Then please let me keep this topic focused on your most salient point. If you are interested, I'll happily also discuss your other points in other reply threads

Then please let me keep this topic focused on your most salient point. If you are interested, I'll happily also discuss your other points in other reply threads. > My most salient point is that proclaiming an "emergency" of an "existential threat" that requires centralized authority (held by decisionmakers who usually pay no cost for being wrong) is a playbook that's as old as history, and one that almost always resulted in great human toll. We've known for more than 100 years that there might be an impact on our global climate from our use of fossil fuels. We've known for almost 50 years that there is an impact from our use of fossil fuels. After years of stalling and ignoring the ever stronger signals that something is amiss, the world came together in 2015 and agreed to limit the warming of the climate to 1.5°C. Now in 2023 we've blown through that self-imposed limit. The list of likely and dreadful consequences is long and known. I won't repeat them here. Many of them have grave consequences to our global society, some of them are very threatening to social stability. This will have dire consequences. Up to now we've not really been acting. And we should, because with every passing day, the potential outcome slowly but surely slides more and more into the direction of global systemic collapse. For me this is not a "climate crisis". It's a climate crisis, period.