= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
hankx7787 comments on Global warming is a better test of irrationality that theism - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (112)
Here's an article by William Nordhaus, a climate economist often attacked by people like Joe Romm for arguing for a slower path of carbon emissions reduction than others.
Key graph here. It's hard to do a thorough search and miss such things.
I appreciate someone at least providing some evidence :P
However, this article doesn't address the criticism that the temperature graph is flawed/inaccurate as I have seen persuasively argued. I don't have any resources on hand since I looked into this years ago.
If you want to make the case that this issue is a rationality "litmus test", then not only should you really be providing some evidence, but you should be showing that the arguments against the evidence are wrong, too. You should be able to make a pretty unequivocal case, right?
I'm going to take Steven's advice below and not recap climate discussion here. However, if you want to do your own research and make a large-stakes bet about persuading some designated neutral judges on the extent of warming in the last 100 years, structured to express the disagreement, I would probably be keen to take it.