Comment on sagan/sanders 1991

betanumerus@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

• Thunderbird4@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  40 years ago.

  It’s so easy to lose sight among all the gish-galloping nonsense around these topics just how long the problem has been almost fully understood and very clearly articulated. It’s absolutely devastating to think about how catastrophically the world has failed to meet the challenge he describes here in the intervening decades.

  source

  • MalReynolds@piefed.social ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    While I adore Sagan, the greenhouse effect was was proposed as early as 1824 by Joseph Fourier (yes Fourier transform dude).

    source

    • Thunderbird4@lemmy.world ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I didn’t intend to suggest that Carl Sagan invented climate science in 1985, just that the political conversation has been clear and ongoing for decades (indeed, longer than 40 years), yet the opposing narratives continue to claim it’s unproven, and the progress remains insufficient.

      source

      • MalReynolds@piefed.social ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Cool, never implied you did,(suggest that Carl Sagan invented climate science in 1985) and happy the spirit continues in you, here for it. Science is never proven (mathematics aside), just more and more probable in most cases, at this point the “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” is anything against climate change…

        source
    • betanumerus@lemmy.ca ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      My point was that Sagan openly taught climate change to Congress 40 years ago, so Congress and Americans have no excuse not to know, not that he was anywhere near being the first to propose it. He was known as a teacher/professor to the masses, much more than as a pioneer like Fourrier or Arrhenius. Topic is Sagan and Congress, not necessarily climate change.

      source

      • MalReynolds@piefed.social ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Right you are, if a tad US centric, not sure the topic actually was Sagan and Congress, although Sagan for Sanders might give you some credibility. I suspect we’re on the same general side anyway and the ancientness of the argument helps both…

        source
  • betanumerus@lemmy.ca ⁨23⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    “gish-galloping nonsense”- Yes well largely because the O&G produce hire marketing firms to mind people’s minds away from the climate crisis. Advertising at/sponsoring sports like Canadian hockey games is a prime example.

    source