I recently had a talk with someone who first brushed all the political shenanigans off with “climate has always changed; that’s totally normal” and then three thoughts further tells me it’s happening faster than we could adjust to. So what now … is it natural or is it faster than normal? Because I don’t have an issue with the temperature rising a few degree over 10000 years. I do have an issue with them rising over 100 years.
I guess in that person’s defence you could hold a consistent position whilst staying both those things. They don’t appear to deny that the climate is changing and does change, they just dispute whether it’s normal for it to do that and they don’t seem describe the frequency or period of that “natural” change so they could be describing something they’ve seen happen over and over in their lifetime hence why they think it’s normal or describing something they’ve merely aware happens and this believe to be normal. They then state that it’s happening faster than we can adjust to, which depending on the rest of the conversation isn’t necessarily contradictory because, that the climate would change of its own accord for non-anthropogenic reasons can be taken as true at the same time that it might be doing so at a different pace for unknown reasons. It can be faster than normal whilst still being normal that it is doing so at all so to speak.
Although really, if they openly accept both those premises as true then it really doesn’t matter because the fact is, as they observe, the climate is changing rapidly and it’s problematic. Unless they have some better solution in mind maybe we should try and act on the levers we have actual control over.
I recently had a talk with someone who first brushed all the political shenanigans off with “climate has always changed; that’s totally normal” and then three thoughts further tells me it’s happening faster than we could adjust to. So what now … is it natural or is it faster than normal? Because I don’t have an issue with the temperature rising a few degree over 10000 years. I do have an issue with them rising over 100 years.
I guess in that person’s defence you could hold a consistent position whilst staying both those things. They don’t appear to deny that the climate is changing and does change, they just dispute whether it’s normal for it to do that and they don’t seem describe the frequency or period of that “natural” change so they could be describing something they’ve seen happen over and over in their lifetime hence why they think it’s normal or describing something they’ve merely aware happens and this believe to be normal. They then state that it’s happening faster than we can adjust to, which depending on the rest of the conversation isn’t necessarily contradictory because, that the climate would change of its own accord for non-anthropogenic reasons can be taken as true at the same time that it might be doing so at a different pace for unknown reasons. It can be faster than normal whilst still being normal that it is doing so at all so to speak.
Although really, if they openly accept both those premises as true then it really doesn’t matter because the fact is, as they observe, the climate is changing rapidly and it’s problematic. Unless they have some better solution in mind maybe we should try and act on the levers we have actual control over.