Bad News Thread

[Grace T.]

So yeah, difficult but not hard. If money isn't a problem, then capacity is a choice. Doable but we won't.

Climate change is the same. We have every excuse in the world as to why we can't, until we will have no choice but to do far worse, to ourselves, because we no longer have a choice. The poor (everywhere) will be the worse impacted. BTW, in a blue sky world, there is no need for any person on this planet to be without food or shelter or access to reasonable health care or education. Unfortunately we're in charge.

We don’t because when you nationalize Pfizer and start drafting people to work there people get upset and you kill the golden goose like Stalin did in the Ukraine

Similarly when you take away people hamburgers, shoot their dogs and tell people to sterilize their kids they have a tendency to get the pitchforks. Why are you guys here if you care about global warming? Why did you have kids? Why are you driving (the horror) to soccer tournaments?

 

[whatithink]

We don’t because when you nationalize Pfizer and start drafting people to work there people get upset and you kill the golden goose like Stalin did in the Ukraine

Similarly when you take away people hamburgers, shoot their dogs and tell people to sterilize their kids they have a tendency to get the pitchforks. Why are you guys here if you care about global warming? Why did you have kids? Why are you driving (the horror) to soccer tournaments?

You are right obviously. The only solution is to nationalize Pfizer. There couldn't be another solution that adds tens of billions to their bottom line that would work. Who could possibly figure out an alternative!

The current population level is 100% sustainable. The problem is consumption, what's consumed & how its produced. Its perfectly feasible to have good quality life and low carbon footprint. Its all about choices. Some are easy, some are not. Low to zero meat consumption, electric cars, solar power, buy local as much as possible, energy efficient models, water efficient products etc.

You're right though, we should all just live it up. There is no hope because nobody else will change, so why should anyone bother.

 

[Grace T.]

You are right obviously. The only solution is to nationalize Pfizer. There couldn't be another solution that adds tens of billions to their bottom line that would work. Who could possibly figure out an alternative!

The current population level is 100% sustainable. The problem is consumption, what's consumed & how its produced. Its perfectly feasible to have good quality life and low carbon footprint. Its all about choices. Some are easy, some are not. Low to zero meat consumption, electric cars, solar power, buy local as much as possible, energy efficient models, water efficient products etc.

You're right though, we should all just live it up. There is no hope because nobody else will change, so why should anyone bother.

Now you are engaging in blue pill fantasy. Pfizer wants to make a ton of money. If they could do it by gearing up they’d be thrilled. They absolutely would. Chestertons fence: then why don’t they? It’s because barring force there are certain limitations in the ability to rev up production. But money and customers is not the problem.

Re climate change you are perpetuating the myth that it’s easy. How do you think Americans will react to having no hamburgers…going back to meatless tuesdays? Electric cars help but the batteries are also a drag on the environment so it’s not all a help. Solar power? You have t heard the California commercials asking us to conserve from 4-7 because of the problems with solar production…if you really felt this way you’d go nuclear.

You’re easy painless solutions don’t get us there. To address it even on the us end it’s painful: less meat, less kids (and the resulting economic stress), less planes, less transport of goods, more nuclear, shoot the dogs, less consumer goods. Yeah they’ll love that. Blue pill fantasy. You couldn’t even do the 1 thing which would most help: not have a kid.

 

[Ellejustus]

Now you are engaging in blue pill fantasy. Pfizer wants to make a ton of money. If they could do it by gearing up they’d be thrilled. They absolutely would. Chestertons fence: then why don’t they? It’s because barring force there are certain limitations in the ability to rev up production. But money and customers is not the problem.

Re climate change you are perpetuating the myth that it’s easy. How do you think Americans will react to having no hamburgers…going back to meatless tuesdays? Electric cars help but the batteries are also a drag on the environment so it’s not all a help. Solar power? You have t heard the California commercials asking us to conserve from 4-7 because of the problems with solar production…if you really felt this way you’d go nuclear.

You’re easy painless solutions don’t get us there. To address it even on the us end it’s painful: less meat, less kids (and the resulting economic stress), less planes, less transport of goods, more nuclear, shoot the dogs, less consumer goods. Yeah they’ll love that. Blue pill fantasy. You couldn’t even do the 1 thing which would most help: not have a kid.

 

[espola]

Yes I do: you are a sad pathetic little man who thinks he’s actually quite clever but is probably one of the least original people I’ve ever met.

Least original? I admit I don't have your facility to just make things up.

 

[espola]

Now you are engaging in blue pill fantasy. Pfizer wants to make a ton of money. If they could do it by gearing up they’d be thrilled. They absolutely would. Chestertons fence: then why don’t they? It’s because barring force there are certain limitations in the ability to rev up production. But money and customers is not the problem.

Re climate change you are perpetuating the myth that it’s easy. How do you think Americans will react to having no hamburgers…going back to meatless tuesdays? Electric cars help but the batteries are also a drag on the environment so it’s not all a help. Solar power? You have t heard the California commercials asking us to conserve from 4-7 because of the problems with solar production…if you really felt this way you’d go nuclear.

You’re easy painless solutions don’t get us there. To address it even on the us end it’s painful: less meat, less kids (and the resulting economic stress), less planes, less transport of goods, more nuclear, shoot the dogs, less consumer goods. Yeah they’ll love that. Blue pill fantasy. You couldn’t even do the 1 thing which would most help: not have a kid.

You're right. Doing nothing is much easier.

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

I thought the world was the lab.

I guess I think yes and no. No, in that there are no single variable controls. No, in that you don't get to repeat many things that your gut tells you are meaningful. Yes, in that much of what we do seems double blind. Yes, in that it's a marvelous place to be. Yes, in that, despite all the obstacles, it is possible to find passable answers to difficult questions.

 

[whatithink]

Now you are engaging in blue pill fantasy. Pfizer wants to make a ton of money. If they could do it by gearing up they’d be thrilled. They absolutely would. Chestertons fence: then why don’t they? It’s because barring force there are certain limitations in the ability to rev up production. But money and customers is not the problem.

Re climate change you are perpetuating the myth that it’s easy. How do you think Americans will react to having no hamburgers…going back to meatless tuesdays? Electric cars help but the batteries are also a drag on the environment so it’s not all a help. Solar power? You have t heard the California commercials asking us to conserve from 4-7 because of the problems with solar production…if you really felt this way you’d go nuclear.

You’re easy painless solutions don’t get us there. To address it even on the us end it’s painful: less meat, less kids (and the resulting economic stress), less planes, less transport of goods, more nuclear, shoot the dogs, less consumer goods. Yeah they’ll love that. Blue pill fantasy. You couldn’t even do the 1 thing which would most help: not have a kid.

So do nothing and end up in your worse case scenario. There's pros and cons to everything, unfortunately we are engaging in the cons more than the pros, so we're on a path to your end state. We don't have to be but too many people just focus on what we can't do, or what might be difficult, or what they might have to give up (God forbid). That's why I said, we don't care. Its not even that we don't care enough.

Ultimately we can decide or the planet will decide for us, which I guess is also our choice.

 

[Ellejustus]

Bill Gates Briefing to CIA April 2015

None

www.bitchute.com

This video in 05 gives me the creeps and the chills. I remember when my brain lit up like a Christmas tree when I read my first religious text.

Light that brain and get living everyone. Open the other 90% with the key of love. Listen to this from the Youngbloods and learn the key to understanding

 

[Grace T.]

Least original? I admit I don't have your facility to just make things up.

Eh Magoo you are even the worst of the trolls…meaning they all do it better than you

 

[Grace T.]

So do nothing and end up in your worse case scenario. There's pros and cons to everything, unfortunately we are engaging in the cons more than the pros, so we're on a path to your end state. We don't have to be but too many people just focus on what we can't do, or what might be difficult, or what they might have to give up (God forbid). That's why I said, we don't care. Its not even that we don't care enough.

Ultimately we can decide or the planet will decide for us, which I guess is also our choice.

We have to do something! X is something. Let’s do x

See the fallacy. You can do things that make your feelings feel better but nothing you do is going to change what going to happen. That was up to the boomers. YOU could have helped by not having children (or a dog if you have one) but you chose not to. So clearly you don’t care much either. And unless you are going to practice what you preach, stop lecturing the rest of us. I don’t do feelings and when you are ready to have a serious discussions of sacrifice including putting your genetic future on the table, then we’ll talk

 

[espola]

We have to do something! X is something. Let’s do x

See the fallacy. You can do things that make your feelings feel better but nothing you do is going to change what going to happen. That was up to the boomers. YOU could have helped by not having children (or a dog if you have one) but you chose not to. So clearly you don’t care much either. And unless you are going to practice what you preach, stop lecturing the rest of us. I don’t do feelings and when you are ready to have a serious discussions of sacrifice including putting your genetic future on the table, then we’ll talk

You blame "the boomers" as if it were a monolithic decision.

 

[Grace T.]

You blame "the boomers" as if it were a monolithic decision.

As I recall you have a few kids, maybe a couple of grandkids and a cat in the mix. You are not only clueless, stupid and unoriginal but the worst of hypocrites.

 

[espola]

As I recall you have a few kids, maybe a couple of grandkids and a cat in the mix. You are not only clueless, stupid and unoriginal but the worst of hypocrites.

It is possible to have children in a sustainable way. I'm not surprised that you don't know that.

For instance, one could delay having children until later in life. By simple mathematics, if every woman had no more than one daughter, the population would stabilize in one generation.

And I have neither grandchildren nor a cat.

 

[whatithink]

We have to do something! X is something. Let’s do x

See the fallacy. You can do things that make your feelings feel better but nothing you do is going to change what going to happen. That was up to the boomers. YOU could have helped by not having children (or a dog if you have one) but you chose not to. So clearly you don’t care much either. And unless you are going to practice what you preach, stop lecturing the rest of us. I don’t do feelings and when you are ready to have a serious discussions of sacrifice including putting your genetic future on the table, then we’ll talk

So it was the boomers fault and now we have to kill all the dogs and sterilize all the kids. Nothing else will work. Got it. Thanks for your wisdom.

I do have kids, but did I have kids, oh wise one? If I do, have I 1, 2 or 5. If I have 2, say a boy and a girl, is that not a sustainable number?

 

[Grace T.]

So it was the boomers fault and now we have to kill all the dogs and sterilize all the kids. Nothing else will work. Got it. Thanks for your wisdom.

I do have kids, but did I have kids, oh wise one? If I do, have I 1, 2 or 5. If I have 2, say a boy and a girl, is that not a sustainable number?

It is possible to have children in a sustainable way. I'm not surprised that you don't know that.

For instance, one could delay having children until later in life. By simple mathematics, if every woman had no more than one daughter, the population would stabilize in one generation.

And I have neither grandchildren nor a cat.

No it’s not because you’d have to offset the population increases in the third world. You clearly have no appreciation for the scope of the problem. 1 child maybe but with longer lives definitely not 2 and definitely not a pet such as espolas cat.

There are other solutions too such as collapsing the western economies in violent Marxist revolution or a pandemic that actually takes a substantial chunk of the population, but short of someone figuring out what to do about India and China, the rest you are just talking about bandaids. We are talking about effectively reverting to either pre industrial outputs or preindustrial populations.

 

[Grace T.]

No it’s not because you’d have to offset the population increases in the third world. You clearly have no appreciation for the scope of the problem. 1 child maybe but with longer lives definitely not 2 and definitely not a pet such as espolas cat.

There are other solutions too such as collapsing the western economies in violent Marxist revolution or a pandemic that actually takes a substantial chunk of the population, but short of someone figuring out what to do about India and China, the rest you are just talking about bandaids. We are talking about effectively reverting to either pre industrial outputs or preindustrial populations.

Actually the thing most likely to mitigate all this is technology but govt investment has so far been investing in vanilla crony businesses like solar panels. It requires a game changer like fusion nuclear energy, large cheap efficient battery retention for solar, or warp drive

 

[Ellejustus]

As I recall you have a few kids, maybe a couple of grandkids and a cat in the mix. You are not only clueless, stupid and unoriginal but the worst of hypocrites.

Grace is on fire today and Espola and his cat are good. You go girl!!!

 

[espola]

So it was the boomers fault and now we have to kill all the dogs and sterilize all the kids. Nothing else will work. Got it. Thanks for your wisdom.

I do have kids, but did I have kids, oh wise one? If I do, have I 1, 2 or 5. If I have 2, say a boy and a girl, is that not a sustainable number?

You do best with strawmen arguments, don't you?

 

[espola]

No it’s not because you’d have to offset the population increases in the third world. You clearly have no appreciation for the scope of the problem. 1 child maybe but with longer lives definitely not 2 and definitely not a pet such as espolas cat.

There are other solutions too such as collapsing the western economies in violent Marxist revolution or a pandemic that actually takes a substantial chunk of the population, but short of someone figuring out what to do about India and China, the rest you are just talking about bandaids. We are talking about effectively reverting to either pre industrial outputs or preindustrial populations.

Think globally. Act locally.