I thought the current conclusion is: we’re at the tipping point now that would allow most wildlife to persevere. We need to be changing course now or yesterday to save the majority of even most if any at all. There are efforts, but most habitats are on course for nearly irreversible modifications.
Humanity will survive, at the cost of other wildlife on the planet.
Well that’s about disastrous decimation of wildlife due to climate change, which is technically a separate thing. I was just commenting on the obvious fact that less humans means better outcome overall for the planet and wildlife.
The comment I was making was regarding wildlife. Above, you specifically made a check mark talking about wildlife.
My comment was on topic to your comment.
Human population is affected by the climate of our planet. Part of the reason we don’t have more people is also climate related.
We’re going to drive most wildlife extinct by the currently unfolding action, population size notwithstanding. The damage is done.
This better outcome you speak of doesn’t account for the fact that we’re not changing our behavior now. We should have changed these things 20 years ago.
The current messaging is that we have only 15 years left to figure this out and Limit the increase to 1.5c.
We already failed hard, it’s a question of how much collateral damage to the ecosystem will we cause.
Wildlife will not be ok.
Humans and societies in general will be distressed.
This event might be a large test of our longevity as a species.
The planet will be fine and has been through worse.
I thought the current conclusion is: we’re at the tipping point now that would allow most wildlife to persevere. We need to be changing course now or yesterday to save the majority of even most if any at all. There are efforts, but most habitats are on course for nearly irreversible modifications. Humanity will survive, at the cost of other wildlife on the planet.
Well that’s about disastrous decimation of wildlife due to climate change, which is technically a separate thing. I was just commenting on the obvious fact that less humans means better outcome overall for the planet and wildlife.
The comment I was making was regarding wildlife. Above, you specifically made a check mark talking about wildlife. My comment was on topic to your comment.
Human population is affected by the climate of our planet. Part of the reason we don’t have more people is also climate related.
We’re going to drive most wildlife extinct by the currently unfolding action, population size notwithstanding. The damage is done.
This better outcome you speak of doesn’t account for the fact that we’re not changing our behavior now. We should have changed these things 20 years ago.
The current messaging is that we have only 15 years left to figure this out and Limit the increase to 1.5c.
We already failed hard, it’s a question of how much collateral damage to the ecosystem will we cause.
Wildlife will not be ok.
Humans and societies in general will be distressed.
This event might be a large test of our longevity as a species.
The planet will be fine and has been through worse.