• Hypx@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    And what are the consequences of failing to deal with climate change? At some point, the option becomes unavoidable.

    • PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, if everything else fails. But continuing our current rate of consumption and assuming geoengineering will save us (which, let’s be real, is the intention of most geoengineering supporters) is insane. I don’t oppose developing the tech. I oppose using it until we’ve tried everything else.

      • Hypx@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Then you are simply not aware of the situation. We have “tried everything else.” It has basically failed already. There is no chance we can stop emissions in the timeframe desired. Geoengineering is already the only possibility.

        • PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          We haven’t tried shit. We’ve continued to operate as if there are no limits to the biosphere. I’m very aware of the situation, which is the only reason I don’t reject geoengineering out of hand. Mao thought ecoengineering by killing all the sparrows would increase crop yields. It did not end well. I simply don’t want that on a global scale.

          • Hypx@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You’re missing the part about time. There is nothing that can be done in time to stop the problem. We’ve already tried everything that could actually work in a short amount of time. Geoengineering is the only thing left.

            The rest of your argument is a strawman argument. There’s nothing to defend there.