3 ms·
This guy is reducing his quality of life to save the environment (or so he believes). That's more than most of us are willing to do, and that's why his sacrific
by ggreer 13y ago
This guy is reducing his quality of life to save the environment (or so he believes). That's more than most of us are willing to do, and that's why his sacrifice is futile. He's the exception that proves the rule. I don't think any civilization has ever voluntarily reduced its resource consumption. Adapting to climate change or reversing it with geoengineering is probably easier than changing human nature.
- gaius 13y agoYou can fly and drive all the miles you please knowing that you will never impact the planet as much as someone who has 2 or God forbid more kids. Because there is one and only one thing that will save the planet, and that's fewer us.
- angersock 13y agoHow haughty to assume that the onus is on us to "save" the planet. How absurd to also assume that the only way we could accomplish this is by some quota of human beings.
- gaius 13y agoOh the planet will do fine without us, but using the commonly accepted meaning of the phrase to mean preserving a familiar ecosystem, then yes, the only was todo that is to consume less. If we abandon modern tech that will happen anyway since we rely on industrial farming. So we can reduce our load on the ecosystem in a managed way likeChina did, or we can have it forced upon us, but it is going to happen.