Crossing 1.5 Degrees Isn’t as Bad as You think. It’s Worse.
Posted by TwoRight9509@reddit | collapse | View on Reddit | 258 comments
Collapse related because: This article - perhaps - marks a grim turning point in journalism: The facade of hope and maybe that has been practiced by the average journalist has started to shift, perhaps and in some cases, replaced by blunt truth.
Timidity and denial have left journalism trailing behind science and its stark warnings. Now, the reality is unavoidable - collapse is here, and the narrative - especially the ones writing it - can no longer look away.
“An analysis of the path the world is currently on shows that we’re headed for somewhere between 2.2 and 3.4 degrees of warming. This paves the way for centuries of unimaginable planetary cataclysm.”
“To me, the real consequence of crossing 1.5 degrees isn’t that any one thing breaks at 1.5 degrees. It’s that we’re slipping away from an era in which the community of nations came together for the common good of humanity—and moving toward an everyone-for-themselves descent into nationalism. It’s that any urgency we’ve felt so far, any actions we’ve taken, hasn’t been enough.”
NatanAlter@reddit
I’ve always thought that when effects become unbearable people will eventually take action to reduce emissions. It may be too late but it will be action nevertheless.
Not in my wildest dreams could I imagine the oligarchs to double down on fossil fuel consumption. They obviously think their wealth will protect them, a misconception that will hit them when it is too late.
krillwave@reddit
Even if some people take action it only takes global shipping and air travel and all our corporate overlords to just keep pushing on for more profit and more luxury for them. They won’t stop. They are insatiable.
Dangerous-Sort-6238@reddit
The fact that the majority of them have children. They have access to all the knowledge in the world. They know what’s going on. And they still care more about having more money in this lifetime, than their children’s children having water in theirs.
HarrietBeadle@reddit
I think sometimes having children makes some people behave even more selfishly and short sightedly. I submit as evidence:
The rise of SUVs on the roads in the US in the 1990s. This was before many if any of them were electric. They were in fact mostly gas guzzlers and people knew it. But people chose them and explicitly said so, because they felt that their FAMILY, their own kids were safer and more comfortable in a bigger vehicle.
They wanted what they felt was the biggest and strongest vehicle in part so they would be more likely to survive even if it meant others being in more danger. They wanted the space of a mini van so everyone in their family could be comfortable with all their stuff and plenty of room. The early to mid 90s felt like an arms race on the roads for bigger and bigger grills and vehicles in order for no one in the family to have to sit too close to someone else or forgo their little TV screen, and just try to outlive the guy next door in the event of a road accident. To hell with how it affected others and to hell with the extra gasoline use.
And people outwardly admitted this at that time, saying that their family’s immediate safety and comfort was what was ultimately important.
Yes I get the irony of someone caring about the immediate safety of their family at the expense of doing harm to the ecosystem over the longer term. If pressed on it at the time many would say they felt like their individual choice didn’t matter much in the bigger scheme of things, everyone else was buying them, and well I can’t be the smallest car on the road or that’s more dangerous for my family and my job is to protect my family (full circle you are back to square one of the argument)
bunbunsweet@reddit
You mean, in the USA? In my country people have small cars and it is very rare to have more than 1 vehicle per family. People also bike a lot and take public trans with their kids.
HarrietBeadle@reddit
Yes this was the USA. Sorry I didn’t include that.
MorganaHenry@reddit
Yes, they're everywhere. It happened later in Europe, but it's started here too. I think it may be unfocussed dread of an increasingly dark future, as well as protect mah fambly
m00z9@reddit
BoobTube tells people what they "want". Humans are primates.
lebookfairy@reddit
>The early to mid 90s felt like an arms race on the roads for bigger and bigger grills and vehicles
Still feels that way.
BTRCguy@reddit
If there is a famine the King does not worry that his children will go hungry. If there is a shortage of resources, it is not going to be a shortage for those with wealth and power.
There will be people dying for lack of fresh water at the same time others are bathing in imported bottled water.
nabael27@reddit
The thing is that things will get bad fast, and money will lose its meaning.
Their wealth will not save them from collapse.
BTRCguy@reddit
I think you underestimate wealth and especially power. If anyone is going to still be doing well, it will be those with wealth and/or power.
Plenty of people managed to continue to live lives of luxury during the Black Death, after the fall of Rome, the collapse of the Byzantine Empire, and so on. Either because they had power or had wealth and leveraged that into power. The whole "the guards will turn on their employers" conceit is not borne out by history. Plenty of people whose talent is busting heads will gladly take a paycheck (in whatever form) from someone whose talent is managing an organization, rather than say killing their employer and taking their place.
Sure, if things get so bad that everyone is reduced to digging grubs out of rotten logs with a pointed stick then wealth will be of limited utility, but even in here-and-now collapsed places like Haiti and Gaza people are still using colored pieces of paper as having actual value for transactions. Money is still useful there, and those who have more do better than those who have less.
Zestyclose-Ad-9420@reddit
"The whole "the guards will turn on their employers" conceit is not borne out by history."
without using google, from the top of my head:
-praetorian guards murdering emperors they didnt like
-legionaries naming their own emperors and marching on rome
-the list of one thousand coups in the 200 years at least
-the jannisaries murdering reformist bureaucrats and putting the sultan under house arrest
-the mamluk slave soldiers rebelling and becoming rulers of egypt
-Genghis Khan conquering his former employees of the Jin empire
I agree that the powerful tend to remain powerful. But power is a constantly evolving field, you cant just be passively powerful and coast through disasters. Thats why we like the Sopranos and Game of Thrones, you have to be smart to survive at the top when the system gets shaken up. I think you are confusing the resilience of power *structures* with the resilience of the power-ful. And theres also the fact that I'd hardly say most of the rich and powerful these days are talented at "organisation".
BTRCguy@reddit
And how many of those praetorian guards or legionnaires or coup plotters became emperors, etc.?
And how many simply continued in their old job under new management? They simply traded one wealthy/powerful boss for another. Does not matter if their new boss came from within their ranks or outside, they are still doing the same job they were before.
With hundreds of countries in the world and thousands of years of history, for every one example of a coup or assassination by bodyguards I can give you a hundred governments where this did not happen.
We hear about and remember the ones where bad things did happen because they are the exception. Everyone in the US knows that Lincoln was assassinated, but only a minority of people know the name of the vice president that took over from him, or the president that preceded him. Because those guys weren't assassinated.
Zestyclose-Ad-9420@reddit
Well now you are just agreeing with me while moving the goalposts to pretend you disagree with me.
Power structures are resilient. But powerful individuals often arent, and history is an example in favour, not against.
Having a lot of money cant protect someone forever, they have to actually use that money to translate into real power, especially if said money rapidly loses value.
BTRCguy@reddit
Ahem.
My point was about the immediate bodyguards of the wealthy and powerful ("the guards will turn on their employers"). You are the one whose argument was so weak that you had to move the goalposts to to extend it to legionnaires in the field marching on the emperor (not bodyguards), coups from another branch of government (not bodyguards), slaves rebelling (not bodyguards) and Genghis Khan (not bodyguards).
If you wanted to make your point you should have stuck to Praetorian Guards murdering the emperor and then one of the murderers becoming the new emperor, and showing how often that happened compared to the times it did not. And even in that case, everyone involved except the new emperor is still doing the same damn job, they're just guarding and doing the dirty work of the new boss.
And as long as you are invoking Game of Thrones, as I recall the King's Guard served the king. Not a particular king, just whoever happened to be the king. Same job, new boss. And the only exception was notable as an exception, not a general rule.
Zestyclose-Ad-9420@reddit
i concede. the actual bodyguards rarely take over.
but :nerdface:
the subgroups in a society acting as security and/or military often do. and i guess i will make a hypothetical leap and imagine that a secluded bunker or compound acts as a microcosm, since the dynamics of a personal bodyguard and the dynamics of armed forces in general are very different. but i think im being too pedantic there... im not actually trying to "win" a debate against you, just have interesting conversation
we'd have to talk about a specific case study i guess and analyse it from there. also its funny we are talking in two different posts at the same time.
KR1S71AN@reddit
And I think you might be underestimating how cataclysmic climate change is. This event is unparalleled and unprecedented. The closest thing to this is the Permian-Triassic mass extinction event, the greatest extinction event in the geological record.
https://thecottonwoodpost.net/2019/12/10/modern-climate-change-is-10x-faster-than-historic-global-warming-mass-extinction-events/
Take a look at the graph there. It compares the rate of warming of past mass extinction events to our expected rate of warming. I STRONGLY disagree that money will do much of anything for these morons when shit hits the fan. In the next 20 years, they might be able to hold on to some comfort. Their wealth and their bunkers will shield them for a bit, but make no mistake, that will last very little. Once we get to 3 degrees these guys are FUCKED. They will try to keep things running as usual, they'll probably try to geoengineer the Earth with sulfate or diamond particles, which could cool the Earth by a substantial amount, but that would only mask the heating. It would only delay what's coming, because we won't be able to keep that up for long I think. And we'd need an ever growing amount of sulfate or diamonds because CO2 emissions will not stop. And then the heating will come all at once once the particles stop. These guys are short-sighted and incredibly foolish to think their wealth will do anything for them in these circumstances.
Zestyclose-Ad-9420@reddit
notice in the graph that the faster the warming the less severe the extinction...
Graymouzer@reddit
Thousands of very wealthy people just lost their homes. They can recover of course but the fact is that nowhere on the planet is safe anymore.
kthibo@reddit
I didn’t understand cognitive dissonance until covid.
Morel_Authority@reddit
I still don't understand it.
Ok-Gold-5031@reddit
There’s no one driving the bus, there’s small groups of powerful people that yell at a bus driver that isn’t there. Individually the billionaires aren’t so much different than the rest of us so they are just trying to get more money and more power for themselves because the only way they can help themselves long term even if in the whole all of them doing this brings us to collapse.
kthibo@reddit
Ok, fair. I don’t really get it either, but I watched literal rocket scientists deny all the data and knew there had to be a psychological phenomenon going on.
Taqueria_Style@reddit
I still don't. I'm aware of its existence. I'm guilty of it myself in several areas. Can't say I understand it thought.
Terrible_Horror@reddit
Isn’t it just our way of life? We need to make more money this month or quarter and next because everyone else is doing it too. If we stop, we will be left behind because they are never gonna stop. And climate problem is too big for just one person or corporation to stop so let’s not do anything about it.
greencycles@reddit
I have figured out how to break this cycle. It's quite simple and coming soon.
awesomepossum40@reddit
Is it love?
greencycles@reddit
You'd start at love as the guiding principal, and then work backwards all the way to the forcible disruption of the current landlord/tenant dynamic present in US real estate. Then you'd arrive at the details of my plan.
2xtc@reddit
Is it along the lines of The Great Simplification?
greencycles@reddit
My model gently pushes things toward more complex (because I believe we can handle it and that increased complexity is necessary). After reading very briefly about the Great Simplification and Hagen, he and his listeners would potentially LOVE my model after coming to understand its true goal.
The closest thing that exists to my real estate model is a company called BILT Rewards. I have a different, albeit way more powerful angle on the same exact concept, in my opinion.
kthibo@reddit
Sounds positively anarchist.
greencycles@reddit
On the contrary, the only way for something like this to ever actually function would be as an insurgency deeply embedded within capitalism, hiding in plain sight but untouchable. Anarchy is completely naive and reckless.
Jung_Wheats@reddit
Yeah, but see...they're rich. They can buy water for their children.
The goal is to purchase their way out of the troubles.
hectorxander@reddit
They believe their own hype, everyone around them pretends they are always right, they never have to admit a mistake, and think they would be able to buy their way out of the problem or fix it with magical new tech.
So they know, but they don't think they or their kids will be the ones to suffer, and that they are smarter than everyone else of course.
pippopozzato@reddit
Exactly with climate change one good deed does not counter one evil deed ... by the way we are above 1.6'C of warming already ... LOL.
krillwave@reddit
Venus by Thursday
pippopozzato@reddit
maybe Wednesday ... LOL.
Aromatic-Reach-7125@reddit
That's why so many have built bunkers. They'll be fine, we'll all be toast
json-123@reddit
Bunkers aren't going to help anyone. They will be huge targets for resources and the resources will run out. Not going to stop tens of thousands of people trying to take them over.
Aromatic-Reach-7125@reddit
I guess we just have to wait and see how it plays out, everything is so absurd now that I feel all bets are off.
krillwave@reddit
Ahhh yes lovely bunker life, to me that just sounds like a drawn out lonely death without the luxuries they have above ground.
Aromatic-Reach-7125@reddit
I am sure Zuck's Kauai bunker is pretty posh, but I agree for us non-billionaires a concrete bunker would not be fun. Also it's so gross that he basically stole that land to build it.
WonderIntelligent777@reddit
My ex's family had a bunker, & they used it as a social bargaining chip. It was very weird when the dad showed me his bunker. It was like a 90s condo made of concrete.
Aromatic-Reach-7125@reddit
Reminds me of a Twilight Zone episode with a nuclear bunker and all the neighbors want in
Morel_Authority@reddit
So you're telling me the problem is actually much smaller than we think: a few hundred billionaires...
krillwave@reddit
Yes and the governments they own
SidKafizz@reddit
The problem is feeding, housing, and providing a reasonable life for 8.1 billion people. The billionaires want to make it worse.
Taqueria_Style@reddit
The billionaires want to make them dead and have plausible deniability and their farming and mining and smelting operations continue. They're not getting it done because the goals are at cross purposes with each other and these guys always think they can have their cake and eat it too somehow.
Taqueria_Style@reddit
See the thing is. It all depends on how early in the process they get rid of the competition. Unfortunately for them they've waited too long and the effects are now irreversible. But the world population of 500,000 really, really, really rich people would look very different. Yes, I understand them being really rich and all would still have the emissions profile of about a billion people. Still way less than 8 billion.
It's kind of a moot point now though.
Dfiggsmeister@reddit
And when global shipping and air travel ceases to become viable because travel via boat becomes dangerous from constant massive hurricanes and air travel becomes dangerous due to stronger than normal winds, we will see global supply chains fall apart as quickly as it did during Covid. Covid was a taste of what will happen in a decade or two and at this point, there’s not much we can do to stop it. That train has already left the station, it will only get worse from here.
Anxious_cactus@reddit
It's like deciding to eat healthy and drink tea after you've been diagnosed with stage 4 cancer. It's just insignificant because the illness progressed too much.
We only have a chance if we (metaphorically) figure out chemo and radiation, and even then the illness is so bad we might have a 10% chance of successfuly treating it.
Busy-Support4047@reddit
I think we're doubling down on fossil fuel because as resources dwindle and disasters multiple we're trying to backfill for still-increasing energy consumption.
Whatever pocket of humanity survives a hundred years from now won't even have the wood, soil and animals that our ancestors had, because we will bleed every last inch of this planet dry in our death throes. Bleak af.
againer@reddit
I'm psyched because the end for humanity is nigh. We'll die off and mother nature and the earth will still keep doing her thing.
Mandelvolt@reddit
Their wealth can't protect them from this. Nature doesn't care who you are or what your net worth is, and neither do starving homeless people.
Filthy_Lucre36@reddit
I think we also underestimate the feedback loop of us trying to deal with and contain the damage from climate change. Just looking at the sheer amount of people, vehicles, planes, helicopters and pure logistic might we've brought to contain the LA fires or repair the Helene aftermath. The amount of energy we're using to mitigate the damage is staggering, and no clean energy can compete right now trying to handle these disasters.
Ragnarok314159@reddit
My hot take is that in emergency situations like this, go ahead and use fossil fuels.
Firetrucks need gas engines? Bust them out. Want to use B52 size planes to dump sea water? Knock yourself out. But for everyday usage along with the massive corpo pollution? Nope, end it now.
ChinaShopBull@reddit
My hot take on your hot take is that effectively means “going Amish” except in emergencies. I’m trying to do that. It’s difficult to get others to join me.
cobcat@reddit
This is precisely the problem. We cannot get rid of fossil fuels without dramatically reducing our standard of living. Renewables and especially batteries simply can't keep up with our energy demand.
This is the issue, not oligarchs and billionaires.
Altruistic_You6460@reddit
Sorry but that's a stupid take.
A very small group of people have the power to change this. Billionaires, governments and corporate execs.
Billionaires and oligarchs are 1000% a major issue.
cobcat@reddit
Change what? What meaningful change do you think is currently blocked by billionaires?
Altruistic_You6460@reddit
I didn't say blocked so you've made that up. Which makes me think you're paid or have an agenda.
Making the changes we need requires concerted, collaborative will and effort from people with power. Billionaires, governments and corporate executives are the only people with access to all of those things.
cobcat@reddit
Maybe I misunderstood. What did you mean then? I don't have an agenda, I'm just frustrated by the "simple" solutions that are spouted here. "Oh if only billionaires weren't assholes then we could fix climate change". No. It's not that easy. It's basically impossible to fix climate change unless we deindustrialize.
My point is that this is not enough by far. The most important thing is that it requires the will of the population. That's what's holding us up. Imagine what would happen if those leaders said they want to introduce a 100 % tax on fossil fuels. Gas prices double, everything that uses fossil fuels (which is everything) goes up in price. It would be an absolute bloodbath during the next election. People already can't afford anything, there would be violent uprisings.
Altruistic_You6460@reddit
Ok fair point.
Which means it's chicken and egg. So we're fucked.
cobcat@reddit
Essentially yes. On the plus side, developed countries are not going to be quite as fucked as the global south. We'll probably see hundreds of millions dead from starvation and war in those places.
ChinaShopBull@reddit
It is hard to convince powerful people to act against their own interests. You, however, are very capable of lowering your own standard of living.
Altruistic_You6460@reddit
Which will make how much of an impact? A negligible impact. So it's an unsound strategy to try and repeat negligible impacts until we achieve a sufficient scale of impact to make the impact we need.
ChinaShopBull@reddit
But you’re basically saying you want a greater authority to lower your standard of living for you. We kinda tried that last year—maintaining the functionality of the economy without causing an uptick in unemployment by making things more expensive. So, the population voted for a bozo.
I don’t think there’s a way to solve climate change, or the larger overshoot problem, without consuming less. If authorities enact policies that have the result of lowering consumption, the population will vote those authorities out of power.
JoeBobsfromBoobert@reddit
Oh they are most definitely a big part of the issue
cobcat@reddit
They are a problem, sure, but nowhere near the main one. The actual problem is that our entire industrialized civilization is based on consuming an unsustainable amount of energy. It's billions of people driving cars, eating meat, consuming so much stuff that it's impossible to maintain this without using fossil fuels.
Cement production alone accounts for 8 % of emissions, and we all need places to live. It's pointless to point the finger at a handful of billionaires, we could easily overcome them via a popular movement if we wanted to.
But any meaningful measure to reduce emissions (like a co2 tax) will dramatically increase cost of living for everyone and is extremely unpopular. That's the issue.
Altruistic_You6460@reddit
You can't change what groups of people do without leadership instigating the change.
cobcat@reddit
I agree. But our elected leaders will not do anything that causes them to lose power, and any meaningful change is extremely unpopular.
I think we should invest more in renewables, sure, but the kind of investment we need must lead to cuts somewhere else. And simply "invest in renewables" is not even enough, we ALSO need to reduce our energy consumption, change how our industry works, etc. Hell, the amount of Lithium we'd need to build batteries so our power grid doesn't collapse under a fully renewable system equals something like two decades of Lithium mining.
Ragnarok314159@reddit
We all need to get away from the consumerism shit. Our hyper productivity and infinite growth is destroying, but we all know that here.
I agree with you. Wish there was some magic balance we could have, but if it means the death of the planet then we need to all go Amish and accept life for what it needs to be.
zefy_zef@reddit
It doesn't matter. Like it really doesn't. We can't remove the CO2 that's already there, let alone catch up to what we're putting in now. Best things to do would be balls to the wall extinction avoidance measures. Like immediately.
Fuck the carbon footprint, our species will die if we keep trying to 'fix' climate change.
gnostic_savage@reddit
God and the angels bless you. "Amish" was always all the planet could take. People lack the knowledge of historical conditions to understand that. Every civilization has collapsed from overshoot with one exception so far, China, but that is going to go down with the rest of us. Europe had already done tremendous damage to its own environment by the middle ages, in particular to waters in major population centers from human and animal waste. The Romans never saw a forest they liked standing.
The United States hasn't even occupied most of the western US for 160 years. The last of the "Indian wars" was officially in December of 1891. By 1950 entire rivers were on fire with our industrial pollution, and portions of the Great Lakes were too toxic for people to stand in the water at the shore. We didn't create the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 our of forethought or intelligent planning. It was done because it was already glaringly apparent that we were quickly destroying the whole place in multiple ways.
My great-great-grandmother lived well into her 90s. 160 years isn't very long to trash the entire world.
PaPerm24@reddit
My hot hot take is no, let it all burn to the ground.
arthurthomasrey@reddit
Just be patient.
Successful_Addition5@reddit
Easy for you to say when you don't live here.
heyhodadio@reddit
I live next to the LA fires, it’s not climate change it’s a direct cause of forest mismanagement and lack of preparedness. Journalists have been calling out the lack of brush clearing for over a decade and, despite some of the most rain in years, the reservoir in the palisades was empty because they were fixing the cover or something like that.
heyhodadio@reddit
All you downvoters are hilarious, you hold all of humanity accountable for climate change but not the individuals responsible for one of the biggest releases of CO2 that just undid so much of California’s progress
It isn’t a partisan issue, it’s a competence issue
Johundhar@reddit
Lots of human behavior feedbacks: Climate migration, increased use of AC...
Not sure how much of this is or can be included in climate forecasts
But these are dwarfed (darved??) by carbon used by such actors as the global military, billionaires, AI, etc
Delicious_Crow_7840@reddit
Eventually they'll panic geoengineer. It would be hilarious if they are too greedy though and only make a token effort.
At some point something will go wrong with the geoengineering and then the heating will ramp way up again. Shitty times.
winston_obrien@reddit
Or we’ll get Snowpiercer
etsprout@reddit
Ok that’s a solid movie though, even if I’d be waaaaay at the back of the train.
winston_obrien@reddit
I would be one of the fleshcicles that tried to make it onto the train.
Delicious_Crow_7840@reddit
Maybe. I feel like we'd really have to overshoot spewing water vapor in the ocean or whatever to get to runaway albedo and the rich seem stingy AF about fighting climate change.
More likely we get a program in place and then eventually science deniers get in charge and defund it.
winston_obrien@reddit
I should have specified sarcasm. Nobody will really do much of anything.
Delicious_Crow_7840@reddit
Seems likely.
Deguilded@reddit
I just quoted it in a politics thread, but that book about the rise of Nazi'ism is surprisingly relevant even here.
Each step is not so much worse than the last, and if you didn't take a stand there, why would you take a stand here? And so on.
The great moment of realization we are hoping for will never happen.
etsprout@reddit
The water was fine when I got in, and now it’s only a little warm. I’m sure it will level out soon! Certainly never rise to a boil, that’s preposterous /s
dan-theman@reddit
They are mostly old enough that they know they can live in luxury while the world burns.
saul2015@reddit
the richest ppl in charge are all old and think they can outlive the consequences
KneeBeard@reddit
I think the oligarchs tend to be nazi sympathizing eugenics whores - so it isn't so much that they have a misconception, it is more about them being able to pick and choose which people are more likely to survive the calamity.
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
People will double down on wasteful activities because they have less time left, mark my words. "Live your life like it was your last day" is commonly used motto.
Zestyclose-Ad-9420@reddit
and you can mark my own words then, that those people will be the ones to whine, bitch and scream the loudest when that lifestyle is no longer possible.
TrickyProfit1369@reddit
so true
ThirstyWolfSpider@reddit
I was surprised when YOLO became a catch-phrase for living only for today, as in my youth "you only live once" was a cautionary line implying the continuation "so don't screw it up".
recigar@reddit
i use it either way to justify whatever
ontrack@reddit
From my casual observation it appears to me that people would just prefer to be looking at their phones on their last day.
winston_obrien@reddit
Hey! 😆
stumblingindarkness@reddit
Yep I think since it is the easier, more immediately self preserving solution, it will be the path most people follow. An admission that their future is fucked, so might as well live the best life they can now, even if it means accelerating and worsening our demise. I fear the younger generations have already latched onto such ideals...
slayingadah@reddit
The younger generations didn't ask to be born, and when they were born, it was onto this already destroyed earth.
Give the kids a break. The older generation fucked them over.
stumblingindarkness@reddit
I won't give anyone a break. Nobody asks to be born, that's life. Life is struggle. Doing the right thing, hell even figuring out what the right thing is a struggle. But struggle we must. I do empathise with the difficulty of it all though.
hypnoticby0@reddit
We need to switch them down
Meowweredoomed@reddit
Can't eat money.
No jobs on a dead planet.
Vipper_of_Vip99@reddit
The problem is that the immediate (discounted) cost of reducing emissions will always be higher than the discounted benefits. This is intrinsic to human psychology, and precisely why “discount rates” are a thing. We value $1 today more than we value $1 in 20 years. Said another way, the present value of maintaining fossil fuel consumption will always outweigh the present value of future costs associated with avoiding their use. For that reason, our entire economic engine of the human enterprise will never fundamentally orient itself towards fossil fuel reduction.
GieTheBawTaeReilly@reddit
Or, reducing emissions is largely pointless at this stage, considering both the inertia in the system and the natural feedback loops which have already been triggered.
I am, however, amazed at how little work has gone into adaptation, which in my opinion is a much more useful approach at this point than mitigation.
fortyfivesouth@reddit
That's a dumb take.
You can't adapt your way out of +4C warming.
You have to mitigate (reduce emissions) and adapt.
GieTheBawTaeReilly@reddit
How do you propose we prevent 4C of warning then?
Ghostwoods@reddit
That's a dumb take.
You can't mitigate your way out of +4C warming.
Even if "reduce emissions" meant anything other than "trigger immediate full collapse", it wouldn't help. We've already passed permafrost tipping. We could use Alien Space Magic to instantly stop all emissions and we'd still be utterly and completely screwed.
KR1S71AN@reddit
But can you adapt? My understanding is that no one can adapt to this. Specially given how abrupt the increase in temperature is. Is my understanding wrong?
Ghostwoods@reddit
Adapt to higher temperatures and disaster risks while the world limps on? Yes, if you're rich. Adapt to collapse? Haha, no, there's no chance.
Some people will survive in utterly random places that just happen to have kind microclimates and some decent arable soil, but that's it. Just small pockets of humanity here and there, clinging on. Then, if there's any adapting to +10C over the next 200 years, they'll have to find the way to manage that.
For the staggeringly vast majority of the rest of us... We're just waiting for the hammer to fall.
NatanAlter@reddit
I agree about adaptation. It’s only denial now which is simply a batshit crazy approach.
TyrKiyote@reddit
I think we all ought to be living in earth berm homes, and towns able to support them ought to have a solar array or wind farm.
lebookfairy@reddit
Build me one and I'm there. Unfortunately the housing stock is all stick built homes running on natural gas around here.
TyrKiyote@reddit
For about 300k i could power my thorp with solar, i think.
And for about 80k i could build an earth sheltered home that would last to my EOL, i think.
Working on it.
Taqueria_Style@reddit
80?
Including the land or no? Who's your contractor and where's zoned for this kind of thing?
Johundhar@reddit
"reducing emissions is largely pointless" Not completely. It's never too late to stop making things worse.
Omateido@reddit
Not just adaptation, but preservation. We are proceeding forward as though the thought of running out of resources that people depend on for survival is not even on the horizon. Al it will take is a few bread basket failures and we’re suddenly going to find ourself in a situation where we can’t feed everyone.
KarmaRepellant@reddit
We can thank Russia for destroying the 7th largest wheat producing country in the world.
Exact_Fruit_7201@reddit
Maybe they don’t even think that. They’re just trying to have as good a time as possible before their luck runs out, as they know it will
recigar@reddit
if I don’t burn it he will so I might as well burn enough for the both of us - philosophy of life
jaymickef@reddit
This is kind of the Star Trek approach, in the original series WWIII was so bad that in the aftermath the survivors united and made peace. But I think it’s kind of telling that WWII wasn’t bad enough for that to happen.
ThirstyWolfSpider@reddit
It also appears that the Eugenics Wars of the '90s weren't enough.
jaymickef@reddit
Yes, that's true. And, of course, we've been having "the war to end all wars" fairly regularly.
hippydipster@reddit
Unbearable to whom? Some folks have died. That's pretty unbearable.
The rest of us are bearing it fine though.
sambull@reddit
Wild.. I’ve always thought that when effects become unbearable people will eventually take action to reduce the 'others' for more carrying capacity..
iqueefkief@reddit
they’re just grinding us down and taking everything they possibly can from us in the meantime
disobey81@reddit
Just wait until their private security details turn on them when their bunker food supply runs low. Whoever has the guns and the guts will be calling the shots.
No-Body6215@reddit
That is the truly scary part. How far will they push this. What difference does being a trillionaire make when the world is burning?
ThrowDeepALWAYS@reddit
They are fools.
Centrista_Tecnocrata@reddit
People will not take action.
itsadiseaster@reddit
But the shareholders will need trillions and trillions (as billions won't be enough for them).
Widowmaker89@reddit
There is this idea in liberal circles that if only we had the "right" people in the "right" positions and the population was educated enough to see the facts of what was happening and what was coming, then that would be enough to cause society to move in a different direction.
This infantile view is so exhausting at this point because after decades of having the rug pulled from under us with these fake climate goals and commitments, it should be clear that well meaning people and ideas and education doesn't drive society. Systems do. And this system called capitalism dominates every facet of life, from the planet wrecking economic extraction and consumption to the political system designed to uphold this state of affairs with violence if necessary, to the complete dispossession of the mass of the population of any agency in their own lives, let alone the direction of the societies they belong to.
If capitalism remains the dominant form of economic organization, no one should be shocked that things haven't changed. The way things would have to change would make capitalism obsolete. It is the elephant in the room that most people are afraid to name, because we have been so conditioned to associate our very existence with its continuation. Humans have created and changed and adopted many different forms of social organization many times throughout our history. There is no natural law that says capitalism must continue forever and ever.
Whenever I read articles like this that completely leave out the economic drive towards a dead plant, and then act surprised when their polite marches and climate conferences have had no effect, I already know the authors aren't serious thinkers.
DoctorProfessorTaco@reddit
But isn’t this just trying to trade a very difficult solution for a near impossible one?
Yeah, educating the broader populace about the danger being faced and getting the right people into key positions to bring about meaningful change is very hard. We’ve seen some success, as understanding of the risks of climate change has grown over the last couple of decades and we’re starting to see exponential growth in renewable alternatives, albeit more slowly than the problem requires. But for as difficult and slow as all that is, asking the entire system to change to move away from capitalism as a whole is basically asking for something that will never happen, at least not in the foreseeable future. It’s a reasonable critique of the causes of our current state of affairs, but is an even less actionable solution that the already limited one you deride. I don’t think it’s infantile to try to take actionable steps within the system we’re stuck with, rather than to just hope for a change in system that isn’t anywhere close to happening.
Widowmaker89@reddit
If you are barreling towards a wall at 200mph, and you think you can only muster the strength to brake the car down to 180mph, great you saved yourself a few seconds, but you are still going to hit the wall at 180mph. It is debatable if we are even doing that much in terms of reducing our climate impact.
Just because we are doing our best with what we have does not absolve us from the physical reality of not rising to the challenge of doing what is required to save ourselves. And that is the tradeoff, either we adapt or we die. It is looking less and less hyperbolic to say that by the year given the scale of the recent natural disasters in just the past 365 days.
This system is not held up by anything but our collective imaginations. There are no physical constraints as to why we can't wake wake up tomorrow and change everything. Of course, this is not to say that our collective imagination is not a powerful force; if it wasn't powerful, it wouldn't have had the capability to deform the planet in such an all-encompassing way in a mere 500 years.
However, there are physical constraints to growing enough food for people in an increasingly hostile climate, to rebuilding thousands of houses constantly being burned down or flooded out due to unpredictable weather, keeping major cities well supplied with water. These are hard limits of our planet and and the planet's carrying capacity is shrinking by the decade. These natural forces cannot be negotiated with. However, how we organize human society can. It is not going to be easy. But there is not an option to do less than what is necessary and still have human civilization as we know it come out on the other side of this.
fractalineglaze@reddit
Yes, Great Man Theory is alive and well. Unfortunately.
Mylaur@reddit
We are born into capitalism, so we can't imagine something else. It's just as ingrained as breathing.
quadralien@reddit
How about this as a transition strategy: a global political party. Call it the wiki party. There's a wiki where with the consent of everyone introduce simple principles, starting with just basic human rights, responsibility for all fellow being, environmental caretakership, prohibition of rape and murder. When someone from the wiki party runs for office in any jurisdiction, their platform is the wiki and their mandate is to influence whatever political system they are in towards these principles.
As the influence of the party grows, laws in every jurisdiction converge, and the principles expand their scope until the concept of the nation state evaporates and every ecosystem is managed by local self-rule in harmony with nature and neighbours.
Don't agree with the principles? Don't vote for the wiki party.
guiesq@reddit
No revolution has ever happened through voting in human history.
I'd even say no revolution has ever happened peacefully im human history, so unfortunately, I dont believe voting our way out of this mess is a possibility.
stumblingindarkness@reddit
Is the propagation of the system not a direct result of the lack of the 'liberal' ideals? The 'infantile' view is that if the right people are in the right positions, they will help support system change and transition by providing a workable vision of the future after system change. The 'infantile' view is that if the population was educated, they would hopefully come to the same understanding that the system needs to be changed. Systems don't change before these conditions are met. But we know from history, as you rightly pointed out, systems HAVE changed. What were the driving forces behind those changes?
One historical example (simplified) is the failure of the religious systems in the dark ages to account for the catastrophic loss of life from the black plague - this led to the enlightenment and rationalism leading to new systems overthrowing the old. Is there no parallels we can draw when it comes to climate change?
Widowmaker89@reddit
When I say education doesn't automatically mean change. I'm thinking of all the educated liberals that live in places like LA and Cambridge who are sitting in cushy careers with multi million dollar houses. Social needs clearly state that these places will need to change cost of living structures (I e the housing prices will need to come down dramatically) so standards of living can improve. And as LA burned to the ground last week showed, less sprawl, more fire resistant density and nature barriers, or even increased tax investment in a more efficient fire fighting system.
But they won't do it. They won't agree to that. They won't agree to higher density. Or higher taxes on the top that might threaten to stop spirally home prices from continuing to spiral upwards. They are probably smart enough to know what the problem is, but they are too locked into the incentives of the system to willingly make a sacrifice like that. And it's not even a real sacrifice. Just a smaller relative advantage over the lower rungs of the population. Because lower housing prices doesn't mean you don't have somewhere to live! Unlike not being able to afford a house at all.
And on the right people in right places, can see where the author slips and says AOC launched Green New Deal but golly gee it wasn't enough. The Green New Deal was DOA. Was watered down and parts of it (the business friendly parts) became part of the Inflation Reduction Act. The Green New Deal never made it past the starting line. Why? Because actually doing the real thing would mean at the very least massive increase in govt spending and production of products needed for the transition. Would require reimagining what production would look like, similar to how it would work in a post capitalist world.
You might say, they aren't in power, so they can't do anything. Fair enough. But AOC, Bernie spent their political capital lobbying for Biden to get elected and the failed Kamala campaign without so much as a major concession on these fronts. As soon as the liberal establishment comes into power, the progressives realize they have given up all their leverage. And that's how Biden becomes president while the US is the world's largest oil producer. The Inflation Reduction Act was a joke, EVs are not a solution to the climate crisis and are little more than a handout to the auto giants.
The "right" people that are held up as fighting on the right side more often than not are designed to stifle change, not push it forward.
psychotronic_mess@reddit
The system: capitalism, money in politics, maybe the U.S. government as a whole, will change when it is burnt the fuck to the ground. That will likely happen regardless of what anyone does, but until then it will continue to accelerate on its current course. Being proactive in a less severe manner has been on the table for the last five decades, and would have been the smart move, but here we are. The playing field is too corrupt, and the established levers of power are too entrenched, to do anything else. The public will get their education in real time as they passively watch everything crumble around them. Maybe a few survivors will walk away with lessons learned. Maybe not.
quadralien@reddit
This!
We have technology which completely obsoletes capitalist hegemony, but the cognitive model imposed by this system makes it very difficult to even conceive of another way of living. If we were to put what we have built to effective use, we could stop manufacturing so many things!
Why do most cars spend most of their time parked and the rest of the time moving one or two people around? It's insane!
"But everybody needs a job!" ... no, everybody needs something fulfilling and worthwhile to do! Many things that need doing aren't enjoyable, so anyone willing to do them should be honoured and pampered!
Petrochemicals should be used only carefully and conservatively where the environmental devastation and release of carbon can justify the benefit to the world.
We need a system in which a better way of living makes natural sense. That's not capitalism.
ThrowDeepALWAYS@reddit
Once all the capitalists are under control, there are those pesky other nations who will take full responsibility for their actions. Right?
Busy-Support4047@reddit
Joke's on you, I just multiply anything the media says by about 10x when trying to deduce a more accurate starting point.
GrowYourConscious@reddit
Meh, it was hotter when the dinosaurs were around.
collapse-ModTeam@reddit
Hi, GrowYourConscious. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/collapse for:
Please refer to the Climate Claims (https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/wiki/claims#wiki_climate_claims) section of the guide.
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
You can message the mods if you feel this was in error, please include a link to the comment or post in question.
fungussa@reddit
Well when the dinosaurs were around, sea levels were +200ft higher than today, the tropics were uninhabitable and tropic ocean waters were devoid of life due to hypoxia. You have thought things through at all, have you?
Zestyclose-Ad-9420@reddit
you need to grow your conscious
Similar_Resort8300@reddit
yep we are cooked
LilithFiles@reddit
The writing has been on the wall for at least two decades. Even people who just had their insurance cancelled and their house burnt down in CA wildfires still deny climate science. People don’t want to change, they don’t want to grow up, they don’t want to be responsible (unless it serves institutionalized/industrialized thinking under capitalism). What it means to be an adult in western culture has been severely highjacked (prosperity gospel life problems).
bigbootycommie@reddit
They never will because it isn’t human nature. It’s been proven in studies that if you put a bunch of people in a room and start filling the room with smoke, their first reaction will be to look around and see if anyone else is reacting. If no one reacts, they won’t react either. If someone does react, then they will react.
Then you have the bystander effect. If they see someone injured, they will assume someone else is calling for help.
These two combined - checking to see if anyone else seems that worried plus assuming someone else is fighting - prevent large actions. Then combine that with mass propaganda and you have a population basically trapped by their own instincts.
Collapse2043@reddit
I guess that’s why I don’t drive, fly or eat animal products. I’m always the person who reacts to the smoke, the one who leaves the building when the fire alarm goes off, the one who stops to see if that person is ok etc.
bigbootycommie@reddit
The study did find that there were people who would react occasionally in some of the study sessions where they didn’t include an actor to do it. It was bizarrely rare, but there are people who do it.
Collapse2043@reddit
Just reading all the reasons people are giving for the wildfires on You Tube makes me feel like I’m living the movie, “Don’t Look Up” and that we are surely doomed.
Dumbkitty2@reddit
I have in laws who have worked in Christian television for years promoting the prosperity gospel. It’s really worrying to hear a adult tell you we can abuse the earth all we want, Jesus will just make more; more water, more ores to mine, more oil to pump. And if He doesn’t, it’s still okay. They are going to be taken up into heaven while the sinners get left behind to rightfully burn. I’m just boggled by the thought process.
Aromatic-Reach-7125@reddit
I know people who think like that too. They litter because love of the world is a "sin." So ridiculous.
humongous_rabbit@reddit
Being a piece of shit because a magic book says so? Sounds reasonable. /s
Aromatic-Reach-7125@reddit
Infuriating, these same people literally told me that I was under Satan's influence when I went vegan because God made animals for food and sport.
Dumbkitty2@reddit
I believe it. I was repeatedly called a demon for donating blood to the Red Cross because just anyone could have it. Blood should only be given in directed donations so you can make the person or family “pay for it, one way or another.” There more to it but was too racist even for Reddit.
humongous_rabbit@reddit
Wow, that sounds insane. Is this a common occurence in the US?
Dumbkitty2@reddit
Honestly, I don’t know. I’m from the area Jim Jorden and Vance come from so, lots of churches, but I was raised without a religion and have generally avoid very religious people. This was new to me, however I have read a comment or two over the more racist bits here on reddit over the years.
SpeakerOfMyMind@reddit
Could it be argued the past 3 decades? I'm getting close to my 30s and my whole life I've known nothing would happen. The first presidential election I remember was running on climate change. I grew up listening to scientists beg and plead with the government, corporations, and the general public to take notice.
My entire life has never been if, it's always been when.
Holicionik@reddit
Most people don't care.
I criticize the system but for the vast majority living in developed countries, the system feels very stable. So why change it?
Even mentioning that we should tweak the system makes everyone lose their minds. They cannot imagine a different way of living because we have all been raised in this type of system. Change is scary for humans, but unfortunately mother nature don't give a shit a out that and the change will come even if everyone sticks their heads in the sand and pretends nothing is happening.
Once it happens we will see the biggest freak out in our lives, and with the connectivity of our society, all this will be streamed live.
Maybe after that we will be able to fundamentally change society. I'm not so positive though.
RhetoricalAnswer-001@reddit
"An analysis of the path the world is currently on shows that we’re headed for somewhere between 2.2 and 3.4 degrees of warming. This paves the way for centuries of unimaginable planetary cataclysm."
A very recent study shows that the "headed for " numbers (as above) AND the generally accepted timelines for collapse are both underestimated.
I apologize: I Googled and can't find the article. May be symptomatic of my own collapse as a Boomer who, as a child, ate paint chips, loved old-school diesel exhaust (Yes, it has changed), breathed air pollution 24/7 before leaded fuel was outlawed, and enjoyed playing with mercury from vials stored in his dad's basement. Surprised that I remember all of that.
Terrible_reader@reddit
I want to revolt so bad bc I want to fucking love but we really fucking can’t. They got us by the god damn balls.
TieVisible3422@reddit
The only reason billionaires get away with it is because people let them . . . again and again. We're all going to be fighting each other to the death in 2-3 decades (at most). Let it begin now while I still have a chance not to be murdered by these deniers.
I'll revolt by scamming the deniers so I can afford a bunker. Totally unfair that they get to murder people with their ignorance. Not on my watch. Sell them get rich quick courses since they love instant gratification without long-term consequences.
Unfair_Creme9398@reddit
And how many dollars do you need and do you think you’ll get away with it?
sp0rkify@reddit
But if we don't revolt.. we're all dead anyways.. so, why not? Why can't we?
ChameleonPsychonaut@reddit
Revolt how? Against whom? What channels or options do we have against the “powers that be” that would move the needle even a fraction of a degree? Stop buying stuff and going to work? Burn stuff down? Block highways? Shoot insurance company CEO’s? Regardless of the option, now I have a greatly-diminished quality of life and have made literally no difference in the scheme of things.
Reallyhotshowers@reddit
The issue is revolution requires numbers, and the vast majority of the population is either completely ignorant on this subject or wildly misinformed.
climate-tenerife@reddit
The abysmal failure of journalists to report on the scientific findings throughout the last few decades is what led to such widespread apathy and denial among the population. We are so doomed now, in a large part, because journalism failed to illuminate the masses on the severity of the situation when it mattered: when we could still do something about it.
bristlybits@reddit
I'll say it again and again.
if you want boring regular Americans who don't get it to start caring, say it in fahrenheit. say both numbers. scare the pants off em.
Cheeseshred@reddit
A temperature difference of 1.5C isn't "scary" to the average European either.
The same for 3 C, that's just nothing x2.
A 6 C difference is still barely enough to impact what clothes you wear.
All along, we have called those temp anomalies by their true names:
Everything will be immensely more expensive and horrible weather Mass starvation and death *Annihilation
K10111@reddit
Yeh I agree it’s framing issue but also it just something people can’t or wont imagine could be true. I had a conversation about this with a friend, smart guy, and he just was looking at me like I was describing a fictional universe when I tried to explain what the increases in global average temp means and how fast we are going to start to see (are seeing) the effects. I just don’t know really what to do when reasonable people just won’t accept what’s coming.
gottarespondtothis@reddit
I think this is the fundamental problem with getting people to understand the danger. They think “oh ok so it’ll be 90 instead of 88 in summer so maybe I’ll have to turn the AC up a little. Oh well”.
Dumbkitty2@reddit
Omg, YES! The dedication to freedom units will do use all in. The average person has zero comprehension of the metric system. The smart ones had to buy metric socket sets for work and never gave metric a thought again. If you want people to hear you, you must speak a language they understand.
rsready@reddit
Replace ‘the average person’ with ‘the average American’.
BTRCguy@reddit
Journalists have been reporting on this since the first "hockey stick" chart presented to Congress in the 1980's. You cannot engage in denial of something you have not been informed about.
It is not a failure of journalists speaking, it is a failure of people listening.
climate-tenerife@reddit
But until the last year or so, every story which provided any accuracy in the current trend ALWAYS finished on a "feel-good" note: something like "a team of scientists are developing technology which will trap excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and turn it into soap".
Whenever I've tried to talk to my family about the climate, they spit back those tiny, ineffective examples that things will get better. Just leave it to politicians, science and tech.
We've sleepwalked into disaster, in part, because the truth is always delivered with a spoonful of sugar.
BTRCguy@reddit
I think you illustrate the point. People do not want to be informed that their world is going to collapse. They will latch onto the tiniest message of hope that lets them deny the larger reality. They listen to the part of the story they want to hear. If the news gave them reports of 100% doom, would they listen?
Or would they change the channel?
AcceptableProgress37@reddit
I can give you an illustrative example: my grandmother lived through WW2, was in the Womens' Royal Navy for most of it too. She had no idea just how close the Allies came to defeat in 1940 until the documentary The World At War was shown in 1973, more than 39 years later, despite being relatively well informed at the time. It simply did not occur to her that losing was a possibility.
whereismysideoffun@reddit
Eh, I think most people feel hopeless for being able to affect government. I know plenty of people who are super well informed on climate change and who do nothing about it. That includes environmental activists. With decades of experience with activism, I feel pretty hopeless on any change being possible.
Kerlyle@reddit
There's so many ways I'd like to effect change and so few means. If I had the means I'd build an of grid house that runs off solar panels, with a home garden. Realistically I will not be able to afford that for another 20 years, or never if the system collapses before then. Ideally I'd advocate to those who do have means to make these sorts of changes... But they are consumed by their echo chambers and brainrot. How can I convince a random person to do something if I can't convince my own family.
climate-tenerife@reddit
I feel the same way to be fair. Used to try to effect change when I was in my 20's. Got tired of people ridiculing what I was saying and calling me alarmist etc.
Well, who's laughing now?
None of us, that's who.
ideknem0ar@reddit
I know I feel hopeless. I have enough energy for going to my job and doing intense food gardening in the summer. Or I could quit my job and tilt at climate windmills. I'm sticking with my job where I get a great paycheck that I can use to soften my personal climate doom landing as much as possible. I'm sure there are plenty of others out there who have made the same calculation.
Im_Ur_Huckleberry77@reddit
Guess who's paying those journalists Bub?
Morel_Authority@reddit
It ain't regular people, that's for sure. Almost no one values journalism enough to pay for it.
Im_Ur_Huckleberry77@reddit
I'm so glad I dropped out of journalist school two decades ago, that careerpath coinciding with modern technology and over politicizing everything would've put me a never permanent job and perhaps a quite dangerous one.
mynameisnotearlits@reddit
Lol..... They've been trying for years. No one was listening.
I know it's satisfying to blame a group of individuals for the fantastic shit storm we're about to hit, but journalists aren't the one. That doesn't make any sense at all.
climate-tenerife@reddit
A few have, but not many. The overriding stance of the MSM has always supported the lie that "we still have time", long after this ceased to be true
Rossdxvx@reddit
There could not be a worse time in human history for "everyone-for-themselves nationalism" to arise. I can foresee the world splintering apart akin to a global 1990s Yugoslavia. Inevitably, this also always leads to wars and conflicts. There will also be Children of Men-like scenarios where the wealthy western enclaves will ruthlessly suppress the mass climate migrations that are going to occur.
From the top on down, people will greedily try to hold onto what they perceive as theirs in a world that is disintegrating globally to the detriment of humanity as a whole.
qweiot@reddit
that's definitely going to happen because that's what nations do, but people separating and fighting will just mean the extinction of humanity. meaning there is evolutionary selective pressure in favor of cooperation.
but who knows, maybe we're extinct no matter what we do. in which case, nationalism would be a good thing because it would just hasten the inevitable.
Rossdxvx@reddit
I think collapse is unavoidable. In that case, making it happen faster would perhaps be better. However, I would be a fool to say that I actually want it - to suffer and perhaps die. The longer we put this off the better, yet the longer we put it off the worse it might be. It is a very bad paradox.
Because, let us be honest, most of us here in the West only know of lives of relative comfort. A post-collapse world for whatever remnants of humanity survive is going to be much like surviving a nuclear war. Think of The Road, Mad Max, or The Book of Eli. It’s gonna suck hard.
qweiot@reddit
oh, sorry, what i mean is that the "it" in question is "the extinction of humanity".
basically to reword what i said, when we're in the full swing of collapse, nationalist splintering will definitely happen, but i think it'll be maladaptive.
RichieLT@reddit
“Britain soldiers on”
Zestyclose-Ad-9420@reddit
studying how the yugoslav wars unfolded is a study of collapse; simultaneously entirely avoidable and yet completely inevitable.
i recommend all collapsniks study the yugoslav wars, so they may recognize the warning signs in their own home countries.
Rossdxvx@reddit
I also think studying the rise of Hitler and Nazis is equally as important for our contemporary times. How democracies fail and fascists take advantage of failed, decayed democracies to move in.
daviddjg0033@reddit
Describing Balkanism. Dividing up places. No -ism is going to save us from 2C of warming
xXLegendarySwordUSB6@reddit
Kumbaya my lord KUMBAYAAAA
etsprout@reddit
Fun fact, Kumbaya essentially translates to “come by here”, so yeah….its time to sing.
MorganaHenry@reddit
Toby ruins it for everyone -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc1vrO6iL0U
Nomadent91@reddit
The global top 1% emits the same ghg as the lower 50%. That’s only 80 million people, 1 billion people who care about our future can easily reduce 50% of ghg, how? Disable their carbon emitting toys, literally takes a few 50 cent rounds to the engine.
They buy more toys, we disable more engines. A message will be sent, no people need to be killed. Tho these super emitters need to be in jail. They are killing us (literally, not even figuratively) slowly.
The energy me and you will one day use to run away from disaster and securing resources should be used now, to hold these people accountable and reduce or ghg by 50% .
Of course this assumes the majority of people actually care if we have a world to live on or not, and I guess i genuinely don’t know if that’s the case.
KenGriffencriminal@reddit
it's just social murder bro, no biggie.
god i can't wait until i die
Nomadent91@reddit
You hush! And wait for your turn to be devastated by the climate.
Ya cuz disabling the planes, yachts, super cars is murder, no bud, what’s murder is when billions people start dying once we hit 2 and 3 degree Celsius cuz the 1% couldn’t give up the bloated luxuries in life.
KenGriffencriminal@reddit
i was talking about the social murder billionaires do lol
2legsRises@reddit
lots of fear, few facts. Shit article.
gnostic_savage@reddit
It's been hotter than anytime in human "civilization"?
Human civilization has existed for 6,000 years, and in extremely limited regions of the planet until the last 2000 to 1000 years. CO2 has averaged 220 ppm for 800,000 years. reaching 300 ppm once in all that time, and otherwise not exceeding 280 ppm, and doing that only three times in those entire 800,000 years.
Two days ago Mauna Loa registered CO2 at 427.30 ppm. We are increasing CO2 on average about 3 ppm per year. We will see above 430 by April or May, and 440 within three more years. Or, twice the average for the past 800,000, estimated three million or more years.
You think it's hotter than anytime in human "civilization"? I bet. It might be hotter than anytime since homo sapiens appeared on the planet 315K to 340K years ago. It might be hotter than anytime 500,000 years before that.
lurkertiltheend@reddit
It’s so weird to just sit here and watch it happen. But there’s literally nothing I can do
Cheetawolf@reddit
Don't have kids. They'll just suffer.
karl-pops-alot@reddit
It rained today here in mid-Southern Finland. In January. Rain. Unbelievable
urlach3r@reddit
All together now...
krillwave@reddit
Venus by Thursday!
gobi_1@reddit
Nah, still by Tuesday.
npcknapsack@reddit
If it's sooner than expected, surely it'll be here on Monday.
krillwave@reddit
Can’t be, it’s Tuesday now and the sun is ri——
Butt_acorn@reddit
smash’t ‘er thena breakfast
touchathegrassa@reddit
I think for so long, a lot of people thought it was going to get hotter, but things would be the same. We'd just be cranking our AC on more!
People do not understand the predictable seasons are destabilizing and thus, predictable food via agriculture is becoming limited. Cities do not have the labor, the money, the resources, & the infrastructure to keep stomping our fires (literally in the case of the wildfires, but also all the other related natural disasters/crisis).
We are not going to be able to keep up with all the little things happening here and there and it's going to keep compiling.
As someone else said, a lot of people are going to view this as a shrug of your shoulders kind of moment and just live it up. That will compile to where we will continue with our overshoot, so much so that when that gets corrected, the amount of death is going to be unbelievable, but I do not think there is any of this at this. We've backed ourselves into a corner with no pleasant way out.
whofusesthemusic@reddit
so how its always been then?
The lie of globalization was always that there would be enough for everyone to have whatever they want. That has never been the case.
UpbeatBarracuda@reddit
Honestly, if the media finally told the truth about reality that would be a great relief. One of the most frustrating things about this whole process has been the hopium and the denial. If we could remove that frustration, that would at least be nice in its way.
Greenemcg@reddit
USA voters nothing to fing see hear don’t look up - morons
manntisstoboggan@reddit
“An analysis of the path the world is currently on shows that we’re headed for somewhere between 2.2 and 3.4 degrees of warming“.
Those are rookie numbers. I’d say we’ll look back on those numbers wishing we had that but we’ll all be dead by then..
bipolarearthovershot@reddit
Agreed, 2.2 is like 2-3 years away tops
CaptinACAB@reddit
And we still have people on the climate change sub arguing that all we need to do to counter the warming tipping points is to trigger the cooling tipping points.
I think the people knowledgeable about climate change doing Copium is even more frustrating than the chuds blaming aliens or ancient robots or something.
urlach3r@reddit
They're like, "There's still time! We can turn things around. The car is crashing while on fire and also exploding, but we can make a difference if we all just work together!!!"
slowrecovery@reddit
More like “We can turn the car wound” but the car’s brake pedal has been disabled, and the driver is currently removing the steering wheel, while trying to convince the occupants in the back seat that “Everything is fine. There is still time.” The car continues to careen towards the cliff of boiling lava.
Deguilded@reddit
It's hollywood movie syndrome. There's a dramatic moment, everyone blinks and realizes "the truth" and changes.
And everyone lived happily ever after.
hectorxander@reddit
Like that Onion article from some ten years back or so, that climate scientists who know it's too late to stop climate change put out a statment telling us it's not too late to fix climate change.
Not that we shouldn't try, but some insist we all live in denial so their fragile psyche doesn't have to acknowledge the facts.
BTRCguy@reddit
"If we step on the brakes hard enough it will counteract us having gone over the cliff!"
CaptinACAB@reddit
We just have to convince the right billionaires to invent the right tech in a cave from a box of scraps!
bipolarearthovershot@reddit
I think all the main climate subs are captured by fossil fuel bots and AI and deniers. I had to leave them all for my sanity
TieVisible3422@reddit
Simon Clark recently had a kid. Said that he's fighting for a livable future & what's the point of fighting for that future if there aren't future humans to live it.
These people disgust me more than the deniers. They know better.
HardNut420@reddit
Wtf is a cooling tipping point
CaptinACAB@reddit
It’s when the Copium gets released into the atmosphere in huge quantities apparently.
Deguilded@reddit
What cooling tipping points? The fuck?
KaMilAnRavgs@reddit
Agreed. Is all pure Hopium. Seriously
Desperate-Strategy10@reddit
This is exactly what I fear is going to happen; as we get increasingly desperate, we'll start trying to trigger these cooling mechanisms. But it won't fix the core issue, CO2 will continue to rise in the background, and suddenly we won't be able to grow anything cuz we blocked out the sun. Or the air will be too unsafe to breathe. Or the weather will get so extreme and unpredictable that cities will be wiped off the face of the earth and our infrastructure will finally collapse. Etc, etc...
If we're going to do anything, it should be scaling back our fossil fuel use. Definitely not trying to trigger events we cannot fully understand. But we seem dead set on barreling full speed ahead with FFs, and I'd bet my meager retirement that the powers that be will try some crazy stupid stuff to cool the planet over the next few years. I'm sure it'll be great. 🙄
6rwoods@reddit
I swear that sub is overrun by bots and denialists. They do the classic “I’m not a denier but…” and then repeat denialist talking points they could have only picked up from Fox News or drump’s tweets. Maybe it’s because their sub’s name is the most obviously connected to climate change so that’s where the hoax believing people go to undermine the science, but r climate and r collapse are miles ahead of r climate change in terms of the quality of the discussions and the average level of knowledge of the participants.
willem_79@reddit
I have this horrible feeling that they are trying to reduce the world’s population catastrophically so they can start again with a world of their own making and a more sustainable population. It’s the thing that explains the gleeful abandon mentality more than just greed
PranksterLe1@reddit
Bahh, who cares? We will just rely on our technology and build domes to protect us from our destructive ways! /s
technitrevor@reddit
There are two kinds of suffering in the world: necessary suffering and unnecessary suffering.
Necessary suffering is the kind of suffering we have to endure to fix climate change mainly reaching net negative emissions.
Unnecessary suffering is the kind of suffering we have to endure not changing a dang thing.
One of these could lead to a future for humanity and the other ends humanity. The good news is that we collectively have a choice
HomoExtinctisus@reddit
Is that really what we did? I don't think so.
Malak77@reddit
GOOD! Get me the fk outta here before my retirement savings dry up.
milka121@reddit
I'm sure the descent into nationalism will happen - it's already happening - but we need to abandon this notion of some mythical "global community coming together for the common good." I'm yet to see any one example on how this has happened. Individual rights of individual human beings in individual nations were fought for with blood, not granted when we as humanity reached some higher plane of global understanding. By no means I'm trying to diminish the information explosion of the Internet and other niceties, but all this "global good" has paved the way to nationalism and collapse by its own design and decree.
A better world is possible, still, after it all burns down. Not like this, and not as kind, perhaps. But it is possible.
monkeysknowledge@reddit
Unpopular opinion here: The elites will be relatively fine.
First, I just want to point out that being an oligarch doesn’t mean your smart; it means you’re ruthless.
Secondly, keep a perspective of just how much more wealthy these people are than you. I’ll leave it to your imagination to scale what $1/2 trillion or even a mere $1 billion looks like. Suffice it to say, they are many orders of magnitude more powerful than you.
Now then, in 2050, the planet will likely be between 1 and 2 degrees warmer than today (~2-4 C warmer over the preindustrial era). It will be an era of scarcity and hardships. I picture Dustbowl type of hardships but globally (already a reality for far too many human beings). Nomads, jungle camps, jalopies and hungry children. The elites will have private farms, water resources, planes, and armored vehicles with the police, private fire departments, and private security to protect it. They’ll be fine. Stop worrying about them.
3337jess@reddit
Humans are weird. They like these pieces of paper, but there’s hundreds of different kinds. They decide to manufacture things so far away from where they consume it. They poison acres while protecting small gardens.
-Aliens watching earth right now
NyriasNeo@reddit
"an era in which the community of nations came together for the common good of humanity"
That is just delusional BS hot air. When was the last time the "community of nations" give a sh*t about "the common good of humanity"? It is always about power, leverage and self-interests.
It is a miracle if we stop killing each other for even a single day. WW1, WW2, vietnam war, korean war, 7 day war, cold war, Falkan war, Iraq war, Afghan war, Iraq war AGAIN, and so on and so forth.
Conscious_Drive3591@reddit
The fact that 2024 was the hottest year in recorded history and marked our crossing of the 1.5°C threshold should be a wake-up call for everyone. This isn’t just a number, it’s a sign that we are losing the fight against climate collapse, and the consequences are already unfolding around us. What stands out to me most is the piece's focus on the collective failure to act decisively. We had the Paris Agreement, hailed as a triumph of global unity, yet we’ve blown past the goal it set. It’s not just that 1.5°C is a scientifically significant threshold, it's also a symbol of our inability to treat climate change as an urgent, shared crisis. Instead of pulling together, the world risks spiraling into nationalism and fragmented action, which is the opposite of what’s needed.
I think a lot about how climate change is framed. While big numbers and dire projections are attention-grabbing, they can also be paralyzing. What the article gets right is emphasizing the human side of this crisis. Stories of loss, resilience, and survival make this existential challenge feel personal and relatable. That’s what motivates people to act. At the same time, we can’t ignore the larger systems at play here. The fossil fuel industry, corporate greed, and misinformation campaigns continue to erode progress. Yet, this doesn’t absolve us of responsibility. As the article says, every action matters, even now. Slowing down a crash doesn’t stop the damage, but it can make survival possible. And survival, together, is still worth fighting for.
stonecats@reddit
crossing 1.5 is a symbolic landmark on our way to 2.0 when growing enough food to feed 8bil humans will require many scarifies. imho we went from bad to worse by not killing putin and reversing his invasion of ukraine. this failure shifted energy flow from europe which was trying to become fossil fuel independent to india & china which is only interested in maintaining GDP, meanwhile USA outputs more fossil fuel than ever to feed the euro shortfalls. this shift further silences UN IMF WB EU from even thinking about further climate change reforms, let along action on them. so when you're grand kids have to migrate closer to the poles to survive, you can thank biden's half hearted nato defense strategy and now trump being in putins pocket.
Maj0r-DeCoverley@reddit
I wouldn't call that a turning point in journalism. It's Slate. If you had a democrat in the White House they would spend their time claiming 1.5°C is fine and great solutions are coming.
They're liberals, for baguette's sake. I know in the US you assume liberals are radical leftists, but in Europe rosy eyed liberals like that has been accurately labeled center-right all along and now they're dying because they're useless. I don't even have to open the link to guess that's just rich heirs playing at progressism but mainly concerned about their villas burning in Malibu. Writing grand statements without ever talking about the economy or reality in general.
They're part of the problem, not the solution. Even worse, they're central to the problem because they're ultracapitalists and always has been.
It-s_Not_Important@reddit
There’s a great measure of naivety in a statement like, “we’re slipping away from an era in which the community of nations came together for the common good.” The community of nations came together for profit opportunity in globalism.
Taqueria_Style@reddit
Also known as: journalism playing chicken with Project 2025, just to see if it's serious or not.
Yes, they're always contrarian to whoever's in the White House. Ain't gonna work out this time. I get it's a habit just to be the kid giving Daddy the finger. Daddy's drunk off his ass and he's got his belt out this time.
suzemagooey@reddit
".... any actions we’ve taken, ~~hasn’t been~~ enough.”
wasn't
Like many who's reasoning I found to be solid, I believe we are past any meaningful correction point by many years, if not decades.
soporific16@reddit
Yet another article that doesn't mention the culprit. Get fucked, liberal media!
What is the major cause of environmental destruction? The fact that the capitalist mode of production is the dominant mode and that there exists an enormous power structure to keep it dominant. What happened to Iraq, a country destroyed in 2003, is the perfect example of this power structure.
It's not (just) climate change, it's capitalistically engineered planetary destruction!
Centrista_Tecnocrata@reddit
Ok, but people will not stop having kids, even collapse-aware people. We are fucked.
TyrKiyote@reddit
we're going a lot further than that
diggergig@reddit
'Isn't as bad' narratively implies 'less than.'