Hacker News Reader

Comment by ivm | Hacker News Reader

This is not true, for example, "Humans Are Doomed to Go Extinct" was published in Scientific American last year: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/humans-are-doomed...

View on HN

That's... one man's opinion and at the absolute extreme end of accepted science. You will find a person willing to have a view on anything if you look hard enough.

If you read mainstream publications, then you will gradually form an opinion, which is that there is a climate emergency, but not that humanity will be destroyed.

Climate doomerism has been a catasrophe, because it means many people have "given up", when things can actually be done. The doomer propaganda jumped off the deep end, and the mainstream media should have called them our on their absurd nonsense years ago.

I notice the BBC is starting to fight back:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-61495035

Humanity probably will not be wiped out, but the current global civilization will collapse like it happened to many other civilizations before because they reached the ecological overshoot. I also thought that something "could be done" on a large scale, but after studying the problem in depth (starting with the IPCC report), I began to prepare on the community level for the impact in the next 10-20 years. That's the only area where something can be done.

By the way, BBC is not a reliable source, like other neoliberal propaganda they bet on continuing "business as usual" while coming up with some innovative solutions (so-called "techno-hopium").

"I began to prepare on the community level for the impact in the next 10-20 years"

Sorry, I don't think rational debate is possible here. Your beliefs are not based on science or rationality.

…said the person who conveniently ignored the mainstream scientific forecasts. Well, with time you'll see.

Your reaction surprises me. What is so strange about "preparing on the community level", which would mean things like making sure your township is not expanding into areas that would be destroyed by newly severe forest fires or hurricanes or floods. Or that your city forbids certain types of lawns or agriculture because droughts are getting more severe. Or just having a more independent electricity/water/sewage in your house because the municipal systems do not have the backups they will start needing.

All the things you describe are good and beneficial for society. The problem was that you are preparing for an "impact" in 10 years that is not being predicted by anyone, except doomers and propagandists. You believe that the BBC is "neoliberal propaganda". That is your right, but you will alienate the vast majority of people with such extremist rhetoric.

Slow down for a second, I am not the person to whom you originally responded, I am just a passerby that is surprised by the intensity of your reaction given there are fairly reasonable interpretations of the passage you quoted as a reason to not bother having conversation with OP. We do know that droughts and fires and hurricanes will be more severe over the next decade or two, so it seems reasonable to call it "impact", their severe dislike of BBC notwithstanding.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com