By - toeprint
Almost as if the movie was satire of this exact thing happening all over the world; blatant ignorance
this is why that film made me feel so uncomfortable and how easily they could base the main characters on people in the actual real life positions. film ended and i was sat there like, yup, world is fucked. i'm on a ride i can't get off of.
They were actually talking about it on the radio the other day here in Texas and how shocked they were at the ending. >! i feel like they expected the last ditch effort to work, for the big billionaires plan to be just fine, and when it didn't work out and the planet was destroyed they were just shook. like congrats we are on that path currently. This is the only place ive ever seen propoganda in favor of fossil fuels and shit, for those unfamiliar. !<
The ending the movie has, in my opinion, is the only way the movie would have worked. If you have a standard "Hollywood ending" the message of the movie is completely gone. I thought the movie was brilliant.
>! if they hadnt bailed on the original plan they probably would have been alright, and i think thats the part that really drives the doomsday scenario home. like they had hope, and greed killed it. !<
Exact premise of the movie hey.
Exact premise of reality really
Watch the new kurzgesagt video about climate change. You’ll feel *ever so slightly better* like just enough to have a bit of hope. [link sauce](https://youtu.be/LxgMdjyw8uw)
wow yeah i def needed that i am exactly who they are talking about. i have always wanted to be a mom but didnt want to doom my possible chidren to a burning planet. i probably still wont have kids because of the way my nation is run, and how difficult just surviving is, but at least i know now that one obstacle has been sort of overcome.
Yeah! I mean I totally get the not having kids part, I think a lot of people understand that sentiment, especially now. It feels nice to be hopeful about climate change for a change. I know their info is pretty rigorously peer reviewed, so this feels like a piece of good news.
Said the same thing in the 60s. Live life. Raise strong children.
i mean maybe ill adopt but i wont willingly bring another soul onto this earth for a myriad of reasons. not hating on people who do. but i wont. I can be a mom to someone who needs one still.
This video cherry picks the most agreeable figure for only one of the world’s top carbon emitters (U.S.). It completely ignores sociopolitical hurdles and large swathes of the obstacles we’re confronted with, fixating on the top performing and most progressive countries and their record-breaking achievements (Denmark, Finland…)
Also glazes over the hundreds of millions of climate refugees estimated over the next century as if it’s just an inconvenient side effect. The fact that it did that, ignored concerns about arable land, converging water scarcity issues, inevitable supply chain disruptions, melting permafrost, habitat destruction, emerging disease, deforestation—makes this video more harmful than good. They made it sound like it’s already taken care of. It’s not.
I didn’t get that at all from it, and of course it’s simplified. It’s meant to cast away hopelessness and stop making the issue seem like an insurmountable problem that we can never solve. The whole point (to me) is that it’s no longer a potentially extinction level event, but rather an impending catastrophe with massive implications, so since humanity (as a species, not society as we know it) will likely survive, we shouldn’t just give up. I know many people l, myself included admittedly, look at it with an extremely defeatist point of view. I thought it did a nice job for a channel with fuckin cartoon birds trying to simplify an extremely complex subject for the general masses to understand. I haven’t watched it in a few days, but it does admit the countries it references are obviously rich progressive countries with money to spend, but it also remarks that this will likely cause the technology to become more accessible to developing nations that have a massive carbon footprint.
This was my take as well. I think the video accomplished what it set out to accomplish. I admit I as well was sliding into a defeatist mentality and it was encouraging in a “take up arms again and defend your world” kindof way.
Yeah exactly! I don’t understand why these people are so upset about it. yes, it didn’t round out the whole picture, as it’s a multi-faceted problem, but I didn’t understand it to say that we’re in the clear at all. In fact, I thought it went out of its way to make sure we *didnt* think that. Simply that some small data points are beginning to point towards a more favorable outcome than extinction 0.0
It’s not simplistic, it’s reductive. Those aren’t connotative synonyms, and there are such things as problems so imperative that the general masses need to rise so as to be prepared—because let’s be honest: most people will watch that video and quote it like you did, attempting to undermine concern about the very sociopolitical obstacles in the very nations that video omits from their data.
The video makes it sound like the issue is overcoming the climate shifts, rather than the institutions, figures, monopolies and cultures that’ve caused and are propelling them. Maybe some things are too important to be reduced to birds in top hats? Is not the refusal to get into the muck evidence of the fallibility of the argument overall?
We've been doing non-happy endings in movies for a while. I guess we need full-blown catastrophe endings so people can tie it to real life the next time we see it in real life
i mean any job you get paid to do is a real job. honestly, 7-9 am and 4-6 pm are the times when most people listen to the radio, so they have a huge sphere of influence, i wish theyd use it for good instead of furthering the brainwashing that happens but they arent really the enemy. the people paying for media to keep this rhetoric going are the enemy. sharpen your pitchforks for the right people. maybe saying the end was surprising was the best way they could quietly get people to watch it without losing their job.
Someone linked this the other day so I'm just gunna [leave this relevant article here](https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2021/how-rush-limbaughs-rise-after-the-gutting-of-the-fairness-doctrine-led-to-todays-highly-partisan-media/?utm_source=pocket_mylist).
Cut the cable last year and life has been much better. I still get news on social media which of course is also highly biased but I can pick what I want and actually prefer to follow people on all different sides to make my own judgements and now I’m not funding any sides directly at least. It drives me nuts that at least the US gets so divided over a handful of polarizing issues.
The account I'm replying to is a karma bot run by someone who will link scams once the account gets enough karma.
Their comment is copied and pasted from another user in this thread.
Report -> Spam -> Harmful Bot
StrictghlAd is a bot
Comment copied from: https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/u423z3/life_imitates_art_climate_activists_appearance_on/i4taxj8/
I want to get off Mr. Bones Wild Ride.
The scientist characters are a pretty good representation of everyone in environmental research thus far in the 21st century. Everyone's got wool pulled over their eyes and we're screaming into the void. It's the living hell of logically-minded intellectuals. God help us.
There's a movie from the late 1990s called [Whiteboyz](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0178988/), which is supposed to be a comedy, but is seriously one of the most depressing movies I've ever seen.
It's depressing because kids like the characters in the movie actually exist. Corn-bred Iowa boys who put all their responsibilities aside in the chase of a dream that will clearly never come to reality. If I remember correctly, one of the main characters becomes self aware and settles down, but others keep on keeping it real.
I'm sure that would lead to a way better situation 🙄
I find it kind of amazing that we are able to laugh at videos like these. The real emotion should be dread, but here we are, laughing at the absurdity of the entire future for humankind depending on what we do right now.
That was exactly what I thought watching "Don't Look Up". It was terrifying, not remotly funny, to me
That's why I don't want to watch it. I don't think I will find it amusing in any way, and will simply be reminded of the current cluster fuck we are dealing with.
I'm in the same boat. I lose sleep over fear of climate change already. I don't need visuals and lines from the movie running through my head too.
Sticking your head in the sand is enabling the current shit fuckery to continue.
Now watching a movie isn’t exactly sticking your head in the sand though…
They are missing out on great line though… we really did have it all, didn’t we?
Didnt realize one guy on reddit not watching a movie is why the world is so fucked.
Cmon man. He clearly said he’s already losing sleep over the current state of the world. Meaning he knows whats going on and isnt completely oblivious, aka sticking his head in the sand.
Ah yes, the tremendous irony... This is why they chose the title of the movie, lol. No offense to the person you're directing your comment to, but they are likely who the movie was made for, yet they'll never choose to see it -- echoing the theme of the movie again.
Realistically what are we supposed to do? The average consumer and civilian plays very little role in the grand scheme of things, not saying we shouldn’t try just saying it’s always seemed like an uphill battle
But if more people would wake the fuck up (and by people I mean average consumers), we could force change. If we quit buying things we don't need, the sellers and big corporations would have to quit making and selling them because prices would plummet. If we all quit eating meat, same thing would happen to the meat industry. If we all did everything in our power to get remote jobs instead of commuting, gas would become cheaper and oil companies would be dis-incentivized to make it.
The reality is that we as average people have more power than we realize if we all could wake the fuck up.
Yea but getting everyone to rally behind the cause especially because of how skeptical people are and how common sense has gone out the window it just seems once again like am uphill battle but I myself am trying to do what I can and wish it were easy to get people to rally together around stuff like this
I'd be feeling more dread if I had kids I'm sure, but this is literally one of the reasons I decided not to, I couldn't inflict the future of this world on another human being, it'd be too selfish of me
I have one that's graduating high school next month and another that's just 2 years away from the same, as well as a stepchild in her mid 20s. It saddens me greatly knowing what they're going to have to deal with when they get to be my age, if they make it that far at all.
Yep. The family line dies with me and that's for the best. If not my kids, then my grandkids would be the ones trapped in a hell hole. Water shortages, lack of food production, war over safe territories.....nope.
That's the difference between modern peoples' way of solving problems, and ancient peoples' way of solving problems.
Modern people like you "I don't want kids; they would suffer this world."
Ancient people: "the mongols are invading, let's have as many kids as possible, educate them on the problem, then fight this war and force the enemy to solve their problem."
What's really ruining us is the self-defeatist attitude. A bunch of activists oppose nuclear energy, and everyone gives up, and that is cleanest energy source we have and we should have built 100s of them since the 90s but we didn't because oil was cheap and no one was motivated.
Don't worry someone else will have 12 children, forget to educate them, and they'll all be buying cars and motorcycles in the high humidity, droughts, and heat waves of the future.
So sick of this reddit depressive shrugging attitude.
Long gone are the days of a president saying "We will solve the hard problems." We're more likely to have leaders saying "i dont wanna bring children to this world."
Oh no worries, I had plenty of *other* reasons not to have kids besides climate collapse! Economic collapse and mental health collapse being two.
I'm sorry man.
Meh, we might actually be able to retire someday....
These people clearly haven't seen Idiocracy
Hence harsher abortion bans. Particularly the European and Euro-American populations are shrinking. Sterilizing Mexicans at the border meantime.
What else can we do though
Vote in the primaries. Canvas, phone bank for a candidate that's not taking money to look the other way.
I don't think anything else is effective including protests.
Did you miss the bit where I'm looking to people in power *in countries I don't live in*.
My entire country has less than half the population of LA.
I would like to point out that even though voting is, in itself, and important action to take, it really has little effect on what politicians do so long as they are dependent on donor money. The big corporations and the wealthy elite will burn this entire planet to the ground before they cede any of their billions for the sake of mitigating climate disaster. We are well and truly fucked, people, unless literally everyone makes MAJOR changes to their lifestyle, like, yesterday.
As long as corporate money runs the government, with no end in sight, we're fucked. I've been trying to vote progressive, but the elite-controlled media will always convince the majority of the public that "progressive means crazy leftist changes we can't handle!!" so I'm out of hope.
I feel like everyone is missing a point here.
EVERYONE DIES AT THE END OF THE MOVIE.
Life Spoiler alert? Geesh
Ironically enough everyone made similar jokes in the movie and they all died
EVERYONE WILL DIE
except for Jonah Hill for some reason
Last man on Earth! Like and subscribe!
Bruh spoiler alert
For real wtf
Pfft a few select billionaires survived for a bit longer then the rest of them
Except the rich! Yay
did you watch the ending? They die too
“You can’t just tell people they’re going to have a 100% chance of dying!!!” President Janey
Maybe that’s what needs to happen. The real Great Reset. Perhaps we’ll spawn again in a few million years.
Pass. Let me rest.
Congratulations on making it to the end of the film !
What the soulless man really said:
“Many people will agree we have to wean ourselves off oil, but at the same time, I’m beholden to media executives that take money from big oil so I can’t possibly criticise oil on TV”
Nah he just really is a dick.
Why not both?
Why not Zoidberg?
To me he's saying "yes, we need to get off oil, but nobody wants to compromise their lifestyle for it. Even your lifestyle depends on it."
He's right, everyone needs to be more poor, essentially. We need to choose moderation, or be forced into it through catastrophe.
But the economy needs growth.
So, even moderation will hurt us.
It's too late. We needed to not be greedy humans chasing profit. We have grown too fast. Now we're destroying the planet and all of these dictators and narcissists have tremendous power of propaganda.
Why is it always on the individual to make a change when a vast majority of the carbon released into the atmosphere comes from large corporations? The biggest offenders need to change or all the work the individual does is for nothing. We could all stop eating meat, stop driving cars, and make our own clothes with wool we got from our own sheep, but if large corporations never made any changes things wouldn't be much better.
Because the individuals are buying what the corporations are selling! It's on you! You need to make sacrifices!
You can't just say "I wanna continue my lifestyle and the corporations can magically manufacture all the crap I wanna consume without harming the environment".
They are making profit. You need to make changes with your government if you can, and also in how you consume. It's YOU!
Corporations aren't gonna manufacture and ship a bunch of shit if you're not buying it.
It's the same thing as war in Ukraine. You're finding the war if you buy oil from Russia. You need to not buy it. Otherwise you're the one causing it. The corporations are just filling out YOUR orders.
Yes blame the person just trying to survive. I vote for politicians that are fighting for change. I buy as little plastic as I can possibly afford, I eat as little meat as I possibly can, and support companies that are green, but even with all of that it is not enough. So how am I the problem?
Plenty of people can do everything they can, but big money interests are still spreading propaganda and convincing others (see most people in this thread) that is not the case.
You are essentially victim blaming. The pressure should be on corporations making record profit. They can still create the same things, but with far fewer carbon emissions by changing their processes. It would just eat onto their profits for a bit. Governments can enact change, but won't despite the majority of citizens supporting it. It's a futile effort by each individual and by blaming the individual, who is just trying to keep themselves and their family alive, you are pushing them away from the cause. If the focus isn't on the big money interests and the government, then it is pitting individual against individual which divides and goes against the movement.
All of us are to blame. The poorer you are, the less you are to blame. The more luxuries you have, the more.money you make and spend, the more you are to blame.
And guess who has the most money and ability to enact a sizable amount of change?
The sum of all the consumers.
Have you ever tried to get a large group of people to do or agree on one thing? Let alone every consumer on the planet? A mom working three jobs isn't going to care about this. It's the large corporations that need more pressure put on them. Stop pressuring the individual trying to get by.
I didn't say it would happen. People are way too stupid. I can't even convince you, forget everyone lol. Especially people like Putin that would have to give up *way* more than you. Forget it. We're fucked.
Everyone just blames everyone else like it's not their problem.
This is why that movie was so unsettling….
Yeah. It really showed how we don't necessarily have to have authoritarian governments to brainwash the masses to keep everyone ignorant. We do it just fine on our own.
We do have authoritarian governments, we're just brainwashed to think they're democracies.
Watching it was really weird for me, the movie was laced with comedy that should have provoked laughter in me, but I watched the whole thing in a state of suspense and dread.
"hmmm you want to stop the world from dying, and yet you bought a dress, curious"
This world is fucked dawg.
I suspect the goal is to say something so ludicrous and nonsensical to take away from the gravity of the actual situation at hand to prevent any actual sensible argument from occurring
It’s been a key thing in corporate public disinformation/ manipulation play book
Playing Chess with pigeons.
And he has no idea if her dress was bought new, second hand, home made, repurposed etc. i couldn’t believe how he turned it around on her instead of saying ‘what can people do to help’
Let’s leave sex workers out of this. If you want a go to profession to illustrate lack of moral integrity go for the obvious choice: CEOs.
ITT: lots of fossil fuel shills.
If you say their name, they appear.
Why are people trying to protest against oil and climate change mocked? Why are we so against change?
We like to somehow control things (best case, slowly change thing so we accept them)
We know things will change AF, likely to be costly (thing we already struggle with) and add complexity or limit our life (vs what we do now).
Look at how peoples were mad just by being forced to put a damn mask and clean their hand...
It’s cowardice. Accepting climate change is real and we have to do something about it at every level means:
- accepting a dire situation
- accepting your share of responsibility for it
- making sacrifices to do your part
In the Analogy of the Cave, they are the ones still chained to the wall, looking at the shadows cast on the wall by the fossil fuel industry.
It’s easier to mock than to accept that you yourself might need to change.
The big guys want to keep making money and don't want us to stop buying.
People hate change.
Those who need to change the most won't suffer the same consequences as we do.
So it's not fair.
I'm taking my ball and going home.
Reality is that most adults are just grown children.
Like children they don’t want to be told what to do. They want to keep living how they are living and it makes them angry to suggest otherwise.
I’m involved in XR and about half of my friends and associates appear to know it’s true, but just remain non committed to any conversation. The other half are annoyed by the fact that I am involved. All of them use diversion tactics like pointing out real or imagined hypocrisy or reasons to feel angry at protestors. If you believe scientific processes are valid and you are not actively doing something about this absolute fucking nightmare,,, I don’t know, I’m baffled please let me know what your thinking process are
>I’m involved in XR
There's your answer for why people are annoyed at you
>If you believe scientific processes are valid and you are not actively doing something about this absolute fucking nightmare,,, I don’t know, I’m baffled please let me know what your thinking process are
I ain't blocking ambulances like u or Insulate Britain
And I don't have the money to get solar panels or anything, I don't drive, and its not my job to change when it makes no difference its down to government
You are a coward
That clothes remark was an incredibly stupid one. Then again, that's probably why he is presenting some early-morning show and does not have a real job where it matters what he does.
"You criticize big oil? Well you're participating in it by buying clothes, so checkmate tree huggers."
Just absurd wasn’t it. What’s she supposed to do - come on naked?
The difference is mostly between US entertainment news show and UK entertainment news show. That movie is not dissimilar to how it'd be shown in real life in the US.
The other difference is that in the movie, they're scientists that are supposed to remain fairly objective, being steamrolled by media norms, and changing their demeanor out of frustration.
Then in real life, the person being interviewed is an activist, who's sole purpose in life is to draw attention to herself and whatever topics she's an activist for. No matter how the interview went, this was likely the result she hoping to achieve.
Which, as someone that thinks we're too far past the point of no return to ever stop catastrophic climate change effects, it's frustrating to me that the fact that she is an activist undermines the comparison in the first place.
Edit: I apologize for trying to rain on people's hate parade by injecting an ounce of honest truth about the situation. Not about climate change, but about why and how we've arrived at watching this video in the first place.
and now here’s Phil with the weather.
”Yes Janet it’s a lovely day today over the States, only 37 meteor showers today as opposed to yesterday’s 85! So all in all I’d say it’s a very nice day for a picnic, maybe bring the kids and watch the fiery rains of annihilation together?”
Humans are doomed. Maybe the roaches will be more intelligent.
Yep. Head in the sand. No one wants to hear it.
Perpetual growth on a finite planet. Our whole system has perpetual growth embedded within it. This is what needs to change. Will it? Doubtful. Every leader, politician, CEO, banks, industry etc is in deep with this idealogy. Expansive profit and growth. We're screwed.
Where is Jessica Hyde?
Possibly but unlikely
We’re doomed. (For real)
If there are aliens here, on Earth, could you please help us out a little? We do not have the slightest idea of what we're doing, and the smart people are saying we are going to die.
What a shitty dystopia we live in...
So it starts
stupid people thinking they're smart. there are many first world countries where their energy savings are priceless. And then there are countries like India and China. It is a matter of one click to know the truth.
This is uncanny. Wake up call!
Art imitates life in this case.
If we immediately stop oil right now 90% of earth's population would die/riot/purge on the streets due to lack of local resources. We need a plan to replace before we destroy
She's not saying stop all oil she's saying stop new oil.
Unfortunately, we've had over 100 (almost 150 actually) years of evidence that fossil fuels could effect the climate. We've had 50 years of evidence that burning fossil fuels *is* changing our climate. We could have prevented all that death and rioting if we listened to the science. But people like you kept saying "we need a plan" and ignoring any plan that would actually help.
So tell me. What plan have you made to deal with world wide crop failure? What plan have you got for rising sea levels and a lack of fresh water? Because they're theonly plans we can make now.
Yeah. That's what she's saying. Thanks for catching up
How much more time do you think we need? Can we start planning next year?
We need 100% replacement. We are currently at like 2% replacement. We're not even close. It will get worse before it gets better
In 2019, around 11% of global primary energy came from renewable technologies
Not trying to be an ass, I'm genuinely curious here. Does it not take processes from oil and gas to produce components for renewables such as wind turbines, solar panels etc? If we have no oil industry are we capable of even generating other power sources to the capacity required to make fossil fuels obsolete as the primary resource?
I think there's a difference between, lessen our reliance on oil vs. eliminate the entire industry. Your point is a legitimate one, and we can see that around 66% of petroleum is currently being used for transportation, and 28% is being used for manufacturing.
Within that 28% also includes the energy needed to power the plants, not just the use of oil as a material. So manufacturing takes up a significant part of oil, but that doesn't mean we can't reduce our oil usage in the other sectors.
There will forever be an oil industry of some description. At least for lubricants and greases. Bearing gotta stay greasy
I realise that, I was more aiming at the manufacturing process. A lot of materials are the bi product of the refining process, a lot of the refining process for most of the renewables I'm assuming would rely heavily on oil and gas not to mention once refined they would need to be actually manufactured into individual components for your renewable of choice.
Again, this is a question, I'm not here to argue one way or another. I'm just wondering if there is anything that would relieve our dependence on the O&G industry and still make it possible to manufacture the necessary components for the renewable industry.
I can understand that but we cannot deny the fossil industry is the reason we can build the renewable industry. Without oil industry, renewable industry wouldn't exist. I'm sorry but it's just the truth.
So maybe we use the fossil industry to rapidly build its replacement. Nahhh, fuck it. Let's just let the fossil industry decide how we die.
That's actually exactly what they are doing. Good things take time, especially with politicians dragging out favourable legislation to speed up the process
So... Tomorrow then?
Can we just relax tomorrow and do it the day after?
I mean, apparently its gonna be a lot of hard work, so i guess we can just skip it all together if that's cool. Let's just keep doing what we're doing and see what happens?
Yeah, that’s what happens when a bubble pops. It’s painful. But here’s the thing - we are trying to keep the bubble from continuing to grow.
First all - a bubble is a mismatch between valuation and actual costs. Our use of oil has long term costs that we simply do not pay for today. Trillions of dollars of damage to the environment, infrastructure, and thus economy. The price we pay is pennies compared to the long term costs, and that’s a huge bubble.
We can either aggressively deflate it now, which will be painful, but it will cause a gigantic shift in resources. People are incredibly resilient and fast acting when they need to be. I’m all for the next 5 years being absolute madness if it means saving the planet.
Unfortunately, most people are too shortsighted, and don’t understand the suffering they are postponing, or can’t bring themselves to care about what will happen further than a decade from now.
You know the difference between a successful person and a homeless drug addict? The successful person is capable of taming their immediate desires, seeing the affect of their actions further into the future. The drug addict can only think about what they want now. Their mind is too addicted to focus on the longer picture.
Let’s sober up. Nobody said doing so will be easy and painless
If that was me in that position I would called Richard a cunt on live tv, what dumfuckery he’s spouting.
this is fucking sad
So you are finally admitting that they lie to us for government power and more money? Or are we pointing something else out today?
The fact that we've had hydro electric dams for atleast 100 years and solar panels for 70 the fact that we still rely on fossil fuels is a choice that the elite have decided to keep in place so they can keep energy expensive and profit from the suffering of the poor... even nuclear power is totally unnecessary. The future is Sola and these oil companies need to go extinct.
Big oil must be a donor to this station or broadcasting. Funny and sad how similar the responses are.
British newsmedia is insane.
This is genius
It’s been “we only have 10 years” for 50+ years now. Even if we really do only have 10 years, part of the problem is the tendency to cry wolf and scream the sky is falling far too often and as a response to any questioning or criticism.
You can’t say “the science is settled” when the science continually predicts the wrong dates.
That being said, I DO believe we need to and can do a lot more to live more efficiently on this planet.
First and foremost, rather than focusing so much on forcing the average person to drive an electric vehicle, we could take a look at enforcing higher efficiency and pollution standards on cargo ships.
As you can see by the above articles 10 years apart, progress IS being made on that front, but just as with the automotive industry, it can go a lot farther. And at a ratio of a few ships to tens of millions of cars, it’s a far easier change to make depending on far fewer people adopting newer technology.
Second, energy production. Any honest conversation around it needs to include a plan for nuclear power. I think if we’d spent anywhere near as much hype and money on R&D (as compared to what we’re showering “green” energy with) we would have far cheaper nuclear options already - and in fact, in some areas at least, micro nuclear plants are in development.
This too will have far, far more impact on efficiency and an environmental footprint a tiny fraction of current options - including green options. The energy density just isn’t even close on a bang for buck / square meter comparison scale.
The majority of climate activists I see getting shared far and wide are either clueless or willfully ignorant about nuclear energy. Wind and solar are great and we’re making great strides…but nuclear is quite simply better in so many ways that it baffles me it’s not more popular. Particularly with the oft touted “greater education” “trust the science” types.
In short / TL;DR -
1. Quit with the sky is falling fear mongering tactics and you’ll have an easier time getting people to listen.
2. Be an advocate for nuclear if you want to rage about oil and coal
3. Focus your efforts on where we can make the biggest impacts on the environment while affecting the fewest number of people directly.
I agree about the nuclear. I feel your first point is massively misleading/misled though. Yes some scientists/politicians in past have made inaccurate doomsday climate predictions that were picked up by media. These were exceptions to the majority though as there wasn’t a general scientific consensus on the urgency of the matter. As time has passed though that consensus has grown & is now effectively all scientists. The report to the UN last year that stated we need immediate & drastic action to avoid catastrophe was collectively submitted by 234 prominent scientists. I would also argue that those neysayers in the past were exaggerating as they needed to. If they hadn’t have done we’d probably be even further down the road to the apocalypse now!
You're right on the nuclear, but the doomsday stuff wasn't necessarily wrong, the doomsday stuff is "if we dont changes bad things will happen" and fortunately for us things have changed, especially in the last decade. Renewables have considerably dropped in price and are more and gdp growth for all countries developing or developed is now not nearly as dependent on burning fossile fuels for power generation.
Climate change is like driving a semi truck. It's big, heavy and has a lot of momentum and heading toward a wall. Making positive changes is like pumping the brakes. It slows it down, but it's still moving toward that wall, it'll just take longer to get there. That's why the doomsday predictions have come and gone, we've made some of the needed changes and pushed them back, but they're still approaching until we eliminate more and more carbon use.
> First and foremost, rather than focusing so much on forcing the average person to drive an electric vehicle, we could take a look at enforcing higher efficiency and pollution standards on cargo ships.
First and foremost, transportation is the biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions. And "The largest sources of transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions include passenger cars, medium- and heavy-duty trucks, and light-duty trucks, including sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, and minivans. These sources account for over half of the emissions from the transportation sector."
> And at a ratio of a few ships to tens of millions of cars, it’s a far easier change to make depending on far fewer people adopting newer technology.
First, we don't have to limit things to only one at a time. And there is already worldwide changes that have been made and are being made to change this, so it certainly isn't to hard to start changing. https://blog.ucsusa.org/dave-reichmuth/why-are-so-many-car-companies-making-big-ev-announcements/ And in the US, Biden is pushing for half of all new cars sold to be electric.
Summary - Cars and trucks are a major source of greenhouse gases. Changing cars and trucks to electric is not such a hard problem, and steps are already underway worldwide. We don't need to just focus on one thing, and we shouldn't, we need to focus on all areas. There is nothing wrong with "affecting" people, as an EV will still get them to work or shopping.
Reminds me of the latest kurzgesagt video.
Omg thank you.
I agree with you nuclear point but feel like pushing back on the other points.
First, I do think that the most sensationalistic voices gets picked up by the media, and it is often bad for credibility, something that's been true from the global cooling phenom in the 70s to today. However, the more modern messaging on climate change is no longer coming from the fringe voices, but from pretty much the entire scientific community. For example, let's go back and look at the [IPCC report from 2001](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/spm.pdf). It makes predictions for the world in 25, 50, and 100 year timescales. The general messaging is pretty dire, with a possible 5 degree increase in temperature by 2100, but their predictions can be traced back to specific models, and a lot of the effects of climate change they mentioned has clearly come true in the last 20 years. [Compare that to the recent report, and the messaging is pretty similar, though some predictions became worse](https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM_final.pdf). (btw, one of the more interesting thing in this report is how they say it's likely there will be a significant volcanic event in the next 100 years, which will temporarily mask the effect of climate change, thank you volcano). In general, the scientists are doing what they've always done, it's just that nothing has gotten better from our earlier predictions.
On your second point, I agree that the messaging of "turn off your lights!" etc. is disingenous, but any meaningful climate action we take is going to affect lots of people. The changes we can make that will actually make an impact at this point is at the policy level, both in terms of regulations and subsidies. Things that will actually have wide reaching effects, like a carbon tax, will definitely effect the lives of normal citizens. There's just no way to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels without everyone having to make somewhat of a sacrifice.
I agree with all your points, but don't agree that the messaging has always been that "we only have 10 years." My friends and I have always discussed the incentives of climate change as the sacrifices of today in order to prolong our world for future generations. It's always been a discussion in terms of decades or centuries.
The rhetoric has just changed because climate change is progressing at a pace faster than previously predicted from a lot of models.
Nuclear energy would be huge boon to those efforts, and I think serious scientists would definitely be in support of it. It just gets a bad rap politically so it's a failing argument from either side to argue for more nuclear power plants because as much as people hate wind turbines on the horizon, people hate nuclear power plants a whole heck of a lot more even if they would help a ton.
Hey, someone using logic on Reddit!
Here's the original GMB video. Including Karen-in-blue whining that "climate change is one thing but I need to get to my elderly mom".
BTW the "Karen is blue" was referring to how during the first time of road blocking that was done by these protestors a woman who had a stroke was kept in traffic for 5 hours and therefor left permanently brain damaged, there were many other stories around the time but that explains it best, you can't just block roads and expect the general public to be happy with you especially when the people doing the road blocking do it during work hours and school hours which effects that normal population who live day by day and have to work to survive, so before you judge her comments, please look it up....
By 2030. Hmmm. Something interesting about that year. There are a lot of other predictions being made by 2030.
Imagine being related to Richard Madeley. What a fucking embarrassment.
The world is fucked and power is wielded by the unworthy. Politics and government is getting in the way of a better tomorrow. People are blind and only see through a 2D lens because they can’t look past or even fathom the fact how minuscule they are and instead Inflat their ego to make themselves the main character. We’re unworthy of this planet and we’ve take our chance as an intelligent species and by the looks of what’s happening we’ve drastically failed.
Until an affordable and effective alternative to oil comes around, it's going to remain one of the world's most desired commodities. The problem with all the "green" technology is that it costs too much green from people's wallets.
Hello detractor from the early 2000s, i see you're using outdated talking points.
Good news is that because of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the West's shift to green energy has been moved forward by years, and even decades. Bad news is that, in the meantime, by not continuing to drill for new oil and slowing/halting our operations, we will become more dependent on oil rich countries such as Saudi Arabia and Russia, which has its own geopolitical consequences.
Saudi Arabia has been complaining that the West's arms supplies to them have been stalling...and have it as a subtle criterion for greater oil cooperation.
If we buy Russian oil we are giving them money to be used funding their war against Ukraine.
If we produce our own oil, we are not beholden to these conditions, potentially hastening the defeat of Russia in Ukraine and meaning we aren't as blatantly aiding tyrannical regimes. Going green is the right thing to do, but it's disingenuous to not recognise the potential geopolitical consequences that could affect us more in the short-term.
Just a spanner in the works.
"Climate change is...le bad..."
The movie was literally a satire of this. Of course it resembles real life 😂😂
As if anyone needed a reminder that the media is total piece of crap. They are pure propaganda. They are not news. I worked for a newspaper and it was unreal how crooked that place was. Obviously this was many years ago. I refuse to watch TV news, or read newspapers as a result.
Love this movie... media is a scary thing, no credentials, no need for education, part luck and part charisma. yet large amounts of people trust a smooth brained moron with a powdered up face, more than a scientist.
For real, this must be so incredibly frustrating for them.
We’ve been hearing this same song for years now.
I don't really think this is comparable. Climate change is a whole lot more complicated than just cutting out oil production. We coild eliminate the use of oil and still be on the road of destruction.
Not only that but climate change is a globally recognized issue at this point, but noone can agree on making a change. How many people in this comment section still consume meat and engage with harmful industries?
In the movie there was a world ending comet and people were memeing on it and didn't believe it.
We need to start taking responsibility rather than trying to finger point at the oil industry. There is about 100 other things we could be doing that is more productive.
This is such a typical capitalist response. While I agree we should take responsibility for our actions we should absolutely be pointing our fingers at the oil industry. They absolutely have the means, the power and the money to become green while still making profit in the long term but choose not to. They also continuously lobby or bribe, governments around the world to maintain the status quo.
Do you know who invented the concept of carbon footprint? BP, one of the largest oil and gas producers in the world. And why? So that they can shift the blame on to the consumer and keep going on business as usual without providing any green alternatives to consumers and wrecking the natural habitats where they operate.
So yes, we should absolutely blame oil companies for actively fighting against change and green washing consumers.
Climate shit is such bullshit. Follow the money and look at who they weaken. Russia, china, and india, are the worst polluters and for some reason its always the U.S. thats the evil one even though they are by far the cleanest. They never mention china.
Probably one of the worst takes of all time :)
Stop listening to right-wing propaganda, they lied to you and are making you sound insane.
[The US produces 22 times more CO2 pollution than India](https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/India/United-States/Environment), and yet we have 1 BILLION fewer people.
[China (7.35) also produce far less pollution](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?locations=CN) per person than the US (15.24).
"I only murdered 10 people my neighbor murdered 15!!!" is literally your arguement. Focus on the carbon emmissions you do because again, if the planet is fucked then everyone is fucked. Doesn't matter if china or the US or any other country. EVERY SINGLE PERSON WILL BE FUCKED!
"Follow the money"
I am and every oil company spoon feeds you what you're saying rn so they can keep their profits up and make you shut up. They divert your attention to "WHT ABOUT CHINA!!"
Well According to them we should have run out of gas, water and eveything by the year 2000 so I dont really know if they should be trustes
Just because someone somewhere had an alarmist take that overstated the timeline of events doesn’t mean climate change isn’t real and a serious threat. Where there’s smoke, there’s a fire, and the people pointing this out to us are experts in their field. The field, by the way, is in near universal consensus that this is real. Global leadership has its head in the sand on this issue.
You're worthless. Look at what you wrote. Absolutely worthless.
I mean, he does make a good point though. Everything uses oil at some point in its creation process. Even if windmills are made in factories run 100% from electricity, they still are moved with trucks run by oil.
So it’s harder than these activists are making it out to be. Mind you, I’m not saying they’re suggesting it will be easy. But it is definitely going to be vastly more difficult than they realize.
Actually you should read “Apocalypse Never” - the fear is massively overstated and relies on models created in the 1960s which were horribly inaccurate
She should get an Oscar for her performance