Tell me how wrote: » I don't think you understand how Greta has helped to drawn attention to the need for action in this space since she started. (Don't say we knew about it already, we did, but were giving in piecemeal attention as the situation escalated) It's insulting to suggest she needs to wait until she's older when time is such a critical element.
Blueshoe wrote: » Sooner the better. Although scientists told us that if we didn't change our ways we would all be underwater by the year 2000. Il be dead by 2070 give or take unless I die early. But I'd like to see the planet go with me.
is_that_so wrote: » These are absolutely absurd examples and I'd suggest you read more about the potential instant effect of Brexit. If you're really comparing them you are not living in the real world at all. You do seem to be an all or nothing proponent. I saw three good ideas this week which have been implemented. That to me is a good thing and at the risk of repeating myself these things take time but they are happening all around us.
recedite wrote: » :pac: May as well go out with a bang, eh? You can't take the planet with you, after all. I wouldn't worry though. We'll have fusion reactors for supplying all our power by then, and greenhouse gases will be an endangered species. That's assuming we haven't all become Nigerian/Somalis and reverted back to third world technologies.
Tell me how wrote: » What ideas did you see this week? Please, enlighten us. Are they reversing or halting damage or just better than what we have been doing? If you think Brexit is a bigger long term problem than the climate issue, you don't understand the situation. Brexit is much more immediate and rightly getting immediate attention but the climate issue is global, and harder to recover from.
is_that_so wrote: » SF 49ers have banned single use bottles, Molson are taking plastic out of the beer packs at a cost of €8m and Supervalue have introduced a reusable compostible bag! The Guardian, too, has a bag with its weekend supplement made out of potato starch. Who said Brexit was a long term problem, although it could be medium term? It is however an immediate problem and has the potential to cost a lot of money, money then not available to go on other things. There's no silver bullet in this whole issue and it will come through lots and lots of small increments, like any project.
is_that_so wrote: » SF 49ers have banned single use bottles, Molson are taking plastic out of the beer packs at a cost of €8m and Supervalue have introduced a reusable compostible bag! The Guardian, too, has a bag with its weekend supplement made out of potato starch.
Blueshoe wrote: » Waste of time and effort. Akin to trying to stop the tide with a paper cup. (Recycled of course)
Tell me how wrote: » Wow. Panic averted. These really are revolutionary and will have a massive positive impact.
is_that_so wrote: » Every little helps! Actual things being done is good. Pie in the sky notions just stay there and proselytizing sends people into a stupor.
Tell me how wrote: » Do you see now the relevance of my analogy about fly tipping while picking up litter when walking the dog? We need massive change, somehow.
Blueshoe wrote: » Worldwide ban on having more than 2 children per couple is step 1
Tell me how wrote: » Do you see now the relevance of my analogy about fly tipping while picking up litter when walking the dog? We need massive change, somehow. The above should be encouraged, but we need the majority of people to do it. Not just isolated cases which people use to absolve themselves from more serious action.
biko wrote: » How about you just come out and say it - MENAhttp://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/total-fertility-rate/ Most Western countries already have fertility rates below 2
biko wrote: » How about you just come out and say it - Africahttp://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/total-fertility-rate/ Most Western countries already have fertility rates below 2
is_that_so wrote: » Africa too will eventually get there too. The average rates have been dropping since the 1960s. Addressing levels of poverty will reduce it more quickly.
is_that_so wrote: » It's not much use as an analogy absurdly marrying as it does too utterly unrelated activities. Nudging rather than barracking is the way forward.
Blueshoe wrote: » What!! That is totally untrue and the opposite of reality.https://amp-ft-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.ft.com/content/868e20d0-90ec-11e9-b7ea-60e35ef678d2?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQEKAFwAQ%3D%3D#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2F868e20d0-90ec-11e9-b7ea-60e35ef678d2
Tell me how wrote: » This is why it's such a big problem. Our capatilist society is not conducive to sustainability. I'm no socialist/communist but we need to find a way where prioritising the environment is way higher in the order of priorities than it currently is. (Not suggesting socialist/communist societies would inherently be better for the environment either.)
One eyed Jack wrote: » Grandiose gestures aren’t a very good indicator of someone thinking about sustainability though, are they? We all know of the marathon runner who peaked too early, or the sprinter who can only make short energetic bursts and can’t maintain that speed. That’s what you’re advocating with the scaremongering about time being critical and all the rest of it.
Tell me how wrote: » Do you not think time is critical? Do you think the scientists who say it is are lying?
jackboy wrote: » What scientists? Saying what? Are you talking about the 12 year thing?
One eyed Jack wrote: » it’s not that I think time isn’t critical or that I think scientists are lying. It’s that I think creating something sustainable means creating something long-term, not expending all our energy on short-term grandiose gestures that like fireworks make a lot of noise but only last a few minutes. Children already learn in school about environmental sustainability, it’s not even a question of listening to scientists, it’s a question of helping people to understand how they can play their part in creating a sustainable environment and a sustainable economy. Without understanding the basics, telling people just to listen to the scientists is just pointless posturing to be honest.
bfa1509 wrote: » People are always saying "Scientists say this Scientists say that" But they never say who the hell the scientists are! Surely if there is damning research to say x, y and z then the "scientist" who came up with it would want to be referenced appropriately to get the credit they deserve? Someone posted this very interesting article a while back from an actual scientist. It could be a godsend for all those who fear the end is nigh!https://medium.com/@pullnews/what-i-learned-about-climate-change-the-science-is-not-settled-1e3ae4712ace
