Kevin comments on The things we know that we know ain't so - Less Wrong

16 Post author: PhilGoetz 11 January 2010 09:59PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (148)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: taw 12 January 2010 10:22:35AM 0 points [-]

Truth value of "global warming has a serious chance of destroying the world" statement is entirely unverifiable to an average person. The media are saying it's true, quoting many leading scientists and politicians. By what mechanism do you suggest people reach an alternative conclusion?

There's outside view, but it's not accepted even here, as many have the same world-destroying beliefs about AI, and countless other subjects.

Comment author: Kevin 12 January 2010 11:15:53AM *  0 points [-]

I think mass video advertising would probably work. A 30 second summary of the most recent IPCC report.

If anyone reading this has $5 million, we can convince the US public that global warming will not destroy the world. Maybe we can even hint at some more realistic existential threats.

Comment author: alexflint 12 January 2010 12:42:48PM *  4 points [-]

Please define "destroy the world". It could mean:

  • rip the earth into chunks and disperse them separately through space

  • eliminate all life on earth

  • eliminate all humans on earth

  • ruin the fabric of our current civilization

Some of these are more plausible than others w.r.t. climate change

Comment author: Kevin 12 January 2010 01:04:01PM 0 points [-]

Destroy the world means somewhere between #3 and #4 depending on the person with the mistaken belief.