To the uncompromising environmentalists; How are you going save the planet?

[Touchdown]

I tried something a few days ago.

I wrote at least what I thought was a positive observation on the green movement, and how the stridency has been replaced with doable solutions for everybody. It sank like a rock without one response. Now I could be full of shit on this, but I have no idea exactly where I got it wrong, since nobody bothered to tell me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5513864

The next day, I posted a snarky title to a positive news report, largely in a smart-ass response to a rabid vegan-commando's thread on how meat eaters are lower than the methane that cows fart out, with predictable results.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5522752

So my question is, what are you going to do about it?

Do you really believe that people are going to give up their cars and walk? I say walk, because buses use fossil fuels, subways use electricity generated by coal power and bikes contain petroleum products in their manufacture, so they are logically the next targets in the ongoing crusade to deprive everybody from living a modern life.

Even if the arguments for the damage the beef industry are sound (and since despite my defensiveness in my second thread, The good information I received I have no reason to doubt), the best you can hope for is a reduction in meat consumption by a few of your family members and maybe a 100 or so here on the tube series. Judging by the adamant crusaders though, I would suffice to say that if the anti-meat eaters are correct, then there's nothing anybody can do to save the planet, since cow farts will eventually make the Earth a burning cauldron of brimstone and we'll all be dead.

You have to know you will never get everyone to stop eating meat, so if the production of beef for human consumption is the absolute worst thing on the planet, then total inhabitability is the logical outcome of the planet. So why bother doing anything?

So when a new technology comes along that is green, sustainable, recycled, or made from recycled waste, then people balk at it, because it "isn't enough". Perhaps true, but every little bit helps. Every little nickel and dime to live responsibly adds up to have a big impact on one's carbon footprint. So why the preachiness and belief that it's all or nothing? Is altering behavior and reducing one's own carbon footprint ultimately a good thing, or is it just window dressing to the yurt dwellers who are the "real" green livers, and that those CFL buyers and re-useable bag shoppers are just poseurs?

What exactly is wrong with newer, greener technologies that lower or even eliminate toxins in the environment? What is wrong with making your house eco-sustainable, with rain barrels, solar panels, water softeners, recycling, soy based insulation and non VOC paints? What is wrong with shopping at local whole foods markets, and buying the dreaded steak, even if it's free range certified organic?

Is the problem so insurmountable that the numerous little things, as well as regulations, treaties, etc. cannot help anyway, and that the only solution is the strident and quixotic crusade to get everyone to stop driving cars, eating meat, sleeping in houses, using paper, using air conditioning, buying anything new even if it's made from recycled materials or *gasp* leather, and buying a coke in a #1 plastic cup.

If the planet can't be saved any other way, then we've already lost it, because your NEVER going to get the world to capitulate to your demands. So it's useless to do anything. We're all fucked! So tell The President that he's wasting money investing in renewable industries.

[bobburgster]

1. Hard Extremist Image to Shed

I believe environmentalist, green movement or whatever you want to call it has been very slow to shake the bad image they have been slammed with. There are so many industries with a vested interest in keeping things status quo that the negative campaigns they have run are (were?) quite successful in branding environmentalist as whackos.
In the positive, I do believe change in peoples' attitudes is slowly coming around to understanding the need, and being more open taking part in it. Granted it seems the changes are at a snails pace...and in the end may not come fast enough to save our planet.

[damntexdem]

33. While ideologues scream at each other; people are working on sustainble alternatives.

Saving ourselves and other lifeforms is the issue; and we do need to outpace snails to do that.

[bobburgster]

65. Agree with that..

Would be better if the masses were not so gullible.

[Union Yes]

2. Corporate America removed localism.

Now we transport everything everywhere in trucks that get 6-7 miles per gallon.

Perhaps more destructive to our environment than any other force.

Saving the planet should start there.

Buy local.

[Touchdown]

4. Now that's positive. Providing solutions.

Local Farmer's Markets, consumer demand for locally grown and made foods in regular grocers too. This is the kind of argument that I think is helpful.

[Union Yes]

39. Spurs local economic growth which has a positive local ripple effect.

I'm lucky to live near a few great farmers markets.

All Americans should be so lucky.

Local markets, factories, business' ect also fill up our vacant stores and lots. Which in return combats blight, poverty and crime.

Also provides a local economy which creates jobs.

Not to mention goods don't need to be trucked across America in 6-7 mpg big rigs.
A prime source of carbon emmisions.

The positives of localism seem endless.

Peace

[Deja Q]

62. NAFTA superhighway, the railroads, et al - - old infrastructure is still there

and it can be augmented and improved too.

Think globally, act locally.

[anonymous171]

67. Good idea. Also encourages local economic growth. nt

[LeftyMom]

3. Gonna keep starting threads until you "win" one, eh?

Good luck with that.

[Touchdown]

5. yeah, that's exactly what I'm doing.

Time for you to move on with your enlightened self and walk on water.:eyes:

[LeftyMom]

7. You're just pissy because you had the bad luck to encounter somebody who knows what they're talking

about, which got in the way of spouting shit.

Would you like to explain Northern California water politics to me again, or what? :rofl:

[LostinVA]

9. I heard that cows caused global warming

Have you looked at our blog yet? We're posting about Haruka's homemade worm composter this weekend.

[LeftyMom]

13. Yeah, that hasn't been news for decades now.

I had a quote to that effect in my sig line a few years back from that radical mouthpiece, Time Magazine. :rofl:

I took a look at you guys' blog a few days ago, and was shocked to discover that my organic sunscreen is probably giving me eight different kinds of cancer. Though scoring it lower due to "fragrances" seems silly when the fragrance in question is a really mild essential oil. I'll look into finding a new brand when this tube's empty.

[LostinVA]

14. hehehehe

I agree about the "fragrances" if it's essential oils. But, like Consume Reports, EWG is really strict in tests.

I am sad about my Bullfrog, but I'm picking up some new sunscreen at Trader Joe's this weekend. They said they should have some.

That was a very popular post -- even my Dad is buying new sunscreen.

[Touchdown]

15. To your credit, I learned something from you

I tried to be concialatory, but it seems that you would rather impress us with your superior knowledge, call me an idiot, and claim gotcha points.

Fine. You win. How will I EVER earn your forgiveness?

Thank you for telling me that the green movement is an exclusive club and that neophytes need not apply.:hi:

[LeftyMom]

21. You "learned" an opinion you'd already expressed.

In other words, you only absorbed new information that reinforced your existing biases. Again, good luck with that.

[Touchdown]

24. I said you win, Queen Gaia

You are so much better than me.

I and my biases will not try and join your exclusive club. I'm off to buy some freon (black market) just to open the can.

[LostinVA]

8. Read my blog to see how to harvest rain so you CAN walk on water

www.greengrrlsecoadventure.com

[LostinVA]

6. That's about it -- I don't lik teh green movement being falsely maligned, either

"Strident," like those pesky feminazis and nuclear gays.

:wtf:

[Touchdown]

28. And look how far it's taken you?

Only now, is the government and the "fake consumerist bullshit" is taking notice.

How long has this been going on? 40+ years of tree spiking and telling meat eaters they're planet destroyers?

Talk about insulting.

[Grinchie]

36. A fanatic doesn't recognize his own ignorance

And will project their anger onto everyone else.

The problem with the PETA, Tree spikers, rabid Vegans that demand that everyone become vegan have a very low self worth, and it triggers an overinflated, directed rage at individuals "Who MUST COMPLY" with their beliefs.

There is no middle ground. Their is no understanding that humans mature at different rates, or may be the result of wildly differnt upbringings, educational system, or have been subjected to moralistivc dogma.

The truth of the matter is that they think that their choice is not enough to implement change, and that a combatitive, demaning approach will somehow force the "Infidels" (Which is anyone that disagrees with their viewpoint) must be ostracized.

Who knows where this behavior get's it's legs, but it demonstrates a clear repressed frustration deep within themselves which manifests itself in neurosis.

I support the ethical treatment of animals, but it would not induce me to release animals from some medical lab, or burn a professors car. If they weren't blinded by rage and fear, the people would realize that they could be inadvertantly be releasing diseased animals, or hurting the future advocate for better treatment of animals, or the father of the cure for some disease. They live in a vacuum, and go beyond the basic message of respect life.

Tree spikers are the same. This can kill people, and gives the foresters more ammunition totake action against people who relly care about forests.

Vegans have a right to be Vegan, but I have a right to be an Omnivore. It is what my system was adapted to be, and I have the gut bacteria to support it.

I have my own fears about being a meat eater -- CAFO's, GMO feedstock, Unsanitary conditions, stressed out animals, the destruction of soil biota and the dependence on petrochemicals for nearly every item in out food supply.

All one needs to do is stop buying bad food, but how can one do it when bad food has a monopoly strangelhold on the food supply?

It takes more that name calling to change people. There has to be real economic incentive for the corporations to change, and despite what the extremists that promote violence and sabotage think, they are only strengthening the fight against them, because the losses are absorbed, and paid for by insurance, increased regulations, and a more hardened enemy than ever before.

Gandhi was right.

[riverdeep]

47. Most of the time, extremists are wrong,

but sometimes they're correct. This same argument was taking place between abolitionists and the rest of society who said it was unrealistic. They had good reason to believe it was unrealistic, since slavery was practiced in many societies for millenia. Imagine the gall, then, of someone standing up and saying not only that they will not own slaves, but trying to stop other people from owning them too. We can look back and see that the extremists of the time were actually correct.

Many environmental extremists believe that the situation is like someone cutting the oxygen supply on a spaceship. They are endangering the whole crew and at that point what the saboteur wants is irrelevant. I basically agree with you that it won't really be an effective way to get the masses to change, but I see where they're coming from.

[Reterr]

59. I for one am one of the OP's "extreme greens" I guess who has no problem with someone like you

I agree with a lot of your post and think that many of your points about extreme views are valid. The thing is I think a lot of that sort of image has also been promoted for enviros and animal activists by astroturf groups that are fronts for the restaurant and other lobbies. Look up Richard Berman and the Centre for Consumer Freedom for instance.

Not to say that PETA for instance doesn't have some nutty people at the helm, but a lot of local level PETA activists I have met are very reasonable people who promote "flexitarianism" (cutting back from a hard-core carnivore lifestyle with a few meatless days a week to go green etc.). PETA's long held view at the top level that any publicity is good has really not helped them but I think Ingrid Newkirk's nuttiness is to blame for that. And of course people that threaten lab researchers, commit arson etc. are the worst enemies of the animal welfare or green movement. But they are very few and so, so fringe.

On a place like DU adult discussions of these topics are difficult because of at the other end there are a few people who subscribe to "extreme libertarian douchebaggery" I guess would be its best description. The type of people that cannot even discuss scientific facts regarding the effects of CAFOs on the environment (a big issue for Obama go figure) without immediately resorting to childish petulance and "Bwahhaha I am eating my burger" etc.

[LostinVA]

38. Who is this "you" I am supposed to be

:wtf:

You have some serious issues and misconceptions with and about people who try to live green. It's obvious you started all your threads just to attack people who are trying to reduce thair carbon footprint in some way. Weird.

It's gotten me pretty far in my life. I don't know who "you" is.

[Touchdown]

43. I guess I do have misconceptions

I thought that you living by example, and offering help to others learn from that may help achieve your goals faster than being dickish. If it's just you, in the end, you're not making a dent no matter how you live.

[blindpig]

10. Here's the problem.

The 'personal choice' thing is useless, a dead end that is simple elitist consumerism. The problem is Capitalism, it's necessity of growth on a finite planet makes for disaster. It's mere existence make poverty inevitable It's endemic propensity for crisis continually brings misery to those least deserving of it while the perps shrug and go on.

The first and most important thing we can do to save the planet is kill capitalism. After that, much will fall in place.

[LostinVA]

12. That won't happen, but making it survive within strict regulatiosn would help alot

From regulating oil prices to building non-dino fuel cars subsidized by the government, to having very low-cost solar and wind energy components available to everyone, etc.

[LeftyMom]

16. My local utility put in a solar farm* and I've been paying for a share,

which is neat since I rent and can't exactly put up my own panels. The cool thing is that I own the output of my section, so in the summer when it's probably going to exceed my needs the utility will pay me for the excess and thus my summer bill will be lower. In the worst of the winter the program raised my bill by about eight bucks, but my guess is that the summer savings are going to offset that and then some.

* on the site of the old nuke plant, which must chap at least one ass in E/E, but I digress

[LostinVA]

18. That is so cool!

We'd love to put in solar panels in a few years, but we have too many tress, and I can't condone cutting down very old-growth tress to put in solar panels.

[blindpig]

20. It must happen.

Regulation will always fail, is that not what we are experiencing now? The Capitalists tolerated the New Deal only while they had to and have been rolling it back ever since. Same thing happened to Teddy Roosevelt's Trust Busting, the roll back of which resulted in the Crash of '29. As long as they have the power, the wealth and control of the means of production, they will act in their perceived self interest, which they see as the unfettered ability to accumulate wealth.

[Touchdown]

17. Okay. So what's the next step?

What is your proposal to get rid of capitalism? I'm all for pulling out the roots instead of just trimming the leaves, but how?

[blindpig]

27. Only thing I know for sure

is that it cannot be addressed within our current electoral system. People are going to have to organize outside of that, unions would be a good start. The general strike seems to me to be the tactic of choice, perhaps for a start a general strike demanding single payer health care. From that things might take on a life of their own.

[LostinVA]

11. Do you not even realize how insulting you were in that OP???

The inclusion of how "green" WAL MART is was just the icing on the landfill.

[Touchdown]

22. Did I say they were green? No. I said they were taking steps.

Does that mean that it may be self serving on WM's part? Probably, but at least they see a PR thing worthy enough to do something good, no matter how little, and that isn't all that bad.

How are you going to save the planet?

[LostinVA]

25. You cited them as as example -- they LIE about their "greenness"

I told you to read my blog. It chronicles how I am saving the planet. Oh my, let me get that egg off your face!

Your other OP was a "strident" tirade against the green movement. Gaylord Nelson is rolling over in his grave.

[Touchdown]

29. With your holier than thou attitude, I'm not sure I want to read your blog.

First off, judging by your confrontational attitude here, as opposed to maybe enlightening me a bit without the dickishness, it would seem I wold only be in for more.

Second, ordering me to patronize your vanity page is pretty egotistical, no matter what the subject matter. Try asking.

[LostinVA]

35. I like how everyone who cares you on your 'tude is "holier than thou"

Errr... you asked me what I was doing for the planet, so I told you how to find out. Our blog is humorous and educational, and not a "vanity page," which is what I guess your blog is. I don't give a damn if you read it or not. I don't need the blog traffic. I didn't "order" you to do anything -- I answered your snothead question, Sparky.

I'm not the one who is holier-than-thou or dickish. Projection is an interesting thing, as interesting as your continual posting of OPs just so you can fight.

If you post an OP citing WAL MART as one of the great corps leadng the green vanguard, expect to get spanked for it. They lie about having organic food and treat their workers horribly, They suck in many ungreen ways. I'll reserve my green kudos for a mega corp like Starbucks, who is at least really trying.

Your personal insults and attacks against people you perceive as green is odd, considering YOU are the one interested in bringing up the subject so much.

Time to put you back on Ignore. Educate yourself.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

51. Hmm...I think you should read my blog

www.greengrrlsecoadventure.com

[Touchdown]

64. Q: Do I have to have a blog to be part of The OGP?

or do I just have to recommend someone read it?

Nice Blog BTW. I only scanned it so far, but good job.:hi:

[Xithras]

19. The problem with the greenwashing movement is that it's mostly bullshit.

Everybody gets to feel like their helping the planet, while tangible reductions in actual pollution levels are negligible. It's the environmental equivalent of giving trophies to the last place Little League team because it "makes them feel better about themselves" and they "tried".

The problem with the "every little bit helps" argument is simply that people have started thinking that it's ENOUGH to do just a little bit. I've met more than one person who consideres themselves an environmentalist simply because they have CFL's in their home...even though there's an SUV in the driveway of their 6 bedroom home with a giganto pool in the backyard. Every little bit does NOT help when people use that little bit to justify carrying on other environmental crimes.

But then again, I've made my views clear here before, and there's no point in rehashing the same old arguments. Trees before people.

[blindpig]

23. Amen

Our problems are systemic and can only be resolved on that level.

[LeftyMom]

30. Exactly.

In addition, I'll add that there's only so much that can be done on a consumer level. Many of the worst decisions get made for us, which is where market ideology fails. For example, the typical consumer can put in CFLs, turn lights off religiously, etc, but they're going to have a hell of a time getting their utility to switch from coal to something that isn't killing whole communities. The grocery stores are "doing their part" by selling re-usable bags, which people promptly load up with questionable "food" products that do a hell of a lot more environmental damage than their bags ever did, load them up in their enormous car, and drive to their wastefully large house built on former farmland in the middle of fucking nowhere, where they moved because market forces had made the city where they work unsuitable for raising a family, a process to which they contributed by packing up the herd and moving to a subdivision in Outer Mongolia.

Free market ideology is killing us. Changing the light bulbs isn't going to fix that. We need to radically (ooh, scary word) re-imagine our society if we want to survive ourselves, let alone prosper.

[Reterr]

56. Basically yes

Forget the "extreme greens" or whatever, the people that really make the whole thing hopeless are the ones left or right, that treat any piece of factual information with childish petulance if it challenges their worldview.

You won't see them challenge any of the actual facts but merely respond with the inane "muahahahaha my burger still tastes good. Eat the dust from my SUV." or whatever. I really don't get that kind of response. I mean I have had many habits past and present that are bad for the environment and there have been many times when I have been exposed to information or facts about said habits where I did not immediately make a lifestyle change. But you know, if a fact is a fact and if it is accurate as far as more information sources go it is just so unscientific and ignorant to respond to it with childish rebelliousness because it makes you feel attacked. You have to acknowledge facts and there are many consumer choices where you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out which is greener, unless you feel the need to start dragging the whole "well you don't live in a mud hut either so how can you say this is greener" strawman.

[alarimer]

26. In that case, the simple answer is we are not going to save the planet.

There is no way in hell anything we do is going to work very well for the simple reasons that you state. We are fucking selfish pieces of shit who will not give up anything lest it inconvenience us. The half-measures people are willing to do will only slow down the destruction a little.

But the silver lining to this cloud is that we will, at some point, effectively run out of oil. While this will cause a huge disruption because we will, as usual, be woefully unprepared, it will also have an immediate and profound effect on emissions. It will likely also result in the deaths of millions, maybe a billion, people. This will save a lot of animals currently undergoing extinction but will be bad for us as a species. I call it a simple correction. It happens to all species once in a while when they become overpopulated. We are simply due for our turn.

[blindpig]

31. Well, I ain't giving up.

The behaviors of which you speak, greed and selfishness, are rife for the simple reason that we live within a system which rewards such behavior. seems to me the best thing we could do would be to change the system.

[Grinchie]

32. The true Clean, Renewable Energy systems are hidden in the Military Arsenal

And protected under Nation Security covers

It is not until people like the heroic Disclosure Project are actually allowed to be heard, the congress opens up investigations and emands access to 40 years of Black Budget research for the sake of the Military, only then will technologies such as those developed by Stan Meyer be actually be released to the public.

The goverments of the world are truly afraid of free, unlimited energy, because they are of the mindest that everyone would rather just sit around, make love, not war, are stop working for the man.

They have no faith in the Human desire to be inquisitive and create a better life, or explore the universe. They consistently tout "Increased Productivity" and the "Benefits of Automation", yet everyone works harder than ever, including both parent, which delivers their offspring into the hands of a brokan and manipulative educational system, religious fanatics, and corporate thieves to prey upon the void left in the kids by a dysfunctional family unit through consumption and conformity.

The exploration of space is relegated to a special club of "Qualified" personell that must pass rigorous physical tests in order to qualify. It is only because energy costs so much, and is so inefficient that they really need this ridiculous means of regulating access to space. It's rigged to keep people out unless you belong to the military-industrial complex.

People need to demand access to what we pay for. We can no longer pretend that Black Budget ops can go on forever for the sole benefit of Military applications.

[taterguy]

34. Ongoing crusade to deprive everybody from living a modern life.?

Honestly, I take great offense at that phrase.

I lead a very modern life. I've got gadgets out the wazoo. And yes, that makes me a big hypocrite.

However, anyone that's read more than a couple of my posts knows that I'm no fan of internal combustion engines.

It's not that I object to technology. It's that they're so wasteful. Cars are occasionally useful but that doesn't mean they have to be used all the time.

I'd elaborate but the cold cold beer I'm drinking from the second refrigerator in my house is dulling my senses.

I just wanted to point out that it's not about whether or not people lead a "modern" life. It's about how smart they are about it.

[LostinVA]

37. Exactly -- you do what you can do

Harvest rain and save water. Ride a bike to work. Compost.

[taterguy]

41. I once asked for curbside compost pick-up at a city meeting

People looked at me like I was from Mars.

It's done in Toronto and San Francisco.

Silly me thinks that emulating very prosperous cities is a wise thing.

[Touchdown]

45. That was the point I was trying to make.

And the others who have me on ignore are the ones I was talking about.

It seems that if I don't go full hog into radical deprivation of everything carbon in my life, then I'm an earth destroyer. If I try and do what I can, with the limited amount of knowledge and resources I have, then I have no right to talk about it on DU.

[hunter]

40. We're shit out of luck and deep into triage.

There ain't enough ambulances and it really doesn't matter because the hospital is on fire.

Nope, sorry, I don't want to hear about any care-bear bandages Wal-Mart is selling today.

I'm certain there will be people driving around in air conditioned cars while other people are trying to eat dry dirt and drink salt water because that's what's happening now, today.

Unfortunately for us, the earth itself is NEVER going to capitulate to humans. Nature's clue stick is coming down fast. We're about to learn that human population dynamics are exactly the same as any other animal's population dynamics because we are, at the end of the day, just another dumb animal that stumbled upon a rich island environment free of predators, reproduced like crazy, and ate everything we could reach.

Paul Chefurka

That's the most frightening graph you'll ever see, even if you don't know it yet.

Post again when you have some better news, okay?

[riverdeep]

49. I was about to post this same graph.

Maybe I'll just post what happens on the other side:



This is specifically for yeast, but all populations that overshoot their carrying capacity follow the same pattern. Slow growth, a sharp exponential growth, and then, incredibly quickly, a massive die-off. We can be as green as we like, until we come to grips with the fact that there are currently about five billion more people than our planet has room for, it won't make the critical difference.

Of course, that is trying to undo deeply codified and entrenched behavior, so it won't happen in time if at all. So what we're looking at, short of some revolutionary technological breakthroughs* -including terraforming other planets cheaply and making space travel for billions cheap in the very near future- is increasing warfare for a dwindling resources, increasing plagues and resistant bacteria, even more species die-offs, increasing desertification, and then, a die-off of billions of people, probably to a level of a few million. This should occur in the next forty years, if not sooner. If you have a child right now, their adult world will be a living hell.

But you know, there's no urgency...

*There are other ways technology can go that would skirt environmental collapse. One is extreme virtual reality. People could be placed in chambers and plugged in to live in virtual reality their entire lives. They can then drive all the Hummers they want, and they wouldn't be able to tell that it wasn't real. Each individual could be the ruler of their own universe, or however they wanted to set it up. Philosophical resistance aside, environmentally, the impact of this 'lifestyle' would be minimal compared to living in actual reality.

[SmileyRose]

42. "Save the planet" is BS - Humans CAN'T destroy the planet.

The fact is, if we do nothing and let humanity continue on it's current course, we will eventually make the planet uninhabitable for ourselves but the planet will be just fine - probably better off without us.

One need only to look at the area around Chernobyl - abandoned for the planet to take back from us. Or take a drive through the Carolinas and see what has become of the abandoned textile mills - some of which now have full grown forests growing out of the middle of the factory full of all the wildlife one would expect.

The best thing that could happen to this planet is for us to destroy it to the point we can't survive here anymore. IMHO

[blindpig]

50. Quibbling

So change it to 'save the biosphere', that would be more accurate.

The human species is not a lost cause, but our current economic model is. Change that and we got a chance, don't and it may be as you say.

I don't see why the many should suffer for the few, be that a small sector of humanity living high to the detriment of the many or our one species to the exclusion of all the others.

[SmileyRose]

52. The biosphere would be better off without us too.

Eventually we'll manage to have a mass die off but there will be just the right amount of humans left to comfortably inhabit the planet. It's my humble opinion that even if we all give up our cars and walk, all of us turn vegetarian, and there is economic justice world wide this will all still happen. People procreate almost as well as rabbits and cockroaches - and eventually we are bound to simply have more of us than there are shared resources. I don't see this as a bad thing. The other animals of this planet share the same fate. If they spend some time with ideal conditions, they tend to be too successful at procreation, the numbers get higher than the resources will support and something eventually kills off just enough to balance the scale.

I honestly don't think it's possible for humans to completely extinct ourselves worldwide. But better habits on this planet will improve the conditions we live under and the overall quality of our fleeting existence here.

[blindpig]

53. I profoundly disagree.

It is not a matter of humans versus nature, we are part of nature. If we go down we drag down most vertebrate life with us.

What you are saying there is pure Malthus, discredited long ago but revitalized in the service of capitalists society. It is a dodge, you see, blame the people, not the system.

It's like this: Capitalism creates poverty, otherwise the capitalist would have no wealth to accumulate. It is undoubtedly true that the poor have higher reproductive rates. If we get rid of capitalism and distribute the wealth in a fair manner then the birth rate will decline. If we stop raping the planet for profit and instead manage it for the long term then people and nature survives. It's up to us.

[SmileyRose]

54. No, we mostly agree.

I agree with everything you said. The only difference, I think, is that you believe it can happen and no longer believe it can. I am convinced the predator class will always figure out a way exploit the rest of us, even if capitalism dies it's well deserved death.

[Fumesucker]

44. Meh, the *completely* uncompromising environmentalist would just..

Kill all the human beings..

In an ecologically correct way of course.

That would really be the simplest, no-compromise-whatsoever solution.

Ashes to ashes and dust to dust don't ya' know?

[canetoad]

46. I tend to agree with you

Just let them become extinct.
Do you think the question in the OP was 'How to save the planet?' or how to save it's inhabitants.

[opihimoimoi]

48. The answers are coming soon....have paitience....

[flvegan]

55. "rabid vegan-commando's thread"

:eyes:

[Reterr]

57. Grade A flamebait

But if the OP wants to make an ass of himself/herself, that is fine by me.

[stuntcat]

58. seriously, ferocious, grrr!!

:eyes: Honestly.. I feel better about myself because I don't eat their factory meat, or push out another consumer, and don't consume much, or drive.
I'm not fooling myself about saving the fricking world, I realize the changes needed are unfathomably big, but the truth is I'm taking a little less part in the rape of nature than my neighbors are.

I've heard "you can't kill the world" so many times :eyes: it's precious really, y'all better never stop pointing that out, I'm series! But one species driving so many others to extinction just HURTS me. It hurts in my heart, honestly, and doing what I can to help the animals helps ME, inside.

So sue me y'all.. fuss at me about what I feel. Let's see how much more ashamed I can be of my species :)

[hunter]

63. That's a really nice post. I enjoy the biosphere we inherited as humans.

It's where my heart is, I need to protect it.

But I don't suffer any illusions that man has dominion over nature.

So far as nature is concerned, we're just another animal. She's been through far greater catastrophes than insatiable apes.

We preserve this biosphere for ourselves.

For my own healthy conscience I don't do a lot of things that I perceive to be exceptionally harmful to the biosphere. I want to live in a world with blue fin tuna, and whales, and polar bears, and california condors, and sequoias, and little rare amphibians and insects and flowers that most people have never heard of. I need wild open spaces, and abundant oceans, and clean lakes and rivers, and healthy air.

[cliffordu]

60. I don't own a car, ride a bicycle everywhere, shop used clothes stores...

I have a woodstove in my Airstream (an older model trailer, bought used) so I only have to heat ~250 sq feet.
I shop local for everything I can and never buy anything from china IF I CAN HELP IT. (shipping pollution..)

Other than that.......

I'd put solar in on the place if I had the $$$....

Maybe next year....sigh.


Oh, yeah. I opted out of the middle class, not to save the planet or even you ungrateful bastards....I did it cause I got sick and had to learn a new way to live.

I like it here in simple land.

[Deja Q]

61. I already walk, upgrading to greener, more efficient technologies, et al...

:shrug:

[LWolf]

66. "I'M" not going to save the planet.

If I could make it happen all by myself, I already would have.

Outside of some fantasy genie coming out of a lamp and making my wishes come true, or some alien force landing on the planet and naming me the ultimate goddess with the power to order anything, I'd start by doing all of the following:

Offer incentives for more responsible living. Start with taxes. Turn income tax deductions upside down. Over huge deductions for adults who are childless. Offer even bigger deductions, for the life of the tax payer, for those who have vasectomies or tubal ligations. Offer small deductions for adults with one biological child; more for those with one child who then undergo permanent sterilization. Offer no deductions, but no carbon tax, for those with 2 children. Offer those with 2 children a one-time big deduction for sterilization. Then put a carbon tax on every child beyond two.

Pressure the rest of the world to do the same, and open trade only to those that do.

Ban nuclear power plants, tax the shit out of dirty energy production, and offer massive tax incentives for wind and solar power generation. Offer subsidies and grants to develop existing and new clean power generating technologies on a large scale.

Invest in massive public transportation infrastructure, using clean electric trains, trams, subways, cable cars, whatever. Reduce license fees for green vehicles, increase them dramatically for dirty vehicles, and invest in "trade-in" incentives.

Use building technologies to maximize climate control with less energy expended.

That's just a start, but it's where I would start.

From there I'd get rid of factory farms, herbicides, genetically modified food crops and livestock, and invest in sustainable food production by family farms.

Allow the farming of hemp.

Ban any more paving over of arable land to create more subdivisions.

I could go on, but is this enough to the ball rolling?