> What about standards of living on the planet in the 60s? Not just the US and some parts of Europe. How will this be spread evenly on the planet? Do we ask Chi

> What about standards of living on the planet in the 60s? Not just the US and some parts of Europe. How will this be spread evenly on the planet? Do we ask China and India to get back to 60s levels? Do we ask Africa to not make any steps towards industrialization? Does US get back to lower levels than 60s so that emerging nations are on an equal step? Our technology is a hell of a lot more efficient nowadays so hopefully these the answers to these questions will be uncomfortable rather than unbearable. > Why do people today choose to buy ultra processed instead of simple foods? Advertising. UPF allows companies to add value to food by making it more addictive/less filling/etc. See the obesity epidemic. Whole foods take less fossil fuel to create -- less fossil fuel to process, less to transport, etc. They're not even that much more expensive. > Who decides how much we can drive, and fly? Can I go visit my grand-dad in the countryside? Can Bill Gates go to the climate conference on the other side of the world to scold us? The expense of how much fuel costs. The social stigma of driving a gas guzzling truck. > I'm pushing for actively trying to develop new technologies to mitigate the strategy and you are fighting against the viewpoint that we should put our heads in the sand and wait for a solution... I think this thread has run its course. It's sad that you don't see what you're doing for what it is. You started this thread by effectively saying you have A/C so technology will save us. What happens when heatwaves disable the electric system? When we have power outages due to climate changed caused storms? Will technology save us then? My whole point is you are being too blase about the existential threat we face. You're not even a minority viewpoint. I hope we don't all come to regret this attitude.