thing would also help against very obvious problems we also have
If it were true, nobody would care indeed, but most climate proposals are extreme and harmful. Just look at geo-engineering for an example of where this can lead.