tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6697950304516138442.post5366615962731698318..comments2022-03-02T09:11:36.714-06:00Comments on Ian!: Pascal and Global WarmingIanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14922548722060582232noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6697950304516138442.post-44592120266888079642009-03-02T08:08:00.000-06:002009-03-02T08:08:00.000-06:00Oh man, I've tried this argument on so many people...Oh man, I've tried this argument on so many people. I think the last time I fully typed it up was on Warbucket, trying to get people to realize that the costs of even a 1% chance of global warming being real and doing nothing outweigh the costs of it being false and doing something. <BR/><BR/>If global warming really does drown most cities, that's like what, couple hundred trillion in damages? I seem to recall the government calculates the value of a human life around 14 million dollars per to decide whether or not environmental protections are useful, so I assume we can calculate the human cost as well.<BR/><BR/>Those are pretty big numbers though. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the general value of a human is less than the value of an American, roughly 1/14 less, and worst-case scenario global warming, which kills via drowning and starvation 1/3 of the global population, 2 billion people. 1,000,000*2,000,000,000.<BR/><BR/>Let's say there's only a 1% chance of redonkulus global warming happening. That places the theoretical costs of global warming (highly simplified, of course) at 2*(10^13), which I'm going to go ahead and assume is more than the costs of fighting carbon emissions.Rejiggerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06550439230344236706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6697950304516138442.post-27124883187603844682009-02-28T18:11:00.000-06:002009-02-28T18:11:00.000-06:00Since you specifically solicited blog comments on ...Since you specifically solicited blog comments on plans I figured I'd give you some feedback. Plus, I have this really creepy habit of reading the blogs of everyone I know who links to theirs on plans, but never comment or you know, admit that I read them.<BR/><BR/>It was a little long - I didn't read like the last 3 paragraphs or so. But that's not necessarily a bad thing, on average I probably read about 3 sentences out of every blog post I see. Maybe I just have blog ADD or something. It's an interesting topic - but I probably read less than I would otherwise just because I share exactly the same view on global warming and I figured out what you were getting to after a couple of sentences. I had no idea (or rather, had never even considered) how Pascal related to it though, so that was really cool. Normally I explain my view on this to people as: "Imagine that the entire concept of global warming had never been brought up by anybody. Nothing's changed! You still have thousands of good reasons to 'clean up' and not a single good reason not to." (So shut up and stop complaining).<BR/><BR/><BR/>That's all. Write more. There's even a chance I'll discontinue the creepiness.simscasshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15428988008570022966noreply@blogger.com