2 ms·
I'm not sure I'd say those documents suggest "a pretty complete understanding" by any means, and on their own would hardly constitute convincing proof of the ne
by wizofaus 4y ago
I'm not sure I'd say those documents suggest "a pretty complete understanding" by any means, and on their own would hardly constitute convincing proof of the need to start reducing emissions. But we definitely did have that by the 80s, and 40 years later we're still not taking it seriously.
- omniglottal 4y agoI find it tragic how common this rhetoric exists, where one says we should take something seriously immediately after downplaying the issue with a crippling "[no] convincing evidence" clause. Managing world-ending risk, the bar for conviction simply oughn't be so high. How convinced of the inevitability of a home invasion must one be to lock their doors & get an alarm or a gun?