9 ms·
I don’t feel unconvinced - which is a good thing, because if I did, the suggestion that it would be because I’m some psychological stage of grief would probably
by fwlr 4y ago
I don’t feel unconvinced - which is a good thing, because if I did, the suggestion that it would be because I’m some psychological stage of grief would probably feel patronizing or dismissive.
“the environment around us has been degrading faster than scientist have been claiming for years.”
But not faster than science reporting has been claiming, since they have pretty reliably been claiming apocalypse in 5-10 years for 60 years now.
- time_to_smile 4y agoWell the real truth is they were right 60 years ago. That was probably our last realistic chance to avoid catastrophe. But we did nothing and as much as doom and gloom might sell newspapers, true despair does not. Every article since they has made use of increasingly unrealistic solutions to create the illusions that there is more time. And again, the "apocalypse" is not a single day's event in the case of climate change. Given that fossil fuel usage continues to climb as well as CO2 (and now methane) emissions it's clear we have chosen the worst case path. The only limiting factor is how much hydrocarbons we can suck out of the ground. We have committed to destruction of our ecosystem and transformation of the biosphere in ways not seen in millions of years on this planet. You don't need to read the news, you can just look at outside and watch it continue to happen at an escalating rate for the rest of your life.