Greta Thunberg addressed the U.N. (and stared down Trump), shaming world leaders for their inaction on climate change. Jason Momoa addressed the U.N., too. Jane Fonda is organizing “Fire Drill Fridays” and getting arrested. Maggie Gyllenhaal joined the fight against climate change because of her daughter. Another celebrity who’s been involved in this crucial work is Emma Thompson. She spoke at an Extinction Rebellion protest last week, delivering a pointed warning about climate change in the form of a mock weather forecast:
Emma Thompson issued a stark warning about the climate crisis, suggesting that conditions may become so dire that people will eat their pets for protein.
The actor delivered a mock weather forecast outside BBC Broadcasting House at an Extinction Rebellion protest in London, where she outlined the “gloomy projections,” a Daily Mail video shows.
“Climate crisis trends show an increased chance of warmer, wetter winters and hotter, dryer summers, along with an increase of frequency and intensity of extremes,” she said. “Better wrap up warm, stockpile food and remember there is a surprising amount of protein in the average household pet.”
Standing in front of two maps that showed areas of the U.K. that are at risk of flooding by 2030, the climate activist warned if temperatures continued to rise in the country there could be a catastrophe.
“Looking ahead, we are on course to sail past our 1.5 degree centigrade target, putting us on track for long-lasting and irreversible change,” the 60-year-old continued.
Emma has been working with Extinction Rebellion for a while now. Satire often gets people to pay attention: People won’t necessarily care when they hear about the possibility of “hotter, dryer summers”: If summers are already hot and dry, who really cares if they get more hot and more dry? On the other hand, people will be more likely to pause to listen when someone suggests that beloved pets can be a great source of protein, because they will want to figure out what the heck the person is talking about, realizing that, surely, surely, someone wasn’t being serious about eating Spot. But that ridiculous, horrific thought might make them think more seriously about climate change and its repercussions. I’m grateful to Emma, to Jane, to Jason, and to Greta for the work they are doing, but I’m still waiting to see what tangible steps leaders are going to take in the face of protests and dire warnings from the scientific community about how we’re fast reaching a tipping point that we won’t be able to recover from.
Photos credit: Avalon.red
I do not understand why whomever wrote the sourced AOL article felt the need to mention her age? How is it in any way relevant to the story or the work she is doing?
This has been a longtime pet peeve of mine; I’ve seen it in newspapers & magazines across the decades, Jane Doe comma number comma, did x, y, z, John Smith comma number comma, demonstrated a, b, c. This never, ever made sense.
We are in the sixth extinction. I have read much about it and it is amazing how many adult humans truly don’t understand and/or don’t care. The more people address this, the better. We won’t be able to eat our pets, they will drown or burn first. Blerg.
I work for an international conservation organization and have access to top scientists. Yet, every Thanksgiving and Christmas dinner my dad and brother will still argue with me about climate change. If I eventually get them to admit it’s real, they will continue to deny its human caused.
I don’t understand climate change deniers. What’s the worst that can happen by addressing this, according to them, imaginary thing? We end up creating a profitable green economy and stop polluting our water and encroaching on habitats for oil?
It’s become about tribalism at this point (for climate change deniers, that is). It’s more about clinging to a group identity, and for whatever reason, American conservatives have decided that denying climate change is part of that group identity.
You’re totally right, ASDFA. My partner works in this area and he says there is a lot of social science saying that presenting people with facts triggers them to dig in their heels because it’s their identity. Instead we have to find a real, genuinely shared interest with that person (eg. camping, fishing, children) and talk about how climate change will affect that thing they value. I think it’s a helpful strategy! (This is all from the work of Prof. Katherine Hayhoe–she’s definitely worth checking out!)
What gives me hope is a new stat I learned about my mid-size city: 75% of residents believe more needs to be done about climate change, but only 50% believe that other people care. There are many of us out here, and things *are* changing. They just need to change faster, and I hope the tipping point on human action comes swiftly.
I think it is down to denial of accountability (that and not my taxes!). If it’s not real we don’t need to do anything about it. If China keeps polluting, why should we even brother, it won’t make a difference. Weather changes all the time through history – all denier talking points, all pass the buck on action.
It won’t change until people who lack empathy are directly and personally impacted by climate change, otherwise it is invisible to those who only care about themselves
The absolute dumbest of stances in regards to China’s pollution. They are polluting to make crap for our fat American asses! When are the MacDonalds eating, Walmart shopping, Fireworks loving people going to get that thru their fat asses!!!
Just came to say that I love Emma and any/everything she does! Age doesn’t apply here.