3 ms·

> violence (in the short term) is the only thing that can stop the car going over the cliff. nah that’s just what ideologues say because they care more about t

> violence (in the short term) is the only thing that can stop the car going over the cliff. nah that’s just what ideologues say because they care more about their top-down control agenda. If climate change was fixed tomorrow, they’d be disappointed because they wouldn’t be able to exact control over others in the name of climate concern. Plant more trees. Invest in renewables.

Podgajski 3y ago
> Plant more trees. Invest in renewables. I do not know how people can be convinced those things will do anything to mitigate the changes we are seeing and will see for years even if we stop all carbon output now. What his needed is shame, for people to be shamed, but we have no religion anymore so no one cares about shame.
- peteradio 3y ago
  Trees give shade, shade reduces energy demand.
- GravityLab 3y ago
  Nah, leave shaming in the era of the Salem witch trials. We don't need that. Here's what we need: - global amount of co2 emissions per year https://www.statista.com/statistics/276629/global-co2-emissi https://www.statista.com/statistics/276629/global-co2-emissi.... - average co2 sequestered per tree - 25-45 kg depending on species (google for estimates) https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2015/03/17/power-one-tree-ve https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2015/03/17/power-one-tree-ve... 37 billion metric tons / 25 kg = ~1.48 trillion Amount of land available for reforestation as of 2019 is enough for 1.2 trillion native saplings. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aax0848 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aax0848 Given the above, we could plant this many trees in a year or two if we really tried. Couple that effort with more renewables, more investment into fusion and co2 sequestration machines, more electric cars, etc, and it's taken care of. I would question the character of any person who wants to be the one doing the shaming or thinking we need shaming for this. This is an engineering problem.
- spandextwins 3y ago
  The carbon credit contingency says otherwise. You can actually get carbon credits by planting trees.
beepbooptheory 3y ago
Aren't we already at the whim of "ideologues" who care about their top-down control agenda? Isn't that necessarily what, like, a given nation's government is in our world? Even by this logic, I'm gonna go with the guys who've put themselves behind the mitigate-climate-disaster agenda.
tippytippytango 3y ago
This. I don’t believe the environmentalists actually care about the environment. They love the power it gives them. It’s why they are against technological solutions that will make the problem go away. My litmus test is nuclear. If an environmentalist doesn’t like nuclear they aren’t a serious person.

Podgajski 3y ago

> Plant more trees. Invest in renewables. I do not know how people can be convinced those things will do anything to mitigate the changes we are seeing and will see for years even if we stop all carbon output now. What his needed is shame, for people to be shamed, but we have no religion anymore so no one cares about shame.

peteradio 3y ago
Trees give shade, shade reduces energy demand.
GravityLab 3y ago
Nah, leave shaming in the era of the Salem witch trials. We don't need that. Here's what we need: - global amount of co2 emissions per year https://www.statista.com/statistics/276629/global-co2-emissi https://www.statista.com/statistics/276629/global-co2-emissi.... - average co2 sequestered per tree - 25-45 kg depending on species (google for estimates) https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2015/03/17/power-one-tree-ve https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2015/03/17/power-one-tree-ve... 37 billion metric tons / 25 kg = ~1.48 trillion Amount of land available for reforestation as of 2019 is enough for 1.2 trillion native saplings. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aax0848 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aax0848 Given the above, we could plant this many trees in a year or two if we really tried. Couple that effort with more renewables, more investment into fusion and co2 sequestration machines, more electric cars, etc, and it's taken care of. I would question the character of any person who wants to be the one doing the shaming or thinking we need shaming for this. This is an engineering problem.
spandextwins 3y ago
The carbon credit contingency says otherwise. You can actually get carbon credits by planting trees.

beepbooptheory 3y ago

Aren't we already at the whim of "ideologues" who care about their top-down control agenda? Isn't that necessarily what, like, a given nation's government is in our world? Even by this logic, I'm gonna go with the guys who've put themselves behind the mitigate-climate-disaster agenda.

tippytippytango 3y ago

This. I don’t believe the environmentalists actually care about the environment. They love the power it gives them. It’s why they are against technological solutions that will make the problem go away. My litmus test is nuclear. If an environmentalist doesn’t like nuclear they aren’t a serious person.