In short, we aren’t on track to an apocalyptic extinction, and the new head is concerned that rhetoric that we are is making people apathetic and paralyzes them from making beneficial actions.

He makes it clear too that this doesn’t mean things are perfectly fine. The world is becoming and will be more dangerous with respect to climate. We’re going to still have serious problems to deal with. The problems just aren’t insurmountable and extinction level.

  • Holodeck_Moriarty@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    I see this all the time on social media, and it’s frustrating. I don’t want to dampen anyone’s passion for combating climate change (because I agree!), but it’s like a feedback loop for rhetoric that gets more and more extreme.

    Something that starts out as:

    “There was a wildfire in _____. This could be part of a larger trend related to climate change.”

    Turns into:

    “This fire was caused directly by climate change.”

    Turns into:

    “The world is on fire! Take shelter!”

    Turns into:

    “Don’t plan for the future. Don’t have children. Move somewhere cold and start prepping for the apocalypse.”

    You can literally watch this same process happen with every issue that gets traction on social media or cable news. Then one side looks at the most extreme comments from the other side and easily dismisses the whole thing.

    • drphungky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I literally had a convo with two friends this weekend about how they won’t have kids because they think it’s irresponsible to raise them in a world “that might not exist when they’re adults”. The doomsaying and hyperbole is absolutely real.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        What worries me about that thinking is that historically children have been the big reason for people to care about the future and what they’ll leave behind.

        • ANGRY_MAPLE@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, but you can also still care about doing that without having children. I hope that this doesn’t follow those trends.

          People can also love nature, animals, history, the arts, and lots of other things. They might want other people to still be able to enjoy the things that they love in the future. I would still care regardless of if I have kids or not, personally.

      • mrnotoriousman@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I personally don’t want kids, and while that may be a bit of hyperbole, kids being born now are going to be living in a vastly different world 35+ years from now. I think people denying the impacts and going “eh, we’ll figure it out” are worse than the doomers.

      • Holodeck_Moriarty@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        This isn’t uncommon now, and it’s sad. Social media algorithms pushing doom and gloom for clicks are scaring people out of living their lives.

        The whole thing feels very similar to how Fox News scares old people for viewers, except maybe less intentional.