Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: "Washington Post Accidentally Admits Earth at Coolest Point in
 the Last 485 Million Years"
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2024 14:06:03 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 106
Message-ID: <vdk22b$3b6ir$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vd549q$ig2i$3@dont-email.me> <vd7gss$trkm$1@dont-email.me>
 <vdfa4m$2dkq0$1@dont-email.me> <VnHKO.188211$1m96.64409@fx15.iad>
 <vdfild$2emmg$2@dont-email.me> <vdflkd$2ijvf$2@dont-email.me>
 <6f1bc0b7-cae9-98f0-8fd7-6f802288a68c@example.net>
 <vdh5er$2pq41$1@dont-email.me> <h9sqfjdk21h0dt8ue84ivabp5k6j6c8tgt@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2024 20:06:04 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e00f1660b8a6bf45c2384c3b695d8265";
	logging-data="3512923"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+JgieP4aQShQXy6d1NjiXoSg5XpBve6z4="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:6NJrskDWzSKRIdoPjTEaDmBfarI=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <h9sqfjdk21h0dt8ue84ivabp5k6j6c8tgt@4ax.com>
Bytes: 5520

On 10/2/2024 12:20 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 11:45:31 -0400, Cryptoengineer
> <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/1/2024 4:54 AM, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/30/2024 9:18 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>> On 9/30/2024 7:29 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>>> On 9/27/2024 6:59 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>>>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Washington Post Accidentally Admits Earth at Coolest Point in the
>>>>>>>>> Last 485 Million Years"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/09/washington-post-accidentally-
>>>>>>>>> admits-earth-at-coolest-point-in-the-last-485-million-years/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The earth was four degrees C colder at the peak of the ice age 21,000
>>>>>>>> years ago.   So the above is simply not true.
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So the little jog down before present time does not cover the 4 C
>>>>>>> drop ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If not, do you have a better graph ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm sure you have the ability to find one.  Just remember to restrict
>>>>>> your search to the scientific literature rather than political
>>>>>> entertainment websites.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Remember the _Readers Guide to Periodic Literature_?
>>>>>
>>>>> That graph comes from the Washington Post which is not a political
>>>>> entertainment website.  At least not for conservatives.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lynn
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The problem is, it doesn't show useful info, is being used
>>>> in a misleading way.
>>>>
>>>> People haven't survived through climate
>>>> changes for 485 million years.
>>>>
>>>> They've survived through them for about 2 million, at the
>>>> outside. Agricultural society has managed the survive the
>>>> climate changes of just the last 10,000.
>>>>
>>>> Here's a chart on a more useful scale: https://xkcd.com/1732/
>>>> (check the mouseover :-)
>>>>
>>>> 10,000  years ago, the Sahara was a grassland, like our Great
>>>> Plains. Now, its a wasteland. That took a change of about 2C.
>>>> Many of the great grain growing areas of the world could face
>>>> the same fate if temperature goes up another 2C.
>>>>
>>>> We need to fix the climate to what's good for humans. What it was
>>>> 5 million years ago is irrelevant.
>>>>
>>>> pt
>>>>
>>>
>>> Actually no, if it was ok 5 million years ago, that tells us something
>>> about today. We have all learned now that the climate has always varied,
>>> and that there's no need for any fear. With the help of technology, we
>>> also have an advantage over other small animals, in that we can survive
>>> a much broader ranger of temperatures.
>>
>> Climate has always varied. And: Most species have gone extinct.
>>
>> We need to change that.
> 
> That resembles an attitude (which I do not say that you have) that has
> puzzled me for some time: many people who claim to accept Natural
> Selection are adamant that this, that, or the other species /must/ be
> saved.
> 
> Natural Selection, of course, /requires/ that species go extinct so
> that better-adapted species can thrive.
> 
> This is like efforts a while back (and possibly continuing) to return
> a certain patch of urban uncleared ground (it is in a park and
> contains a creek that, no doubt, marks the low point of the valley we
> are in) to its original condition by removing invasive species.
> 
> Which is fine as far as it goes. But by "original condition" they mean
> "before the White Man came". Why not "before /any/ humans came"? Why
> stop at 150 years or so ago? Why not 10,000 years ago?
> 
> Still, it is worth doing, whatever the actual goal is. And most of the
> invasive species are a lot more recent that even 150 years.

The species I'm trying to save is my own. But humans don't live in a
sterile Petri dish. We are surrounded by a vast ecosystem, which
supplies us with food, oxygen and much else.

Maintaining the system which maintains us seems a good idea.

Quite aside from that, diverse habitats and biota are aesthetically
pleasing.

pt