3 ms·
We're affecting it, yes. But we aren't controlling it. There are no intended effects and outcomes that satisfy those intentions. Quite the opposite, actually: W
by ysavir 4y ago
We're affecting it, yes. But we aren't controlling it. There are no intended effects and outcomes that satisfy those intentions. Quite the opposite, actually: We're trying to affect it less and finding it very difficult to do so.
> It’s not a question of whether we can significantly change the climate, we know we can, the question is how we should choose to do that going forwards
This I agree with. What the GP and I are trying to say is that, in our opinions at least, we should choose to do it by adopting practices that minimize how much we affect the climate.
- simonh 4y agoOk, so it's a position opposed to active measures? I can certainly see the argument, there could very well be negative unintended consequences. Ultimately I suppose it's a matter of balancing the risks. If controlling emissions proves unrealistic, or if a feedback effect kicks in like melting oceanic methane or tundra melting, then active measures may be the only option left.