Hacker News Reader

Comment by xyzzyz | Hacker News Reader

Yes, I discuss this in my comment here

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35483780

The point is, though, that the amount of methane that currently have in atmosphere, is only barely relevant when it comes to how it affects climate from human perspective. If all methane disappeared tomorrow, our climate would be back to 2010, which is hardy a significant change. Nobody would even notice other than climate scientists. Similarly, if we increase the rice cultivation, the amount of methane will increase in the steady state, but the increase will be wholly immaterial, so that it does not affect us in any real way. This is not really “bad”.

View on HN

>our climate would be back to 2010, which is hardy a significant change.

Uh, no. It is quite significant, and a mountain of evidence says that the climate changes from concentrations in the last decade are very significant. You appear to be a denier of anthropogenic climate change who is willing to make silly straw men arguments.

I do happen to remember what the climate looked like in 2010, and I very much do not believe that enormous social and economic projects are warranted to revert the state of climate by 10 years.

> You appear to be a denier of anthropogenic climate change who is willing to make silly straw men arguments.

You appear to be unable to discuss the issue on merits, but this doesn’t necessitate resorting to ad hominem. You can do better than that.

Actually describing the beliefs that you hold is not an ad hominem.

You, however, are claiming that they are unable to discuss the issue - that is.

> Actually describing the beliefs that you hold is not an ad hominem.

There is not a single thing I have said in this thread that can be interpreted as “denial of anthropogenic climate change”. You are welcome to find it and quote it though. On the other hand, there are many places where I very much reaffirm the reality of anthropogenic climate change, for example

Well, we can start with how you pretend that greenhouse gas concentration determines the current temperature, and not the rate of change of temperature. I bet you aren't stupid, so it's either willful ignorance or disingenuity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com