I am really dreading the devastation I know this El Niño will bring. As the situation deteriorates, it makes me wonder how I can be most helpful at a time like this. Do I keep trying to pursue my research career or devote even more of my time to warning the public?
“It’s as if the human race has received a terminal medical diagnosis and knows there is a cure, but has consciously decided not to save itself.“
—Prof Lesley Hughes
When a patient receives a likely terminal diagnoses with one obtainable cure, they typically do everything in their power to get to it unless that means leaving themselves or others permanently destitute. Their coming death is very close. So is the only way out.
The cause in both these statements is that global warming will NEVER be an immediate threat. Humans are wired for immediacy, and if the threat is not a right now thing, they switch to ignoring and adapting. Our psychology is wired to try to address the tiger and to adapt to what is unfortunately continual environmental collapse.
Those who understand we literally cannot do that and that a great many of us will die are not equipped to handle that information without simply sinking into increasingly immobile despair, because…what the fuck can I do about it?
I already eat little, don’t even own a car, my worst offense is having internet but it’s necessary for work. My other options are to become homeless again or Amish.
People in many countries are suffering greatly already from natural events that have been kicked up to 20. All I can do is watch. And I do. But more and more as someone who has a large stomach for suffering, even I’m beginning to evaluate what good it’s doing me, as a civilian, to watch.
I can’t help, or I would have. Whatever’s going to happen to me in the future is unavoidable. My choices then are between Despair and Not Despair. This is why the masses won’t pay attention. They don’t have the bandwidth for the entire planet.
The politicians, however, have no excuse for this, and had we less tendency to shut our eyes and stomp our feet and more biological ability to plan in long term, they would be on pikes in the 00’s.
Do I keep trying to pursue my research career or devote even more of my time to warning the public?
Unfortunately, at the risk of sounding defeatist, warning the public is pretty much a lost cause at this point. The ones that are receptive already know (and are seeing it first hand this summer), and the ones who aren’t have their heads so far up their own asses that they’re receiving AM radio. And realistically, there’s not much for the average person to do; it’s the industrial -scale operators that are the largest problem, and they’ll resort to murdering their opposition (both figuratively and literally) before giving up a cent of profit. We as a populace need to full on revolt and take back our health and planet, but we are so effectively convinced our enemies are our neighbors that I really am not sure what to do here.
Not individually, no. Collectively, even if we don’t have everyone, we can go pretty far and we did not too long ago, many times. This is what we should be advocating for, I don’t think there are any other alternatives at this point.
You gotta get the Rs in on it. For a while right and left was more of a friendly rivalry, albeit intense at times. Barring nazis and zealots they’re not all bad. You can see them peaking out every now and then. Tradesmen unionizing, adoption of solar panels, the simple acknowledgment of systemic corruption, the libertarians trying really hard to figure out how to run a country without a government(lol). They’re not all bad extremists. Though they do seem easily controlled by state.
The true dispair is knowing that the ones primarily responsible for the issues we are facing (private jets, mega yachts, hundred million dollar properties, etc.) are completely untouchable by us.
We just get to watch in horror as our world decays and the rich get richer.
I don’t know where you take that from but the super rich are a tiny tiny fraction of the problem.
They don’t buy containerships full of stuff, they don’t eat millions of animals per day, they don’t constitute the vast majority of travel.
Yes, on a per person basis they have an extremely large footprint, but it’s still a drop in the bucket compared to the industries that feed the consumption of the average citizens.
That’s in no way a rich people thing. Polluting less often means that stuff people are used to will cost more or will be less available.
The greens in Germany suggested that maybe meat is too cheap and people should eat it less and maybe also don’t drive your car so much. And a good chunk of the population lost their fucking mind at the audacity to suggest doing something in two sectors that massively contribute to climate change.
The reality is that effective action against climate change is hugely unpopular and politicians realize that it’s often political suicide because people hate change and there is no way to combat climate change without lifestyle changes for every single citizen.
The cold hard truth is our societies need to change from the ground up but it’s a death sentence for any politician to lobby for the changes required. Imagine if a politician came out and said “meat is now banned” and “petrol is now banned”? They would be laughed into obscurity.
We are fucked because we do not yet want off this ride. We want our cheap consumption. The fix is nuanced and multi-facetted and I don’t know if we will get there. Look for geo-engineering to science us out of this. We aren’t going to do the right thing. We’d rather seed the ozone with sulfer dioxide to lower the earth temp.
That politician would be laughed out by his own peers, not even the people of the US. Granted, I know a lot of people that would flip their absolute minds if things like that were banned, but at the end of the day they’ll move on.
The big problem is no one on the floors of the House or Senate would have the balls to vote it in. It’d be the lone politician and his friend. Every couple months they’ll introduce a bill and then have it dashed.
Lobbyists are shit in the US and they contribute to most of our backwards problems. Policies would be getting lobbied by oil and utility companies to stop these politicians. Smear campaigns the whole deal.
The only reason we haven’t made the major life changes we need to make is because it isn’t profitable.
We are not profitable, unless we consume. Unless our money continues to funnel to the top hands we will continue to perpetually destroy our planet. Simple as that.
As citizens, we can only access the changes we need to make based on the size of our income. I can’t afford to get an electric car, fresh ingredients are expensive, I can’t buy a house to then fit it with solar panels.
This change has to come from the people that have the means to change it for everyone, hence the top 400 people holding some 98% of the US currency hostage.
This is not a problem civilians can solve. We can try, but we will fail. The footprint is from the people that can stop it and the only major lifestyle changes would be difficult, but doable for us, it’d be near impossible for the billionaires to adjust to such a degree, and I’m not confident they ever will.
I mean, they’re quite literally not, though. All it takes is luck, firepower, and someone willing take out Taylor Swift.
I’m sure it will have to get one fuck of a lot worse before people in that tax bracket catch it from their own security, but if enough people are self-sacrificing for long enough, they may even have to outlaw guns or something. Which would at least give my wretched corpse a chuckle.
When a patient receives a likely terminal diagnoses with one obtainable cure, they typically do everything in their power to get to it unless that means leaving themselves or others permanently destitute. Their coming death is very close. So is the only way out.
I think our situation is more like that of a decades long cigarette smoker. They know their habit is deadly, and know exactly what the remedy is, but most of them will smoke until they die or until it’s too late because quitting feels impossible. There are smokers that do quit though, everyday.
When a patient receives a likely terminal diagnoses with one obtainable cure, they typically do everything in their power to get to it unless that means leaving themselves or others permanently destitute. Their coming death is very close. So is the only way out.
The cause in both these statements is that global warming will NEVER be an immediate threat. Humans are wired for immediacy, and if the threat is not a right now thing, they switch to ignoring and adapting. Our psychology is wired to try to address the tiger and to adapt to what is unfortunately continual environmental collapse.
Those who understand we literally cannot do that and that a great many of us will die are not equipped to handle that information without simply sinking into increasingly immobile despair, because…what the fuck can I do about it?
I already eat little, don’t even own a car, my worst offense is having internet but it’s necessary for work. My other options are to become homeless again or Amish.
People in many countries are suffering greatly already from natural events that have been kicked up to 20. All I can do is watch. And I do. But more and more as someone who has a large stomach for suffering, even I’m beginning to evaluate what good it’s doing me, as a civilian, to watch.
I can’t help, or I would have. Whatever’s going to happen to me in the future is unavoidable. My choices then are between Despair and Not Despair. This is why the masses won’t pay attention. They don’t have the bandwidth for the entire planet.
The politicians, however, have no excuse for this, and had we less tendency to shut our eyes and stomp our feet and more biological ability to plan in long term, they would be on pikes in the 00’s.
Unfortunately, at the risk of sounding defeatist, warning the public is pretty much a lost cause at this point. The ones that are receptive already know (and are seeing it first hand this summer), and the ones who aren’t have their heads so far up their own asses that they’re receiving AM radio. And realistically, there’s not much for the average person to do; it’s the industrial -scale operators that are the largest problem, and they’ll resort to murdering their opposition (both figuratively and literally) before giving up a cent of profit. We as a populace need to full on revolt and take back our health and planet, but we are so effectively convinced our enemies are our neighbors that I really am not sure what to do here.
Not individually, no. Collectively, even if we don’t have everyone, we can go pretty far and we did not too long ago, many times. This is what we should be advocating for, I don’t think there are any other alternatives at this point.
You gotta get the Rs in on it. For a while right and left was more of a friendly rivalry, albeit intense at times. Barring nazis and zealots they’re not all bad. You can see them peaking out every now and then. Tradesmen unionizing, adoption of solar panels, the simple acknowledgment of systemic corruption, the libertarians trying really hard to figure out how to run a country without a government(lol). They’re not all bad extremists. Though they do seem easily controlled by state.
The true dispair is knowing that the ones primarily responsible for the issues we are facing (private jets, mega yachts, hundred million dollar properties, etc.) are completely untouchable by us.
We just get to watch in horror as our world decays and the rich get richer.
I don’t know where you take that from but the super rich are a tiny tiny fraction of the problem. They don’t buy containerships full of stuff, they don’t eat millions of animals per day, they don’t constitute the vast majority of travel.
Yes, on a per person basis they have an extremely large footprint, but it’s still a drop in the bucket compared to the industries that feed the consumption of the average citizens.
Industries that pollute so much because the rich are spending their money lobbying against laws that could stop them
That’s in no way a rich people thing. Polluting less often means that stuff people are used to will cost more or will be less available.
The greens in Germany suggested that maybe meat is too cheap and people should eat it less and maybe also don’t drive your car so much. And a good chunk of the population lost their fucking mind at the audacity to suggest doing something in two sectors that massively contribute to climate change.
The reality is that effective action against climate change is hugely unpopular and politicians realize that it’s often political suicide because people hate change and there is no way to combat climate change without lifestyle changes for every single citizen.
The cold hard truth is our societies need to change from the ground up but it’s a death sentence for any politician to lobby for the changes required. Imagine if a politician came out and said “meat is now banned” and “petrol is now banned”? They would be laughed into obscurity.
We are fucked because we do not yet want off this ride. We want our cheap consumption. The fix is nuanced and multi-facetted and I don’t know if we will get there. Look for geo-engineering to science us out of this. We aren’t going to do the right thing. We’d rather seed the ozone with sulfer dioxide to lower the earth temp.
That politician would be laughed out by his own peers, not even the people of the US. Granted, I know a lot of people that would flip their absolute minds if things like that were banned, but at the end of the day they’ll move on.
The big problem is no one on the floors of the House or Senate would have the balls to vote it in. It’d be the lone politician and his friend. Every couple months they’ll introduce a bill and then have it dashed.
Lobbyists are shit in the US and they contribute to most of our backwards problems. Policies would be getting lobbied by oil and utility companies to stop these politicians. Smear campaigns the whole deal.
Oh wait…
Humans adapt just fine, billionaires though.
The only reason we haven’t made the major life changes we need to make is because it isn’t profitable.
We are not profitable, unless we consume. Unless our money continues to funnel to the top hands we will continue to perpetually destroy our planet. Simple as that.
As citizens, we can only access the changes we need to make based on the size of our income. I can’t afford to get an electric car, fresh ingredients are expensive, I can’t buy a house to then fit it with solar panels.
This change has to come from the people that have the means to change it for everyone, hence the top 400 people holding some 98% of the US currency hostage.
This is not a problem civilians can solve. We can try, but we will fail. The footprint is from the people that can stop it and the only major lifestyle changes would be difficult, but doable for us, it’d be near impossible for the billionaires to adjust to such a degree, and I’m not confident they ever will.
I mean, they’re quite literally not, though. All it takes is luck, firepower, and someone willing take out Taylor Swift.
I’m sure it will have to get one fuck of a lot worse before people in that tax bracket catch it from their own security, but if enough people are self-sacrificing for long enough, they may even have to outlaw guns or something. Which would at least give my wretched corpse a chuckle.
I think our situation is more like that of a decades long cigarette smoker. They know their habit is deadly, and know exactly what the remedy is, but most of them will smoke until they die or until it’s too late because quitting feels impossible. There are smokers that do quit though, everyday.