Yep. Right now, the vast majority of people claim to be in favor of climate action, while that same vast majority is complaining about how much it costs to fill up their gas tanks due to Trump's Iran shitshow. And very few seem to recognize that there's an inherent contradiction between wanting climate action and fossil fuels like oil to remain as inexpensive as possible.
I think the missing element in this comment thread is finances. Its hard for people to care about what is going to happen in 30 years when they're struggling to feed their families and are having a hard time affording to commute to work. People are naturally more worried about gas prices going up to the point it isnt feasible for them to get to work than sea levels rising 15 feet.
That's a big part of the problem, and something one of the climate scientists I follow has mentioned. It's called hyperbolic discounting, and it's pretty normal psychology. Given a choice between now and later, most people are going to choose now and worry about later...well, later.
As for struggling to feed their families? Well, that's a bit of a pet peeve for me because I go beyond what people say and look at what the data says. In 2024, people were complaining about the high cost of groceries, and for many it was a factor in voting for Trump, who promised to bring down prices "on day one." What was actually happening in 2024? People were spending more on dining out than on groceries.
Food-away-from-home expenditures as a share of total food expenditures reached a high of 58.9 percent in 2024.
Recent hikes in fast food prices have left many diners cold, but the average American still goes out to eat between five and six times a week. Where they’re choosing to go, though, amid economic uncertainty, high gas and grocery prices, might surprise you.
Yes, I'm sure some people aren't dining out, but even in my poor, small rural town in which the median income is 1/3 the state average, every time I drive through town, the restaurants (fast food, BBQ, coffee shop/food, a couple sit down restaurants) are packed.
Your argument relies on aggregate spending, not median household reality. The US has roughly 24 million millionaires, so restaurant spending is heavily skewed by wealthy households. "Food away from home" being 58.9% of food expenditures measures dollars, not meals, and restaurant meals cost way more per meal than groceries, and is again highly skewed. That does not prove ordinary families are fine.
The median household income was about $83,730 in 2024, and the personal saving rate is only a few percent, so a lot of households have very little cushion.
Also, the ‘5 to 6 times a week’ claim is weak, your source was a random radio station. Better survey data shows closer to 7 to 8 restaurant/takeout meals per month, not 20+ per month. This includes things like buying a coffee as "eating out" too.
You can’t expect people to just change their entire approach on their own. We need a plan, some actual goals/actions to point to and say “we need to do this” as opposed to just “we can no longer do that”. Investing in green energy programs/infrastructure/jobs would be a great start to genuinely foster real change on a large scale… unfortunately the fossil fuel industry has bribed our government to shut those avenues down so that we are left with no options aside from “we have no choice but to keep doing this”.
The willingness for the people elected to represent our interests to cripple our future for more $ in their pockets right now is unfathomably selfish and truly heartbreaking.
We (as in Americans) did have a plan under Biden, and it was called the Inflation Reduction Act. It wasn't perfect, but it was the most significant climate legislation up to that point. And how did Americans respond? By not only continuing to overwhelmingly buy vehicles that required gas, but by just as overwhelmingly buying the biggest and most expensive -- SUVs and pickups, which represent ~80% of new vehicles sold. In the last year of his presidency, when tax incentives were still available, only 10% bought EVs, which is among the lowest rates in the world.
And what are people doing in 2026, when everyone claims to be broke? They're still mostly buying the biggest and most expensive, with only one EV (of the Musk variety) in the top 25.
In a face-eating leopard moment, 77 million voted for "Drill, baby, drill" and the destruction of everything the IRA stood for, and 90 million decided not to vote at all.
I think part of the reason why more people didn’t take steps to change their behaviors even when Biden’s plan came out is because there is still a huge amount of propaganda and similar garbage that is denying the reality that climate change is very real and will be getting more and more extreme. The fact that Biden rolled out that plan was a good start… but the fact that the entire opposing political party constantly denies it (as well as entities like fox news entertainment that lots of people still believe is a legitimate news organization), and in fact encourage people to be even more aggressive with their fossil fuel dependence just to spite those who are trying to push for more intelligent choices is an enormous problem.
We haven't been allowed a choice of an alternative because we can't afford a $1000 financial upset and we're expected to pony up $120,000 or more for an EV while these pollution spewing "Data Centers" are jacking our electric rates through the roof!
We're trying to stay housed, alive, and keep our jobs to do so, and you want us to magically materialize change when we have no means or opportunity to do so?!
Do you know what the definition of a hypocrite is?!
It really sucks to admit but it’s absolutely this. Humans are really ill equipped to deal with potential slow moving threats in mass scale. Or perhaps that’s not true exactly, some humans are ill equipped to suss out the propaganda and others feel it’s too hopeless.
I didn’t love Don’t look up the movie but I really liked the concept because I used to think if we discovered an asteroid coming toward earth for sure, that humanity would likely rise to the occasion and figure out a fix. Now I’m not so sure, but climate change is too much of a slow burn so to speak. Humans are just hopeless in large scales when it comes to such slow moving threats.
Honestly, I keep my side of the road clean, per se, but knowing that only about 10% of the global population is actually doing anything useful in terms of reducing pollution, I'm like.. Ehh, so nothing we do is going to help anyways. China still pumping out more CO2 than the rest of the world combined and they're not going to stop, obviously. Having a few people sacrifice while everyone else carries on like business as usual only ends up hurting those of us who care.
They're pumping out that CO2 in order to supply the sheer amount of crap that the world uses. A disproportionate amount of the product that China produces never stay in China.
Once again, this sub presents a global issue and every comment is US-centric and/or pointing the finger at other countries.
This is what I'm pointing to. You're all indoctrinated to think China is a villain, to the point where it's second nature to accuse them of pumping out CO2 whilst surrounded by chinese products brought to you by american companies.
All countries are taking advantage of chinese manufacture and have for generations now. It's disingenuous to blame them and take advantage of them.
Sure, because I have the power to tell China to stop? Oh wait, I don't have anything like that. Obviously. Neither does anyone else here. I'm not wasting my time and money getting an electric vehicle and getting solar because it will have zero effect. No, that's incorrect, it will only effect me negatively by using my time and money. So you can blame whoever you want, it doesn't matter or change anything about the facts, unfortunately.
that sounds great, until you realize most people aren't going to give up cultural norms they are accustomed too and will retaliate if you try and take them away.
"I just think we need to follow christian teachings of stewarding the Earth as God commanded us in Genesis".
"I value people who are the salt of the Earth like our farmers, it makes sense to follow conservative values of ensuring farmers get the aid they need in securing water and being able to keep having myself and my kids hunting the same land my grandpa took me hunting on".
It's really easy you just have to tell people what they already agree with on a fundamental level.
Otherwise we are talking aboot losers who won't lift a finger to stop us as long as they get their sugar, cigarettes and cat videos.
We’re talking about the same types of people who used horse paste for a virus and still use it for cancer. The same who said vaccines and face masks were unsafe, during a pandemic. The same who think the earth is flat, that goods and demons are real, evolution is unfounded, that Trump is a decent human, etc…
I think it's important to remind people of what achievements they can make locally to their own environment. For example, the UK where I live has fought hard for net zero and reducing plastic waste, but people cry it's not doing anything on a global scale.
Whether that's true or not is debatable. I would argue they have created a market for solar and wind energy for innovators in China to excel and reproduce in their own country, for example.
But more importantly, pollution has gone down massively in London since these initiatives and asthma rates are down. Plastic bag usage has dropped dramatically, so that means fewer plastic bags stuck in trees and polluting our earth here.
Noone wants to live in a grim, toxic environment. That's where the focus should be and that makes a difference by individuals.
That's the problem, only solution environmentalists can come up with is talking. 99% of commentary is just complaining about messaging because you can't try to position yourself in decision making roles in fear of getting called a corporate shill.
Unfortunately, you need to tell people what's going on. But ALSO the good things that can come out to make sure the future is not that completely doomed (dang, i said it again...)
But if you look at the skies you'll see more planes. The hunger for data centers is growing in a rythm never seen and they don't plan on stopping. Wars are on 24h display, people get tense even for the slightest thing.
We have a guy in France, Arthur Keller, that makes tough conferences about those matters. 2 hours. And he says at the beginning to the attendants that they need to stay untill the end on leave at once. Because the first part is the state of things that are and that will be, the second part is the means to ease what is coming.
Either you lie to the people struggling with end of the month stuff, or tell them the truth about the end of this world.
You cannot be taken seriously if you tell them to go the happy sobriety way, when they already struggle not to fall into poverty, and watch rich people on social networks doing rich people's stuff.
Reading these comments leaves me so confused. A. Was there a binding democratic global election to decide whether to continue the use of fossil fuel ? B. Did the global top 1% who hold >1/3 of all global wealth decide to stop climate change but now the 99% are dragging their shoeless feet ? C. Did commenters here arrange an armed rebellion but no one showed up ? D. Is the whole system rigged to accumulate power & wealth to the top no matter the global repercussions ?
If the truth were a great and beautiful thing then we would have never invented lying.
There is no sugar coated way to put things at this point. Best case scenario is mitigation, and if we want to ensure the minimal impact to us and the planet as a whole we needed to start about 20 years ago.
Good luck trying to convince the average American. I unfortunately know a homosexual, Covid denying methhead on Medicaid that watches Fox News. They’re literally too dumb.
Always honestly. Most ppl can’t handle the truth even though they say they want it. If it contradicts their egos they will use any evidence they can possibly find to reconfigure themselves as correct
Yes Thats what they were teaching my 10 year old I brought in an article from Nature (a well respected science magazine) that showed why this approach did not eork The was 25 years ago in Ottawa school system
No kidding, people want to know how climate affects them right now, not how it may affect their grandchildren in the future. Change the messaging to “it will bring an increase of climate refugees to come to your country” and watch them clutch their pearls about how they will be flooded with gasp immigrants.
imo the only thing that really works is locally advocating to make your area better/protect wildlife etc. no one wants to live in a heat island, some cities can reduce AC use if they strategically plant trees etc. sadly this isn’t a priority for most people and councils and it only gets worse from there. environmentalism as a movement is also constantly facing attacks from corporate interests and even where i live where supposed progressives are in power, very often the decisions made reflect corporate interests rather than the will of the people (like continuing to log old growth). it gets pretty demoralizing.
The non stop doom and gloom messaging is bad for overall human health because it creates a barrier to looking at the present for improvement, potential or positivity for the viewer of the messaging. Are saying you disagree or are you saying we need to presently worry more as a society or just environmentalists or what
I am saying that the uninhabitability of the planet will be worse for human health than being told things are not good, and not getting better, which is fact.
You can lie instead, and say the environment is doing great, which it isn't, and that will be good for human health in the present moment, right up until they reap the consequences of what they have sewn.
You can draw up all sorts of things aren't so bad in this and that manner, but on the same token, that may be encouraging inaction as well.
Well thats because the average consumer cannot make a difference. Corporations were the ones who shifted the blame to us to avoid having to take responsibility because they would have to take a massive financial hit. These corporations also pay off our elected officials from both parties. Its all about short term greed.
Doomerism is actually a term used to describe people reacting correctly to an insane situation. Calling them doomed for reacting correctly is actually quite comical when you think about it
Plastic-Caramel3714 | a month ago
Yeah well, telling them that there’s still time to change course and do things differently didn’t really work either.
HealthyBits | a month ago
Exactly. Urgency doesn’t work, advocacy neither.
I just gave up. People just keep going without changing their habits or barely. Fine.
I am doing my thing and that’s it.
Thalenos | a month ago
Which is why you reframe to meet people where they are.
Yes we went over the cliff and tens of thousands of species will go extinct but we can still do work now to protect what we have.
PlasticCheebus | a month ago
Honestly, the apathy is there no matter what you tell people.
Ultimately, they don't want to be bothered by the grim truth and they don't want to make any changes.
JksG_5 | a month ago
"I'll be gone soon anyway, just make my profits first"
Wave_of_Anal_Fury | a month ago
Yep. Right now, the vast majority of people claim to be in favor of climate action, while that same vast majority is complaining about how much it costs to fill up their gas tanks due to Trump's Iran shitshow. And very few seem to recognize that there's an inherent contradiction between wanting climate action and fossil fuels like oil to remain as inexpensive as possible.
Either-Banana-7323 | a month ago
I think the missing element in this comment thread is finances. Its hard for people to care about what is going to happen in 30 years when they're struggling to feed their families and are having a hard time affording to commute to work. People are naturally more worried about gas prices going up to the point it isnt feasible for them to get to work than sea levels rising 15 feet.
Wave_of_Anal_Fury | a month ago
That's a big part of the problem, and something one of the climate scientists I follow has mentioned. It's called hyperbolic discounting, and it's pretty normal psychology. Given a choice between now and later, most people are going to choose now and worry about later...well, later.
As for struggling to feed their families? Well, that's a bit of a pet peeve for me because I go beyond what people say and look at what the data says. In 2024, people were complaining about the high cost of groceries, and for many it was a factor in voting for Trump, who promised to bring down prices "on day one." What was actually happening in 2024? People were spending more on dining out than on groceries.
Food-away-from-home expenditures as a share of total food expenditures reached a high of 58.9 percent in 2024.
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/food-prices-and-spending
What's still happening?
Recent hikes in fast food prices have left many diners cold, but the average American still goes out to eat between five and six times a week. Where they’re choosing to go, though, amid economic uncertainty, high gas and grocery prices, might surprise you.
https://www.wmra.org/2026-05-07/why-sit-down-restaurants-are-beating-out-fast-food-from-value-seeking-diners
Yes, I'm sure some people aren't dining out, but even in my poor, small rural town in which the median income is 1/3 the state average, every time I drive through town, the restaurants (fast food, BBQ, coffee shop/food, a couple sit down restaurants) are packed.
Either-Banana-7323 | a month ago
Your argument relies on aggregate spending, not median household reality. The US has roughly 24 million millionaires, so restaurant spending is heavily skewed by wealthy households. "Food away from home" being 58.9% of food expenditures measures dollars, not meals, and restaurant meals cost way more per meal than groceries, and is again highly skewed. That does not prove ordinary families are fine.
The median household income was about $83,730 in 2024, and the personal saving rate is only a few percent, so a lot of households have very little cushion.
Also, the ‘5 to 6 times a week’ claim is weak, your source was a random radio station. Better survey data shows closer to 7 to 8 restaurant/takeout meals per month, not 20+ per month. This includes things like buying a coffee as "eating out" too.
cityshepherd | a month ago
You can’t expect people to just change their entire approach on their own. We need a plan, some actual goals/actions to point to and say “we need to do this” as opposed to just “we can no longer do that”. Investing in green energy programs/infrastructure/jobs would be a great start to genuinely foster real change on a large scale… unfortunately the fossil fuel industry has bribed our government to shut those avenues down so that we are left with no options aside from “we have no choice but to keep doing this”.
The willingness for the people elected to represent our interests to cripple our future for more $ in their pockets right now is unfathomably selfish and truly heartbreaking.
Wave_of_Anal_Fury | a month ago
We (as in Americans) did have a plan under Biden, and it was called the Inflation Reduction Act. It wasn't perfect, but it was the most significant climate legislation up to that point. And how did Americans respond? By not only continuing to overwhelmingly buy vehicles that required gas, but by just as overwhelmingly buying the biggest and most expensive -- SUVs and pickups, which represent ~80% of new vehicles sold. In the last year of his presidency, when tax incentives were still available, only 10% bought EVs, which is among the lowest rates in the world.
https://ourworldindata.org/electric-car-sales
And what are people doing in 2026, when everyone claims to be broke? They're still mostly buying the biggest and most expensive, with only one EV (of the Musk variety) in the top 25.
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g71006285/bestselling-cars-2026/
In a face-eating leopard moment, 77 million voted for "Drill, baby, drill" and the destruction of everything the IRA stood for, and 90 million decided not to vote at all.
cityshepherd | a month ago
I think part of the reason why more people didn’t take steps to change their behaviors even when Biden’s plan came out is because there is still a huge amount of propaganda and similar garbage that is denying the reality that climate change is very real and will be getting more and more extreme. The fact that Biden rolled out that plan was a good start… but the fact that the entire opposing political party constantly denies it (as well as entities like fox news entertainment that lots of people still believe is a legitimate news organization), and in fact encourage people to be even more aggressive with their fossil fuel dependence just to spite those who are trying to push for more intelligent choices is an enormous problem.
Pandemonium_Fallen | a month ago
We haven't been allowed a choice of an alternative because we can't afford a $1000 financial upset and we're expected to pony up $120,000 or more for an EV while these pollution spewing "Data Centers" are jacking our electric rates through the roof!
We're trying to stay housed, alive, and keep our jobs to do so, and you want us to magically materialize change when we have no means or opportunity to do so?!
Do you know what the definition of a hypocrite is?!
haverchuck22 | a month ago
It really sucks to admit but it’s absolutely this. Humans are really ill equipped to deal with potential slow moving threats in mass scale. Or perhaps that’s not true exactly, some humans are ill equipped to suss out the propaganda and others feel it’s too hopeless.
I didn’t love Don’t look up the movie but I really liked the concept because I used to think if we discovered an asteroid coming toward earth for sure, that humanity would likely rise to the occasion and figure out a fix. Now I’m not so sure, but climate change is too much of a slow burn so to speak. Humans are just hopeless in large scales when it comes to such slow moving threats.
morganational | a month ago
Honestly, I keep my side of the road clean, per se, but knowing that only about 10% of the global population is actually doing anything useful in terms of reducing pollution, I'm like.. Ehh, so nothing we do is going to help anyways. China still pumping out more CO2 than the rest of the world combined and they're not going to stop, obviously. Having a few people sacrifice while everyone else carries on like business as usual only ends up hurting those of us who care.
PlasticCheebus | a month ago
They're pumping out that CO2 in order to supply the sheer amount of crap that the world uses. A disproportionate amount of the product that China produces never stay in China.
Once again, this sub presents a global issue and every comment is US-centric and/or pointing the finger at other countries.
This is what I'm pointing to. You're all indoctrinated to think China is a villain, to the point where it's second nature to accuse them of pumping out CO2 whilst surrounded by chinese products brought to you by american companies.
All countries are taking advantage of chinese manufacture and have for generations now. It's disingenuous to blame them and take advantage of them.
morganational | a month ago
Sure, because I have the power to tell China to stop? Oh wait, I don't have anything like that. Obviously. Neither does anyone else here. I'm not wasting my time and money getting an electric vehicle and getting solar because it will have zero effect. No, that's incorrect, it will only effect me negatively by using my time and money. So you can blame whoever you want, it doesn't matter or change anything about the facts, unfortunately.
Thalenos | a month ago
Then you just do it, we only need 3% of the population to make a system that works, everyone else is too lazy to stop us.
rainywanderingclouds | a month ago
that sounds great, until you realize most people aren't going to give up cultural norms they are accustomed too and will retaliate if you try and take them away.
Thalenos | a month ago
"I just think we need to follow christian teachings of stewarding the Earth as God commanded us in Genesis".
"I value people who are the salt of the Earth like our farmers, it makes sense to follow conservative values of ensuring farmers get the aid they need in securing water and being able to keep having myself and my kids hunting the same land my grandpa took me hunting on".
It's really easy you just have to tell people what they already agree with on a fundamental level.
Otherwise we are talking aboot losers who won't lift a finger to stop us as long as they get their sugar, cigarettes and cat videos.
carterartist | a month ago
We’re talking about the same types of people who used horse paste for a virus and still use it for cancer. The same who said vaccines and face masks were unsafe, during a pandemic. The same who think the earth is flat, that goods and demons are real, evolution is unfounded, that Trump is a decent human, etc…
No matter how you talk to them, they don’t listen
Thalenos | a month ago
That's why you tell them what they already know.
"Big Pharma wants you sick, which is we we need to start growing our own food".
"If the water goes then we will be forced to follow the government, sign this petition to stop big Data centers from controlling you with AI".
StarskyNHutch862 | a month ago
Yeah exactly, the same people burnt down tesla dealers and made owning EV's equate to being a nazi. Idiots.
carterartist | a month ago
No not the same people.
And yes, giving money to a company owned by a Nazi is giving money to a Nazi. It’s called the transitive property.
Not defending their actions, only pointing out the two falsehoods you just made in one sentence
StarskyNHutch862 | a month ago
I can't understand chinese I am sorry brother.
carterartist | a month ago
Or English it seems, "brother".... I wrote everything in English. I get it, MAGAts are pretty stupid.
StarskyNHutch862 | a month ago
I voted for jimmy carter brother.
carterartist | a month ago
He wasn't in the election, "brother"... And I doubt you are 68 or older...
External-Praline-451 | a month ago
I think it's important to remind people of what achievements they can make locally to their own environment. For example, the UK where I live has fought hard for net zero and reducing plastic waste, but people cry it's not doing anything on a global scale.
Whether that's true or not is debatable. I would argue they have created a market for solar and wind energy for innovators in China to excel and reproduce in their own country, for example.
But more importantly, pollution has gone down massively in London since these initiatives and asthma rates are down. Plastic bag usage has dropped dramatically, so that means fewer plastic bags stuck in trees and polluting our earth here.
Noone wants to live in a grim, toxic environment. That's where the focus should be and that makes a difference by individuals.
SureMany9497 | a month ago
That's the problem, only solution environmentalists can come up with is talking. 99% of commentary is just complaining about messaging because you can't try to position yourself in decision making roles in fear of getting called a corporate shill.
Twisted_Cabbage | a month ago
I personally feel that mating and power dynamics will prevent us from ever making the changes we need to save our world.
diablosinmusica | a month ago
The cyberpunk survival guide is a scientific publication now?
RAnthony | a month ago
My thoughts exactly. It's almost entirely satire.
nionvox | a month ago
Apprently that includes using copious amounts of AI art on your website
dorkyitguy | a month ago
I’m glad they’re looking out for the environment
humboldtHue | a month ago
What if we asked people whether Climate Change is real, caused by humans, and we owe it to future generations to reduce the negative effects of it?
Or did they only ask the ridiculous, overblown, straw man version of that question?
DonChapulinChavito | a month ago
"Don't look uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup !"
Unfortunately, you need to tell people what's going on. But ALSO the good things that can come out to make sure the future is not that completely doomed (dang, i said it again...)
But if you look at the skies you'll see more planes. The hunger for data centers is growing in a rythm never seen and they don't plan on stopping. Wars are on 24h display, people get tense even for the slightest thing.
We have a guy in France, Arthur Keller, that makes tough conferences about those matters. 2 hours. And he says at the beginning to the attendants that they need to stay untill the end on leave at once. Because the first part is the state of things that are and that will be, the second part is the means to ease what is coming.
Either you lie to the people struggling with end of the month stuff, or tell them the truth about the end of this world.
You cannot be taken seriously if you tell them to go the happy sobriety way, when they already struggle not to fall into poverty, and watch rich people on social networks doing rich people's stuff.
Homeless-Joe | a month ago
Oh no, the absolutely true message is terrible! Whatever shall we do?
carterartist | a month ago
And yet, those things are facts and the truth.
Yes, people hate hearing the truth. No need for a study on that.
Bennnnetttt | a month ago
We’re not doomed because of anything to do with the state of the planet. We’re doomed because we are literally monkeys with nukes.
JemmaMimic | a month ago
...as Captain Holden of the *Rocinante* keeps reminding us.
Practical-Cellist647 | a month ago
Hundreds of millions are doomed from climate change whether or not nukes go off
Bennnnetttt | a month ago
So not a majority? So the implied all of humanity isnt doomed from climate change..? (Ill just start the downvotes myself)
BR1M570N3 | a month ago
But... I use paper straws.
dorkyitguy | a month ago
The world is on fire, but we’re not all doomed. The rich have been building bunkers and will be fine.
BillDeWizard | a month ago
Reading these comments leaves me so confused. A. Was there a binding democratic global election to decide whether to continue the use of fossil fuel ? B. Did the global top 1% who hold >1/3 of all global wealth decide to stop climate change but now the 99% are dragging their shoeless feet ? C. Did commenters here arrange an armed rebellion but no one showed up ? D. Is the whole system rigged to accumulate power & wealth to the top no matter the global repercussions ?
Xyrus2000 | a month ago
If the truth were a great and beautiful thing then we would have never invented lying.
There is no sugar coated way to put things at this point. Best case scenario is mitigation, and if we want to ensure the minimal impact to us and the planet as a whole we needed to start about 20 years ago.
adognameddanzig | a month ago
Don't look up!
Eva-Squinge | a month ago
“No shit.” Says realist random person. 😂
Spaceboy779 | a month ago
You do realize Billionaires are in charge of all Media pushing those stories and they profit from our apathy, right?
morganational | a month ago
Holy crap, this is the Daddy of obvious studies. 🤦🏽♂️
anonymousasu | a month ago
Good luck trying to convince the average American. I unfortunately know a homosexual, Covid denying methhead on Medicaid that watches Fox News. They’re literally too dumb.
downArrow | a month ago
Since when is telling people the truth a bad idea?
Ok_Possibility_4354 | a month ago
Always honestly. Most ppl can’t handle the truth even though they say they want it. If it contradicts their egos they will use any evidence they can possibly find to reconfigure themselves as correct
Practical-Cellist647 | a month ago
I think people are getting the message on their own
HomemadePaddle | a month ago
Yes Thats what they were teaching my 10 year old I brought in an article from Nature (a well respected science magazine) that showed why this approach did not eork The was 25 years ago in Ottawa school system
NAStrahl | a month ago
r/NoShitSherlock
Yelesa | a month ago
No kidding, people want to know how climate affects them right now, not how it may affect their grandchildren in the future. Change the messaging to “it will bring an increase of climate refugees to come to your country” and watch them clutch their pearls about how they will be flooded with gasp immigrants.
RemusShepherd | a month ago
Well, yeah. A lot of people have decided to do the dance of the red death -- if we're all gonna die, they're deciding to go out partying with a bang.
What we need to do is give people hope. How to do that given the current situation is an interesting puzzle.
missgirlipop | a month ago
imo the only thing that really works is locally advocating to make your area better/protect wildlife etc. no one wants to live in a heat island, some cities can reduce AC use if they strategically plant trees etc. sadly this isn’t a priority for most people and councils and it only gets worse from there. environmentalism as a movement is also constantly facing attacks from corporate interests and even where i live where supposed progressives are in power, very often the decisions made reflect corporate interests rather than the will of the people (like continuing to log old growth). it gets pretty demoralizing.
thecjt | a month ago
It’s terrible messaging for human health
FenrirHere | a month ago
A terrible, uninhabitable environment is even worse.
thecjt | a month ago
The non stop doom and gloom messaging is bad for overall human health because it creates a barrier to looking at the present for improvement, potential or positivity for the viewer of the messaging. Are saying you disagree or are you saying we need to presently worry more as a society or just environmentalists or what
FenrirHere | a month ago
I am saying that the uninhabitability of the planet will be worse for human health than being told things are not good, and not getting better, which is fact.
You can lie instead, and say the environment is doing great, which it isn't, and that will be good for human health in the present moment, right up until they reap the consequences of what they have sewn.
You can draw up all sorts of things aren't so bad in this and that manner, but on the same token, that may be encouraging inaction as well.
The truth hurts. People should at least know it.
Maleficent-Goth | a month ago
Well thats because the average consumer cannot make a difference. Corporations were the ones who shifted the blame to us to avoid having to take responsibility because they would have to take a massive financial hit. These corporations also pay off our elected officials from both parties. Its all about short term greed.
Ok_Possibility_4354 | a month ago
Carbon footprint is a myth ✨sadly, yes
costafilh0 | a month ago
Doesn't matter.
Doomers gonna doom.
They don't want to save the planet, they just want to complain about everything because they are miserable.
Ok_Possibility_4354 | a month ago
Doomerism is actually a term used to describe people reacting correctly to an insane situation. Calling them doomed for reacting correctly is actually quite comical when you think about it