3

8 comments

[–] Dii_Casses 1 points (+1|-0)

If there is a climate crisis, shouldn’t we address it?

"Change" isn't scary enough. A crisis should be given high priority.

That was, of course, the entire point of shifting the word usage in the first place. Marketing.

[–] smallpond [OP] 0 points (+0|-0)

It is a crisis, and should be given top priority. Unfortunately it's something we set in motion now, and pay for later when we can't change it, and we're far too stupid to plan ahead as a species.

[–] CDanger 0 points (+0|-0)

No, driving Teslas and putting up wind turbines won't fix the ecological harm we're doing. If anything is likely to lead to a real crisis, it is depletion of the fish stock, plummeting natural biomass, plastic waste, depleting aquifers, and extinction of many species. In the grand scheme of things, 2 degree C is meaningless compared to what we are capable of doing and are doing on an industrial scale with zero work or political will to stop because all the political capital gets spend on divisive shrieking autistic Swedish teenagers to keep the media circus of distraction and disorientation going.

The real crisis is to ecosystem destruction and wasteful consumerism and no politician is working against that because it's easier to distract with lies and fear about global warming. All the fake carbon offsets and electric cars do is let companies greenwash their images, keep consumerism rolling along and growing, create political strife to distract people in culture wars or paralyzing guilt, etc. Meanwhile the private jets keep moving as hollywood celebs fly off to their 4th homes and lecture us on the great work they're doing to save the planet and how they can't believe how stupid anybody is for questioning what they say. See a problem here with this whole approach and why plenty of reasonable people see a bunch of bullshit in all of it?

[–] smallpond [OP] 0 points (+0|-0)

No, driving Teslas and putting up wind turbines won't fix the ecological harm we're doing.

Of course I agree...

In the grand scheme of things, 2 degree C is meaningless compared to what we are capable of doing and are doing on an industrial scale

If you read up on climate science, 2 degrees is most likely all we need to screw over civilization. Sure we may collapse before then, largely for other reasons.

divisive shrieking autistic Swedish teenagers

Insulting well-meaning little girls is always a sign of a big man.

The real crisis is to ecosystem destruction and wasteful consumerism and no politician is working against that because it's easier to distract with lies and fear about global warming.

They're pretty intertwined. There's no effective action on global heating without a ton of downsizing, efficiency, ecosystem preservation/restoration.

Meanwhile the private jets keep moving as hollywood celebs fly off to their 4th homes and lecture us on the great work they're doing to save the planet and how they can't believe how stupid anybody is for questioning what they say.

There's some of your own culture-war brainwashing mixed in here. I'm more than happy to condemn the rich, but with things as they stand, I don't give a shit if they use private jets, as long as the ends justify the means. You're right that in almost all cases it doesn't. Focusing on individual contributions is a transparent distraction - it's a whole of society problem and needs a whole of society solution. If the solution involves eliminating the excesses of the rich, or the rich, great. If it doesn't, well, a solution would be still be great, and we could keep working on the rich. Trying to fix all of society's problems at once is of course a recipe for failure. It's similar to people obsessed with racism/colonialism saying that needs to addressed to address global heating - when it doesn't.