"Recent popular conceptions of the Anthropocene risk making a similar mistake, drawing a thin bright line at 1950 and describing what comes after as a new, modern form of ecological disaster." (implying that what's happened after 1950 isn't an ecological disaster)
"In the ‘pristine myth’ paradigm ... human societies are recent destroyers, or at the very least disturbers, of a mostly pristine natural world." (implying that human-caused climate change is a "myth")
If you read the article you'll find it's using a lot of double negatives like the ones above, and a lot of innuendo, but it ultimately boils down to denying that humans are causing climate change right now and we need immediate political change to reverse it.
"Recent popular conceptions of the Anthropocene risk making a similar mistake, drawing a thin bright line at 1950 and describing what comes after as a new, modern form of ecological disaster." (implying that what's happened after 1950 isn't an ecological disaster)
"In the ‘pristine myth’ paradigm ... human societies are recent destroyers, or at the very least disturbers, of a mostly pristine natural world." (implying that human-caused climate change is a "myth")
If you read the article you'll find it's using a lot of double negatives like the ones above, and a lot of innuendo, but it ultimately boils down to denying that humans are causing climate change right now and we need immediate political change to reverse it.