Why do politician, TV scientist and technicians never offer any practical, actionable solution to the climate change crisis? It's always:
>stop eating meat
>don't have children
>drink from plastic straws
Despite the fact that we have been eating meat and having children for hundreds of thousands of years. Oh and plastic straws are not the chief cause of climate catastrophe. So what gives? Why won't experts stop complaining and just implement a viable solution?
Fossil Fuel special interests
Fpbp
We complain a lot of boomers, but when we have to get in charge of their business, or at least cleaning their mess for our own good, well, we fall short
millennial's are starting to say that the previous generations could have prevented this by adopting nuclear power. There is no reason why we shouldn't have switched from coal power plants to nuclear 40 years ago.
With the coal shortages of China I see them moving to nuclear at an accelerated rate.
>Why do
remember to filter all threads like this anons
> to the climate change crisis
there is no fricking crisis
>using a standard form of questioning deserves to be filtered
I guess asking questions is illegal
>lightbubs dont exist, its just a roided out GMO FireFly in a bulb. Dont belive big BULB!!!11
Because they're politicians and TV personalities. The frick you think they can do, invent a new source of cheap limitless power?
couple of reasons.
1. imagine you had a machine that could regulate the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. if the climate scientists are right, then what you have is functionally a weather machine. now, who gets to control the weather for the entire planet? me? you? some politicians? nobody can answer that question, so trying to build that machine is pointless.
2. now imagine that we do build a system or machine to regulate the CO2 in the atmosphere, and it works, and it turns out the climate scientists models about how CO2 affects the climate are drastically wrong. well, then oops we spent trillions and possibly permanently modified our planet and it was either ineffective or made the situation worse. everyone involved in that project would have their heads put on a spike. truth is, these scientists aren't sure enough of being correct to do anything concrete so its all half hearted non-measures.
That already exists and the effects have been directly observed and measured
really? a global scale system to control atmospheric CO2 has been fielded and is operational? please provide a link to this wonderous machine.
It only works one way though :^)
doesn't exactly regulate or control then, does it?
you really put the zing in bazinga with that one
You're pretty damned stupid
>effective weather control
It's effective CLIMATE control. Which you cannot localise over a single area. And it would take decades to have an effect. It would be useless as a weapon.
>scientist modeling is wrong
They would just revert back to the CO2 levels a century ago. It's not hard. What do you think they're going to do, revert back to the atmosphere of the Jurassic period?
>permernantly modified our planet
You just spoke of a machine that can control c02 levels, just flip the setting
>It's effective CLIMATE control.
i knew you'd say that. when talking about implemented technology, the difference between climate and weather is a matter of granularity and effectiveness of the device. any sufficiently advanced "climate" machine is also a weather machine.
the rest of your post is pure assumption based on existing models, you have no idea what a device like that would do until you build it and turn it on, and then its too late, which is exactly my point. and no one has yet to address my first point, which is who gets the keys to a machine like that?
Why are you going on about unrelated magic CO2 machines when we effectively are already running that experiment and have observed the effects of CO2 on the climate?
because OP was asking why there aren't any concrete solutions. and the CO2 machine isn't magic, humans could construct a crude system right now with current technology but the cost would be so great that even a 0.01% chance of the machine not working or not working the way our models say it would means that no scientist or politician would put their name on the project.
>drink from plastic straws
>implying research and media haven't been telling you to start dropping plastic due to microplastics found in your butt waste
Get with the times old man.
The only viable response is the end of capitalism and with it western imperialism.
>Despite the fact that we have been eating meat and having children for hundreds of thousands of years
Sure but not at the scale we are now.
Up until ~200 years ago, the global population was stable. The meat consumption was extremely low. The sugar consumption was extremely low. The consumption of goods in general was extremely low.
We were consuming 100x-1000x more per person today than we were 200 years ago. Now multiply that 1000x with 1000x population increase. Its a disaster in making. If we limit the consumption to only 10x what we ate in the 1800s per person, than crisis wouldn't be happening. We needed a natural growth curve, not an exponential one.
>we are consuming 100x-1000x more per pwrson today than we were 200 years ago
Maybe Americans do, but not everybody else
Everywhere in the western world is within that 100x-1000x range. From the baby that was just born yesterday to the old man that will die in an hour. Every single person in the western world consumes 100x+ more than what we did 200 years ago.
The only viable solution would stop growth but our economy is build upon that and it wouldn't work in time anyway.
The better thing would be just to accept the possibility and act accordingly to lessen the likely consequences for humans. But I guess, that costs too much? So we'll wait until we have to and it'll be even more expensive.
>Why do politician, TV scientist and technicians never offer any practical, actionable solution to the climate change crisis?
Because it's fake
>Why do politician, TV scientist and technicians never offer any practical, actionable solution to the climate change crisis?
They do, you moronic luddites just ignore or deny those, too.
No, less meat and less privat transport do shit compared to a stop of in and exporting goods that aren't vital or can be produced in the country itself.
you do realise, thats not even close to a complete picture. There are hundereds of interventions needed in different fields which are researched and modelled. These two points are just easy to understand and applicable to a wide audience.
And dont underestimate the resources needed to feed animals compared to their nutritional value.
a better question still; if these scientists are so very sure and billions, if not the entire human species, is doomed, then why aren't CEO's and politicians getting pipe bombs in the mail or getting shot on the streets?
oh, its because these scientists aren't that sure and absolutely lack the courage of their convictions.
or just maby, scientists dont have much power in the modern world and dont like violence.
No it must be a global conspiracy. And yes ecoterrorism is accepted by societies to be reasonable and prooven to further environmental change. Oh wait.....
reason and a distaste for violence are irrelevant in the face of extinction. its doomsday, remember?
not if using these tools, will do the opposite you want to change for the better.
It will only and destroy any collective action for change by splitting it into militants and non violent people. Additionally it will empower reactionaries against climate action.
Agreed. Uncle Ted made many great points, but folks focus in on that murdering for some reason and everything else is ignored.
Activists get blinded and imprisoned for peacefully protesting pipelines, what do you think they're going to do to anyone who does anything remotely violent?
I care about climate change because it has the potential to degrade my quality of life.
Why would I partake in actions that will virtually guarantee I live the rest of my life in a concrete box?
because everyone half-smart knows nothing can be done. We can't just stop the industry, stop making plastic stop burning oil and coal. There is nothing to be done, nothing will get done, we'll deal with it as it happens.
Politicians have to soothe the people who are afraid of whats coming but they can't really "do" anything. There is nothing to be done.
That attitude is one of the biggest hurdles to overcome. We can do something, or at the very least, make a solid attempt. Humanity as a whole needs to step across the mental threshold and finally assume control of our little blue spaceship. The idea that we're all just going along for the ride and mother earth is still at the wheel isn't true anymore, climate change literally proves that. But noone wants speak it, noone wants to say "hey, lets step up and butt frick mom into submission and take the keys to this joint" because that is a complete 180 from the very passive approach we have to ecology.
what are you saying we should do in concrete terms?
Good luck telling your kids they won't have one third the life you have had much less exceeding what you did because the planet may get warmer in the future. In fact good luck telling them they will not even get your stuff.
People naturally want to amass resources, buy nice shit, have a good life. This is not "consumerism" it's pretty basic human nature. If you think they will just magically become the own nothing be happy guy you are beyond deluded.
Politicians are meant to generate votes, not solve problems. They're also incompetent. Politics is outdated.
Anyways, you should still eat *less* meat, stop b***hing about it and do it if you actually care. It's not that easy but it's still easy and important.
People b***hing about things and having too little capacity and willingness to change their behaviors and entire lives is *one* of the major problems here you'd need to consider.
Nuclear power is the only viable alternative that exists and basically 0 "environmentalist" politicians want more of it so that right there alone is how you can deduce this is all contrived.
Carbon credits will change nothing about the source of power (and thus CO2) and just exist as a wealth transfer from the middle class to plutocrats as they pay for the marginal increase in cost that is low enough to not warrant a radical lifestyle change such as not cooling your fricking house in winter or using a computer.
Basically boot all "environmentalists" into an oven.
cooling in summer***
'practical solutions' are not realistically feasible under a democratic republic government.