> they'll change their tune

Like this guy for example, right?

[My hunger strike could be deadly. But I am willing to risk that for climate action] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/27/hunger...

Yeah get back to us when he’s actually dead, which he won’t be.

I'm sorry, but is your argument really that this issue is "n[o]t thought ... through" unless people actually starve themselves over it? That it's all a "ploy" unless this guy actually dies for his cause?

I can't quite tell if you're engaging in a non sequitur or moving the goalposts, but your comment doesn't make sense to me in context.

> That it's all a "ploy" unless this guy actually dies for his cause?

Correct, because anyone can say they’re on a hunger strike but it’s not possible to watch the guy 24/7 to see if he’s really following through.

This guy needs a psychologist.

He's willing to die over data models that have been predicting dire consequences in ten years, but they've been doing that for the last 30 years.

It's sad to think what that kind of commitment could have produced if it was directed at real problems.

It would be equally ineffective because there is no interest in solving problems.

What ploy? Serfs in unheated hovels can't build private jets.