[AutumnCurtain]

My family member worked as a petroleum geologist for Exxon-Mobil for many years, and he is fond of talking about how the climate has changed dramatically throughout the earth's history as a sort of defense against any discussion of climate change. That those changes historically went very poorly for the organisms living in affected areas doesn't seem to faze him, as though we should be desirous of a new Permian extinction. I've come to the conclusion it's a defense mechanism for him psychologically, to avoid having to acknowledge that his life's work served to destroy the natural world and threaten the peaceful existence of his descendants.

[Maursault]

> it's a defense mechanism for him psychologically

Maybe, but it's also a straw man.

[oceanplexian]

I’m not defending Exxon but I feel like no one asks the question “What if we never discovered fossil fuels”.

Well, perhaps Earth would be in the middle of an ice age (And there is evidence to support it) which clearly isn’t good for all the species that would go extinct during such a period. If you look past the alarmism I don’t think we understand this complex system as well as we like to think we do. And that is completely ignoring the massive amount of good things that hydrocarbons do for our planet, help to feed the world, enable humanity to support huge cities and billions of humans, all the modern conveniences of life, and so on.

[tambourine_man]

> Well, perhaps Earth would be in the middle of an ice age

It wouldn’t.

> And there is evidence to support it

There isn’t. Show us the link.

Earth’s cycles are measured in the many thousands of years. The industrial revolution has 200-300 years and hasn’t really made a dent since the last 100 or so.

The amount of denial in a supposedly well informed crowed such HN never ceases to surprise and depress me.