Episode 505 Scott Adams - TDS, Dopamine, Climate Crazies, Russian Interference, Bernie

Episodes › Episode #505 › Segments

MainContent General Commentary

Back to episode — Episode 505 Scott Adams - TDS, Dopamine, Climate Crazies, Russian Interference, Bernie

Context —

e. Have you heard even one? I mean literally one person, a friend, a co-worker, a pundit on TV, even one person. I have not. Who predicted that nobody would change their opinion? Me. Somebody said Woodward. I believe Woodward said from the beginning that when he wrote his book he found nothing, nothing to worry about. Yeah, I'll have to look up Bob Woodward, but I think he never believed there wa…

← Previous segment →

hat's a separate argument. But the debate is that more CO2 creates more warming. Do you actually believe there's no limit to how warm it could get and we'd still be happier?

Let me put it in these words. How many people believe there's no such thing as a limit to how warm it could get? In other words all warming is better forever at any rate. How many of you will commit to that? I want you to say please give it to me in the statement that you believe that there's no amount of warming that will ever be bad and it will always be good to infinity. Anybody? Anybody?

You got really quiet there suddenly, didn't you? Because as soon as I say that all the people who said all warming is good, you realized that there was a gigantic gaping hole in your thinking, which is we're not talking about it going up a little bit and stopping. The whole point is that it won't stop. That's the whole fricking point, is that it's not gonna stop getting warmer until we're all dead.

Now you could argue that the science isn't complete, that we'll figure out ways to, those are all different arguments. But if your entire argument about climate change is warmer is better, you're not really part of the reasoned conversation. You should never say that again. So all of you hearing me now, never say in public again warming is better. It makes you look like an idiot to other people. Right? I'm not saying that's my opinion. Other people, reasonable people, will look at you and say, oh right, what is wrong with you? Nobody's arguing that a little warming isn't good. That's not even the conversation. The argument is that if it keeps getting warmer there'll be a point when it's not good anymore. You all agree with that. Stop saying warming is good.

Here's the other one. Here's the other worst argument about climate change. And again I'm not taking sides on what is true and not true about the science. I'm just saying that no matter what side you're on the following thing is the worst argument. It goes like this: CO2 is plant food. It's the same problem, right? Yeah, more CO2 should be good for the plants. We all agree with that. Scientists agree with that. But more CO2, if the theory holds, creates more warming and the warming will kill you.

So i

Context —

f your entire argument about climate change is CO2 is plant food, CO2 is plant food, you're not part of the conversation. You're saying something that other people, smart people, are looking at and saying, oh my god, oh my god. Nobody's arguing that CO2 isn't plant food. You're simply stating a fact of no importance to the argument. Somebody's saying warming is better. So right, some warming may…

Next segment → →

← ← Previous segment

Next segment → →

Wisdom from this episode

"There was a gigantic gaping hole in your thinking, which is we're not talking about it going up a little bit and stopping. The whole point is that it won't stop. That's the whole fricking point, is that it's not gonna stop getting warmer until we're all dead."

The flaw in claiming all warming is good lies in ignoring that temperatures may not stabilize after a small rise but could keep increasing indefinitely to dangerous levels.

"If your entire argument about climate change is warmer is better, you're not really part of the reasoned conversation. Nobody's arguing that a little warming isn't good. That's not even the conversation. The argument is that if it keeps getting warmer there'll be a point when it's not good anymore."

The climate debate isn't about whether slight warming has benefits; it's about whether continuous warming will eventually reach a point where the harms outweigh any good.

"CO2 is plant food. It's the same problem, right? Yeah, more CO2 should be good for the plants. We all agree with that. Scientists agree with that. But more CO2, if the theory holds, creates more warming and the warming will kill you."

Pointing out that CO2 is plant food is a flawed argument because it ignores the potential downstream effect where extra CO2 drives warming that could become lethal.