Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Rob Greenfield vs Jeff Bezos

  1. #1
    Senior Member catherine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Central Jersey
    Posts
    7,019

    Rob Greenfield vs Jeff Bezos

    I could have put this in a few forums but I chose Environmental Issues. Rob Greenfield's YouTube (see below) points out a bunch of different simple living truths, and I really enjoyed this video. Anyone into frugality, the environment, minimalism, will probably find some value in this TEDtalk.

    "As I made these changes, I thought I was making environmentally-friendly changes, which I was. But what I found was, every time I did something good for the environment, I was doing something good for me--so with making these changes I was becoming happier and healthier."

    Just recently I read about Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk and their desire to set the foundation for being able to actually live in space. Why? Because it will provide an escape from a polluted planet.

    "Our ultimate vision is millions of people living and working in space," Bezos said during a rare, 30-minute conversation with reporters after the announcement in Cape Canaveral, Fla.

    Musk, the Los Angeles entrepreneur who founded SpaceX, envisions a "multi-planet species" that will escape Earth's suffocating pollution to live, for starters, on Mars — after nuking the red planet to warm it up, as he recently told "Late Show" host Stephen Colbert. (To delay the pending environmental collapse, Musk prescribes electric cars and solar panels — from his other two companies.)"

    ????

    So, trash the home you have, and then try to adapt to homes that are not friendly to your biological needs without the support of a LOT of technology.

    Which scenario is more likely: that people will rethink their actions, a la Greenfield, or look for an escape in space, a la Bezos. I know that there are a bunch of people here who don't think either will be necessary--and hopefully there is a middle way. At this point in time, both seem to be extreme solutions, but if you accept that we are in the process of killing the planet, then it may become an either/or situation--and will it be Greenfield's solutions, or Bezos'?



    "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
    www.silententry.wordpress.com

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,490
    [QUOTE=catherine;272284]
    ????

    So, trash the home you have, and then try to adapt to homes that are not friendly to your biological needs without the support of a LOT of technology.

    QUOTE]

    This! Bezos is singlehandedly causing so much waste each day in form of packaging, and disrupting so much local commerce--really sad. That is monstrous, to have such an impact and suggest that rich people go live in space.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Williamsmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Penns Woods
    Posts
    2,162
    I actually think the opposite. We are in the process of improving our planet, building it up, supporting it in its ability to heal itself. Elon Musk is a techno science PT Barnum and Rob Greenfield is more of an artist than an environmentalist. Musk out of sheer willpower and financial resource, may someday establish a fledgling community on Mars but there will never be a need for it. The Earth will always remain. Billions of Humans however......may not.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,396
    a few rich people think they will live on mars while the earth and billions of people on it (plus other species) die in mass environmental holocaust.

    Of course in actuality, this is almost certainly a delusion, maybe not the billions of people dying, that could happen, but the living on another planet etc. since there are many many reasons people are not adapted to other planets at all. I'm not sure how widespread the delusion really is, seems mostly to afflict a few people with way more money than brains not to mention decency. Some people want to explore space for more positive reasons of course, but for that to make any sense you do so in a context of also trying to save this planet.

    Ugh makes me feel guilty for the few things I bought from Whole Foods recently (I mostly have not - ever since it was bought by Amazon!). The Rob Greenfield stuff might be interesting if I have some time ..
    If you want something to get done, ask a busy person. If you want them to have a nervous breakdown that is.

  5. #5
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    6,662
    Can you point to some credible report that Bezos and Musk's motivation for going into space is primarily so that rich people can escape a polluted planet?

    Personally, I think that it is essential for the long-term survival of our species that we get off this planet.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Williamsmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Penns Woods
    Posts
    2,162
    Quote Originally Posted by bae View Post
    Can you point to some credible report that Bezos and Musk's motivation for going into space is primarily so that rich people can escape a polluted planet?

    Personally, I think that it is essential for the long-term survival of our species that we get off this planet.
    Are you conceiving of a mere Noah type experience in space or is this going to be a mass exodus? I'm having trouble getting a grip on this intellectually.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Rogar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,313
    Hawking seems to agree with the uninhabitable earth theory. (But he's just a scientist, which is just a little better than a journalist among some these days.)

    "It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster on planet Earth in the next hundred years, let alone the next thousand, or million. The human race shouldn't have all its eggs in one basket, or on one planet. Let's hope we can avoid dropping the basket until we have spread the load."

    http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/05/stephen-hawking-human-extinction-colonize-planet.html

  8. #8
    Senior Member catherine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Central Jersey
    Posts
    7,019
    Quote Originally Posted by Rogar View Post
    Hawking seems to agree with the uninhabitable earth theory. (But he's just a scientist, which is just a little better than a journalist among some these days.)

    "It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster on planet Earth in the next hundred years, let alone the next thousand, or million. The human race shouldn't have all its eggs in one basket, or on one planet. Let's hope we can avoid dropping the basket until we have spread the load."
    That's right! I forgot Hawking is in the "let's bail" camp.
    "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
    www.silententry.wordpress.com

  9. #9
    Senior Member Williamsmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Penns Woods
    Posts
    2,162
    Quote Originally Posted by catherine View Post
    That's right! I forgot Hawking is in the "let's bail" camp.
    Forgive me but as Catherine pointed out in the OP.......what kind of ethic is it to trash the one planet we have and seek to move on to another planet. Why would we not assume that it will be trashed as well? And for Gods sake, if we have the technology to move the entire human race to another planet or galaxy......you would think we could just make some repairs here and be happy with the remodeled home.

  10. #10
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    6,662
    Quote Originally Posted by Williamsmith View Post
    Are you conceiving of a mere Noah type experience in space or is this going to be a mass exodus? I'm having trouble getting a grip on this intellectually.
    Our solar system is full of rocks, small-to-large. Now-and-then, a decent-sized one hits the earth, and the ecosystem gets significantly impacted. Many species cease to be. Generally the larger and more complex species.

    It's just a matter of time before one hits us. I used to work with an effort to identify and track likely near-Earth-orbit objects and potential impactors. If you approach the problem from an actuarial point of view, it would be worth spending a significant amount of money each year to make progress on the problem - for less than the cost of producing a feature film *about* asteroid impacts, you could actually Do Something Useful....

    Next time one of these hits us, I'd like for us to have some resiliency as a species. Which probably includes having population reserves outside the area of destruction.

    Then of course there are the more boring threats - crazy dictators with nukes causing a larger-scale nuclear weapons exchange, some inept bio-researcher letting a nasty bug escape, a nanotech grey-goo boo-boo, a bad release of Microsoft Windows, that sort of thing.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •