Final answer:
David Hume would argue that historical patterns and contemporary climate events can provide evidence for potential threats, but they cannot guarantee the accuracy of climate change predictions due to the limitations of induction and universal causation.
Step-by-step explanation:
David Hume, a Scottish philosopher, held skeptical views on the reliability of climate change predictions. Hume rejected the principle of induction and the principle of universal causation because he believed that our knowledge is derived from past experiences and observations, which are limited and incapable of proving the necessity of future events.
In the case of climate change predictions, Hume would argue that certain historical patterns and contemporary climate events can provide evidence for potential threats to the planet, but they cannot guarantee the accuracy of those predictions. He would emphasize that climate change is a complex phenomenon influenced by various factors, making it difficult to predict with certainty.
Hume's skepticism towards the reliability of predictions is rooted in his belief that we cannot establish a necessary connection between cause and effect based solely on observations. Therefore, while there might be evidence suggesting climate change and its potential threats, Hume would question the certainty and reliability of those predictions.