A new so-called “Climate Clock” set up in New York City behind the vision of two climate activists, one with a new-born child in his dreams, is set to serve as a public relations tool for climate activists and scientists worldwide, but it may very well end up being another dud.
Why? Because even though the New York Times newspaper recently gave it its blessing with a nice PR story complete with photos of the clock and the two men behind the contraption, it most likely will end up serving as another silly diversion. The problem is the new clock says we have just seven years left before runaway climate change becomes so severe that the end of the world will be not far behind. In other words, another silly deadline which has no basis in reality or no place on any climate activist’s timeline. In fact, we have 500 to 1,000 more years to get things right. Face reality, friends.
The Climate Clock tells viewers now who gaze at the digital face that we have just “7 years, 103 days, 15 minutes and 12 seconds” to set things right and put a stop to runaway global warming or it’s curtains for the human race. Ask reporter Colin Moyhihan at the Times; he wrote the absurdist article. Or ask clock designers Gan Golan and Tom Boyd seven years from now what happened to their ”vision-built-on-a-deadline” that will remain just that: a pipedream. Because seven years from now, 27 years from now, 97 years from now, 207 years from now, 2007 years from now, humankind will still not have solved the climate change problem and the problems will only be worse. Seven years? Who are Gan and Tom kidding? And why did the New York Times step into this load of hogwash?
“A New York Clock That Told Time Now Tells the Time Remaining” was the newspaper’s headline.
The time remaining? So the New York Times can now see into the future like the Old Testament prophets who couldn’t see a thing either?
The Climate Clock shows an important number. This is in red, and is a timer, counting down how long it will take, at current rates of emissions, to burn through our “carbon budget” — the amount of CO2 that can still be released into the atmosphere while limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees C above pre-industrial levels. This is our deadline, the time we have left to take decisive action to keep warming under the 1.5 degrees C threshold, according to Golan and Boyd.
Golan told the Times that he came up with the idea to publicly illustrate the urgency of combating climate change about two years ago, shortly after his daughter was born. He then asked Boyd, ”an activist from the Lower East Side,” to work with him on the project.
The artists artists also claim that they previously made a handheld climate clock for Greta Thunberg, the teenage social activist from Sweden, before her appearance a United Nations Climate Action Summit where she made her famous “How Dare You?” statement to elder statesmen around the world, including U.S. President Donald Trump, who she stared down when he passed her in the hallway after her speech.
Their goal of creating a large-scale clock was influenced the Doomsday Clock maintained online by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Golan and Boyd decided that the Climate Clock would have the most impact if it were displayed in a conspicuous public space and presented like a statue or an artwork, according to the Times.
“This is arguably the most important number in the world,” Boyd told a gullible reporter. “And a monument is often how a society shows what’s important, what it elevates, what is at center stage.”
Is this the monument Boyd was talking about, in living color here?