The 1.5°C climate goal will be breached within 10 years or so. Leading climate scientists overwhelmingly believe there is no way back.

‼️ If you’re an academic and this frightens you, sign our letter to experts working on climate: bit.ly/3f4vtBm

The public needs to hear from trusted experts that they are not only being failed but also deceived. Promises of ‘net zero by 2050’ will not avert catastrophe.

How can governments be held to account if citizens don’t know?

While the public does not know, world-leading climate scientists most certainly do.

96% of surveyed IPCC authors believe we will far exceed 1.5°C of warming.

The IPCC’s most optimistic scenario for staying below 1.5°C involves vast amounts of carbon being removed from the atmosphere to drag temperatures back down.

None of these technologies work at scale today. It is a gamble of epic proportions.

By gambling on sci-fi tech or quietly hoping for a miracle, experts are not levelling with the public.

Citizens are left undefended in the face of ongoing efforts by governments and the fossil fuel industry to resist rapid decarbonisation.

It is not enough to repeatedly say ‘every fraction of a degree matters’ or we need ‘more political will’.

Experts can no longer obscure the failure to meet a global goal with speculation about how that failure can be reversed.

@ScientistRebellion as far as I'm aware, politicians make up only a tiny fraction of earth's population. Shouldn't it be the consumer, that's changing habits?

Is it realistic to force companies into compliance, rather than developing viable alternatives, that consumers prefer, for price, health or other reason?

@franz

Oh, that triggers me. 😉

1/5

Politicians (especially members of national parliaments, governments and other mighty institutions) belong to a tiny fraction of people with enormous power in comparison to billions of people with very, very little power (power to change society). Comsumers should do something, clearly. But they can only change within certain boundaries which are set by... a tiny fraction of people with power. These have by far most responsibility.

@ScientistRebellion

@Voka @ScientistRebellion so you're saying, the people that buy goods; drive car's; fly on holidays - the "consumer" has less impact on the environment, than the politician? It's certainly an interesting thought. Any stats to back this up?

@franz not about the politicians per-se, as part of the state administration, but general super-riches (who sometimes sadly coincide):
Barros, B., & Wilk, R. (2021). The outsized carbon footprints of the super-rich. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 17(1), 316-322. DOI: doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2021.
+
"Carbon emissions of richest 1 percent more than double the emissions of the poorest half of humanity" oxfam.org/en/press-releases/ca and related report

Follow

It's funny how we're trying to blame the super rich, when we ourselves are terribly wealthy compared to the rest of the world - according to your link, we output the largest chunk of carbon, of all classes.

"Climate activists" want the rich countries to pay for it - exactly those where the majority of people are on the streets; those where people have the luxury to miss school, and take a day off. Those that buy a new phone every year, and want a car when they turn 18.

· · Web · 0 · 0 · 0
Sign in to participate in the conversation
PantherX Community

PantherX Community