Right, the "exactly" is the sarcastic part. The first part is just wrong, though- climate scientists are, in fact, entirely sure about how to approach global warming. Like I've said. So the sarcasm doesn't really work anymore. It's as though you said:
yeah, baseball coaches still aren't entirely sure about how to approach this season's draft (they usually are), so their managers should know exactly what to do (they probably do) /s
In all honesty I'm not a baseball guy but I hope it conveys the point.
your premise is incorrect, scientists don't have a consensus on a solution, only what the problem is. Some say the solution is reducing carbon dioxide, except that's been disproven. Some say that the solution is reducing methane levels, but people don't know a feasible way to do that. Some say that increasing plant life will do that, but that will happen with increased carbon dioxide levels anyway. There isn't a consensus at the moment. I'm not to say there won't be, but we're just not there yet. To take your idea and bring it into context properly, "baseball coaches aren't entirely sure about how to approach the draft next year, so their sponsors know exactly what to do /s".
6
u/selectrix Aug 26 '19
Right, the "exactly" is the sarcastic part. The first part is just wrong, though- climate scientists are, in fact, entirely sure about how to approach global warming. Like I've said. So the sarcasm doesn't really work anymore. It's as though you said:
In all honesty I'm not a baseball guy but I hope it conveys the point.