5 ms·

Not guilty at all. I travel internationally. There really isn't a better option for traveling over the pacific. Yes, I recognize I could stay in one place, I do

Not guilty at all. I travel internationally. There really isn't a better option for traveling over the pacific. Yes, I recognize I could stay in one place, I don't consider that a viable option. I think it's a boondoggle to attempt to shame people into changing their behavior when they do not have viable options.

steve1977 7y ago
What are you doing on your travels that prevents not traveling from being a viable option?
- SapporoChris 7y ago
  Attempting to immigrate out of USA. Please, list my non-traveling options, I'm interested in your perspective.
sorenjan 7y ago
Does the fact that there are no other options for trans pacific travel change how much CO2 you're releasing into the atmosphere because you don't want to change your habits? The planet doesn't really care about options or intentions, only actions.
mattlutze 7y ago
"I think it's a boondoggle to attempt to shame people into changing their behavior when they do not have viable options." It's perhaps a boondoggle to represent a person's life as having only a single option that requires such things. If you want to have the sort of life that requires your flights back and forth, that's one thing -- but voluntary participation in that life is a different thing than suggesting that you're trapped by circumstance.
- SapporoChris 7y ago
  Anyone shaming air travel should first become carbon neutral least they be labeled a hypocrite.
  - viklove 7y ago
    Even if someone's lifestyle is emitting 1/10th the carbon of yours, they should still reduce it to 0 before criticizing you? Sounds like you're just trying to avoid feeling guilty and absolve yourself of any blame.
    - SapporoChris 7y ago
      Certainly not. Being a hypocrite doesn't prevent ability to criticize. But it does weaken the argument depending on the level of hypocrisy. I'm not avoiding feeling guilty and I know I'm not innocent. I'm trying to listen with an open mind and exchange opinions in a polite manner. (like everyone else here I hope)
baq 7y ago
classic 'want to eat cake and have cake'. shaming is the first step, the next policy step should be (will be?) carbon tax. i wonder what such a tax would do with viability of options if it was noticeable.
- SapporoChris 7y ago
  I support carbon taxes. I didn't need to be shamed into supporting them. I listened to the arguments and it sounded justified.
linuxftw 7y ago
Pick any political issue. Shaming is now the tactic. Anyone with a brain in their skull is now ignoring these outrage mobs.
the_gastropod 7y ago
“You know, I really enjoy lighting tire fires, and these damn tree huggers are just trying to shame me, and not give me any other viable alternatives.” Why is that any different an attitude than yours? This behavior is literally killing our species. Unfortunately we don’t have a non-harmful viable alternative to the destructive behavior you enjoy. Perhaps it’s reasonable to consider changing that behavior. Buy a ticket on a shipping vessel, for instance. It’s way slower than flying, but you can travel the world this way at a fraction of the carbon footprint.
- SapporoChris 7y ago
  I do find the idea of traveling via a shipping vessel interesting. Unfortunately, they are not well advertised and the routes are extremely limited when compared to an international flight. I can do direct from Texas to Tokyo in under 13 hours. I did see ten day routes from a couple of east coast ports. However, traveling this way from Texas doesn't seem viable. Perhaps I should expand on the definition of viable. I intended the definition: capable of working, functioning, or developing adequately Ten days stretches the credibility of viable in my humble opinion. Not a fan of Quora, but the site suggested I could go Houston to Chiba in 26 days. Round trip would be 52 days. I'm currently doing two round trip international flights a year. Previously I was taking four. Two round trips would be 104 days of traveling a year on a ship versus my current 52 hours on an airplane.
  - the_gastropod 7y ago
    I understand. As I said: > Unfortunately we don’t have a non-harmful viable alternative to the destructive behavior you enjoy Right now flying internationally is artificially cheap. It's cheap because we collectively have allowed our commonwealth to be exploited, at great cost to our health and our future. You have a choice today whether to participate in that exploitation. And (hopefully) soon enough, most of us will simply be priced out of this type of behavior, as the externalities are better accounted for.
    - SapporoChris 7y ago
hackeraccount 7y ago
This is why I feel no shame about my Saturday night Giant Panda steak. I mean, if someone really wanted to they could breed Giant Panda's like cattle.

steve1977 7y ago

What are you doing on your travels that prevents not traveling from being a viable option?

SapporoChris 7y ago
Attempting to immigrate out of USA. Please, list my non-traveling options, I'm interested in your perspective.

sorenjan 7y ago

Does the fact that there are no other options for trans pacific travel change how much CO2 you're releasing into the atmosphere because you don't want to change your habits? The planet doesn't really care about options or intentions, only actions.

mattlutze 7y ago

"I think it's a boondoggle to attempt to shame people into changing their behavior when they do not have viable options." It's perhaps a boondoggle to represent a person's life as having only a single option that requires such things. If you want to have the sort of life that requires your flights back and forth, that's one thing -- but voluntary participation in that life is a different thing than suggesting that you're trapped by circumstance.

SapporoChris 7y ago
Anyone shaming air travel should first become carbon neutral least they be labeled a hypocrite.
- viklove 7y ago
  Even if someone's lifestyle is emitting 1/10th the carbon of yours, they should still reduce it to 0 before criticizing you? Sounds like you're just trying to avoid feeling guilty and absolve yourself of any blame.
  - SapporoChris 7y ago
    Certainly not. Being a hypocrite doesn't prevent ability to criticize. But it does weaken the argument depending on the level of hypocrisy. I'm not avoiding feeling guilty and I know I'm not innocent. I'm trying to listen with an open mind and exchange opinions in a polite manner. (like everyone else here I hope)

baq 7y ago

classic 'want to eat cake and have cake'. shaming is the first step, the next policy step should be (will be?) carbon tax. i wonder what such a tax would do with viability of options if it was noticeable.

SapporoChris 7y ago
I support carbon taxes. I didn't need to be shamed into supporting them. I listened to the arguments and it sounded justified.

linuxftw 7y ago

Pick any political issue. Shaming is now the tactic. Anyone with a brain in their skull is now ignoring these outrage mobs.

the_gastropod 7y ago

“You know, I really enjoy lighting tire fires, and these damn tree huggers are just trying to shame me, and not give me any other viable alternatives.” Why is that any different an attitude than yours? This behavior is literally killing our species. Unfortunately we don’t have a non-harmful viable alternative to the destructive behavior you enjoy. Perhaps it’s reasonable to consider changing that behavior. Buy a ticket on a shipping vessel, for instance. It’s way slower than flying, but you can travel the world this way at a fraction of the carbon footprint.

SapporoChris 7y ago
I do find the idea of traveling via a shipping vessel interesting. Unfortunately, they are not well advertised and the routes are extremely limited when compared to an international flight. I can do direct from Texas to Tokyo in under 13 hours. I did see ten day routes from a couple of east coast ports. However, traveling this way from Texas doesn't seem viable. Perhaps I should expand on the definition of viable. I intended the definition: capable of working, functioning, or developing adequately Ten days stretches the credibility of viable in my humble opinion. Not a fan of Quora, but the site suggested I could go Houston to Chiba in 26 days. Round trip would be 52 days. I'm currently doing two round trip international flights a year. Previously I was taking four. Two round trips would be 104 days of traveling a year on a ship versus my current 52 hours on an airplane.
- the_gastropod 7y ago
  I understand. As I said: > Unfortunately we don’t have a non-harmful viable alternative to the destructive behavior you enjoy Right now flying internationally is artificially cheap. It's cheap because we collectively have allowed our commonwealth to be exploited, at great cost to our health and our future. You have a choice today whether to participate in that exploitation. And (hopefully) soon enough, most of us will simply be priced out of this type of behavior, as the externalities are better accounted for.
  - SapporoChris 7y ago

hackeraccount 7y ago

This is why I feel no shame about my Saturday night Giant Panda steak. I mean, if someone really wanted to they could breed Giant Panda's like cattle.