Recently, James Hansen, NASA’s former top climate scientist, and sixteen of his colleagues penned a terrifying report in “Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussion,” an online open-access journal published by the European Geosciences Union. The paper, entitled “Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2°C global warming is highly dangerous,” is being widely debated by academics around the world.

Right now, the scientific community is divided. Some researchers believe that Hansen’s predictions are too radical and catastrophic, while others in the scientific community argue the opposite. Additionally, there are those who essentially agree with his findings.

For the time being, let us assume that Hansen’s predictions are correct and, ecologically speaking, things are going to get much worse in the near future — particularly in the form of melting ice glaciers, hence faster rising sea levels.

Immediately, the dilemma human beings face is the inability to adequately prepare for the future, both individually and collectively. Without question, we have a terrible historical record of predicting the future, let alone arranging our lives and social institutions in a way that is conducive to future circumstances.

However, certain fundamentals remain true: communities who are organized and cohesive will have a better chance at ‘weathering the storm’ than communities who are socially fragmented, racially segregated and ideologically scattered. Therefore, it is extremely important to constantly and consistently instill communal values (sharing, compassion, solidarity, etc.).

Moreover, we need to speak about the future honestly, and in a manner in which regular people can understand and relate to. If the scientists are telling us to prepare for ecological disasters, average people should be aware of such information, as governments and corporations are lagging far behind the scientific community.

In the United States, for instance, many people living and working in South Florida understand the dire future, which surely awaits them (flooded coastal cities, forced migration, devastated agriculture, etc.), but their conservative state government refuses to acknowledge the realities of climate change (even going so far as to ban the word), let alone adequately prepare for rising sea levels.

Nonetheless, as ice glaciers melt and sea levels rise, at some point, people will be forced to evacuate their homes and communities. Unfortunately, this horrific scenario is on the horizon. As a result, the question becomes: How should we respond?

Most importantly, at least for the time being, there must be broader forms of environmental education, as the general public is simply not plugged-in to environmental political movements. In fact, the majority of people are just now waking up to the fact that climate change and ecological devastation ravage our planet and haunt our future (a recent study suggests that 40% of the world’s population has never even heard of climate change).

Obviously, we need to be honest with people. But we also have to be careful, as people often feel disempowered when learning about the prospect of ecological collapse, and rightfully so: the evidence is utterly frightening.

When I first learned about climate change, I didn’t know how to respond, and in some ways, I still don’t. What’s the proper response when one learns that the entire human species, including billions of non-humans, face the prospect of extinction by the end of the 21st century?

However, once confronted with the science and facts concerning climate change and ecological destruction, and after shaking the initial shock of learning what the future likely entails, I started thinking about possible alternatives and appropriate responses.

Of course, the first question that came to mind was: Can we stop this process? For the sake of time, let’s assume that human beings will not be able to radically transform society, particularly the fossil fuel industry in the next several decades. If that’s the case, then people should prepare for the worst: warmer temperatures, unusual weather patterns, increased natural disasters, food shortages, draughts, rising sea levels and so on, not to mention the subsequent economic, social and political fallout that will ensue.

To be clear, preparing for the worst doesn’t inherently mean that people should devolve into a cynical existence void of social-communal-political responsibilities.

When people ask me if we can reverse these processes, I’m honest, and respond by saying, “The scientists are split on the issue. Some climate scientists think we’re already doomed, while others insist that we can change course. Regardless, our task remains the same: to organize society in a more just and peaceful manner.”

Indeed, people don’t need to fully understand the science to comprehend its conclusions, and what those conclusions mean for their everyday lives. If sea levels continue to rise, and if we hope to survive, the planet will require local, regional, national, continental and international cooperation on an unprecedented level. Again, educating the public about climate change and ecology is a vital task, but socio-economic-political education is equally important. Without such an education, people will be incapable of making reasonable decisions when confronted with future ecological realities.

If the world is forced to eventually evacuate some of its most populated cities, existing societal schisms such as racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, nationalism, religious dogmatism and rabid political ideologies will curse what will surely be a fragile and trying process. Thus, people would be wise to move beyond such antiquated ideologies. Here, human beings face great challenges.

In the end, Hansen’s latest report simply confirms what scientists and environmental activists already know: humanity faces the greatest challenge in the history of our species. Hence, we should talk about our collective dilemma in such terms as I think more people would inclined to join environmental movements if they understood the critical role they could play in the unfolding of history. To put differently, we should remind people that they are not simply spectators, but participants in the historical process.

Undoubtedly, it’s exhilarating to contemplate and reflect on our finite existence on this planet. That is, without question, a uniquely human feature. We should tap into this aspect of the human psyche when educating the public about political or environmental issues. At the same time, we shouldn’t sugar-coat reality. If climate scientists are talking about mass-migrations, the general public should be engaging in similar discussions and debates.

Finally, what we accomplish or fail to accomplish today, will lay the foundation for tomorrow. In other words, human beings might not be able to fully prepare for rising sea levels, but we can make sure that the global community is as prepared as possible for rapid ecological ruptures.

Vincent Emanuele is a writer, activist and radio journalist who lives and works in the Rust Belt. 

---