this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2023
648 points (93.4% liked)

World News

38705 readers
13 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In short, we aren't on track to an apocalyptic extinction, and the new head is concerned that rhetoric that we are is making people apathetic and paralyzes them from making beneficial actions.

He makes it clear too that this doesn't mean things are perfectly fine. The world is becoming and will be more dangerous with respect to climate. We're going to still have serious problems to deal with. The problems just aren't insurmountable and extinction level.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 51 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Wow, what a ridiculous straw man.

I haven't heard anyone referring to 1.5 C as apocalyptic. I HAVE heard it described in terms of being a threshold at which climate scientists predicted a certain set of consequences.

What's apocalyptic about the situation is our acceleration towards even greater climate change, and world governments' unwillingness to take the situation seriously.

In the US, for example, Biden passed the greatest climate mitigation law of all time ... and it's grossly inadequate. They're treating it much the same way that the Obama administration treated health care. They patted themselves on the back for passing the ACA, which still left the country in a health care CRISIS, because it was a half measure.

In many ways the absolute worst way you can respond to a crisis is with these types of half measures. Why? Because it acts as a pressure valve, removing all the momentum for real, meaningful change.

Much like the ACA, Democrats will pretend that this is a stepping stone for the next set of reforms... But we only need to look at the ACA to see how flawed that reasoning is. We have not built on the ACA. We have spent a decade watching Republicans chip away at it.

Now we're playing the same game with climate change mitigation. And the price will be hundreds of millions of climate change refugees, war, and famine.

To be 100 percent clear: while the Democrats are incompetent here, the real villains are the Republicans, who are WILLFULLY ignorant of the science, and are the ones forcing either impotent compromise or no mitigation at all.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I haven’t heard anyone referring to 1.5 C as apocalyptic. I HAVE heard it described in terms of being a threshold at which climate scientists predicted a certain set of consequences.

In this speech by the UN Secretary-General, the climate crisis is stated to be an existential threat to the world and already past the point of no return. I think the latter statement exemplifies the kind of rhetoric that Jim Skea believes to be counter-productive.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, I don’t see what he’s getting at. There has absolutely been alarmist rhetoric surrounding climate change, and I see it all the time. Hell, I’ve seen people who think we’re already too late, even if we were to stop releasing CO2 today itself.

Part of me wonders how much the other side has benefitted from the sense of apathy this could create. After all, there’s real value in making stupid people give up entirely, in some ‘we’re doomed’ scenario.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think I do. So much in terms of doom and gloom is being shouted in terms of climate change that many are becoming numb to it, which is dangerous.

He is wrong about 1.5C not being an issue, however. 1.5C != “every place will raise only by 1.5C”. It means localized temperatures in many areas will be much, MUCH higher, as parts of the US are beginning to find out.

Responsible messaging is important, but the looming catastrophe cannot be understated. You or someone you know will likely die from global warming, if it hasn’t happened already.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I know 1.5 is dangerous; after all, we’re already seeing a slew of weather disasters all around the world. This is why now is the time we should scream off the rooftops that it’s not too late, that we can still fix this, because people are starting to wake up just a little more.

Now is the worst time to give into apathy, and to tell people who’re just starting to wake up that we can’t do anything.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think the issue is that some of us know this, but most are getting blasted by the media non-stop, and some of the messaging is even outright denying climate change exists. After a while people get tired of hearing about it.

I don’t have an answer for how to solve that one except to say that regardless of who is saying what or how loud, governments around the world aren’t doing enough. It is amazing to me because at the end of the day, money can slow and eventually stop/reverse climate change. We have the technology, we just need to invest in the required infrastructure and technology to make it happen.

Climate change isn’t political. It will kill all of us if left unchecked.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Problem is that climate change is political. Worse, it’s geopolitical. It’ll take the will of the people to just tell governments to stop plodding along doing the bare minimum and take some real action for once.

What’s happening right now is terrible, but it’s also a chance to wake up the masses in time. I just hope the impetus isn’t lost to apathy.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

4° C is apocalyptic. 1.5° C is still catastrophic and will result in massive floods and global famines.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

But that line of thinking will let some people believe we’re good until we hit that 4° mark. I have no idea how likely some of the tipping points are (AMOC collapse, West Antarctic glacier loss, permafrost melt and methane release) but they sound apocalyptic and much more likely as we increase climate change

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I haven't heard anyone referring to 1.5 C as apocalyptic.

AOC did.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

It’s not straw man, you just reenforced his point, good job.

It’s fundamental social science.