Thread by @SteB777

I've just read what Grant Shapps the UK's Transport Secretary said about climate activists and the climate crisis. I'm absolutely stunned by his profound ignorance of the situation. Remember, the UK government believes itself to be a climate leader.
1/
independent.co.uk/news/uk/grant-…

I don't want this discussion to be about either Grant Shapps or even the UK government. What I want to focus on, is the very real possibility that no major government, or senior politician, anywhere, has got even the slightest grasp of the climate and ecological emergency.
2/

What I want to focus on, is why this is the case.

Grant Shapps is a senior cabinet member, not known as a climate change denier. So we can take it that this is the view of the British government, not just one idiosyncratic view of one particular minister.
3/

There are 2 profound points I want to make right at the very beginning. If people do not understand these profound points, then our civilization is heading towards collapse and our future is very bleak indeed.
4/

Firstly, for the last 30 years there has been this prevailing groupthink amongst senior scientists etc., that we mustn't be too alarmist when talking about the climate crisis to politicians and the public, so as not to put them off and to get them on board.
5/

This has been a tactical mistake of gigantic proportions. Instead of getting politicians and the public on board, these toned down accounts, have profoundly misled politicians and much of the public into thinking the crisis isn't really that serious at all.
6/

So profound is this misunderstanding, that if a very informed person with a good grasp of the overall big picture and science, stands up, and gives a very conservative account of mainstream science, they are mistakenly dismissed as an hysterical extremist and doomer.
7/

A week ago @DoctorVive made this profound point, and I created a thread about it. Essentially she suggested that the media is scared to report the science in an accurate way, because if they do, it becomes a serious criticism of our current system.
8/

https://twitter.com/SteB777/status/1484919206676156427

The path our civilization is currently on, is the path to global suicide. We should have taken a profoundly different direction after the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, and should have openly said this was necessary and acknowledged it at the time.
9/
un.org/press/en/2011/…

Instead, because of this fallacious idea that the way to get politicians and the public on board, was to tone things down. Politicians and then public mistook these toned down summaries to be how things really are, and that crisis could be addressed with the current system.
10/

This was never the intention. The idea was to get the politicians and the public on board, and when this happened, to gently explain the situation was far more serious than the vast majority realise, and that we must take drastic action.
11/

Unfortunately, this never happened and we went along with the grossly toned down version and pretended the situation wasn't too bad. We've ended up in a situation where if someone tells the truth and says what the science really say, they're seen as an extremist.
12/

Secondly, it is imperative that we produce a very simplified, but very accurate big picture view of the whole situation, the crisis, and the major changes we need to take, to avert catastrophe.
13/

I cannot overstate how important this is. If a politician says profoundly stupid things about the climate and ecological crisis, or takes policy decisions contrary to what is necessary, there is no clear cut, simplified scientifically validate summary to contradict this.
14/

Instead, IPCC reports, scientific papers, do not spell it out in clear language. To understand how serious the situation is, you've got to be very knowledgeable to understand what the opaque jargon, and understand it will personal insight, not because they spell it out.
15/

During my time commenting on the Guardian, arguing against climate change deniers, luke-warmists, anyone denying the need for urgent action. They would say, if it is really as serious as you say, well link to the papers or IPCC reports, which support what you say.
16/

The problem was I couldn't provide any scientific paper, IPCC report etc, that actually laid that out, in clear, plain, unambiguous language, making it seem as if I was exaggerating. Of course the papers, the IPCC etc, did say it but only by indirect implication, not overtly.
17/

It's almost impossible when someone is trying to shout you down, to get them to follow long technical accounts, and what they actually say. What the Jennifer Lawrence character says in Don't Look Up, about we're all going to die, sums it all up.
18/

What we need is a short unambiguous summary that anyone can understands, that spells it is in brief, unambiguous language. In every other field of human endeavour, there are these clear, unambiguous summaries. But not as regards the climate and ecological crisis. Why?
19/

I can think of a very simple explanation. Politicians, corporations, billionaires, the fossil fuel industry, don't want the public to understand how serious the crisis is. So we can carry on with business as usual and no one can contradict their fallacious arguments
20/

Somewhere there should be a simple clear cut summary, based on a much deeper full scientific account, which should allow me to simply say, look Grant Shapps, you have no idea what you're talking about.
21/

Unfortunately, there isn't. No authoritative summary ever. But there should be. Please scientific experts, produce one. It ain't rocket science, to accurately summarise what already exists.
22/

Most accounts are written for graduates, in technical jargon, which none experts and the public at large, cannot understand. Please just make it clear for them. Clear to everyone. It's not much to ask, is it?
23/

I apologise if there are any typos or garbled text, because it is very late, and I just accidentally posted most of the thread before I was able to proof read it, and I'm not going to copy it all, and then delete all the posts and re-write it. It's already taken too long.
24/

@GeorgeMonbiot @GretaThunberg @ClimateHuman @JKSteinberger @ClimateBen @KevinClimate @NaomiAKlein @billmckibben

@threadreaderapp Please unroll?