• notapantsday@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 年前

    Your second paragraph could be summed up as: we chose the destination years ago, so there’s no point changing course.

    Which makes perfect sense when you consider that there’s a deadline, we’ve gone a very long way in one direction and going all the way back to take another route would guarantee missing that deadline.

    It’s like you’re taking your ship from China to Rotterdam, you’re past the Suez canal, in the Mediterranean and now you decide to turn around and go around Africa after all. It really would be idiotic.

    • p1mrx@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 年前

      It’s like you’re taking your ship from China to Rotterdam, you’re past the Suez canal, in the Mediterranean and now you decide to turn around and go around Africa after all. It really would be idiotic.

      That decision wouldn’t be idiotic if I actually wanted to go to Africa. It takes even longer to turn around from Rotterdam.

      • notapantsday@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 年前

        In my example, ‘Rotterdam’ is supposed to be the ultimate destination, so it would be equivalent to ‘carbon neutrality’. Changing the destination to ‘Africa’ would be the equivalent to just building nuclear power plants for the sake of it, regardless of whether they help us reach carbon neutrality.