Reducing the severity of climate change (we've already signed up for potentially civilization destroying consequences, even if we could go zero emissions today), requires keeping proven reserves in the ground. No amount of "green" energy will impact our future if it doesn't mean we start using less fossil fuels (globally) than today.

Darkly, a disastrous global nuclear war that sends us back in time 500 years would be the most effective and most probable way of achieving this.

We've been getting progressively more dog-eat-dog short-term since Reagan.

Climate hasn't been a real topic of discussion since the Obama administration.

Not because of AI or Iran war. It’s because we, in the US, voted for it to disappear.

The US has been taking steps in the wrong direction wrt climate change and they will undoubtedly be judged to jave been on the wrong side of history on this one.

In the near term, however, Americans will blame everything except man-made pollution for the fallout from climate change.

I don't think climate change is being ignored: AI, war profiteering, ICE, detention centers, destruction of the international system, global fascism are their answer to climate change.

It's not to prevent it, or to mitigate its damages, it's for the people who disproportionately caused it, and have already benefitted from it, to finalize their control over the resources they want. Some of those resources are some of us.

[flagged]