In your car crash analogy, we are now past the point where hitting the brakes will help. The car will be irrepairably destroyed and all passengers will be killed.
This is flat out wrong. In fact, the more co2 is emitted, the more extreme the consequences are. The change from 0->1 degree of global warming barely registers. The change from 3->4 degrees is catastrophical, for example.
Thus, the warmer it gets, the more worth it is to fight against it, as each small win contributes more to the bottom line than in the beginning.
I think we’re past the point of the car hitting the wall even if we brake, and the damage ruining your day. We’re not past the point that braking will save lives or even make the car unrepairable.
In your car crash analogy, we are now past the point where hitting the brakes will help. The car will be irrepairably destroyed and all passengers will be killed.
This is flat out wrong. In fact, the more co2 is emitted, the more extreme the consequences are. The change from 0->1 degree of global warming barely registers. The change from 3->4 degrees is catastrophical, for example.
Thus, the warmer it gets, the more worth it is to fight against it, as each small win contributes more to the bottom line than in the beginning.
Just put ice in the airbags.
That’s why it’s an analogy, and not reality.
There is no point where hitting the brakes will not help. We can always reduce the amount of harm done.
We haven’t taken our foot off the gas and legislators are stopping us from even touching the brake pedal.
I think we’re past the point of the car hitting the wall even if we brake, and the damage ruining your day. We’re not past the point that braking will save lives or even make the car unrepairable.