jacob wrote:I would much prefer if we turn this discussion more towards politics than the correctness of Physic101.
My best argument against doing anything wrt GW is that humans can adapt to a lot---especially on a generational basis. The likely of an utterly catastrophic outcome seems to be very small and even if this was so, do present generations care what might happen in 500 years (e.g. suppose astronomers calculated that the Earth would be obliterated by an asteroid collision in 500 years, how much would that concern you ... frankly, it wouldn't depress me that much as in "I'd get over it"). To wit, I'm old enough to remember when the weather (and things weather related) was more stable. However, for the younger generation, the last decade is all they've ever seen. That's their normal. When they listen to me or my parents or grandparents talking about how the climate used to be, that's only hear-say in a sense and they probably think we're exaggerating anyway. To them now is the new normal because they don't have a reference point.
I am your age and the worst drought I remember was in the 1980's. I can't see that it's getting worse. The air is cleaner and so is the water. My favorite bird, the Peregrine Falcon, is no longer an endangered species.
The main reason I'm not nearly as interested or emotionally involved in the topic is exactly what you describe here. Weather has always changed. It's changing now, almost certainly with anthropogenic impact, but in the end, we will adapt. The world will adapt. It will be different. In some ways not as good, maybe in other ways better.
If we are wrong, we die. Pretty much the same outcome either way.
As a thought experiment, suppose GW had been discovered by 1650 (rather than 1850) and all the consequences had been mapped out by 1700 (rather than 2000), should we have proceeded not to industrialize. In retrospect, would that have been a good decision?
No.
Every one of us has the option to live as bigato said, rural 1700's style with the internet and hygiene. Most people, and increasingly so, choose cities, gadgets and tech fabrics.
It would be a very dramatic change for life to go back to being as short for most as it was in pre-industrial times, to say nothing of the fun we've had along the way. I'd almost surely already be dead in the old days, my being here would've been much less likely pre-industrial revolution and with anything less than 1960's technology the doc said my son would've slowly died just after birth while we watched helpless, instead of a few mostly really boring days in hospital...so I'm definitely biased!
We are living in the biggest thing since the industrial revolution. I'd hate to see it stop.
