Just re-read this article in Environmental Research Letters from James Hansen where he clearly frames the challenge within the scientific academy and within major global climate institutions (ie. IPCC) for downplaying the seriousness of the threat of ACC - the idea that there are deeply ingrained cultural and institutional mechanisms/inertia that prevent those most in the position to alert the world to dangers to fall short of their responsibility to induce alarm. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/2/2/024002/pdf Seems to me there is a parallel here in the world of social science and activism. There is a vast reticence, especially evident within dominant and mainstream environmentalism, to under-conceptualize the depth of embeddedness of conservative views within "the movement". It is also an ever present threat with those who have access to the great wealth of radical systems, of thought, and who feel the visceral existential agony of inaction to neglect to apply that knowledge and spirit to the present activist challenge. Understanding that Hansen isn't a radical by some definitions, yet he exhorts those within his professional realm to "see the forest for the trees" with the injunction to "abandon the comfort of waiting for incontrovertible confirmations" to overcome scientific reticence. In British Columbia there has just been a major breakthrough with First Nations, at least temporarily squashing the Kinder Morgan (now Trudeau) pipeline in its tracks. Beautiful in itself and a nice, packaged triumph of NGO/FN alliances. Damn if we don't hear calls for going much, much further, for example to call for the shut down of corporations themselves and entire industries - airlines, automobiles, transportation and ultimately the system of global capitalism - global sourcing and the global economy itself. Nothing less is called for in the face of what some of the few brave climate scientists and true climate justice activists reveal is at stake.