anyone who has seen a temperature record going back more than a couple hundred years will tell you that this is hardly uncharted, there is strong evidence that it’s been way way hotter and way way colder before, and that at scale the global climate is oscillating back and forth between ice ages, if you look at the zoomed out view you would conclude that we are heading towards another ice age, and perhaps it seems unintuitive at first, but it’s theorized that extreme weather and fires, earthquakes and volcanoes are part of what brings about an ice age as the sun is blocked by particles in the sky…
I get they are talking “modern times” and specific types of recording history, however given what we know on a large scale it makes these kind of articles seem short sighted and uninformed at best, especially when they try to sound so scientific, and at worst, perhaps intentionally misleading FUD
after thinking about it perhaps too deeply the cynic in me sighs thinking maybe modern web analytics has taught the industry that FUD is simply what gets the most likes and shares
> it’s theorized that extreme weather and fires, earthquakes and volcanoes are part of what brings about an ice age as the sun is blocked by particles in the sky
Whatever floats your boat, but "extreme weather and fires that block the sun eventually driving the world into an ice age" is not the win for humanity you might think it is.
at this scale the laws of nature do not care who the winner or loser is but evidence of carbon spikes before ice ages is what lead to the theory, ie perhaps the onset of rapidly oscillating extremes eventually causes an extreme correction
> the laws of nature do not care who the winner or loser is
Ok, that's great, but anthropomorphization of nature isn't at issue here. The world is better for humans like me and one assumes also you when humans care about environmental impacts on humans.
Like...if someone is in a nihilistic death mindset, doesn't care about their own survival, doesn't care about whether the planet is hospitable to them personally, whatever, great, personal choice, knock yourself out. Literally. But there are quicker and more ethical ways to accomplish that without also taking down the people who do care.
> anyone who has seen a temperature record going back more than a couple hundred years will tell you that this is hardly uncharted, there is strong evidence that it’s been way way hotter and way way colder before, and that at scale the global climate is oscillating back and forth between ice ages
Share the charts, you can't expect "anyone who has seen" those mythical charts to just happen to be the same ones reading your comment. Supporting your claims is always a good start instead of "as it's already known" when it's definitely not the scientific consensus, hence the article talking about uncharted territory.
Modern civilisation wasn't around some tens-hundreds thousands/millions of years ago. It simply doesn't matter, it's not relevant, it won't change the argument: we are heating the Earth faster than in any other time period we are aware of, it's real, it's happening right now, and it doesn't matter that the Earth might cool or warm naturally over a span of dozens/hundreds thousands of years or more, we haven't been through it, we don't know, empirically, what will happen to us and other species, and we aren't prepared for it either.
And I never understand this argument, so what it's happened before? Our collective knowledge and intelligence has a pretty good consensus that we will experience consequences ranging from harsh to apocalyptic, no scenario predicts a good outcome, why be pedantic about "akshually, the Earth has been warmer before"? It does not add anything important to the discussion, it's just trivia.
Edit: on the topic of trivia, xkcd has a nice relevant chart [0]
And your point is? Humans evolved in that last tenth of the chart, and established modern society in the last pixel. I'd rather not our extremely fragile global society get disrupted by temperature fluctuations.
>your misinformation isn't even internally consistent, you talk about charts hundreds of years back and then ice ages.
That was the point if I am reading correctly, to show that a trend on the order of a couple hundred years is not expected to be internally consistent with the longer term trend on thousands or tens of thousands of years
The thing that society needs to do most urgently right now is to identify people like you then disempower, ostracize, and shun them. Free speech is great and all but there should be consequences for using your privileged access to fora like these for the purpose to which you are trying to abuse it. Access to civil society should be predicated on pulling in the direction of survival.
fear leads to hatred and hatred leads to violence, fear also leads to religious zealotry, but who is writing your scriptures? I would be curious to learn how I violated them so severely to deserve such an extreme response
I get they are talking “modern times” and specific types of recording history, however given what we know on a large scale it makes these kind of articles seem short sighted and uninformed at best, especially when they try to sound so scientific, and at worst, perhaps intentionally misleading FUD
after thinking about it perhaps too deeply the cynic in me sighs thinking maybe modern web analytics has taught the industry that FUD is simply what gets the most likes and shares