Climate Change is Out of Control

  • Status

    State
    Next Steps
    Case Date
    Jurors Accepted
    Juror Verdicts Finalized

    The details, verdicts, and comments within this case record come from its participants. The Court's role is solely to facilitate the case process.

    Copyright © 2022-2023 Bright Plaza, Inc., All Rights Reserved. No one may publish a case, or any part of it, without a clear reference to the link with the case number as in https://www.truthcourt.net/case/<case-id-number>

  • Details

    Name
    Category
    URL
    Markup
    Lie Truth

     
    Accusation
  • Verdicts

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    The evidence related in the article seems to indicate that we are in ecological overshoot. One the other hand, while these crises stated may indeed be interrelated, it's an oversimplification to attribute all of them to a single cause. Each crisis has its unique factors and complexities that contribute to its occurrence.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 60 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 75 %
    Supporting Text:
    Actually, the multiple causation argument is correctly associated with chaos theory which quite formally predicts collapse is almost certain under such circumstances Chaos theory proposes two predictor functions, one is the gradual change and the other is the chaotic change. The problem under chaos theory is that it only can predict when the collapse occurs after a few successive collapses, it can predict the next one. That means we can't necessarily see when the chaos first starts. So this warning is perfectly believable.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 85 %
    Supporting Text:
    It is entirely plausible that if we keep on track to 2.7C heat increase then 1/3 of the world would become uninhabitable for humans (collapse). But if we swerve off that track and “join together immediately to slash greenhouse gases roughly in half by 2030 and then stop adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere altogether by the early 2050s. If those two steps were taken, the world would have about a 50 percent chance of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius”. My guess is that there is one chance in 3 of that happening. So collapse avoidance probability is 16%.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 45 %
    Supporting Text:
    This issue is fraught with misinformation and alarmism but there is evidence suggesting that overshoot is a possibility.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    The media plays a part in supporting the mirage of ‘everything is okay-ism’.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    The media plays a part in supporting the mirage of ‘everything is okay-ism’.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 75 %
    Supporting Text:
    The media plays a part in supporting the mirage of ‘everything is okay-ism’.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 70 %
    Supporting Text:
    No predictions of the future can be “the whole truth”. If we had a strong increase of volcanic activity, that could cause significant cooling (e.g. of 1.5C) as has happened in the past. (Of course, that would be a disaster in and of itself, though not a collapse.)

    Answer: Don't Know
    Answer Confidence: 50 %
    Supporting Text:
    Correlation is not causation. The various "indicators" cited can be for into a model that supports the overshoot claim. But for such complex systems, which in hubris we think we understand, other reasonable models could show a different result

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    Above all else, we need to be raising awareness that things are not ‘business as usual’. We need to penetrate through the miasma of delusion that our civilisation is much too sophisticated to collapse. Even a casual familiarity with global history will make clear that sophisticated and complex civilizations like ours have collapsed – to think that we are somehow immune to this eventuality is ignorance and hubris at its most extreme.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    Above all else, we need to be raising awareness that things are not ‘business as usual’. We need to penetrate through the miasma of delusion that our civilisation is much too sophisticated to collapse. Even a casual familiarity with global history will make clear that sophisticated and complex civilizations like ours have collapsed – to think that we are somehow immune to this eventuality is ignorance and hubris at its most extreme.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 65 %
    Supporting Text:
    Above all else, we need to be raising awareness that things are not ‘business as usual’. We need to penetrate through the miasma of delusion that our civilisation is much too sophisticated to collapse. Even a casual familiarity with global history will make clear that sophisticated and complex civilizations like ours have collapsed – to think that we are somehow immune to this eventuality is ignorance and hubris at its most extreme.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    Above all else, we need to be raising awareness that things are not ‘business as usual’. We need to penetrate through the miasma of delusion that our civilisation is much too sophisticated to collapse. Even a casual familiarity with global history will make clear that sophisticated and complex civilizations like ours have collapsed – to think that we are somehow immune to this eventuality is ignorance and hubris at its most extreme.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    Above all else, we need to be raising awareness that things are not ‘business as usual’. We need to penetrate through the miasma of delusion that our civilisation is much too sophisticated to collapse. Even a casual familiarity with global history will make clear that sophisticated and complex civilizations like ours have collapsed – to think that we are somehow immune to this eventuality is ignorance and hubris at its most extreme.

    Answer:
    While this statement is made in an alarmist tone, and the reasoning stated in the article relies on cherry-picked examples and is something of an oversimplification, overall, it is mostly not deceitful.
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    The deceit is not this statement, but rather that everything is okay, or that our political systems or technology will 'fix' this problem. Everything is definitely not okay, and neither "the market," nor "democracy," nor technology will get us out of this.

    Answer:
    While this statement is made in an alarmist tone, and the reasoning stated in the article relies on cherry-picked examples and is something of an oversimplification, overall, it is mostly not deceitful.
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    The deceit is not this statement, but rather that everything is okay, or that our political systems or technology will 'fix' this problem. Everything is definitely not okay, and neither "the market," nor "democracy," nor technology will get us out of this.

    Answer:
    While this statement is made in an alarmist tone, and the reasoning stated in the article relies on cherry-picked examples and is something of an oversimplification, overall, it is mostly not deceitful.
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    The deceit is not this statement, but rather that everything is okay, or that our political systems or technology will 'fix' this problem. Everything is definitely not okay, and neither "the market," nor "democracy," nor technology will get us out of this.

    Answer:
    While this statement is made in an alarmist tone, and the reasoning stated in the article relies on cherry-picked examples and is something of an oversimplification, overall, it is mostly not deceitful.
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    The deceit is not this statement, but rather that everything is okay, or that our political systems or technology will 'fix' this problem. Everything is definitely not okay, and neither "the market," nor "democracy," nor technology will get us out of this.

    Answer:
    While this statement is made in an alarmist tone, and the reasoning stated in the article relies on cherry-picked examples and is something of an oversimplification, overall, it is mostly not deceitful.
    Answer Confidence: 35 %
    Supporting Text:
    The deceit is not this statement, but rather that everything is okay, or that our political systems or technology will 'fix' this problem. Everything is definitely not okay, and neither "the market," nor "democracy," nor technology will get us out of this.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 50 %
    Supporting Text:
    With the caveats stated above, there is a strong element of truth in this statement.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 50 %
    Supporting Text:
    With the caveats stated above, there is a strong element of truth in this statement.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 50 %
    Supporting Text:
    With the caveats stated above, there is a strong element of truth in this statement.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 50 %
    Supporting Text:
    With the caveats stated above, there is a strong element of truth in this statement.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 60 %
    Supporting Text:
    The information provided is likely accurate, even if presented with a openly stated bias.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to give warning and to inform, though the article's alarmist tone and oversimplifications are counterproductive.
    Answer Confidence: 75 %
    Supporting Text:
    We can let this happen in a chaotic, brutal way as the climate extremes bear down on us. Or we can urge our government to embrace the guiding principle of SUFFICIENCY in all its economic policies, while shoring up the social infrastructure we will need to promote and support the wellbeing of all, including the most vulnerable.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to give warning and to inform, though the article's alarmist tone and oversimplifications are counterproductive.
    Answer Confidence: 75 %
    Supporting Text:
    We can let this happen in a chaotic, brutal way as the climate extremes bear down on us. Or we can urge our government to embrace the guiding principle of SUFFICIENCY in all its economic policies, while shoring up the social infrastructure we will need to promote and support the wellbeing of all, including the most vulnerable.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to give warning and to inform, though the article's alarmist tone and oversimplifications are counterproductive.
    Answer Confidence: 85 %
    Supporting Text:
    We can let this happen in a chaotic, brutal way as the climate extremes bear down on us. Or we can urge our government to embrace the guiding principle of SUFFICIENCY in all its economic policies, while shoring up the social infrastructure we will need to promote and support the wellbeing of all, including the most vulnerable.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to give warning and to inform, though the article's alarmist tone and oversimplifications are counterproductive.
    Answer Confidence: 75 %
    Supporting Text:
    We can let this happen in a chaotic, brutal way as the climate extremes bear down on us. Or we can urge our government to embrace the guiding principle of SUFFICIENCY in all its economic policies, while shoring up the social infrastructure we will need to promote and support the wellbeing of all, including the most vulnerable.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to give warning and to inform, though the article's alarmist tone and oversimplifications are counterproductive.
    Answer Confidence: 75 %
    Supporting Text:
    Just the possibility that the claims are true is sufficient to threaten the interests of powerful entity with the means to stamp out the facts and demonize the messengers.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a potential terrible truth. We must square our shoulders and face it together. But we must also beware of oversimplifications and strive for a nuanced understanding of these issues.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a potential terrible truth. We must square our shoulders and face it together. But we must also beware of oversimplifications and strive for a nuanced understanding of these issues.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a potential terrible truth. We must square our shoulders and face it together. But we must also beware of oversimplifications and strive for a nuanced understanding of these issues.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a potential terrible truth. We must square our shoulders and face it together. But we must also beware of oversimplifications and strive for a nuanced understanding of these issues.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a potential terrible truth. We must square our shoulders and face it together. But we must also beware of oversimplifications and strive for a nuanced understanding of these issues.

    Answer:
    This statement is substantially true, but it doesn't take into account many nuances of the underlying claims.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Above all, the prospect of collapse is an opportunity. Just like a life-threatening illness, it should stop us in our tracks, to fundamentally re-evaluate what really matters in our lives. For most of us, it will be sustenance, warmth, connection with those we love, and the ability to find joy and laughter in everyday things. We must reevaluate how we are living and realize that can still have meaningful, albeit much simpler, lives which don’t cost the earth.

    Answer:
    This statement is substantially true, but it doesn't take into account many nuances of the underlying claims.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Above all, the prospect of collapse is an opportunity. Just like a life-threatening illness, it should stop us in our tracks, to fundamentally re-evaluate what really matters in our lives. For most of us, it will be sustenance, warmth, connection with those we love, and the ability to find joy and laughter in everyday things. We must reevaluate how we are living and realize that can still have meaningful, albeit much simpler, lives which don’t cost the earth.

    Answer:
    No label needed
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    It is a great statement which is correct.

    Answer:
    This statement is substantially true, but it doesn't take into account many nuances of the underlying claims.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Above all, the prospect of collapse is an opportunity. Just like a life-threatening illness, it should stop us in our tracks, to fundamentally re-evaluate what really matters in our lives. For most of us, it will be sustenance, warmth, connection with those we love, and the ability to find joy and laughter in everyday things. We must reevaluate how we are living and realize that can still have meaningful, albeit much simpler, lives which don’t cost the earth.

    Answer:
    This statement is substantially true, but it doesn't take into account many nuances of the underlying claims.
    Answer Confidence: 80 %
    Supporting Text:
    Above all, the prospect of collapse is an opportunity. Just like a life-threatening illness, it should stop us in our tracks, to fundamentally re-evaluate what really matters in our lives. For most of us, it will be sustenance, warmth, connection with those we love, and the ability to find joy and laughter in everyday things. We must reevaluate how we are living and realize that can still have meaningful, albeit much simpler, lives which don’t cost the earth.