Funny how they blame corporations and the ultra rich. The ultra rich may consume more than most, with reasons based in fact (flying around in jets, palatial homes all over the world etc etc etc) but that is not enough to drive the huge profits of the huge global corporations.I tend to agree with Jane, I wrote a piece on this a few pages back, but off course that is unpopular with the climate change religion, the arguments here against Jane's observation are pretty thin when you look at the reality of world wide deforestation, the rape of the oceans in SE Asia, etc, etc, etc.
Jane Goodall's comments at Davos may seem harmless, but they reflect a dangerous misreading of the climate crisis that needs to be challenged.theconversation.com
That says it all and backs up what I've posted recently and past. I'll be blunt this girl (and that is all she is, her brain won't mature for years yet) is in danger of dramatic overload due to the pressure put on her by her managers, backers, parents and the people who don't subscribe to her radical theories that would endanger the worlds economy (except for the ultra rich) if adopted.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I quite enjoyed this.Funny how they blame corporations and the ultra rich. The ultra rich may consume more than most, with reasons based in fact (flying around in jets, palatial homes all over the world etc etc etc) but that is not enough to drive the huge profits of the huge global corporations.
It is the over population of the world and, through mass media, the desire to have what others have that has driven the age of envy and over consumption.
Corporations are built on demand, if there is no demand there would be no supply and therefore no profit to be had.
But demand is there and so we get more and more uber rich. One goes hand in hand with the other.
Overpopulation reflects issues of carrying capacity (world wide deforestation, the rape of the oceans as you mentioned) by which developing nations are evaluated to consume more than their land can support (most developed nations have population in decline and thus rely on immigration to drive the consumerism and expansion to increase the tax take).
And while overpopulation is bad, over consumption is far worse, and it is the over consumption driven by the age of envy. Again, they both go hand in hand.
People need to look past the obvious primary factors taking a toll on the environment, like industry and agriculture, and instead realise whose needs those things are servicing.
Look at the impacts of consumers based on where they live and you find that the richer a country is the more its inhabitants consume (yes the developed nations like Oz is guilty of this as well), and the greater each person’s impact on the planet.
But the fact is that the developing countries want to be like us and are going at break neck speed to catch up, and they have huge population increases going on as well.
And guess what, those very same countries are encouraged to lift local standards by parties like the UN etc to meet that of the western world, which can only be done by increasing consumption, but the very same groups that say we have to cut our consumption to reduce pollution, emissions etc or pay the price.
Like the attenborough misrepresentation, the bodies that are trying to govern the world (UN) and telling us what to do with regard to emissions are also misrepresenting the facts.
Everybody has an agenda to push and unfortunately it is the indoctrination of the young like little miss thumperburg who are swallowing their BS hook line and sinker.
(if all that makes sense you will be doing well, I have no idea if it does as I have the worst hangover in years, think I will go back to bed)
I and many others are not quite so sure. But let us suppose the world is in catastrophic danger from man made climate change like the doomsdayers are saying, you and I and the next 12 odd generations would be dead before anyone would notice a change, I remember Tim Flannery saying something along those lines when pinned down.There are going to be a lot of very quiet science deniers in a few years time.
No climate denier here.There are going to be a lot of very quiet science deniers in a few years time.
That video should piss off both the left and right. It'll piss off the right because he doesnt deny climate change. In turn it'll have the left wanting him dead because he points out our modern society is literally built on and with hydrocarbon.No climate denier here.
But I am a against the BS that the climate activists scream all day long (supported by their corporate puppet masters, like those who would love to have the revenue of carbon credits in their pocket, or are the produces of wind turbines, photovoltaic cells etc etc) while ignoring the more crucial issues we are facing.
Besides, Marko_SJ's link of post 2928 is a fact, that none in the green / renewable / alternative world of screamers will ever admit to, or address, in any meaningful manner.
Having been in the hydrocarbon business all my life we often laughed at the simple mindedness of the raving nut bag greenies and their followers, who would be the first to become extinct should we divorce ourselves from hydrocarbons with out a reliable, easily transportable and cheaply produced method of energy production on the scale needed to accommodate their, and everybody else's, way of life.
And there is no method of energy production to meet that scale available, no matter what you or others bleat from your comfortable position in your very easy life, that was brought to you by, yep you guessed it, hydrocarbons.
And there is another issue that would be the fall out and that spells disaster for you, me and every stupid nut job greenie out there, and billions more.
Renewable / alternative energy in enough scale and supply just to support a minority of the worlds population at the current standards of living will require a vast enclave of land with strict regulation and defence to ensure that that minority survives, with some getting passed on to those out side of the walls not so lucky to be in that enclave, and the world is divided in to the haves and have not's. Maybe a better term would be the "elites and the starving masses".
see changes to your statement above as to what really is the caseThat video should piss off both the left and right. It'll piss off the right because he doesnt deny climate change. In turn it'll have the left wanting him dead because he points out our modern society is literally built on and with hydrocarbon.
Further we cannot go cold turkey
or probably even"and" continue our standard of living and reduce our"without" hydrocarbon consumption. This goes treble for developing nations.
There's two points to be made here.I and many others are not quite so sure. But let us suppose the world is in catastrophic danger from man made climate change like the doomsdayers are saying, you and I and the next 12 odd generations would be dead before anyone would notice a change, I remember Tim Flannery saying something along those lines when pinned down.
Might I add some of these doomsdayers are frightening the bejeezes out of children with their ravings.