/sci/ - Science & Math

>>4355004
>>4355006
>>4355015

>EK

>>4136330

>>2979360
>Retard detected
Name-calling? Great way to open.

>You seem to be unaware that the things that we are interested are hapening now and in coming decades, not millions of years from now.
I didn't post about these imminent problems, I refuted an earlier statement. Maybe you should have read the post I quoted. And if we don't take into account the long-term changes the planet will undergo, we would just be delaying the inevitable.

>Also you seem to think that humans will go extinct. >We won't unless we kill ourselfs with nukes.
Because nothing else could possibly kill us humans.

>New orleans managed the storm well, they saw it coming and they raised their walls, oh....
That change happened in a matter of days. We're talking a matter of years. You already tried to correct me for looking at the problem at the wrong scope.

>We have dramatical changes that will affect the lives of millions. These changes include but are not limited to:
>More and more powerfull storms, drought, floods, increase in temperature, sea level rise etc. etc.
None of those is an insurmountable problem.
>We can repair the damage and move the harbours but do you have any idea how much it will cost to move every harbour in the world?
Yes. It would cost very much, but because the change happens slowly it doesn't need to be done all at once.


>The thing is that the costs will be massive.
Yes, but in the long run, the VERY long run, we have no reason to suspect the global climate is subject to our control and our time would be better spent preparing for what lies ahead than trying to dig in our heels and stop it. Change isn't always bad and Earth won't stay the way it is forever anyway.

>I would like to act before we must repair the damage and lives are lost.
And you finish with an appeal to emotion.

>>2611530
>disagree with someone
>FUCKING TROLLS