Emissions are no longer following the worst case scenario

Re:Emissions are no longer following the worst case scenario by Guthur on Friday May 26, 2023 @08:14AM (#36083083)

Really, ok what is the good part of plus 4.5 degrees? Is it all bad or has no one actually considered both sides.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Emissions are no longer following the worst case scenario by empyrrhicist on Friday May 26, 2023 @08:53AM (#36083404)

Looking for good parts of 4.5 degrees of warming is like looking for a bright side in a horrible apartment fire. Sure, it might open up some more green space for a future park, but given all the terrible death and suffering that kind of misses the point.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Emissions are no longer following the worst case scenario by Guthur on Friday May 26, 2023 @05:26PM (#36089700)

Would it open a north sea passage, would it make most of Russia inhabitable...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Emissions are no longer following the worst case scenario by empyrrhicist on Saturday May 27, 2023 @07:56PM (#36099687)

I feel like that exactly matches the comparison I was making.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Emissions are no longer following the worst case scenario by Sakos on Friday May 26, 2023 @09:18AM (#36083693)

I fail to see any upside that would justify the displacement and suffering of hundreds of millions of people across the planet. Are you serious?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Emissions are no longer following the worst case scenario by Guthur on Friday May 26, 2023 @05:24PM (#36089685)

Still not telling the good side then?

We're talking global control here so displacement is not that far fetched.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Emissions are no longer following the worst case scenario by Sakos on Saturday May 27, 2023 @03:24AM (#36092751)

Still not caring about the suffering of millions? Okay, I'm done here.

[ Parent | on HN ]