[krashidov]

The carbon in our atmosphere is already in the atmosphere and it won't go away. So there really is nothing more you can do other than take it out of the air and store it somewhere for as long as you can. Trees are a good way to store it until we have better technology/can handle climate change better

[SV_BubbleTime]

No. Pick a timeline that is influential, short or long. If it’s long, trees don’t capture carbon. Not in any scenario of population growth, which inevitably leads to some edgelord reductionist “maybe we should all die then for what we’re doing to Gia!” trite.

This “climate is a 100 years” thing while using ice core samples to make your case is not in support of science. It is in support of politicians.

The latter I’m personally getting sick of. And the people that can separate them, harm the former.

[swiftcoder]

> Not in any scenario of population growth

We're not really in a scenario of population growth - there is a direct correlation between being relatively well off and having less kids. Basically every developed nation hit peak population a long time ago, and the faster we pull other nations out of extreme poverty, the sooner their populations will start falling too

Even the most fatalistic estimates have world population peaking at 10 billion.