(Global) Politics failed to keep global warming within the 1.5°C (physical) limit and we think, global warming is still significantly underestimated, since we expect an exponential temperature rise (cf. “Temperature rise will be exponential“). Let us keep this simple. This is not a matter of even more or better data. It is a matter of connecting the data in a heuristic way. “Greenhouse gas” (GHG) sinks are full now, there is a ca. 30 years delay between GHG emissions and actual temperature rise (cf. “Temperature rise shows ca. 30 years delay“), global annual GHG emissions are still rising and above 1.5°C global average temperature rise tipping points will be reached within the dynamic global climate system and (technologically) unstoppable “self-reinforcing cycles” will be activated.
The climate system from our mother planet Earth is first of all inert, thus delayed, and then dynamic. This makes it so incredibly dangerous for us humans. It is the worst case for our human cognitive abilities to act on that accordingly, since we (re)act too late and too little.
Human behaviour has the basic patterns coming from our brain’s limbic system when being threatened: escape, attack, freeze and submission (fight, flight, freeze, and fawn). They all will not help with mitigating global warming, climate change, and the loss of biodiversity. And the most easy way to “cope” with difficult situation is to simply suppress the negative thoughts, the issue, the threat or danger, bury your head in the sand.
(Global) Politics is currently in a kind of collective “suppression mode” and this is very dangerous, since global warming is like a shark attack. It stays underneath the water for a very long time. Although there is the clear feeling, something is dramatically “wrong”, something dangerous is approaching, but there is no reason to act, since there is no clear evidence for any threat. But then, there is all of a sudden the fin of the shark over the water and you know, the shark is about to attack. And then, everything is going very fast.
Seeing the fin of the shark, you might hope, the shark will let off and swim away. But seeing the fin of the shark is like crossing the 1.5°C (physical) limit with global warming. There is no way back, the shark will undoubtedly attack, decisive, fast, and deadly.
We all know that very precisely and we fully understand all the connections. Still, we do not act accordingly, by far not. Most politicians and most people think, the shark will swim away. Most politicians and most people think, the shark will find another victim. Most politicians and most people think, the shark might attack but will not harm them.
One of the main raison, why mitigating global warming failed to keep it within the 1.5°C (physical) limit is a way to positive, whitewashing rhetoric. Carl von Clausewitz explains already in his book “Vom Kriege” (“About wars”) published 1966 how decisive phantasy is within wars. Currently we are at war against GHG emissions. This means we are at “war” mainly with burning fossil fuels and meat production. The intensity of this “war”, the intensity of our fight and the strength of our fight is strongly determined by the phantasy we have about the consequences of this “war”. The consequences for us in person loosing this “war”.
Hans Hansen (2020) is very clear about that in his book “Narrative Change. How Changing the Story Can Transform Society, Business, and Ourselves” (Columbia University Press). And it feels like every second sentence from politicians these days is about “narratives”. The word “narrative” is currently used inflationary. Hans Hansen explains the pattern of change, but politicians have to actually find and tell the story, find and tell the “narratives”.
“Global warming is like a shark attack” is a first try to change the so far significantly misleading, underestimating, and whitewashing narrative around global warming, climate change, and the loss of biodiversity.
It will be like a shark attack – silent, inert, delayed, but then fast, intense, and deadly, for not just thousands, or millions, it will be deadly potentially for billions of people faster than most currently can imagine (cf. “Trans- & interdisciplinary global warming scenario“).
It is not just some small islands (e.g. in the Caribbean) being flooded by the increased see level or the ice bears being extinct. Although in our view, this would already be good enough to stop fossil fuels and significantly reduced meat production. And global warming, climate change, and the loss of biodiversity is not something some might “profit” and some might “loos”. We all will loos, dramatically loos.
Global warming, climate change, and the loss of biodiversity is already and will show up as heavy rainfalls, floods, mudslides, heat waves, droughts, forest fires, ice storms, cold waves, hurricanes, breaking apart mountains. And this is just the beginning. All these natural catastrophes will lead to dramatic suffering, (1) direct deaths due to drowning, starving, die of thirst, heat, burn, frostbite and deadly strikes by torn away houses, trees, cars, bridges or even collapsing mountains and (2) indirect deaths due to disease pandemics, migration & population flows, and conflicts about the fight for limited resources (e.g. water), brutal and deadly wars will start.
We ask everyone out there to significantly change the narrative about global warming, climate change, and the loss of biodiversity. It is not about being “dramatic” or being “exaggerated” or being “unreasonably” or even “hysteric”. It is about time to tell the people with “radical honesty” the future we are heading into and tell them, what is actually necessary to act accordingly .
We will have at least a global overall temperature increase of ca. 2.5°C till ca. 2050. The GHG emissions for that are already in the atmosphere and there is (at least currently) no technological solution for that.
Huge parts of India, South-Asia, Australia, Africa and America will just not be habitable arias faster than most can currently imagine. (see e.g. Xu et al. 2020: “Future of the human climate niche”, PNAS, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910114117)
Science aims to be rational and this is great when it comes to “understanding”, but not when it comes to “acting” or even “changing”. All the data, insights and analyses do not lead to (re)actions. The reason is very simple, because humans, also politicians mostly act based on emotions (cf. e.g. Stefanie Stahl). So, the “understanding” has to be transferred into “feelings” and “imaginations”. These feelings and imaginations then will be transferred into emotions and emotions can than deliver a “changed reality” and this changed reality can change believes, attitudes and behaviour.
Emotions are the domain from art and now it is time for the “creative industries”, it is time for art to frame all the scientific insights we have about global warming, climate change, and the loss of biodiversity into emotional experiences. This will significantly support the needed change in believes, thinking and acting, the needed change in political decision making and human behaviours.
We pledge for a significant engagement of art and culture all around the globe to take our (rational) scientific evidence we have in masses into formats of emotions. We want to see concerts, operas, movies, exhibitions, poems, novels, etc. with a clear message: We are heading towards the by far worst humanitarian catastrophe within the upcoming years, much worse than the 2nd world war and much faster than most can currently imagine.
A humanistic approach demands to act now and to preserve (not thousands, not millions, but) potentially billions of livelihoods and lives.
We can learn and overcome our mimetic human forces (greed, vanity, envy, jealousy, group-think) and focus or transmit or divert these mimetic human forces to actions of love, peace, solidarity, health promotion, and sustainability.
We can transfer money into flowers. Yes, we can and let us start now and produce fantastic art projects based on “global warming is like a shark attack”.