[swarnie_]

While it dose sit quite far to the left as a publication and some of its articles are concerning i don't think you can credibly call this one of them.

What about the article do you find distasteful/untrue?

[will4274]

Not parent, but I didn't like:

> the increasingly severe hurricanes and wildfires that are racking the country

From my own understanding, increasingly severe hurricanes have been predicted but not observed and wildfires have a bit more to do with forest management than climate change.

Edit: there was also this bit

> “There is also the issue of American individualism, remnants of manifest destiny, that don’t set us up well for understanding that we are part of the web of life. The American dream is quite self-involved. We need a new American dream.”

I'm not quite sure what the point of this sort of rhetoric is. Climate change is a complicated enough topic without tying it to a supposedly necessary re-conceptualization of the American worldview that many Americans will find unpalatable.

[swarnie_]

> I'm not quite sure what the point of this sort of rhetoric is. Climate change is a complicated enough topic without tying it to a supposedly necessary re-conceptualization of the American worldview that many Americans will find unpalatable.

My only guess is this is written for the UK and to a lesser extent EU audience and they felt this would echo with the current prescription of the US overseas. Newspapers don't set the discourse, they follow it.

[bryanlarsen]

> increasingly severe hurricanes have been predicted but not observed

The severity of Cyclone Fani has been directly attributed to climate change. The hurricane may have occurred without climate change, but there is very strong consensus that its severity is directly attributable to abnormally high temperatures in the Bay of Bengal.