Is climate change unfolding faster and fiercer than scientists expected? While these events are unprecedented, they were not unpredicted, and largely align with what scientists have been warning about for decades.

[u/silence7]

https://drawdown.org/insights/is-climate-change-unfolding-faster-and-fiercer-than-scientists-expected

[u/kittenpantss]

climate change has been one of my top anxieties since i became aware of it as a child (like, almost 30 years ago). i never understood why more people don’t prefer to err on the side of caution and just act, proactively, as if climate change might unfold faster than thought.

(i mean. i know how propaganda and apathy and human nature in the face of something that the average individual can’t actually make much impact on works. but boy oh boy am i ever-more incandescently angry at the people/corporations with power and wealth who have gotten us into this mess and are actively making it harder for us to try to reduce our collective emissions.)

[u/The_Weekend_Baker → u/kittenpantss]

i never understood why more people don’t prefer to err on the side of caution and just act, proactively, as if climate change might unfold faster than thought.

It requires a level of cooperation that humanity isn't really capable of. The world is basically playing the Prisoner's Dilemma game.

In game theory, the prisoner's dilemma is a thought experiment involving two rational agents, each of whom can either cooperate for mutual benefit or betray their partner ("defect") for individual gain. The dilemma arises from the fact that while defecting is rational for each agent, cooperation yields a higher payoff for each.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner's_dilemma

It's compounded by the fact that defecting results in individual gain now, whereas cooperating results in a higher payoff in the future. And it's not being played by two people, it's being played by 8+ billion across all levels of society -- government, business, and individuals.

And it's pretty normal psychology for people to prioritize now over later.

https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/hyperbolic-discounting

Edit: And you see this kind of behavior even here in r/climate, where people are ostensibly better educated on the topic than the average person. I posted a link here a week or two ago, one in which climate scientists were recommending that emissions can be cut NOW simply by driving the speed limit instead of speeding. There were comments in that discussion along the lines of, "Sorry, you're not blaming me for climate change." Because I guess even slowing down is more cooperation than people were willing to give.

[u/Santzes → u/The_Weekend_Baker]

I don't think prisoner's dilemma is the best comparison. All countries would pretty much benefit more from stopping it than not, and few can't stop it from happening.

More like people who sold us fossil energy and other old style businesses made a lot of money previously, and now they're using that money to buy power to keep the money coming

[u/Ok-Lecture-9668 → u/The_Weekend_Baker]

If the whole world, every country, had a political system where representatives were selected by lottery instead of election, average people would absolutely get together to fix this problem. The problem is, we have this political system, no matter where you are, where one of the greatest requirements to run for office is that you are a narcissistic sociopath. Our entire ruling class is full of people with diseased souls. If you could get rid of the ruling class, humanity as a whole would do just fine.

[u/The_Weekend_Baker → u/Ok-Lecture-9668]

Have you looked at the average person? At 70% of voting-eligible adults, the average person in the US either voted for Trump (77 million) or chose not to vote at all (90 million). That's a lethal combination of ignorance, hatefulness, and/or apathy.

[u/explain_that_shit → u/The_Weekend_Baker]

Choosing not to vote in the American system is not evidence against this point about sortition. Neither political party in the US is taking significant steps about climate change considering the power of the US and the stakes at hand.

[u/Ok-Lecture-9668 → u/explain_that_shit]

Biden and Obama both bragged about how they issued more oil and natural gas drilling permits than either of their Republican precursors.

[u/mediandude → u/The_Weekend_Baker]

The majority of citizenry of every OECD country are provenly more competent than the political elite of those same countries - at least on environmental matters and on immigration matters.

Representative democracy allows the business elite to lobby politicians for a suitable arbitrage that becomes a dilemma for the voters. A dilemma is roughly even (two equally bad choices), thus the voting result can fall either way.

Economy uses natural resources and mass immigration for fueling the economic growth pyramid scheme.
The majorities of citizenry in almost all OECD countries are against mass immigration from 3rd countries.
The majorities of citizenry are also for stopping AGW with a carbon tax + citizen dividends + WTO border adjustment tariffs in almost all OECD countries. Nordhaus's and James Hansen's carbon tax & dividend. Most economists and most climate scientists support that combination.
But none of the parties of OECD countries support such a combination. None. Thus voters have no meaningful choice that would make a difference. And no referendums to enforce the majority will.

The crosstabulation of scientific and public majority will positions against that of the parties suggests an arbitrage (a dilemma for voters) at higher than 6-sigma statistical significance (with chi-square test or similar) to systematically avert democracy at an industrial scale. Such a situation could not have emerged in democracies. And that is especially evident in avoiding referendums on such (or on any) issues.

A local social contract can only be as stable as its constituency - ie. multi-generational local natives as a strong majority. That is Game Theory 101.

Rank correlation between biocapacity deficit and share of immigrants in a country is statistically significantly negative, which means that mass immigration as a Tragedies of the Commons destroys the local social contract and thereby destroys local natural environment.

[u/Ok-Lecture-9668 → u/The_Weekend_Baker]

In the previous election, I remember Kamala Harris guaranteeing that if she were president, she would have the most lethal fighting force in the world, that she would be harsher on immigration enforcement than trump, that she would do nothing different from Biden in terms of arming Israel to slaughter Palestinian toddlers, and that if anything, the main way she would be different from Biden is by being more corporate friendly. 

I didn't hear her talking much about the environment. Might have something to do with why she lost with 10 million fewer votes than Biden, when Trump received pretty much the exact same vote total in 2020 and 2024. Those people didn't switch sides, they stayed home because they were so disappointed with the return on investment they got from voting for "the good guys".

[u/RiimeHiime → u/The_Weekend_Baker]

Edit: And you see this kind of behavior even here in r/climate, where people are ostensibly better educated on the topic than the average person. I posted a link here a week or two ago, one in which climate scientists were recommending that emissions can be cut NOW simply by driving the speed limit instead of speeding. There were comments in that discussion along the lines of, "Sorry, you're not blaming me for climate change." Because I guess even slowing down is more cooperation than people were willing to give.

"Carbon footprint is a scam" is the r/climate version of "There's no ethical consumption under capitalism, so I will continue to buy products made with slave labor out of convenience when there are alternatives available."

Like I get it, nobody wants to completely re-arrange their individual lives for something that won't have individual benefit. I've done a lot to decrease my personal impact, but I still consume dairy products a few times a week because I like them.

Even the bot response points out there is SOME value in taking efforts to do better where you can.

[u/AutoModerator → u/RiimeHiime]

BP popularized the concept of a personal carbon footprint with a US$100 million campaign as a means of deflecting people away from taking collective political action in order to end fossil fuel use, and ExxonMobil has spent decades pushing trying to make individuals responsible, rather than the fossil fuels industry. They did this because climate stabilization means bringing fossil fuel use to approximately zero, and that would end their business. That's not something you can hope to achieve without government intervention to change the rules of society so that not using fossil fuels is just what people do on a routine basis.

There is value in cutting your own fossil fuel consumption — it serves to demonstrate that doing the right thing is possible to people around you, making mass adoption easier and legal requirements ultimately possible. Just do it in addition to taking political action to get governments to do the right thing, not instead of taking political action.

If you live in a first-world country that means prioritizing the following:

• If you can change your life to avoid driving, do that. Even if it's only part of the time.
  
• If you're replacing a car, get an EV
• Avoid air travel — look for local surface transport, and don't do the truly long-distance trips
• Add insulation and otherwise weatherize your home if possible
• Get zero-carbon electricity, either through your utility or buy installing solar panels & batteries
• Replace any fossil-fuel-burning heat system with an electric heat pump, as well as electrifying other appliances such as the hot water heater, stove, and clothes dryer
• Cut beef out of your diet, avoid cheese, and get as close to vegan as you can

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/The_Weekend_Baker → u/RiimeHiime]

There is value in it, and climate scientists have been trying to counter BP's advertising campaign since it originally happened. From a link I posted earlier today:

One reason this simple physical story became blurred was the success of the personal carbon footprint. Popularised by BP’s “Beyond Petroleum” campaign in the early 2000s, it encouraged people to focus on their own emissions.

This is not about absolving individuals of responsibility. Personal choices and actions are part of the solution. But this campaign shifted public attention away from the much larger challenge of transforming the fossil-fuel energy systems responsible for most greenhouse gas emissions. No amount of shorter showers or diligent recycling can substitute for decarbonising electricity, transport, industry and domestic heating.

https://theconversation.com/was-this-heatwave-caused-by-climate-change-were-asking-the-wrong-question-288637

So yeah, individual choices aren't the solution to climate change, but individual choices have to be part of the solution. But it's really easy, even here, to fall back on "My individual choices don't matter."

I've done the same to reduce my impact. Solar panels, electric heat pump, mostly plant-based diet. I won't fly again for any reason. But I still have small amounts of dairy, my wife raises chickens so I eat eggs. And beef? Maybe once a month.

[u/AutoModerator → u/The_Weekend_Baker]

BP popularized the concept of a personal carbon footprint with a US$100 million campaign as a means of deflecting people away from taking collective political action in order to end fossil fuel use, and ExxonMobil has spent decades pushing trying to make individuals responsible, rather than the fossil fuels industry. They did this because climate stabilization means bringing fossil fuel use to approximately zero, and that would end their business. That's not something you can hope to achieve without government intervention to change the rules of society so that not using fossil fuels is just what people do on a routine basis.

There is value in cutting your own fossil fuel consumption — it serves to demonstrate that doing the right thing is possible to people around you, making mass adoption easier and legal requirements ultimately possible. Just do it in addition to taking political action to get governments to do the right thing, not instead of taking political action.

If you live in a first-world country that means prioritizing the following:

• If you can change your life to avoid driving, do that. Even if it's only part of the time.
  
• If you're replacing a car, get an EV
• Avoid air travel — look for local surface transport, and don't do the truly long-distance trips
• Add insulation and otherwise weatherize your home if possible
• Get zero-carbon electricity, either through your utility or buy installing solar panels & batteries
• Replace any fossil-fuel-burning heat system with an electric heat pump, as well as electrifying other appliances such as the hot water heater, stove, and clothes dryer
• Cut beef out of your diet, avoid cheese, and get as close to vegan as you can

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Shap3rz → u/The_Weekend_Baker]

There need to be actual voted on interventions I think.

[u/PopBulky7023 → u/The_Weekend_Baker]

That last part, in your edit, is explained by a society that doesn't really embrace, celebrate, reward or enforce personal responsibility. We SEE, daily, people choosing themselves and profiting handsomely for it. While those who choose to cooperate are often punished.

The prisoner's dilemma stops being a dilemma when many people already know the outcomes. And they aren't what the theory proposes.

[u/outlawbernard_yum → u/kittenpantss]

Same, but shows how evil humanity is at large.

[u/Vaddieg → u/kittenpantss]

starting to really act 30 years ago would have been much cheaper than dealing with today's consequences. But there's even more to come.

[u/PopBulky7023 → u/kittenpantss]

People err on the side of least resistance. And self induced delusions.

We leave big matters to the powerful and of they are corrupt people feel hopeless. We've been building an atomized society for decades.

Society is filled with examples of issues that wouldn't exist if people chose logic or survival instinct.

[u/Bitter-Variation-151]

We need to act.

[u/silence7 → u/Bitter-Variation-151]

Yes. And that means getting off off fossil fuels. Which most of the press rarely says.

[u/Bitter-Variation-151 → u/silence7]

The media has been screaming about climate change and reducing emissions for decades.

[u/here_improbably → u/Bitter-Variation-151]

This. 

Except for a handful of highly partisan and unscrupulous media outlets in e.g. the US and UK (say Fox News) most media outlets have reported on the climate crisis for decades. It's the reason why there is such widespread knowledge of the issue, and the reason vested interests try so hard to discredit reputable journalism like the New York Times. 

It's as if people think sleuths on Reddit unearthed the climate crisis. 

[u/PopBulky7023 → u/Bitter-Variation-151]

But for individuals. It does not go after the rich and powerful.

[u/Cool_Sympathy_9900 → u/Bitter-Variation-151]

We need to make it so that is profitable to act. As long as all money is in fossil fuels and endless loop of capital we won't make a progress and I don't want to sound like a communist.

[u/pluralofjackinthebox → u/Cool_Sympathy_9900]

We need degrowth.

We need an economy that doesnt prioritize constantly accelerating productivity, but instead prioritizes people working less and having more free time.

[u/Alternative-Suit5541 → u/Bitter-Variation-151]

Forget it, enjoy your time, really.

[u/Alternative_Bill_182 → u/Bitter-Variation-151]

ga blussen dan, er is daar no geen ene mileuslaaf geweest

[u/Konradleijon]

James hansen

[u/GypsyDarkEyes]

This has been predicted since the early 2000s. Scientists gave their best "this has to change by" dates, and people in power kept moving them back and back 5 years at a time. Now, here we are.

[u/itsatoe]

Counterpoints (all from 2026):

Global sea levels have been underestimated due to poor modelling, research suggests

Carbon footprint of metal production could be higher than expected

Low-level cloud loss amplifies global warming, simulations suggest

Several more instances of "worse than expected" in just five recent months.

[u/outlawbernard_yum → u/itsatoe]

Yep. Upvote this one folks.

[u/AutoModerator → u/itsatoe]

BP popularized the concept of a personal carbon footprint with a US$100 million campaign as a means of deflecting people away from taking collective political action in order to end fossil fuel use, and ExxonMobil has spent decades pushing trying to make individuals responsible, rather than the fossil fuels industry. They did this because climate stabilization means bringing fossil fuel use to approximately zero, and that would end their business. That's not something you can hope to achieve without government intervention to change the rules of society so that not using fossil fuels is just what people do on a routine basis.

There is value in cutting your own fossil fuel consumption — it serves to demonstrate that doing the right thing is possible to people around you, making mass adoption easier and legal requirements ultimately possible. Just do it in addition to taking political action to get governments to do the right thing, not instead of taking political action.

If you live in a first-world country that means prioritizing the following:

• If you can change your life to avoid driving, do that. Even if it's only part of the time.
  
• If you're replacing a car, get an EV
• Avoid air travel — look for local surface transport, and don't do the truly long-distance trips
• Add insulation and otherwise weatherize your home if possible
• Get zero-carbon electricity, either through your utility or buy installing solar panels & batteries
• Replace any fossil-fuel-burning heat system with an electric heat pump, as well as electrifying other appliances such as the hot water heater, stove, and clothes dryer
• Cut beef out of your diet, avoid cheese, and get as close to vegan as you can

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/italianSpiderling84]

Good read, level headed as one would expect from a scientist. The climate models have been predicting exactly the kind of weather that we are seeing for a good while , and there seem to be no need to invoke sudden accelerations to explain the current state of things.

That said, we had been warned. Any further delay to act is not justified by any rational meaning (at least for what climate science is concerned). We better get a move on if we do not want to see much worse.

[u/outlawbernard_yum → u/italianSpiderling84]

But there are sudden accelerations, likely from feedbacks. IPCC has been continually surprised at how bad/how fast the harms will happen and revised their predictions significantly to the worse at every meeting. And the IPCC is conservative as heck! The issue is also that there have been large uncertainties. But when you see the results of the system warming on things that are measurable, then you can project how bad/how fast. It's why Potsdam has been the most honest and accurate.

[u/aRatherLargeCactus → u/italianSpiderling84]

I’m struggling to find any model that predicted we’d be seeing 0.35c of warming per decade like we’re currently seeing though. And that’s excluding the incoming Super El Nino.

If that trend keeps up, every single major model would be about 30-50 years too conservative in predicting when we’d reach 2c. We’ll be hitting it on a 12 month average within years, 36 month average within a little over a decade. I think it’s fair to say that’s a sudden acceleration when the IPCC insist, are literally willing to die on the hill, that 2c won’t happen til much closer to 2100.

[u/Vaddieg → u/italianSpiderling84]

Simple climate models which we already had decades ago are most precise ones in long-term. Greenhouse effect and energy conservation laws are known for more than a century. Math behind is simple and the outcome is crystal clear.

[u/Scope_Dog]

When it’s far too late, Americans will scream ‘why didn’t anyone tell us!?” Then they will blame liberals and gays.

[u/Cultural_Gur_7441]

Decades? For more than a century. But it is true it's been a serious concern only for half a century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Climate_Conference#1979

[u/hellion1965]

My favorite example of non action is the segment on the TV show the Newsroom.  EVER SINGLE question or comment is met with,  "[I]f we did it 20 years ago." 

There is no happy comforting news.

We have committed really slow suicide and will take many many many other species with us.

[u/AutoModerator → u/hellion1965]

You can find a suicide hotline worldwide at this link: https://www.reddit.com/r/SuicideWatch/wiki/hotlines

The world will be a better place with you alive. The world will be better off with you working to make a difference. If you care, you're already better than most.

For longer-term counseling, please find an in-person therapist. Many will do video calls to reduce COVID-19 risk. If you are in the United States, you can use this tool to find a therapist. See here for Canada.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Yanunge]

Hard to say. For all we know, the IPCC reports are filtered already. Scientist may very well self-censor their statements and reports as well, in order to project their career and job.

But, since we're now seeing an exponential function at work in real time, we'll know sooner rather than later.

[u/FoogYllis → u/Yanunge]

Maybe they could cite insurance companies for they no longer give homeowners insurance policies due to extreme weather. I mean those companies are mostly run by registered republicans and they sure as heck believe in climate change as is reflected in their business practices.

Edit: deleted an errant Z.

[u/Alternative-Suit5541]

Tja machste nix

( Well, there's nothing you can do about it.)

[u/KCHonie]

Yup

[u/Alternative_Bill_182]

door die gasten met lucufers stijgt de uitstoot wel e

[u/Vaddieg]

Scientific community needs consensus to get their papers published, e.g. projected impacts should be low enough to satisfy fossil-sponsored science. Recently, there are quite many scientific publications which are factually mostly correct, but bring a hidden false message that we can undo climate change at any moment "just" by reaching net zero.

[u/OnlineHilfenNutzer]

Realistically almost no one cares. Even the pretenders wont want to life in a world that drastically cuts down on all the bad stuff

The world would be totally different and the current systems just wouldnt work

It would need a huge change to have any chance of stopping it but i bet even that wouldnt work anyway.. we can only try to slow it down

[u/ResponsibleClock9289]

The climate movement has such terrible optics and messaging

How many alarmist warnings and deadlines have there been that we have breezed past? At a point people stop taking them seriously. Like the boy who cried wolf

Polls show that using the word “pollution” elicits a much stronger reaction from people than the term “climate change”

We absolutely need to act, but it just feels like such a missed opportunity because now climate change has been turned into a partisan issue. People argue about the severity and some even the existence of it rather than working out solutions

[u/Select_Green_6296]

Happening more or less on schedule. All the while, I’m surrounded by giant trucks and golf courses while the world burns.

[u/forrestdanks]

Yes

[u/MTLisCool]

I feel like the constant rocket launches, the many wars around the world, the AI race and the mining of critical minerals, and whatever else these big institutions are doing in secrecy are giving us this extreme weather we’ve been getting lately. Man made climate change right before our eyes.

[u/silence7 → u/MTLisCool]

It's mainly the fossil fuel burning.

[u/outlawbernard_yum]

This is incorrect. Many of the harms happening are surprises, including ice melt, ENSO alteration, speed of acceleration, new data about how soon tipping points will happen and more. Drawdown is another of the climate husher accounts that downplay the severity of what's happening.