:eek: :dubious: This seems like a highly unrealistic claim. For instance, the doubling (actually about halfway between doubling and tripling) of drug-overdose death rates between 1999 and 2015 affected only a small proportion of the overall death rate, but people have been noticing the SHIT out of that.
Hell, AFAICT the overall death rate in England and Wales didn’t even come close to doubling during each of the freaking World Wars, including the 1918 influenza pandemic. Yet the war years are remembered as periods of massive destruction of life.
I think if the entire global annual death rate actually DOUBLED as a result of climate change, people sure as hell WOULD notice it.
Climates always are changing, we probably made it worse, and there is a reason none of us live within 50 miles of the coast or in one of the states with weather/temp extremes.
Clearly, you don’t know me.
I’ve been loudly and consistently warning people about the dangers of AGW for decades.
But, I’m also not hysterical. While Climate Change may be the biggest challenge to face humanity as a whole, it will also not result in the destruction of the Earth, or the extinction of humanity, and to say otherwise undercuts how serious it is.
Yup. “Oh well, as long as it doesn’t result in the extinction of humanity or the Earth turning into a giant ball of flame, no worries, then.”
I’m not sure that somebody who thinks that a literal doubling of the global death rate is something that wouldn’t even be noticed is the best judge of “how serious it is”. In any case, AFAICT only a tiny minority of warnings about climate change are couched in any such apocalyptic terms, so I don’t see why so much of the tut-tutting about inappropriate rhetoric is directed toward them instead of toward all the “minimizing”.
And AFAICT there’s a pretty steady drumbeat of “sky is falling”-style hyperbole. Perhaps it is “only a tiny minority”, but it’s the ones that get most of the attention and discussion. IIRC, we’ve even had a thread here, on the SDMB, where climate change activists wondered allowed if they should purposefully exaggerate.
There are several people in this thread that I would specifically ban from being around my kids and would warn other parents to do the same. Last thing any parent needs is a freaked out kid scared the fukin’ world is ending because some adults are loony tunes and propagating fear.
This shit has almost become something akin to a religious cult for some people.
I am more of an alarmist than a denialist, but my following comments will draw accusations of denialism.
First: There are FAR more important ideas one must try to instill in one’s children than knowledge of climate change. My son’s infatuation with video games, and his plans for college are of hugely greater concern to me. There are much more pressing dangers he should be concerned about, dangers which he needs to be aware of and react to personally. When I do chat with him about climate change, it’s in the hope of kindling his general interest in science and politics, rather than specifics.
Second: I continue to be bemused that folks speak of future warming, when politicians will probably act to delay the warming! No, I’m not speaking of sensible mitigation — the entrenched kleptocrats won’t allow that — but of simple schemes to inject coolants into the upper atmosphere to compensate for the warming gases. The annual cost of such mitigation is estimated to be less than the U.S. currently spends annually on NFL football, less than the GDP of Mauritius or Outer Mongolia. When the disastrous costs of temperature rises are finally realized by even the stupidest voters and politicians, I expect such a measure to be adopted. (Given this, I find it somewhat disingenuous to write about continued temperature rises up to apocalyptic levels.)
Nota Bene: I am NOT an advocate of continuing CO2 emissions and other environmental destruction. Atmospheric coolants will NOT prevent the continued acidification of the oceans. Sulfur — if no better coolant is found — is itself an environmental poison and was banned from fuels for a reason. Stratospheric sulfate injection is a desperate measure; but I think the world will get desperate once the costs of climate change are clearer. That’s the real danger facing humanity during the coming century: not runaway climate change, but a world of acid rain and overly-acidic oceans.
I’m 37 years old and I have a son who will be 2 in a few days, so I spend a lot of time thinking about how I’ll educate him about various topics. Concerning this one, I figure that when he’s old enough to start reading the news, he’ll probably want to talk about climate change as well as other topics. At some point, I’ll talk to him about all the warning I’ve gotten in my lifetime regarding the upcoming end of the USA, the economy, the human race, planet earth, and/or the entire universe:
[ul]
[li]Certain Christian groups have insisted that the Rapture, the Battle of Armageddon, and the second coming are right around the corner. For example, Harold_Camping gave the precise date for apocalyptic events numerous times.[/li][li]Certain New Age/hippie religious groups have also predicted the end of the world. Most famously, many said that the world would end on Dec. 21,2012, because the Aztec calendar supposedly predicted it.[/li][li]Something called “the Y2K bug” was supposed to destroy computer systems and threaten our civilization on Jan. 1, 2000. There were Congressional committees devoted to it. Experts predicted economic collapse and worse. Some people believed it would cause the end of modern civilization, sold their property, bought spam and batteries and moved to remote places to avoid the fallout.[/li][li]Numerous infectious diseases have supposedly posed an enormous threat, ready to erupt and claim millions of lives: ebola, bird flu, swine flu.[/li][li]“Peak oil” was the theory that the world would soon run out of oil, thus leading to the collapse of industrial civilization and other bad things. Top scientists wrote books about the matter, assuring their readers that this was inevitable.[/li][li]Beyond oil, there have been countless predictions of upcoming catastrophe based on general resource shortage. The Limits to Growth (1970) is one of many famous examples.[/li][li]And food shortages. The Population Bomb (1968) gave an unqualified guarantee that global famine would soon kill hundreds of millions worldwide and plunge the world into geopolitical chaos.[/li][li]And if overpopulation didn’t cause global starvation, then topsoil loss was sure to do so. Or lack of biodiversity. Or a dozen other things.[/li][li]Certain commentators have insisted that Muslims will soon conquer and destroy western civilization, leading to, as one put it, “The End of the World as We Know It”.[/li][li]And there have been predictions of economic apocalypse probably every single day of my life: hyperinflation, second Great Depression, you name it.[/li][/ul]
So what do all of these things have in common? None of them ever happened. The Rapture never happened. The Mayan Calendar apocalypse never happened. The Y2K bug was a triviality. The world produces more food per capita than ever before. And more oil. And more of everything else that we need. Civilization has not been destroyed by inflation, or by Muslims, or by topsoil loss, or by ebola, or by acid rain, or by drag queens in public libraries.
Every declaration of the imminent end of the economy/USA/western civilization/human race/all life on planet Earth turns out to be completely wrong.
So I’ll tell my son that’s why, no matter how many people tell you that your future life is ruined by this or that, you don’t need to be afraid.
After establishing that fact, my son and I might then start discussing why so many people are saying that the climate change will bring about such a horrible future. And bearing the previous examples of failed apocalypses in mind, we might arrive at some of the following conclusions:
[ul]
[li]The media is a business and in order to make money, they have get people’s attention.[/li][li]Which means that the media are likely to print the type of story that gets attention, and not print the type of story that gets ignored.[/li][li]The media has probably found that stories about upcoming horrible disasters sell better than more restrained stories about moderate difficulties.[/li][li]Which explains why the media prints so many apocalyptic stories.[/li][li]Even scientists and other well-educated experts nonetheless are competing to get media attention, funding, etc…[/li][li]Which means that even experts, and even those with good intentions, are likely to have a bias towards exaggerating the scope of problems.[/li][/ul]
None of the things on your list had any scientific evidence behind them. Climate change is not some whacked-out fringe group proclaiming the end is near, and it’s not media sensationalism. If your son starts reading newspaper articles (or their future equivalent) in 10 years, he’ll hopefully understand how climate change has already affected the world economically, socially, and politically and how 10 years ago, people were still in denial, but how–fingers crossed–since that time, we’ve worked to mitigate some of the worst long-term effects.
It is incredible hubris of man to think the earth takes what we give it. Incredible. We’ve always been, and we always will remain, taking what the earth gives us.
This is a bit like thinking you’re bulletproof because when you played cops and robbers with your toy guns, nobody ever died. Seriously, you’re equating overt gibberish with substantiated science. It reads like an attempt to dismiss that science because of deference to a preferred conclusion.
There’s a reason why your sentences are in the conditional and mine are in the declarative.
You would keep fact-speakers like me away from kids. I do tell kids the truth. And you nor anybody else has and exercises the power to stop me from doing so.
The “puny human” presumption that human beings must be intrinsically unable to significantly affect the global environment is, scientifically speaking, flat-out wrong. You may find it personally comforting to imagine that global climate is incapable of changing due to human activity, but if you actually believe it, you are putting your trust in unscientific bullshit.
In some cases, there were certainly prominent scientists who said that there was. When mentioning the peak oil hysteria that was running rampant no so long ago, I linked to the book Out of Gas, by David Goodstein, who is a physics professor at CalTech and recipient of many academic awards. The Population Bomb was written by Paul Ehrlick, biologist at Stanford and among the most widely cited and quoted scientists of all time. The Limits to Growth is among the best-selling scientific books of all times. One could name further examples such as Silent Spring, which is still assigned in high school science classes even though almost every scientific claim it made was wrong.
So there have been past instances of panic-mongering by scientific authorities. You can insist retroactively that they weren’t really scientists. Shall we call that the “no true scientist” fallacy?
Scientists say one thing, the media doomsayers will always desperately want my son to believe vastly worse things. The media want my son and all young people to believe that their lives have been totally ruined and deprived of all hope because of climate change; their temporary hysterical praise for Greta Thunberg’s UN speech is just the latest example of many instances of that. Well that’s false, ridiculously so. Middle class kids like my son have no serious reason to believe that their life is ruined by climate change. Rich kids like Greta have even less. Mainstream science predicts sea level rise of less than 3 feet by 2100 without mitigation efforts, and less if emissions are reduced quickly in the coming decades. How much is that? Not much. A very small number of people have reason to care about that, but most don’t.
Those that “don’t” are ignorant of the science, and ignorance isn’t going to protect them. Sea level rise is just the tip of the iceberg in climate change impacts – no pun intended – but the effects of it are already being felt in terms of stronger and more destructive storm surges and increased flooding in many coastal areas. In plausible higher projections, half of Florida could be lost by 2100, not to mention many low-lying island nations.
Sea level rise comes in part from melting polar ice (the rest from thermal expansion) and that ice loss greatly accelerates polar warming by exposing darker ocean and land surfaces, which in turn has long-term impacts on global circulation systems. Loss of biodiversity from climate change is already happening and poses real risks of mass extinctions that affect us all. Permanent regional climate changes including precipitation changes and increased droughts and floods threaten our livelihoods, our food supplies, our quality of life, and even life itself. Warming oceans threaten marine life. More extreme weather and greater destruction from weather events is already happening. The list goes on and on.
This is not just the prediction of some random scientist who wrote a book. This is the consensus of a well established body of science based on more than half a century of intensive research. Instead of the old trope that “science has been wrong before” you should educate yourself about the seriousness of the problem.
What would I tell my kids? I have kids, so it’s not a hypothetical. I tell them the truth, and I teach them to distinguish reliable sources from bogus ones, to distinguish real science from self-interested propaganda and hype.