5 ms·
It's really hard to see how it matters at this point. Just as the debate is really getting started we've ensured another 4+ years of not only stasis, but revers
by M_Grey 10y ago
It's really hard to see how it matters at this point. Just as the debate is really getting started we've ensured another 4+ years of not only stasis, but reversal. This, when we already have permafrost melting and releasing methane, and a system with 20+ year delays on inputs. The deniers have "won" in a broadly suicidal sense, barring some kind of technological or literal miracle.
- woogiewonka 10y agoMakes me sad to think about it.
- anigbrowl 10y agoThere's always the unlikely but nonetheless possible political miracle, where people deem the system of governance to be failing and set about changing it. Admittedly the predictable conflicts that would result would themselves come with a significant environmental bill, but you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
- thinkmilitant 10y agoTake heart, the world is larger than America and much of the good we've already done will continue to ripple forward. Adopting the attitude that we've already lost gives a sense of closure to a topic that still requires effort and attention.
- mirimir 10y agoFor sure, "never say die" is great advice, and all. But arguably, it really is too late, to avoid major disruptions for human civilization. So hey, now we can all agree that anthropogenic warming is happening. And dispute about how bad it will be. What we'll find, I suspect, is that exponentials are full of surprises.
- M_Grey 10y agoI find it impossible to muster even a false sense of hope at this stage, and frankly if enthusiasm solved problems they'd all be solved. Throw some realistic hope my way that doesn't include, "First human nature needs to change" or something like that though, and I'll be there. I'm bad at faith, but I'm willing to pin hopes on analytically sound long shots, if they're all I have.