I care about my friends and family not fucking dying either due heat stroke, starvation, dangerous increases in Co2 concentration or some eco-fascist.
I think the pushback you got from myself and others stems from the fact that your fixation on these concerns is not rationally grounded. Not because any of these things aren't possible, but because the path from current climate science to these specific outcomes for those specific people is so riddled with contingencies and beyond our meaningful prediction horizon that to worry about it daily unmoores you from whats actually going on around you. You don't seem equally worried about them dying in car accidents or heart disease or the people who are going to die due to inadequate healthcare access.
No one here is denying climate change, or that it's going to be bad, or even that you should take it into account when making decisions in your day to day life (i.e don't buy a house in Phoenix). All I'm saying is do what you reasonably can to prepare for reasonably possible outcomes, use what little influence you have to try to push things in a better direction, but don't make these specific lurid death fantasies (which is what they are) more than an occasional indulgence.
You kept digging into the statement as though I believed the concept of climate change would stab me in the heart, which I repeatedly explained was not the worry.
No your worry is that one of it's manifestations is going to kill you an everyone you know. Right?
I care about my friends and family not fucking dying either due heat stroke, starvation, dangerous increases in Co2 concentration or some eco-fascist.
Which is what we're talking about now.
"that has a low probability to happen"
This was specifically referencing human extinction, and that was not my assessment, but the assessment of the scientists who wrote the paper cited. But this isn't relevant as you're specifically uninterested in human extinction.
I'm not denying any of these things. I'm questioning the usefulness and rationality of taking foreseeable climate change consequences by all of those things and applying them haphazardly right now to make predictions of specific causes of death to specific people in the unforeseeable future. What do you get out of that other than a malaise?
That's not at all what you've been doing in your discussions with me, not then nor now.
No one here is denying climate change, or that it's going to be bad, or even that you should take it into account when making decisions in your day to day life (i.e don't buy a house in Phoenix). All I'm saying is do what you reasonably can to prepare for reasonably possible outcomes, use what little influence you have to try to push things in a better direction, but don't make these specific lurid death fantasies (which is what they are) more than an occasional indulgence.
Thanks for describing my fears of the future as a "death fantasy" that's definitely what they are! I know you can speak with authority about this, because you have a PhD, so even though every piece of climate science I encounter tells me we're fucked, I'm glad to know it's just me fantasizing, and not at all reacting to verifiable fact.
There is not a single climate change paper out there that says "Your great Aunt Martha is going to be stabbed by an ecofascist on August 21st 2031". That is probably not going to happen! It could happen, but there's no sense in worrying about that outcome for Ole Aunt Maratha when there are so many to choose from. You're taking real, aggregate trends and predictions and using them to construct specific worries for specific people. Are you equally concerned about Aunt Martha's diet and exercise cause if she's in the US, current science indicates it's going to be heart disease and not the Rural White Citizens Brigade that does her in.
Yup that's totally what you've been saying, which is why you've completely ignoring my closing statement,
I'm not interested in the closing statement, because it's predicated on the feelings of doom the rationality of which I am questioning. If you just posted your closing thoughts I wouldn't have anything to say, but you insist on leading into them with a catalog of climate change death scenarios.
No you're just denying every specific way in which it will take shape
No, I'm just denying that you can generalize from aggregate trends to specific predictions about specific people. I don't freak out everytime I get into a car, even though in aggregate that's one of the most dangerous things I do. I do freak out every time I get on a plane though, humorously enough, because I am an irrational sillybilly. I don't spend any time fretting that my friends and family are going to get T-boned on the highway, despite the fact that TONS of people do and will get T-Boned on the highway. There's no sense in it.
I think the pushback you got from myself and others stems from the fact that your fixation on these concerns is not rationally grounded. Not because any of these things aren't possible, but because the path from current climate science to these specific outcomes for those specific people is so riddled with contingencies and beyond our meaningful prediction horizon that to worry about it daily unmoores you from whats actually going on around you. You don't seem equally worried about them dying in car accidents or heart disease or the people who are going to die due to inadequate healthcare access.
No one here is denying climate change, or that it's going to be bad, or even that you should take it into account when making decisions in your day to day life (i.e don't buy a house in Phoenix). All I'm saying is do what you reasonably can to prepare for reasonably possible outcomes, use what little influence you have to try to push things in a better direction, but don't make these specific lurid death fantasies (which is what they are) more than an occasional indulgence.
deleted by creator
No your worry is that one of it's manifestations is going to kill you an everyone you know. Right?
Which is what we're talking about now.
This was specifically referencing human extinction, and that was not my assessment, but the assessment of the scientists who wrote the paper cited. But this isn't relevant as you're specifically uninterested in human extinction.
deleted by creator
I'm not denying any of these things. I'm questioning the usefulness and rationality of taking foreseeable climate change consequences by all of those things and applying them haphazardly right now to make predictions of specific causes of death to specific people in the unforeseeable future. What do you get out of that other than a malaise?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
There is not a single climate change paper out there that says "Your great Aunt Martha is going to be stabbed by an ecofascist on August 21st 2031". That is probably not going to happen! It could happen, but there's no sense in worrying about that outcome for Ole Aunt Maratha when there are so many to choose from. You're taking real, aggregate trends and predictions and using them to construct specific worries for specific people. Are you equally concerned about Aunt Martha's diet and exercise cause if she's in the US, current science indicates it's going to be heart disease and not the Rural White Citizens Brigade that does her in.
I'm not interested in the closing statement, because it's predicated on the feelings of doom the rationality of which I am questioning. If you just posted your closing thoughts I wouldn't have anything to say, but you insist on leading into them with a catalog of climate change death scenarios.
No, I'm just denying that you can generalize from aggregate trends to specific predictions about specific people. I don't freak out everytime I get into a car, even though in aggregate that's one of the most dangerous things I do. I do freak out every time I get on a plane though, humorously enough, because I am an irrational sillybilly. I don't spend any time fretting that my friends and family are going to get T-boned on the highway, despite the fact that TONS of people do and will get T-Boned on the highway. There's no sense in it.
Jee, I wonder why people are pushing back when you call them climate change deniers