Billions for Climate Change

[QUOTE=catherine;224717]So, is the reason you have not joined the climate change camp because you haven't been convinced that the scientists actually are committed what they're espousing? What would you need to see from them for you to say, "Holy cow, I guess 95% of the scientists are right--we're up s**t's creek!"?

I guess I'd have to look out my door and see the water rising up the mountain toward my house, or step outside in January or February and not need my snowshoes or maybe be found covered up by house debris one thousand yards from where my house used to stand and be told, "If you think that was something wait until you see what's coming tomorrow!" Short of that ....how about climate change becomes a major plank in the Republican Party platform. That will be a sure sign it's way too damn late!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Williamsmith

...climate change becomes a major plank in the Republican Party platform. That will be a sure sign it's way too damn late!!

---

Classic!

Civilization can take many forms, we just happened to have stumbled into a form that leaves us with clean underwear and a dirty planet. Eisenstein may fall a little to the utopian side, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. Excluding indigenous peoples from the 'blue zones' (an ironic choice of names) in Paris may be one of our highest crimes. Discounting thousands of years of accumulated knowledge because its delivered in the form of a fable that differs from our own fables just proves to me that we are becoming even more closed minded, selfish and myopic.

Aside from hunting for a few hours then getting stoned there is another possible solution. As soon as cleaning up, going green, etc. becomes as profitable on a quarterly basis as the extraction economy is now the reversal will be immediate. Humans being humans saving the planet is too esoteric, but getting rich isn't. The transition from a fossil fuel based economy to whatever comes next will be the greatest undertaking in our history. New technology will require new infrastructure. That level of job creation should be any politician's wet dream and the opportunities for their biggest donors will be almost limitless. Roadblocks removed. Its really just a matter of getting to that stage while there are still enough of us left to care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregg

Civilization can take many forms, we just happened to have stumbled into a form that leaves us with clean underwear and a dirty planet. Eisenstein may fall a little to the utopian side, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. Excluding indigenous peoples from the 'blue zones' (an ironic choice of names) in Paris may be one of our highest crimes. Discounting thousands of years of accumulated knowledge because its delivered in the form of a fable that differs from our own fables just proves to me that we are becoming even more closed minded, selfish and myopic.

Aside from hunting for a few hours then getting stoned there is another possible solution. As soon as cleaning up, going green, etc. becomes as profitable on a quarterly basis as the extraction economy is now the reversal will be immediate. Humans being humans saving the planet is too esoteric, but getting rich isn't. The transition from a fossil fuel based economy to whatever comes next will be the greatest undertaking in our history. New technology will require new infrastructure. That level of job creation should be any politician's wet dream and the opportunities for their biggest donors will be almost limitless. Roadblocks removed. Its really just a matter of getting to that stage while there are still enough of us left to care.

---

+100
Especially this:

Quote:

---

Discounting thousands of years of accumulated knowledge because its delivered in the form of a fable that differs from our own fables just proves to me that we are becoming even more closed minded, selfish and myopic.

---

We are ensconced in believing that what we've had for only the PAST 100 YEARS (more or less) is the ONLY way. We're more creative than that. It's not an either/or proposition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregg

Civilization can take many forms, we just happened to have stumbled into a form that leaves us with clean underwear and a dirty planet.

---

That is like saying soda pop can take many forms. Yes, it can. But it is still bad for ya! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregg

Aside from hunting for a few hours then getting stoned there is another possible solution. As soon as cleaning up, going green, etc. becomes as profitable on a quarterly basis as the extraction economy is now the reversal will be immediate. Humans being humans saving the planet is too esoteric, but getting rich isn't. The transition from a fossil fuel based economy to whatever comes next will be the greatest undertaking in our history. New technology will require new infrastructure. That level of job creation should be any politician's wet dream and the opportunities for their biggest donors will be almost limitless. Roadblocks removed. Its really just a matter of getting to that stage while there are still enough of us left to care.

---

How can cleaning up and going green be profitable?
Also: Sure, transitioning from a fossil fuel-based economy to whatever comes next is going to be the greatest undertaking. But I just don't know that enough people are up to the task. Do you? Most environmentalists I know are purely rhetorical or largely rhetorical.

They drive SUVs and commute long distances, they eat exotic imported foods, they live in massive houses, they have several children, etc. They obsess over recycling and voting -- which, IMHO do nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregg

Aside from hunting for a few hours then getting stoned there is another possible solution. As soon as cleaning up, going green, etc. becomes as profitable on a quarterly basis as the extraction economy is now the reversal will be immediate. Humans being humans saving the planet is too esoteric, but getting rich isn't. The transition from a fossil fuel based economy to whatever comes next will be the greatest undertaking in our history. New technology will require new infrastructure. That level of job creation should be any politician's wet dream and the opportunities for their biggest donors will be almost limitless. Roadblocks removed. Its really just a matter of getting to that stage while there are still enough of us left to care.

---

I agree. If we are to be "saved", it won't be by eco-visionaries preaching technological self-denial from electronic pulpits or by far-seeing bureaucratic elites. It will be sordid capitalists harnessing the cunning of engineering and science for self-enrichment. Call me small-minded and selfish, unable to grasp the profundity of naturalistic pantheism, but I believe the venture capitalists are a more likely source than shamans for the solutions we may need.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler

They drive SUVs and commute long distances, they eat exotic imported foods, they live in massive houses, they have several children, etc. They obsess over recycling and voting -- which, IMHO do nothing.

---

I think a big part of the survival curve will be learning to appreciate efficient use of resources rather than simply celebrating all things grandiose. And even more so if those resources can be shared. There are seven houses on my block and all of us own a lawn mower. Aside from the idiocy of lawns in general, why? One or two well maintained mower(s) would easily groom all our grass. The greenhouse in my back yard could, and to a small degree does, easily supply all the herbs and most of the greens the block uses all winter. With a little more planning and education it could do a whole lot more. Several of us work from home so we could easily share cars. The reasons my neighbors and I give for not taking all those steps and more are some of the fundamental stumbling blocks of progress. Like catherine said, we just kind of see what we're doing as the only way to do it. I actually tried pitching the shared mower to my next door neighbor last summer. I would have received a warmer response if I'd have asked to adopt his dog. Change is difficult for humans unless its forced upon them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler

They drive SUVs and commute long distances, they eat exotic imported foods, they live in massive houses, they have several children, etc. They obsess over recycling and voting -- which, IMHO do nothing.

---

I want to meet more quiet environmentalists. I consider myself one, take my lunch every day, re-use my bags, eat a lot of veggies and minimally processed foods, don't have a throw away wardrobe, recycle but also work at not having so much to recycle, live in a small sace, watch my shower length (that is my pet peeve). I add little things like now I have silverware and a cloth napkin in my lunch bag and I have starbucks resuable cups all the time so I can use those when I get my addiction. But there is nothing glamorous about these small steps, so kinda hard to see them at times.

The standard they should be judged on is effectiveness (not purity, effectiveness). If they are advocating policy change they should be as vocal as they need to be to achieve those goals (I don't know it depends on the goal, working with city hall may not always be loud, but it might be).

If they achieve useful policy change it doesn't really matter either if they are hypocritical as it can do more good to achieve policy change than any of their behaviors (the standard of judgement is effectiveness). But what if they don't achieve anything at all and are sometimes just shouting into the wind? Well the standard of judgement IS ultimately effectiveness - and if that's all that is accomplished then FAIL (I mean try anything, but if everything you do doesn't work, time to rethink it). If governments are impossible then all we have is personal behavior, but really one should stop accepting the hypocrisy criticism. It's a criticism that guarantees nothing will change as most anyone in the modern world could be accused of some level of hypocrisy. But so what? Does it mean we don't need carbon taxes or something just because the person advocating it is in some way hypocritical?

And really of course the environmentalists I've met don't drive SUVs, if they drive they usually drive Prius, true to stereotype (although that implies having some money as Prius ain't cheap). But if they did drive SUVs and still had good things they were working for, it would need to be taken into account how effective it all was, if all anyone talked about was their car choice then it could be said to be distracting I suppose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler

climate change being both real and anthropogenic.

---

Climate changes, everyone knows that:

http://www.science-skeptical.de/wp-c...alaeotemps.png


Even recently there is lot of deviation

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpr..._image0021.jpg

The question is how much is really man made. You will not get agreement on that, and the models have not demonstrated that anyone really understands what is happening

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpr..._image0071.jpg