It is distinctly unhelpful to keep trying to make people feel bad. People experiencing negative emotions are less capable of effecting positive outcomes.<p>It is also unhelpful to keep referring to individual points like this as illustrative. It's hypocritical and provides ammunition to climate change deniers when they say things like "But this spring was really cold!" Weather is not climate and a year over year comparison of one calendar month is not a trend.<p>This is exactly the kind of nonsense article I would publish if I were a climate change denier.
Is this not anxiety inducing for anyone else? Is that why I see these posts fall away quickly, or is news like this just expected now, and so not that interesting?
The really scary thing about climate change is the time lag. The warming we are experiencing today is the effects of the carbon emitted 20 years ago. If we stopped cold turkey right now we’d still get another 20 years of warming- but we won’t. So 20 years from now, we’re going to look around and go, gee, this is getting bad, but at that point we will be committed already to another 20 years of warming after that.
I expected more from Covid, for it to be a miracle cure for global warming, what with planes grounded and people not in the same consumption patterns.<p>But no, turning off the taps or turning down the taps a tiny bit isn't going to suddenly bring a halt to warming temperatures.<p>Interestingly though we have some people wanting to bring emissions to a halt for climate change reasons. But, with things like Chess you have to think a few moves ahead. Has anyone thought ahead past a drastic cut in emissions? If everyone stopped consuming (as if) and temperatures still went up, how would that work out? It would be a bit like Covid where lockdowns happen but the pandemic is not brought under control, maybe just slowed down for a bit.