>You can discuss and discuss and both sides will bring arguments and you will never find a conclusion. It's a sham. If we can't solve this problem then anythin

>You can discuss and discuss and both sides will bring arguments and you will never find a conclusion. It's a sham. If we can't solve this problem then anything we do to save the environment now is just a band-aid. >Germany, for example, is investing quite a lot into green energy. Just for fun? Or probably with a reason? I think most everyone is on board with polluting less (with the obvious exception of people like the Koch brothers), it's just a question of how. People point out, for example, that creating green technology can be more damaging then the potential savings in using it. I personally don't give this this argument much merit because we tend to get better at things when we do them more, but it just goes to show you that people who care just as much as you do still don't agree on how to tackle the issue. >It's easier to accept the argument that everything is fine, not care about it and live as if nothing happened without reflecting. I'm not sure as many people do this as you think. They may not agree with the severity of the issue but everyone understands that we are destroying at least parts of our environment (e.g. poisoning the oceans). That's not controversial. >The quintessence is to not look away but do something. We are. Not as fast as some people might like, but people are trying things. The reason is simple: there's money in it.