3 ms·
>On a species level we'll probably survive it This is an arrogant assumption. Another assumption, one I find more realistic, is that we're driving full-speed t
by riffic 10y ago
>On a species level we'll probably survive it
This is an arrogant assumption. Another assumption, one I find more realistic, is that we're driving full-speed towards the cliff.
- iand 10y agoIf this is true then I presume you are devoting all your waking hours to preventing it?
- akvadrako 10y agoI'm sure somebody else will take care of it.
- anigbrowl 10y agoIf a cautiously qualified probabilistic statement is your idea of arrogance then you might want to adjust your disapproval thresholds. I've been making pro-environment arguments since the 1980s and I don't care to be lectured to about some imaginary complacency that I don't actually feel, thank you. I'm really quite annoyed by your comment because I've already been through years of climate deniers telling me how 'arrogant' I am ot think humans could change the climate/derail God's plan/whatever, so I don't need pro-environment people calling me arrogant for a cautious assertion lifted out of its context, where I went on to talk about the likelihood of disastrous outcomes in the same sentence.