NSLet’s stick to this first part of the new Sixth World Climate Report. There is no other way than to focus completely. Sentences want to be read twice, thrice, literally. Reading becomes an exercise; And the essence disappears in the repetitive particles of language. This is not only because specialists in mitigating oil-addicted governments sat at the table at the editorial, and they like to be called climate diplomats, but also because of the so-called calibrated language in the “Summary for Policy Makers”. Every scientific statement about the future and history of climate is packed into calibrated language in little probability crumbs, and everything is filled with signs of probability—graded, of course: from little to very likely, moderately emphatic or—particularly nice—”likely from no.”
Apocalypse, at least we have that certainty, has been carefully scaled. In the semantic validation process which is certainly not new and has many advantages, for example, if you, like scientists and politicians, are looking for a common denominator and do not even want to present false facts. But it can also be annoying. Especially when it comes to the end of the world itself. At least someone would like to have plain text. Greta Thunberg can also.
“Total coffee aficionado. Travel buff. Music ninja. Bacon nerd. Beeraholic.”