3 ms·
You're mistaking anti-religious-authority behavior for "anti-intellectualism". Climate change is a long-term issue we absolutely should deal with, but the cons
by chrchang523 7y ago
You're mistaking anti-religious-authority behavior for "anti-intellectualism".
Climate change is a long-term issue we absolutely should deal with, but the consequences of not doing as much as ideal are, while large, still normalish-distribution-bad, not apocalypse-bad. Too much of the messaging around climate change to date has been apocalyptic. Realistically, anyone who wants to create a bubble of actually constructive discussion and action in this area in a public forum in 2019 should ban all apocalyptic terms/discussion on sight, to avoid triggering a huge number of people who are offended by bogus apocalyptic claims.
- fzeroracer 7y agoClimate change absolutely is apocalyptic-levels of bad, just not for the nations contributing the most to climate change yet. It seems to me that the people 'triggered' by 'bogus apocalyptic claims' are those that honestly, in my opinion, don't want to face the stark reality that many people are facing right now due to the way we treat our environment and would prefer to cover their ears and hope it goes away. Banning that sort of discussion just means nations like Vanuatu get to continually be silenced.
- chrchang523 7y agoWow, somebody really hasn’t done their homework. Hint: Most of Singapore is at an elevation of <15m; they’re roughly as exposed as Vanuatu. They also have a government with one of the best technocratic track records in the world. And they’re keeping an eye on climate change, but they aren’t panicking.