In order to make meaningful change, we need to tax fossil fuels at a very high rate. I can't imagine this is a politically viable option. But until we enact change at the societal level, individuals choosing to give up meat or bike to work aren't really doing much to save the planet. Then of course there is the issue that many other countries would need to do the same. It's all quite overwhelming to think about.

Yep no way to stop it. We would have had to start in the 60’s.

Climate change is exponential. So everything will seem fine till it’s not.

It's irreversible but doesn't have to be as bad. I don't think voting is enough given the dysfunction of our government, lack or urgency among most Democrats, and length between elections; I think we all have to become activists in our own way. I am not sure what to do but I included a couple climate-based orgs in my year end giving.

Anonymous wrote:We’ve been hearing this climate crisis global warming nonsense for decades.

The difference now is people are more gullible and stupid to fall for the scam and willfully and happily get taxed to death to ‘save the planet’

And this is why I say half the world is in denial.

Anonymous wrote:I work for a conservation organization and we often have lectures from experts in various fields, often climate related.
In a recent one, the speaker said that if we got to a carbon negative planet, we could reverse the global temperature increase. However, we cannot undo the melted ice caps. So, sea level rise is here to stay but if we acted, we could undo warming and the increased related weather incidents.

OP here. So that means we have to actually all agree to tighten our belts once and for all. The U.N. panel from August said that we have to limit the rise in temperature to less than 2 degrees. So not only do we have reverse the trend of about 30-40 year (a trend most of our salaries are built on, even if only indirectly), but also get to zero net emissions.

That means we have to get super polluting countries in Asia and the Middle East to shut down their energy and transport infrastructure. But that probably ALSO goes for energy and transport infrastructure in the rest of the world too.

To stay within the 2 degree limit, we need to basically halt industry and infrastructure in EVERY place. That means convincing Texas as much as China.

We also have to redirect government money for this. When I spoke about the Blue/Red divide, I am saying that both sides are corrupt and inert. And I just don't see our government - blue OR red - redirecting spending to save us from an apocalypse.

I bet people are still in denial about climate change even after December wildfires in snowy Colorado.

Just look at the facts I'v put up there and tell me if saving our planet is even feasible. Like, realistically. I might be gloomy today but I'm starting to think of back-up ideas like a bunker or something.

We’ve been hearing this climate crisis global warming nonsense for decades.

The difference now is people are more gullible and stupid to fall for the scam and willfully and happily get taxed to death to ‘save the planet’

I work for a conservation organization and we often have lectures from experts in various fields, often climate related.
In a recent one, the speaker said that if we got to a carbon negative planet, we could reverse the global temperature increase. However, we cannot undo the melted ice caps. So, sea level rise is here to stay but if we acted, we could undo warming and the increased related weather incidents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It is irreversible but can ALWAYS be mitigated. Please vote for politicians who will enforce legislation to mitigate climate change.

OP here. I think we need to end the tyranny of our Blue/Red divide, at least here in the U.S., before voting leads to any meaningful changes. But yes, I agree otherwise.

I agree with this as well. I have been voting for the environment for a number of elections now. And that has meant that all of my votes have pretty much gone towards the blue. But I really wish we can get over this blue red divide that we have. It is the downfall of our country.

Are you voting to bring manufacturing back to the US to comply with US environmental standard? China is the number one polluter and a lot of it is coming from their factories which US companies use.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It is irreversible but can ALWAYS be mitigated. Please vote for politicians who will enforce legislation to mitigate climate change.

OP here. I think we need to end the tyranny of our Blue/Red divide, at least here in the U.S., before voting leads to any meaningful changes. But yes, I agree otherwise.

I agree with this as well. I have been voting for the environment for a number of elections now. And that has meant that all of my votes have pretty much gone towards the blue. But I really wish we can get over this blue red divide that we have. It is the downfall of our country.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if we were in a "calm apocalypse" does it really matter if it can't be changed?

OP here. It does matter. Do you have kids? What exactly would you plan to leave them if our civilization is being destroyed by Nature?

The dinosaurs were destroyed by nature. It's the natural progression of things. There will be a time on earth post humans and it doesn't bother me.

Anonymous wrote:
It is irreversible but can ALWAYS be mitigated. Please vote for politicians who will enforce legislation to mitigate climate change.

OP here. I think we need to end the tyranny of our Blue/Red divide, at least here in the U.S., before voting leads to any meaningful changes. But yes, I agree otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:Even if we were in a "calm apocalypse" does it really matter if it can't be changed?

OP here. It does matter. Do you have kids? What exactly would you plan to leave them if our civilization is being destroyed by Nature?

It is irreversible but can ALWAYS be mitigated. Please vote for politicians who will enforce legislation to mitigate climate change.

Even if we were in a "calm apocalypse" does it really matter if it can't be changed?

Would especially like to hear from geologists and meteorologists in the crowd. The horrific wildfires in Colorado have really hammered it home for me that maybe the time for optimism is over.

You all probably remember that in August of this year, the U.N. held a panel on climate change which essentially said that:
- some climate changes that we've already seen are irreversible (e.g. flooding, wildfires, and drought)
- because of this, the polar ice caps are melting so sea levels will continue to rise no matter what - we can't reverse it now
- yearly small increases in temperature are having big effects

Does that mean all we can do now is mitigate, not reverse, climate change? And is even mitigating it realistic when half the world refuses to believe climate change is real and/or doesn't want to cut their profits and growth in order to mitigate climate change?

Sooo...I'm asking this in the most sober and non-sensationalist way possible...are we legit living through a calm apocalypse?