9 ms·
I remember Al Gore saying we got 10 years in 2006. In fact this type of rhetoric has been going on for centuries. [1] [1] https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/
by stackola 7y ago
I remember Al Gore saying we got 10 years in 2006.
In fact this type of rhetoric has been going on for centuries. [1]
[1] https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/08/the-ever-receding-climate-goalpost-ipcc-and-al-gore-12-years-to-save-the-planet-again/ https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/08/the-ever-receding-cli...
- alexandercrohde 7y agoThat's the downside of boys crying wolf... when the actual wolf comes we don't listen.
- yogthos 7y agoExcept nobody was crying wolf. If we took the problem seriously back then, we wouldn't be fucked now. The reality is that we're living through a mass extinction driven by climate change. Over 60% of animals have gone extinct since the 70s. The fact that people are looking at the world today and asking where's the problem is beyond belief.
- weberc2 7y agoIt's not beyond belief; it's that it's happening so slowly that it's not perceived by the common person. And the "crying wolf" that people upthread were referring to was the "this will be irreversible in N years" specifically, not the broader threat of climate change generally.
- RyanDagg 7y ago"Over 60% of animals have gone extinct since the 70s" Citations?
- stackola 7y agoMight be referring to this [1], but it concludes population sizes have gone down 60%, which doesn't sound good either, but is still a different story. [1] https://www.wwf.org.uk/updates/living-planet-report-2018 https://www.wwf.org.uk/updates/living-planet-report-2018
- foolzcrow 7y agoThey are an apocalyptic death cult. The end is nigh submit to the elite or forever perish. How is submitting to the 1% going to save earth? They used to say by the end of the century. Year after year their predictions fail and the cult marches on.
- AstralStorm 7y agoShow us where these predictions fail or that's beneficial to elites who actually want status quo.
- jefflombardjr 7y ago1. Al Gore didn't say this, James Anderson did. James Anderson is a "Harvard University professor of atmospheric chemistry best known for establishing that chlorofluorocarbons were damaging the Ozone Layer." 2. You're right about the rhetoric - it has been around for centuries but so have major ecological disasters. The Dust Bowl alone forced tens of thousands of poverty-stricken families to abandon their farms, unable to pay mortgages or grow crops, and losses reached $25 million per day by 1936 (equivalent to $450,000,000 in 2018).[0] I can hardly fathom the true cost of something that impacts the entire planet. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl
- WillPostForFood 7y agoAl Gore has made the claim multiple times: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ice-caps-melt-gore-2014/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ice-caps-melt-gore-2014/ e.g. in 2007: Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years. Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss.
- stubish 7y agoCould, not would. Like smoking can kill you, not smoking will kill you. It is a common and fundamental English language pattern, clearly indicating doubt and should never be misinterpreted as certainty.
- WillPostForFood 7y agoFair enough, but could is enough to play on people's fears. Immigrant X could be a terrorist. Food additive Y could cause cancer. You can't then claim you didn't say "would". Note that things like tobacco cancer warnings use use can/could not will/would, and the intent of the message is still clear. "SURGEON GENERAL WARNING: Cigar Smoking Can Cause Lung Cancer And Heart Disease." "WARNING: This product can cause mouth cancer."
- jchanimal 7y agoWe kinda had 10 years back in the 80s. Just saying.
- oceanghost 7y agoNo, no. You're the crazy one for thinking the world might not be ending. Remember?