I was in the PNW for that heat wave, it is not scary to me in an acute sense. I didn't have AC, it was 100 degrees in my house at 10pm for a couple days and it was unpleasant.
It seems like there are now several imminent threats to continued human thriving on earth, global warming among them. But humanity cannot collectively solve its problems (anymore?), and I have not heard anyone smart propose a practical way to think about solving the problem of humanity being unable to collectively solve its own problems.
The more panic that gets spread, whether moral or existential, the more people seem to just throw their hands up. I find this understandable, although depressing, because even small contingencies of voters within a place can't agree on the basic terms of reality anymore. It isn't obvious to me how Russia, China, EU, India and US will come together soon to alter course. But a lot of municipalities will pass legislation that amounts to virtue signaling.
What's scary when everything you've read from the media your whole life promises mass death and suffering to come? Everything and nothing. By some forecasts dating back 50 years, it was supposed to be over by now. The Malthusians thought the planet would run out of food a hundred years ago.
I think this current era has a higher likelihood of being a true threat to humanity, but how much study should I undertake to be sure? How much work should I do to look behind the headlines, that at least 30% of everyone knows are full of lies and sensationalism. What is the impact of my individual contribution or vehement agreement that things are dire?
How can we replace the insistence that everyone be afraid with the insistence that we do something constructive about it?
It seems like there are now several imminent threats to continued human thriving on earth, global warming among them. But humanity cannot collectively solve its problems (anymore?), and I have not heard anyone smart propose a practical way to think about solving the problem of humanity being unable to collectively solve its own problems.
The more panic that gets spread, whether moral or existential, the more people seem to just throw their hands up. I find this understandable, although depressing, because even small contingencies of voters within a place can't agree on the basic terms of reality anymore. It isn't obvious to me how Russia, China, EU, India and US will come together soon to alter course. But a lot of municipalities will pass legislation that amounts to virtue signaling.
What's scary when everything you've read from the media your whole life promises mass death and suffering to come? Everything and nothing. By some forecasts dating back 50 years, it was supposed to be over by now. The Malthusians thought the planet would run out of food a hundred years ago.
I think this current era has a higher likelihood of being a true threat to humanity, but how much study should I undertake to be sure? How much work should I do to look behind the headlines, that at least 30% of everyone knows are full of lies and sensationalism. What is the impact of my individual contribution or vehement agreement that things are dire?
How can we replace the insistence that everyone be afraid with the insistence that we do something constructive about it?