Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
47. I think we got off on a bad footing here.
Mon Nov 5, 2012, 09:36 PM
Nov 2012
1. I am not Booker, so discard your straw man.


Didn't say you were. What I'm trying to say, though, is that we gotta stop falling into these traps because it really does hurt us in the long run.


2. Running out of time, hell yes look at the tipping points we have already passed.


And?


3. In the last 45 years how much progress have you seen in moving toward a carbon free civilization? Hell politically we can't even pass a 1% global annual emissions reduction, socially we can't get the majority to recycle, use mass transit, or buy less toys.


4. Renewables cannot come close to supporting industry, and without industry your precious growth crumbles.


I'd like to refer back to the S.S. article.


5. The economy most certainly would stagnate with only a 2 -3 % annual reduction in CO2 emissions, it is why governments refuse to pass any binding resolutions providing limits.


See what I mean? These are traps we have to avoid falling into.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-too-hard.htm


6.It is you who consistently infers, incorrectly, that all will be well if we only shift our priorities and develop green energy in the coming decades. Your claims of my fantasy are a very weak straw man that misrepresents all the posts I have written, and destroys your own credibility.


No. I have stated, in fact, that we do need to permanently shift away from dirty energy & towards clean energy. All I have said is that less consumption just won't do much good by itself, as noble as such efforts may be.


7. You consistently blame the 1% for all the problems while sticking your head in the sand about the other 99% consuming and polluting without regard. These are your relatives, your neighbors, and your country men, yet you can no more change what they are doing than change your own consuming reality. But instead of admitting your situation, you want to invent your way out of your reality. So, don't tell me I need to wake up.


I'm not really trying to deflect ALL blame from people. There are some people who really are ignorant enough to remain inefficient just to stick it to "dem librulz", etc. And frankly, many of them can't be helped much. But many people simply aren't informed enough about the issues, and once they are, most will do what they can to make their lives more efficient, such as trying to use less gas, less electricity, etc.

But more than anything, we DO face a conspiracy in the form of Big Oil/Coal/Gas lobbyists, and people like the Koch Bros. who are just so obsessed with their profits that they'll do anything to keep the cash flowing. And once we get that out of the way, it will be significantly less difficult to move towards a better world. We will have jumped a major hurdle.


8. Baked in emissions have already past 2% an will continue to rise as the tipping points already past continue to influence warming. Get used to it.


TBH, we really don't know that at this point. Could it happen? Yes. But is it? As far as the evidence says, around 2*C is probably baked in at this point barring carbon sequestration, but not really much more than that.


9. Save your booker and other spam, you are sure to need it with the future you most certainly have helped to create, and help to sustain.


I'm sorry you think that.

OK, I dunno. It's very possible we may have misunderstood each other here, and if so, perhaps I should apologize, though I think any further discussion is probably best relegated to PMs and such.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Ungrowth: the new paradigm. pscot Nov 2012 #1
Not only can we not have economic growth, ... CRH Nov 2012 #2
You don't need to eliminate growth to help fix the problem. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #5
Can you point to one program or event that has reduced global CO2 emissions, ... CRH Nov 2012 #10
CRH, you don't get it. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #18
I think it is you who needs to wake up, ... CRH Nov 2012 #42
I think we got off on a bad footing here. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #47
If more people catch on to what is really needed, NoOneMan Nov 2012 #3
True, but artifically stopping growth isn't amongst the solutions. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #6
Everyone is causing the problem NoOneMan Nov 2012 #8
It doesn't really work like that. The 1% hoards and MORE energy gets used. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #17
Supply-Side, Trickle-Down Economics is false NoOneMan Nov 2012 #26
I never said Trickle-Down was plausible. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #29
"The 1% hoards and MORE energy gets used." NoOneMan Nov 2012 #33
Maybe. I just don't have the faith that it'll necessarily be true, though. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #50
Why red flags? NoOneMan Nov 2012 #52
"Why is shutting down the global economy such a terrible thing?" AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #54
I am talking about an organized decline globally NoOneMan Nov 2012 #55
False hope? AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #56
false hope is saying we can consume energy to fix an over-consumption problem NoOneMan Nov 2012 #57
I love the smell of truth... GliderGuider Nov 2012 #4
Good article. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #7
Consuming less has been a substantial factor in emission reductions during the recession NoOneMan Nov 2012 #9
Yes, but if true, this was more extreme luck than anything else. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #19
That assumes that humans will always exploit all available energy and negate surplus NoOneMan Nov 2012 #24
What's all this spiel about 'infinite' growth, anyway? AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #25
That is civilization's driving goal NoOneMan Nov 2012 #28
Both the article and the comments are deeply flawed IMO. GliderGuider Nov 2012 #11
I feel one of the "fake" solutions is a real solution NoOneMan Nov 2012 #12
Every realistic idea I've seen so far... GliderGuider Nov 2012 #13
But that could change NoOneMan Nov 2012 #14
No doubt it will GliderGuider Nov 2012 #15
Hi GG, I don' t have much time but let me take a shot, ... CRH Nov 2012 #16
I agree as far as it goes GliderGuider Nov 2012 #21
Wealth is a cultural construct and quite alien to many pre-agricultural societies NoOneMan Nov 2012 #23
This message was self-deleted by its author CRH Nov 2012 #59
Here is my kooky, quasi theory: NoOneMan Nov 2012 #22
That's a very well-appointed rabbit hole you live in. GliderGuider Nov 2012 #27
Quick question: NoOneMan Nov 2012 #31
Well, here's one example: GliderGuider Nov 2012 #35
Hey you two, the posts in this mini thread, 21-35, ... CRH Nov 2012 #60
You're welcome, I guess. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #61
Pessimism is understandable. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #30
Bouncing back doesn't necessarily include humans bouncing with it FYI NoOneMan Nov 2012 #32
Actually, it kinda does. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #37
The thing about the aftermath of Toba is this: GliderGuider Nov 2012 #39
Re: "The resources of the planet were entirely undepleted." AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #40
How do you know? GliderGuider Nov 2012 #43
Well. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #46
You have so much faith in the ability of humans to rebuild after complete collapse NoOneMan Nov 2012 #45
Of course, it IS more complex than that, BUT........ AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #48
I see little difference anymore between these lines of thought: NoOneMan Nov 2012 #49
Cheat Sheet Answers: Number one is an outright liar and Number Two isn't even short-sighted. =) AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #51
Increased efficiency means more available energy, meaning cheaper energy, resulting in more growth NoOneMan Nov 2012 #53
Two quick thoughts GliderGuider Nov 2012 #34
An interesting way of putting things, I suppose. n/t AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #36
We're not hitting 10*C by 2100, especially not if we get things done. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #20
Bank on the business as usual scenario, ... CRH Nov 2012 #38
My response. AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #41
A bit of exaggeration in parts, don't you think? ... CRH Nov 2012 #44
Just a quick comment to everyone who posted overnight (since about reply #10) ... Nihil Nov 2012 #58
Heh, no prob I guess. =) AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #62
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Tyndall Center Director A...»Reply #47