tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6803306.post8578607133348782037..comments2023-10-19T05:09:40.165-07:00Comments on Backseat driving: What I think about global warmingBrianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09301230860904555513noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6803306.post-13110991572239542712010-07-15T13:23:13.953-07:002010-07-15T13:23:13.953-07:00100 years ago the most obviously pressing problem ...100 years ago the most obviously pressing problem New York City was horse manure and carting away dead horses. (The first model year for the Model T Ford was 1909). By 2100 we will have new problems and new tools for dealing with both current and future problems that we can barely imagine today.<br /><br />Item 3 has a missing caveat "...relative to what the temperature would otherwise be". So one basis on which to agree with 3 and doubt 4a would be to believe that CO2-caused warming is likely to help stave off the next ice age. It also doesn't take much techno-optimism to figure that *by the time warming seems like a problem* we'll have better tools for dealing with it than we do now, so we should wait until then to solve it. Maybe this will be just like the horse manure issue - obviated by technological changes we want for other reasons.Glenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14661650090485723755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6803306.post-77996586157093316292010-07-11T22:04:36.278-07:002010-07-11T22:04:36.278-07:00Interesting thought experiment, William. I'm ...Interesting thought experiment, William. I'm guessing they'd try to avoid mechanized warfare, which would've been good. Some would try to avoid the problems created by capitalism (mixed bag) while others would try to avoid socialist revolution (mixed bag). Many would try to avoid racial and ethnic mixing, which would've been bad, except that they actually tried that with extreme effort anyway. <br /><br />The wilderness conservation and public health movements were both off and running in the US 100 years ago, so combine them and you have a facsimile of the modern enviro issues. I don't know much about those fields in Europe.<br /><br />And maybe it's not entirely quibbling to point out that 2100 is less than 90 years from now.Brian Schmidthttp://backseatdriving.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6803306.post-90448034714180616092010-07-10T15:50:42.177-07:002010-07-10T15:50:42.177-07:00You are too kind. I'll come back, but just qui...You are too kind. I'll come back, but just quickly:<br /><br />> first, that the universe ends in the year 2100<br /><br />I agree that there are various things waiting past 2100 that it is hard to see as benevolent: several m of SLR from Greenalnd, for example. BUT the killer counter-argument (IMO) is that trying to predict society more than 100 years ahead is just too difficult. Had our ancestors of 100 years back looked ahead and tried to avoid what they saw as their pressing troubles - would we have thanked them? I am doubtful.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.com