This article is basically the climate change equivalent of that "what happens when the Pacific Northwest is hit by a super quake" article in the New Yorker.
Hyperbole, but worth thinking about, and certainly worth continuing to plan. I do think the article is right to point out that rising sea levels are really just the tip of the iceberg (climate change puns!) in terms of challenges climate change will bring, but it's usually the one that dominates discourse.
I'm not sure how its hyperbole? Its a look at the worst case scenarios, its doing what the scientists as the other article says, are almost to afraid to speak of. The majority of people dont have a clue how bad its going to get, its not a pressing issue at all to them when it should be. They elected someone whom is going to do a lot of damage that cannot be undone, not with a great amount of effort, maybe not at all.
I dont believe in this paralysis thing, not when it involves large populations, they havent been paralysed by lead, cfc's, and a million other possible problems we've encountered. If there are no possible actions only an extreme minority would even be paralysed. And its not like in this case there are no possible actions.
If you dont tell them the probable, real worst dangers then maybe they can blame you? "You should have told me the worst that could happen, I would have done something sooner if I'd have known". They might say.
If they'd have sugar coated the possible effects of no ozone layer, would people have been so urgent to do something about it. Imagine if we hadnt even studied the ozone layer at all, like we were aware of it, but didn't bother to keep track of it, why would we need to. Imagine the disaster we could have sleep walked into. Would we have been oblivious then paralysed until it was to late?
I mean thats what the US government seems to be proposing or attempting to do with global warming, making sure its as hard as possible to study. Like who knows what could happen how things could change, if we know and have as much detailed and up to date information as possible, then we can make the best choices. That kind of ignorance has to be challenged, the danger has to be emphasised to anyone with half a brain, to stop these small minority of fuckers from screwing it up for everyone.
And even if it was hopeless and we couldn't do anything would people really be standing around paralysed. No, they'd be digging holes and tunnels, or building ships and things, anything for that minuscule hope of survival. I feel like we are sleep walking into these worst case scenarios, like it'll be fine we'll figure it out just in time, there is no time, the time we lose is time we cannot get back, and it makes the effort all the harder and more impossible.