Even aggressive reduction in CO2 emissions look bad for the majority of the world’s population. The more likely scenarios put New York and Bangkok under water; leave Spain, Italy and Greece as deserts; a third of corn and wheat yields gone; tropical storms at least 25% more destructive; and over a third of existing species extinct.

It would seem to me that not using every means at our disposal to prevent this amounts to a monumental evil of which the human species has never seen. I don’t think it’s hyperbolic to say that a world-wide, multi-species Shoah looms. And yet, more commonly, people speak only of pragmatic and feasible solutions. These have more to do with discursive and ideological battles (i.e. stressing education, research, etc.) than material rearrangements of our communities.

The energy and oil industries, the cultures of mass production, and those who would defend the status quo are condemning billions to death, and eradicating the Earth of countless species.

What would be a symmetrical response even look like?

How many gigatons of Carbon Dioxide...?

How many gigatons of Carbon Dioxide...?


One Response to “The futures of our world and symmetrical responses”

  1. Michael A. Lewis, PhD

    Climate change is not a religion, not even a philosophy. There is no “monumental evil.”

    This is a faith-based diatribe based on McKibbens “Do the Math.” It didn’t work for McKibben, and it doesn’t work here.

    Climate change has occurred for millennia and continues today. There’s nothing humans can do to change that geological reality.

    Get over it and start accommodating!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *