Commentary: Underestimating the Challenges of Avoiding a Ghastly Future

Bradshaw et al. (2021) make a call to action in light of three major crises - biodiversity loss, the sixth mass extinction, and climate disruption. We have no contention with Bradshaw et al.’s diagnosis of the severity of the crises. Yet, their call for scientists to "tell it like it is", their appeal to political "leaders", and the great attention they afford to human population growth as a main driver underpinning the three crises, rest on contested assumptions about the role of science in societal transformations, and are scientifically flawed and politically problematic. In this commentary, we challenge Bradshaw et al.’s assumptions concerning the nature of science, polity and humanity as well as the implicit politics underlying their analysis and messaging. We end with an alternative call to action.Bradshaw et al. (2021) make a call to action in light of three major crises - biodiversity loss, the sixth mass extinction, and climate disruption. We have no contention with Bradshaw et al.’s diagnosis of the severity of the crises. Yet, their call for scientists to "tell it like it is", their appeal to political "leaders", and the great attention they afford to human population growth as a main driver underpinning the three crises, rest on contested assumptions about the role of science in societal transformations, and are scientifically flawed and politically problematic. In this commentary, we challenge Bradshaw et al.’s assumptions concerning the nature of science, polity and humanity as well as the implicit politics underlying their analysis and messaging. We end with an alternative call to action.