Overly-confident math models based on unrealistic assumptions are used to avoid crisis-consistent climate policies and to protect global elite privilege, while abandoning our duties to the planet’s most vulnerable.
I’m tired of hearing that optimism is dangerous.
I’m tired of hearing that pessimism is dangerous.
Nothing matters and we’re all gonna die. That’s just how it is. Do your best, eat the rich, make some noise - or don’t and live a comfortable life while you still can.
Hearing narratives like this just leads to inaction. Nobody wants to act when they have no hope.
@gothicdecadence the article argues that the faux-optimism created by faulty IPCC models/assumptions has led to less urgent (and also unjust) policymaking. We need to know what we’re dealing with if we want to start solving it.
It’s also not true that there isn’t hope—even if the worst situation happens, there’s still harm reduction that can be done. All these require knowledge of what’s happening and would happen—instead, the “optimistic” models have caught many people, including scientists who relied on the models, by surprise.
I personally am done acting like I’m helpless even though I know I am one person and my sole contribution doesn’t matter. I’ll do what I can to the best of my abilities and circumstances to reduce my own harm to the planet (including by sacrificing my own lifestyle standards and expectations) and encourage the people in my life to do the same, and in the meantime also learning whatever skills I need in order to best serve and care for my community in the near future (ie growing food, etc).
I completely agree with you friend. We’re not helpless - we can do things here and there and build skills - but we’re also just a tiny cog in a massive machine that doesn’t stop even if we do. It’s a weird thing, trying to do harm reduction and lifestyle changes (which I am too) while also knowing it doesn’t change much. There’s a friction, a cognitive dissonance, that I think is hard for most people paying attention and trying to be good people nowadays.
I do value truth and realism over tenuous hope though, so yes the more accurate the models the better. I just see so many different narratives about how we’re “supposed” to feel about climate change and I personally think that causes emotional stasis regarding activism. I know I certainly struggle with that.
@gothicdecadence I feel you too, friend! I have definitely spent many days (years?) feeling paralysed and helpless. It’s definitely hard watching what feels like everyone else in my country/part of the world/social media just continuing to live as if the future will remain as luxurious and comfortable as it is today. For my own sake I’ve decided to just focus on what I can do—it’s not a lot l, but I have the privilege of being able to learn a little here and there to better put myself in a position of contributing.
Removed by mod
What cracks me up was listening to the radio about how if we get to X temperature it could have catastrophic consequences. Catastrophic consequences are here. It can have even worse catastrophic consequenes.
It’s worth reading the full article — the big concerns are that:
- We’re not living in the worst-case scenario, but it’s still necessary to get emissions down to zero
- large-scale negative-emissions technologies are pretty unlikely, so it’s more important to end fossil fuel use than the models indicate
None of this in any way reverses the idea that if we actually got to zero emissions, we’d see temperatures stabilize, or that it’s impossible to do just that.
