4 ms·
Because, if you read the article, it's actually not "inevitable." What it would take is drastic, coordinated action, lead by the United States, within the next
by pmiller2 6y ago
Because, if you read the article, it's actually not "inevitable." What it would take is drastic, coordinated action, lead by the United States, within the next 10 years to reduce emissions to zero or near zero in order to prevent the worst case scenarios from being realistic. This can be done, but not without the cooperation of the top climate polluters, almost all of which are American corporations. Oh, and also the US government is one of those top polluters.
- Leherenn 6y agoDo you think it can be done? I mean realistically, not theoretically? I see this as far too demanding for everyone, and far too short for viable alternatives to come up to be a realistic target. On the other hand, this year has shown that people are far more prepared to make huge sacrifices for what we think is the greater good than I would have expected just a year ago.
- pmiller2 6y agoHonestly? No, I do not. One thing this year has shown me is that a large portion of the population is 100% unwilling to make any sacrifices whatsoever, however small. It's going to take all of us working together to make it happen.