> if we're going to get serious about saving ourselves If we were serious about saving ourselves we would have started controlled scaling down of economic acti

> if we're going to get serious about saving ourselves If we were serious about saving ourselves we would have started controlled scaling down of economic activity 30-40 years ago. If we were serious about saving ourselves we would immediately start scaling down fossil fuel usage, but we currently are using more of every fossil fuel on Earth than we were 5 years ago. As I pointed out in another comment, if we take aggressive action and make the most optimistic estimates regarding this path we'll see us reset our emissions back to 2010. Which is nice but not anywhere near enough in a short enough time span to make a difference. If this is the "most encouraging bits of news" then we are in extreme danger. edit: the irrational downvotes comments like this gets would crack me up if it wasn't so sad. We've tried to solve climate change through "more production" for decades now and have only see things get worse. If you disagree with me, please show me some basic estimates about how you have a solution that scales up to working.