Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bordercases 2407 days ago
Scientific consensus is slowly (very slowly) turning around in favour of an upcoming/ongoing solar minimum.

https://electroverse.net/nasa-predicts-next-solar-cycle-will... https://spaceweatherarchive.com/2018/09/27/the-chill-of-sola...

The difficulty caused by current climate advocates is that even if they are alarmed to the right degree, they're alarmed in the wrong direction.

This is actively harmful because the strategies for dealing with problems caused by cold temperatures are different than the strategies for warmth. An example is crop failure: you can breed for frost or you can breed for flooding, but you may or may not be able to breed for both, but are more likely to find strategies for just one or the other depending on where your investment goes. If we've just invested in growing crops which are flood-resistant instead of frost-resistant, our food supply can be blind-sided.

This implies that through climate advocacy, billions of dollars have been invested in a systematically biased way which is not only wasteful to some extent or another, but amplifies our fragility/reduces our resilience. That's a lot to chew on. The consequences are far-reaching.

It's generally a bad approach to resilience if you're not dealing with each worst case rather than some worst-case you're expecting. A worst case you're expecting is almost an oxymoron.

The good news is that we'll have a longer temperature window to invest in technologies that will help us eliminate carbon-based problems which will have knock-on effects on other emerging systemic risks, like water and air pollution by micro plastics, or an energy crisis.

2 comments

Googling the NASA scientist mentioned in the 2nd URL gives me this rebuttal: https://www.iflscience.com/space/no-there-isnt-going-to-be-a...

And another: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/15/skepticism-is-a-full-...

But welcome to 2019 Internet, random websites (ironically, so are the links I posted) claiming all sorts of things, misciting authorities like NASA or reputable journalistic institutes. Like blogs with "eco" in the URL taking the diagram of how the Fukushima quake caused a small tsunami in California and screaming "This diagram shows Fukushima radiation reaching California!"...

But well, climate change will also cause extreme winter events, as well as deadly summer heatwaves. What's your point?

You'll need to provide some better evidence of the scientific consensus turning around that those two links since they're not that compelling.

A well referenced link that provides evidence against the solar cycle cooling theory is here:

"Peer-reviewed research, physics, and math all tell us that a grand solar minimum would have no more than a 0.3°C cooling effect, barely enough to put a dent in human-caused global warming."

https://skepticalscience.com/grand-solar-minimum-mini-ice-ag...