Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Indeed, we can go back to living at pre-Industrial Revolution standards and have a great effect on the climate.


sort by: page size:

I wonder if there is any point to go to a preindustrial climate though. By the time we get technology to the massive scale required to actually fix it, the worst effects will have already occurred. The climate will have already changed and we will have dealt with it one way or another.

Going back at that point will basically mean another climate change. One that will be mainly for the better but will again have impact on nature that will have adjusted in the mean time. It won't be a 100% positive. I wonder if that is really worthwhile. And if things will really get back to what they were; For one the arctic ice, would that build up again in the exact same places? They have a large effect on jetstreams so I'm not sure if things would really go back to the same way things were in pre-industrial times.

Also, in pre-industrial (and early industrial) times winters were really harsh sometimes. It wasn't all rosy either. I think around the 70s/80s the climate was the mildest though I didn't study it.


we have a new climate

Our society is highly optimized to the current climate. Any change is for the worse.

It's important to mention that the current-ish (started 10,000 years ago in the Younger Dryas) warmth of Interglacial era made us able to settle down and practise agriculture. Before that, for millions of years - we're stuck as Hunter-Gatherers, forever in the mercy of Nature.

Perhaps in the days of tomorrow, we will once again be in the mercy of Nature? Of course not, as long as we retain our technologies. Ergo, even if you (and I agree) don't think climate change will doom humanity as a whole, I'd still be sympathetic to rational campaigns reducing it's effects.


Climate change has caused famine and strife for humans in the past. It's one of the more common reasons for civilizational decline. Sure, this round of climate change is worse. But our ability to fend for ourselves is better.

Climate has been changing since the planet exists and you benefit from everything that a modern society has to offer. Better if you become the example of change in society and go live inside a cave to reduce your own carbon footprint.

How could we not adapt? We can move our houses. We can heat and cool them. Grow food.

Hopefully, we will be able to adapt to the climate changes here on earth, much like we would if we were to colonize an alternative planet.

But, if the climate is warmer, we would live more comfortably, not to forget that we could grow more food.

I'm basically saying, change in itself is not a terrible occurrence - there are pros and cons. Stasis or no change, is arguably worse, imo. Must we keep things the same, or can we develop our adaptability? With all our tech, we should be able to manage things better than ever, if we want.

Change is not a disaster.


Can't we just take it for granted now the climate we've experienced as homo sapiens is going to change in a very huge way? We don't have the tech to direct the change, we don't have the political institutions to even stop our own contribution to the change. So let us start from the premise it will change and start working on ways to survive that change with some modicum of success rather than mass die offs.

You've just described a necessary consequence of uncontrolled climate change: having to change the way we live to cope with the effects.

And it's incredibly expensive.

And also a luxury of the relative rich west.


The problem is that the way we humans are living right now is NOT fit to adapt to significant changes in climate, and changing that would be even harder than curtailing our emissions. And it does not matter that there have historically been much greater differences in climate - we're living right now.

In the long run (centuries, millenia), yes, finding a way of living that can adapt to climate changes would be better. But that would require a significant smaller population density to have safety margins.


Better than being headed into a new medieval era because climate change caused civilization to collapse.

Most of humanity already lives in conditions you would consider “semi-modern”. I understand that change can be scary and that yes you personally will either need to adapt your expectations to live a comfortable semi-modern lifestyle. Or perhaps decide to seize the situation and make life better for yourself and others by providing goods and services that assist the transition and maintain your current luxurious lifestyle.

It’s funny to me when people point to weather events and blame climate change. Yes there will always be some place in the world experiencing extreme weather events, and climate change will change the distribution of extreme weather events so that some places become more extreme and others become more mild. I wouldn’t want to live in California ;-)


The sooner that people realize that the climate is going to change regardless of what humanity does the better off we will be. When the reality sinks in maybe we can put our efforts into adapting. Might have a chance that way.

Luckily we are much better equipped to deal with any effect of change in climate today than we used to be when we also had even warmer climate.

In fact that's one of the things we've been really good at learning to deal with. Natures tendency to throw us all sorts of unexpected events.


Warmer temperatures will mean we may need to change where we farm our food and move some cities but it's much better than things getting colder. It may even be better than the current climate, given it may actually increase the amount of land where food is arable.

So let's say industrial revolution started 400 years ago (more or less). How long you think climate change will impact life on earth?

now do climate change
next

Legal | privacy