I'm wondering what the difference is between "climate doom", and realism based on scientific data? Legitimate scientific papers from the 80s and 90s concluded, "we have ten years left to address climate change, before it's too late". These weren't fringe articles, but rather, genuine peer-reviewed papers in recognised scientific journals. So…are these papers suddenly no longer valid? Why is someone who reads these, and concludes that it's too late, called a "doomer"?
...To which I answered:
You busted a troubled narrative. Climate exaggeration has been mainstream for decades, and it is now alarming the alarmists.
...To which I answered:
You busted a troubled narrative. Climate exaggeration has been mainstream for decades, and it is now alarming the alarmists.
No comments:
Post a Comment