Thread by @AukeHoekstra

If you are in for some realistic antidote to climate anxiety, read this piece!

Sometimes you read something that you would like to be yours because it is so good. This new piece by @mattyglesias is an example. I have to admit I'm a bit jealous.
🧵
slowboring.com/p/people-need-…

You should read it yourself but some tidbits.

The premise of the story:
Improbably Apocalyptic *warnings* on global warming are often mistaken for *predictions*.
This leads people to suffer anxiety and grief.

The piece starts by describing people sinking deeper and deeper into depression because they start to believe what they see and read when doom scrolling. It's a bona fide health problem as the linked @nytimes piece by @EllenBarryNYT also proves.

Then @mattyglesias makes a point we should make more often: "If you say it’s not as bad as the risk of all of humanity being wiped out in a full-scale nuclear exchange or by a large comet, you’re now the guy who is minimizing climate change."
Well, it's really not *that* bad.

Next up: dire *warnings* are not *predictions*.

Most bad stuff you read are *warnings* of things that are very unlikely to happen. A good example are articles based on RCP8.5.

A while ago an intensive twitter discussion on RCP8.5 raged (I was very vocal but @MLiebreich was the pack leader and @hausfath, @Peters_Glen and @jritch provided scientific muscle) which taught us that this highly unlikely scenario (a warning) is often used as a prediction.

As @mattyglesias correctly concludes: "Indeed, the current projections of 2.2 or 2.7 degrees are closer to 1.5 degrees than to 4.4 degrees; we are more than halfway there. This is pretty good news!"

But many climate communicators hide this fact beneath Apocalyptic warnings.

Then he treats us to some "Cognitive behavioral therapy for climate anxiety".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive…
CBT is the most effective way to treat anxiety and depression. An important part of it is challenging destructive habits and untrue beliefs with evidence.

One bummer he doesn't mention I want to get out of the way: we really are causing the sixth mass extinction of animals
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_…

But will your children die?
No. Their odds are better than yours have been.

Exhibit A: Daniel Swain, a climate scientist pointing out many popular doomer claims lack an empirical basis.

Exhibit B: climate scientist Brian O'Neill pointing out we have every reason to expect humans will be more healthy and live longer in the future and there is no Mad Max scenario in the IPCC report.

Like @mattyglesias I'm not comfortable with pointing out how other people should feel. But I love the way he puts it into perspective here:

For me it is simple: we have solutions for the problems we face. If we take the long view, applying the solutions will increase both our wealth and happiness.

So not mitigating climate change is a really stupid thing to do. I want to do the smart thing and be proud of myself.

But if you disagree and think people need the threat of personal extinction to get into action,
if you think it's ok to undermine the science by exaggerating,
you should still ask yourself if you want to cause so much suffering in terms of anxiety and depression.
/end