<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>kurthr</author><text>So over the next 85 years we&amp;#x27;re expecting a rise of 2-10m based on current warming with the low end hoping that we maintain only 2c by the end of the century, which currently seems unlikely. Follow the link at the bottom and ask yourself what the US is going to do without Florida, or how much the dams across the Golden Gate (and Houston, New York, DC, Shanghai, London) are going to cost to prevent the inundation of Sacramento and the destruction of California farming.&lt;p&gt;We&amp;#x27;re ignoring poor places like Bangladesh with a population of 200Mil (or Indonesia with 1Bil), which will likely be largely depopulated.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m now going to past text I used in an earlier comment:
_Florida is porous. You can build walls but they don&amp;#x27;t do much. The water will rise to cover the entire peninsula. Long before that tides and storm surge will destroy all of the surface roads to coastal cities. I personally wouldn&amp;#x27;t lend money there for longer than 30years._
&lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;geology.com&amp;#x2F;sea-level-rise&amp;#x2F;florida.shtml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;geology.com&amp;#x2F;sea-level-rise&amp;#x2F;florida.shtml&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>ryanwaggoner</author><text>In that case, my question still stands.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m asking because I frequently see this kind of climate change alarmism on forums (it&amp;#x27;s the end of civilization, billions will die, etc) but my &lt;i&gt;sense&lt;/i&gt; from an admittedly cursory reading of the estimates is that the dangers of climate change are likely to be an epic refugee crisis from coastal flooding, famine, and war. Hundreds of millions will die, and many more will see a substantial decrease in quality of life for generations.&lt;p&gt;So, horrible. But I think it&amp;#x27;s wrong to say that it represents the end of civilization. For one thing, like most things, the consequences of climate change will be felt very unequally. The richest countries of the world are likely to see a much smaller impact in terms of famine and death.&lt;p&gt;Granted, no one knows for sure, but as someone who is NOT skeptical of the cause and effects of climate change, I am somewhat skeptical that in 100 years it&amp;#x27;ll be as bad as many internet chicken little types seem to think.&lt;p&gt;I probably sound more dogmatic than I am though, so please do share some research and change my view :)</text></item><item><author>M_Grey</author><text>By &amp;quot;end us&amp;quot; I mean end our civilization... extinction is unlikely.</text></item><item><author>ryanwaggoner</author><text>Is there any credible research that climate change is going to &amp;quot;end us&amp;quot;?</text></item><item><author>M_Grey</author><text>To be fair, kids born today are pretty fucked for so many reasons. In a way, this kind of dystopian future is averted when you consider the rate of accelerating ocean warming, permafrost melting, etc. It seems likely that all problems short of that which is going to end us, sort of gets subsumed.&lt;p&gt;All of these social problems are in the context of a failing ecosystem that is being increasingly overtaxed. So... the kids never had a chance.</text></item><item><author>apathy</author><text>This is severely fucked.  Wellness programs do little or no good but do allow employers to offer incentives for participation. This on the other hand is GATTACA level fuckery. GINA took many years to be put in place; now the proposal put forward will potentially cause people to lose health coverage or their job based on things they cannot control.  Potentially their kids, too, since these idiotic &amp;quot;wellness&amp;quot; programs are administered by poorly regulated third parties.&lt;p&gt;This is very, very bad stuff.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Employees who decline genetic testing could face penalties under proposed bill</title><url>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/03/11/employees-who-decline-genetic-testing-could-face-penalities-under-proposed-bill/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>wavefunction</author><text>I would just say in response to your post: the start of Syria&amp;#x27;s troubles are considered by some to begin with an unseasonable and sustained drought.&lt;p&gt;That&amp;#x27;s one country&amp;#x27;s population sudden injection into the rich Western world you consider to be facing limited fallout, and we&amp;#x27;ve witnessed the results and the reactions.&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#x27;t think most people can picture the real effects of sustained and mass migration, even if you&amp;#x27;re fortunate enough to enjoy the perks of Western life.</text><parent_chain><item><author>ryanwaggoner</author><text>In that case, my question still stands.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m asking because I frequently see this kind of climate change alarmism on forums (it&amp;#x27;s the end of civilization, billions will die, etc) but my &lt;i&gt;sense&lt;/i&gt; from an admittedly cursory reading of the estimates is that the dangers of climate change are likely to be an epic refugee crisis from coastal flooding, famine, and war. Hundreds of millions will die, and many more will see a substantial decrease in quality of life for generations.&lt;p&gt;So, horrible. But I think it&amp;#x27;s wrong to say that it represents the end of civilization. For one thing, like most things, the consequences of climate change will be felt very unequally. The richest countries of the world are likely to see a much smaller impact in terms of famine and death.&lt;p&gt;Granted, no one knows for sure, but as someone who is NOT skeptical of the cause and effects of climate change, I am somewhat skeptical that in 100 years it&amp;#x27;ll be as bad as many internet chicken little types seem to think.&lt;p&gt;I probably sound more dogmatic than I am though, so please do share some research and change my view :)</text></item><item><author>M_Grey</author><text>By &amp;quot;end us&amp;quot; I mean end our civilization... extinction is unlikely.</text></item><item><author>ryanwaggoner</author><text>Is there any credible research that climate change is going to &amp;quot;end us&amp;quot;?</text></item><item><author>M_Grey</author><text>To be fair, kids born today are pretty fucked for so many reasons. In a way, this kind of dystopian future is averted when you consider the rate of accelerating ocean warming, permafrost melting, etc. It seems likely that all problems short of that which is going to end us, sort of gets subsumed.&lt;p&gt;All of these social problems are in the context of a failing ecosystem that is being increasingly overtaxed. So... the kids never had a chance.</text></item><item><author>apathy</author><text>This is severely fucked.  Wellness programs do little or no good but do allow employers to offer incentives for participation. This on the other hand is GATTACA level fuckery. GINA took many years to be put in place; now the proposal put forward will potentially cause people to lose health coverage or their job based on things they cannot control.  Potentially their kids, too, since these idiotic &amp;quot;wellness&amp;quot; programs are administered by poorly regulated third parties.&lt;p&gt;This is very, very bad stuff.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Employees who decline genetic testing could face penalties under proposed bill</title><url>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/03/11/employees-who-decline-genetic-testing-could-face-penalities-under-proposed-bill/</url></story>