[1ris]

I have yet so see any argument why this should be ineffective or even highly so. Or why this should be any less effective than anything else that has been tried.

With regards to your article: I think the authors answers his own questions: These are serious scientists. They told everybody in the whole world that we are all going to die (I'm paraphrasing, but you get it) in the most adult and sophisticated way possible: Highly prestigious peer reviewed journals, conferences and so on for several decades. Nobody listed. THAT was highly ineffective. Now it seems like time for a change in strategy.

And given how very well it worked for the yellow vests and their infantile demands it looks like a good strategy.

[ratboy666]

No, the serious scientists did not tell everybody in the world. I would challenge that assertion. As to "time for a change in strategy". Sure, why not. Turn off the lights and go home. Remember the quote from the attempted Sunflowers incident:

"Is it worth more than food? Worth more than justice?" ... "are you more concerned about the protection of a painting? Or the protection of our planet and people? The cost of living crisis is part of the oil crisis. Fuel is unaffordable to millions of cold hungry families. They can't even afford to heat a tin of soup". I will let you think on this. "No new oil" is the supposed solution to unaffordable fuel. And cold.

Sure, no new oil. I guess it is an oil painting. The good news? Maybe they are beginning to learn to not make statements.