I feel like we need movies/media that helps things feel more real, personal, negative, close to home.

Not movies that _focus_ and sensationalize climate disasters like The Day After Tomorrow. But movies that exist in the near future where really visceral elements of how climate change played out 10-20 years exist as a backdrop to whatever story is being told (but feel grounded in reality).

e.g. water rationing, abandoned towns/cities, authoritarian responses to increased immigration/migration, food shortages, etc...

I'd say 'Don't Look Up', but on second thought, the venn diagram of climate change denialists and people who don't realize the movie's a satire about climate change is almost a circle.

Children of Men feels like a very realistic dystopia of the UK five years from now.

Children of Men doesn't specify the cause for the infertility, I think? Only some handwavy "there were some chemicals", IIRC? At least I'm pretty certain it doesn't attribute anything to climate change.

Russell T Davies's Years & Years feels like a plausible near future. Bananas are extinct, baking systems failing, refugee crises.

> e.g. water rationing, abandoned towns/cities, authoritarian responses to increased immigration/migration, food shortages, etc...

More like Mad Max?

Ya the original is a good example but that's probably still too apocalyptic, one can watch that and scoff saying "it'd never get that bad".

Stuff that's more focused on the immediate, painful changes but still in line of sight from our current reality. Children of Men did a pretty good job pulling some subtle "here's how society has changed for the worse" world building in (obviously all based on it's underlying premise that no more children are being born)

> More like Mad Max?

More like California, Arizona, Utah, South Africa, etc.?

> "people start acting themselves "

There are only 3 'individual' actions avaliable that have any real impact: Voting, Stop eating meat, and pitchforks / civil unrest.

I predict we will reach phase 3 very suddenly and then there will be all these talking head on TV wondering 'oh my god, how did this happen?'.

Of these, voting has the only real impact, because no action an individual can take (safe for suicide) can make their life carbon neutral. That needs policy.

What about saving energy and not wasting water?

Being a vegan protester is clearly the only way to have any impact

if you live in an apartment, don't own a car and you main use of water is shower.

There are no real energy savings avaliable without cutting back on hygene

This reads like you're looking for a fight by using the least charitable interpretation of the quote.

Yeah, it's only really "us vs them" in the sense that "they" don't seem to realize they're also really "us."

Obama would say "we"

I say "folks" as a 1:1 synonym for "people" and only recently became aware that some folks/people find this in some way derogatory. I think it's a regional thing.

I’ve pretty much been using “folks” as a gender neutral “guys” because I find “people” potentially problematic (some constructions like “you folks” or “you all” are pretty much always casual while “you people” can sound charged, etc). I think this is common? Haven’t heard of people taking offense to “folks” before.

Polar bears don't work on me, because the provided polar bear population numbers are higher than previous years!

The question for me, is why do people believe that there is a problem? Is it that you just have to state polar bears are in trouble? Does anyone check the claims of the climate alarmists?

You should take a look at Al Gore's film again, and see how well that has aged.

Climate alarmists need to answer the claim that they are just boys who cry wolf, imo.

I don’t agree that the data support your claim. This link seems like a good summary: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-27/fact-check-gina-rineh...