It's not the heat. It's the stupidity.

Somewhere on Eclogiselle, there's a link to dirty math on Reddit where I was doing initial number crunching. Initial data is ALWAYS wrong. What you are looking for is something solid enough that inevitable minor errors in your calculations aren't sufficient counterargument to a general conclusion.

This is my general conclusion:

1. The industrial revolution gets the entire blame for human caused climate change.

2. The industrial revolution dates to the 1700s. Since the 1700s, we've destroyed 85 percent of global wetlands. No one is much talking about THAT.

3. Simply planting more trees has NO HOPE of fixing this mess and we know it. It's why we are sure we are doomed. (Please note: That doesn't mean you shouldn't plant more trees or that it's useless. It means that by itself it can't fix this.)

4. Wetlands store vastly more carbon than trees and we've lost a LOT more wetlands than forests.

Ergo, it's not actually hopeless. It's fixable.

That is: If planet Earth will pull its head out its butt and address the correct problem.

FYI: I believe that stuff like trees urinals and latrines backing up on wetlands as natural waste water treatment not only improves quality of life for the poorest of the poor, it simultaneously addresses human caused climate change.

This flies in the face of current mental models that you must choose between raising standard of living and saving the planet, but it fits nicely with hard data that says "Reducing the production of trash improves the bottom line of a business." and "Effectively addressing environmental issues increases local prosperity."

No, I'm not providing citations. Look them up. This is common knowledge. We just forget that we all know this when discussion of climate change comes up.

< ------- >