>>10769847Something can be real AND a political movement. Climate change is a real phenomenon and either blazingly, seriously important in the near-term or largely insignificant misdirection.
If we actually knew it was important: if we had strong evidence of powerful positive feedback loops in the near future, then something would be done. Celebrities wouldn't be talking about it, engineers would be taking charge. Sulfate aerosols, messing with the algae. We'd be doing geo-engineering, not talking about it.
The other option is long-term discomfort and harm largely for poor regions like Bangladesh, so nobody really does things. This seems more likely. Green activists leapt on the bandwagon and hyped it to hell, just like peak oil, plastic waste and Amazon depletion. Alarmism and self-flagellation seem to be surprisingly popular and act as a means for the left to attack people it already hates: big companies.
A third, more sinister option is possible. Global warming is a serious near-term threat and it's deliberately allowed to do serious damage, prompting socialist revolution. AOC is a joke right now, but if SanFran were under water her ideological allies would be greatly emboldened. Perhaps they realise that capitalism is unassailable on the basis of long-term effectiveness, so they're worsening an emergency so they can take power.
