3 ms·
There's no way to peacefully convince like 20 countries whose budgets all rely on selling fossil fuels to stop selling them, and the same goes for the countless
by htss2013 3y ago
There's no way to peacefully convince like 20 countries whose budgets all rely on selling fossil fuels to stop selling them, and the same goes for the countless buyers whose livelihoods depend on using them. Are you going to mandate they endure mass starvation and economic collapse?
So what is the point of going on about deniers and anti climate XYZ? Even if they all agreed with you, what would change? It seems like pointless scapegoating and divisiveness.
- jfengel 3y agoForty years ago we could have accomplished something. Now I just want everyone to know that climate deniers are liars and bad people. It won't save us from the disasters, but climate denialism also comes with a cluster of other horrific anti social behavior. The political party that makes climate denialism its official platform should not be voted for under any circumstances. That will not stave off disaster long term but it might let us have some cogent national discussion for once while we wait.
- c_crank 3y agoForty years ago "we" could have forcibly stopped the use of fossil fuels, killing billions of people, to spare them the agony of dying at some point in the future from climate change?
- genmud 3y agoAh yes... the all or nothing school of black and white thinking appears. I'm not a climate scientist, activist or am particularly conscious about the environment, but even I know that these effects stack on each other. Had we even flattened emissions, rather than going up and to the right at a steep rate, we could have slowed the problem. As it is, we have drastically increased the amount of impact any meaningful solutions will need. My understanding of the subject is basic, but the changes we are experiencing happen slowly, then quickly and unpredictably.