4 ms·

In elementary (late 80's) were constantly propagandized that the whales were going to be extinct, the ozone layer was going to be gone, and killer bees were goi

In elementary (late 80's) were constantly propagandized that the whales were going to be extinct, the ozone layer was going to be gone, and killer bees were going to get us all. Not a peep of optimism that we could solve problems. It was presented as inevitable. There are strong forces that need people to be in a constant state of worry. Power is derived from it.

gmanley 7y ago
The ozone hole actually existed and was solved by legislation. If people weren't panicking about it I don't think that would of happened. I'm not sure why you are calling it propaganda.
wcoenen 7y ago
The panic about the ozone layer was the correct response. It lead to the Montreal protocol which banned CFCs. Quote from a NASA page[1] about what would have happened without that CFC ban: > By 2040, the ozone hole is global. The UV index in mid-latitude cities reaches 15 around noon on a clear summer day (10 is considered extreme today). [1] https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/38685/the-ozone-layer-if-cfcs-hadnt-been-banned https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/38685/the-ozone-lay...
- refurb 7y ago
  China laughs at your Montreal protocol. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/climate/china-ozone-cfcs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/climate/china-ozone-cfcs....
MrRadar 7y ago
> There are strong forces that need people to be in a constant state of worry. Power is derived from it. Who is "deriving power" from sounding the climate change alarm? The people with the most power (the wealthy) seem to be trying to silence/defund/disempower the entire scientific community over it.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
antod 7y ago
Would those problems have been solvable if the general attitude was an optimistic view of "don't worry, someone will solve it"? Humans tend not to solve difficult problems unless they are a crisis. Convincing them a problem is actually a crisis is usually the first step in solving it.
hnhg 7y ago
We're now living in a widely recognised mass extinction event, and many species of whales have gone extinct, or are highly endangered. I don't think we solved that one...
opportune 7y ago
The first two were legitimate issues that were solved through international policy (international whaling restrictions and CFC restrictions, respectively). People were right to make a big deal about them, because unmitigated they would have had quite bad consequences
segfaultbuserr 7y ago
> whales were going to be extinct They were. Environmental movement successfully "solved" this problem. https://i1.wp.com/slatestarcodex.com/blog_images/enviro_whale1.png?zoom=1.5789473684210527&w=700 https://i1.wp.com/slatestarcodex.com/blog_images/enviro_whal... "See that tiny micro-bump at the end? That represents progress." * What Happened To 90s Environmentalism? https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/01/01/what-happened-to-90s-environmentalism/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/01/01/what-happened-to-90s-e... See section 7, "Saving The Whales".

gmanley 7y ago

The ozone hole actually existed and was solved by legislation. If people weren't panicking about it I don't think that would of happened. I'm not sure why you are calling it propaganda.

wcoenen 7y ago

The panic about the ozone layer was the correct response. It lead to the Montreal protocol which banned CFCs. Quote from a NASA page[1] about what would have happened without that CFC ban: > By 2040, the ozone hole is global. The UV index in mid-latitude cities reaches 15 around noon on a clear summer day (10 is considered extreme today). [1] https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/38685/the-ozone-layer-if-cfcs-hadnt-been-banned https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/38685/the-ozone-lay...

refurb 7y ago
China laughs at your Montreal protocol. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/climate/china-ozone-cfcs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/climate/china-ozone-cfcs....

MrRadar 7y ago

> There are strong forces that need people to be in a constant state of worry. Power is derived from it. Who is "deriving power" from sounding the climate change alarm? The people with the most power (the wealthy) seem to be trying to silence/defund/disempower the entire scientific community over it.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

antod 7y ago

Would those problems have been solvable if the general attitude was an optimistic view of "don't worry, someone will solve it"? Humans tend not to solve difficult problems unless they are a crisis. Convincing them a problem is actually a crisis is usually the first step in solving it.

hnhg 7y ago

We're now living in a widely recognised mass extinction event, and many species of whales have gone extinct, or are highly endangered. I don't think we solved that one...

opportune 7y ago

The first two were legitimate issues that were solved through international policy (international whaling restrictions and CFC restrictions, respectively). People were right to make a big deal about them, because unmitigated they would have had quite bad consequences

segfaultbuserr 7y ago

> whales were going to be extinct They were. Environmental movement successfully "solved" this problem. https://i1.wp.com/slatestarcodex.com/blog_images/enviro_whale1.png?zoom=1.5789473684210527&w=700 https://i1.wp.com/slatestarcodex.com/blog_images/enviro_whal... "See that tiny micro-bump at the end? That represents progress." * What Happened To 90s Environmentalism? https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/01/01/what-happened-to-90s-environmentalism/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/01/01/what-happened-to-90s-e... See section 7, "Saving The Whales".