If human civilization as we know it is dependent on the maintenance of the stable climate in which it evolved over the past 10,000 years, then we are well and truly @#$%ed.

Tuesday’s election results mean it is now virtually impossible to avoid exceeding the targets set forth by the U.N. for “safe” levels of climate change. This election looks to be a turning point down the long dark road to the collapse of planet’s cryosphere.

From here on out, we are mitigating our emissions of greenhouse gases not because we think it’s possible to avert catastrophe, but because we are attempting to avert a worse catastrophe.

It’s the scenario outlined by a seminal 2009 paper in the world’s top scientific journal, Nature: “Overshoot, adapt and recover.”

As Obama’s science advisor John Holdren put it:

 We basically have three choices: mitigation, adaptation and suffering. We’re going to do some of each. The question is what the mix is going to be. The more mitigation we do, the less adaptation will be required and the less suffering there will be.

Many scientists have already been arguing that the window of opportunity for a largely mitigationist climate strategy has closed — and yesterday’s election underscores that point.

The countless climate zombies elected to Congress have promised legislative gridlock and even trials of climate scientists, virtually guaranteeing that we will have no substantive national laws aimed at curbing climate change for at least the next two years.