this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2023
648 points (93.5% liked)

World News

39151 readers
2535 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

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 !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


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 1 year 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
[–] HWK_290@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Yes but my point is that the world is already burning... People are dying... Homes are sinking into the ocean... Countless species are being lost. Pray tell, when is it bad enough that it is no longer sensationalistic?

Oh, if only people were as passionate about abortion. I mean, they're not killing that many babies, right? Why the fuss?

Edit: also, 1.5 C is catastrophic. Millions will move or die. Refugees will be pouring out of countries in numbers like we've never seen. Food production won't keep up with demands. Entire ecosystems like corals will be decimated and survive in only tiny pockets. Stop me if I'm being too hyperbolic and making anyone feel paralyzed with inaction though. Better we gently sweep it under the rug as we have done since the 1970s, because then it's not a problem!

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Millions will move or die

So not an existential threat to humanity, then.

This person was picked for the job because their job is to encourage effective means of fighting climate change, and encouraging hopelessness is not effective.

We are likely to see 1.5C. The world will go on, because it has to. Being prepared to deal with 1.5C means not assuming 1.5C is the end of the world.

Stop me if I'm being too hyperbolic

Stop.

[–] HWK_290@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm glad you're fortunate enough not to live in a place where climate change does threaten your very existence...your family... Home... Livelihood

I guess it's just tough luck for people whose homes are falling into the sea or the tens of thousands who are dying from record heat across Europe

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If that's what you took away from my post, it's an even better thing you're a junior scientist and not running the IPCC.

[–] HWK_290@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm sorry, do many people dying not constitute an existential threat to all of humanity? Like, are you seriously arguing the semantics?

All I'm saying is that a gentle hand at the wheel hasn't worked. It isn't working currently. What we have now is a moderate response to an existential threat. We should have done a lot more a lot sooner. I guess 2 becomes the new 1.5...then 3 becomes the new 2... And if we lose a billion or so peeps, that's ok. Just the cost of ensuring we're not all wringing our hands bc the head of the IPC said not to.. Whew!

And thanks for taking a dog at my credentials. I'll have you know my h index is looking mighty fine 😘

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, some people dying is not an existential threat to humanity. "Existential" means that the threat will make humanity extinct.

These are not meaningless semantics. This is core to the message of the article.

You may in fact be some form of scientist, but you are completely incapable of a realistic discussion of mitigation of and solutions to climate change.

[–] HWK_290@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You may find this article illuminating, if reading is your thing: Even if humanity does reduce greenhouse gas emissions enough to stave off the worst effects of climate change—and learn to adapt to some warming that is already inevitable—Setiya says that climate change remains an existential threat to a host of human cultures, traditions, and languages

You might want to avoid the preceding paragraph though, as it states "There is a genuine possibility that within the coming century, we will hit temperatures that are deeply incompatible with the continued existence of human life." Such rampant fear mongering will make you too scawed and make peepee

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I am a literal climate lobbyist, so you don't need to worry about either my knowledge or my inaction due to fear.

What are you doing about this problem? If the answer is "doomposting on Lemmy," thanks for proving everything I'm saying correct.

[–] HWK_290@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I work with national and international governments to develop and deploy effective, data-driven, nature-based solutions to mitigate climate impacts and conserve and/or restore natural systems

We're on the same side.. Let's fight together!

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I hate to break it to you, but things don't just work the way you want them to simply because you need them to. Reality is in no way obligated to meet your needs or conform to your sensibilities