Global warming

11617181921

Comments

  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    Earlier this year, Germany broke it's own record for production of energy through renewable resources, hitting the 87% mark in one day. They are well on their way to the goal of 100%. We are lagging way behind on this and could learn a lot from the German example!

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/05/11/germany-renewable-energy_n_9905622.html
    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • JWPearlJWPearl Posts: 19,893
    the weather is crazy and we are suffering over here and no its not an act of God his enemy has those powers too
    number 6...
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    JWPearl said:

    the weather is crazy and we are suffering over here and no its not an act of God his enemy has those powers too

    I'm not religious in the sense of following any particular dogma but as a metaphor I would say you are implying humans are God's enemy since it is we who have cause global warming. What to you suppose God will do about that one!
    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • JWPearlJWPearl Posts: 19,893
    brianlux said:

    JWPearl said:

    the weather is crazy and we are suffering over here and no its not an act of God his enemy has those powers too

    I'm not religious in the sense of following any particular dogma but as a metaphor I would say you are implying humans are God's enemy since it is we who have cause global warming. What to you suppose God will do about that one!
    Isaiah 45:18, revelation 11:17,18,psalms 37:29 your answers are in those scriptures and not by my own sayings...
    number 6...
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    Isaiah 45:18:

    For this is what the Lord says—
    he who created the heavens,
    he is God;
    he who fashioned and made the earth,
    he founded it;
    he did not create it to be empty,
    but formed it to be inhabited—
    he says:
    “I am the Lord,
    and there is no other.

    Revelation 11:17,18:
    17 saying:

    “We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty,
    the One who is and who was,
    because you have taken your great power
    and have begun to reign.
    18
    The nations were angry,
    and your wrath has come.
    The time has come for judging the dead,
    and for rewarding your servants the prophets
    and your people who revere your name,
    both great and small—
    and for destroying those who destroy the earth.”


    Psalms 37:29:

    The righteous will inherit the land and dwell in it forever.

    _________________________________

    I'm not sure how these relate to anthropocentric global warming but that last one reminds me of a Replacements song:




    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    Free said:
    When I see ideas like the one presented in this article, I am absolutely convinced that there are people in positions of power in this world who hate nature, who hate the planet, who love only the short term greedy gain off the almighty dollar and don't care one freaking bit if the whole planet gets trashed after they're dead and gone. This idea of burning forests as "renewable energy is..."

    ... excuse me, I have to go break things for therapy. Back in a while.
    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    brianlux said:

    Free said:
    When I see ideas like the one presented in this article, I am absolutely convinced that there are people in positions of power in this world who hate nature, who hate the planet, who love only the short term greedy gain off the almighty dollar and don't care one freaking bit if the whole planet gets trashed after they're dead and gone. This idea of burning forests as "renewable energy is..."

    ... excuse me, I have to go break things for therapy. Back in a while.
    What kills me is that the two reps who proposed it is from Maine! A state known for its natural beauty. It sickens me, too.
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    Free said:

    brianlux said:

    Free said:
    When I see ideas like the one presented in this article, I am absolutely convinced that there are people in positions of power in this world who hate nature, who hate the planet, who love only the short term greedy gain off the almighty dollar and don't care one freaking bit if the whole planet gets trashed after they're dead and gone. This idea of burning forests as "renewable energy is..."

    ... excuse me, I have to go break things for therapy. Back in a while.
    What kills me is that the two reps who proposed it is from Maine! A state known for its natural beauty. It sickens me, too.
    Crazy. Absolutely crazy.
    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,537
    And if Trump is elected they will have a very real chance of actually doing this.
    Maybe now you might understand why some progressives like myself feel it is our duty to hold our noses and vote for Clinton to stop this kind of nonsense from happening...
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    rgambs said:

    And if Trump is elected they will have a very real chance of actually doing this.
    Maybe now you might understand why some progressives like myself feel it is our duty to hold our noses and vote for Clinton to stop this kind of nonsense from happening...

    No. You're not going sway or even entertain us with bringing your candidate into this. We know who the real candidate is for the environment and it's not her. Wrong woman.
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    The candidate most likely to be environmentally proactive is Jill Stein. Trump is anti environment and Clinton only gives it lip service. Her loyalty is to corporations that for the most part are environmentally harmful. The environment is changing and at current trajectory will become unsuitable in many or most places for human habitation. With global warming acceleration, we really don't have time to settle for mediocrity. If we're serious about environment , we will vote for candidates who are serious about environment. The problem can't be ignored anymore.
    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,537
    Y'all can vote for Smokey the Bear if you want, but there's only 1 candidate that can stop the anti-science goofballs from ruling the day.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    edited October 2016
    rgambs said:

    Y'all can vote for Smokey the Bear if you want, but there's only 1 candidate that can stop the anti-science goofballs from ruling the day.

    Would that be the one who supports fracking rather than saying no to fracking? The one who is more in favor of "clean coal" or the one who is more in favor of solar energy? Obviously I'm comparing Clinton with Stein. Clinton's focus is economy, not people or regulations that support environment. Her environmental stance is status quo and does little if anything to move us forward in the way we need to in order to have an environment suitable to large mammal habitation in the not too distant future.

    For an excellent comparison of the two on environment, please take some time to check out this video:



    Edit: The other thing I would like to address here is the notion of "denial". We've all talked about climate change/global warming denial and most of us agree that anyone in denial about global warming is just simply not well informed and educated on the subject. The kind of denial is basically pathetic at this point and most of us would agree to that. But I believe there is a more dangerous form of denial which is the belief many have that by simply recycling a few more cans and bottles and voting for someone like Clinton rather than Trump is going to solve our climate and environmental crises. This is simply not true. We can no longer afford to take baby steps. Clinton vs Trump, for example, is like saying I'd rather be hit on the head 100 times with a ball peen hammer rather than 100 times by a sledge hammer. Sure, one is going to do you in faster and more make more of a mess but the end result is the same. Now this may seem hyperbolic to use such a graphic metaphor but I believe it is appropriate to do so. We are facing extinction. Some of you may believe I am fear mongering or exaggerating but I don't believe it. If you study the ecological sciences and gain a basic understand of climate and life cycles, it's simple logic, not hyperbole.

    Sorry- end of lecture. I can't help it. It makes me nuts to see how foolishly we are ignoring our peril.
    Post edited by brianlux on
    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,537
    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    edited October 2016
    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    You're right Brian. And those like rgambs who think that HRC is going to save the day will eventually just prove that she flip flops so much on environmental issues, because she has the fossil fuel industries lining her back pocket while claiming to the public that she's all for environmental progress, that her true interests at with those who line her pockets. She has said she has a public and private identity in the emails. She only really votes for those throwing big money at her. Anyone thinking otherwise is the fool.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,537
    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    Living in rural Ohio, I will never be able to take an election lightly.
    2 miles from my house is a full sheet of plywood in someone's yard painted to say:

    Trump
    I'm A
    Deplorable

    Trump signs are more numerous than teeth around here and as Ohio goes, so goes the election.

    As far as the environment, I am mostly without hope. We need a polar shift in human ambition and I just don't see it happening. We can only mitigate unless there is some massive catastrophy that changes things.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    Free said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    You're right Brian. And those like rgambs who think that HRC is going to save the day will eventually just prove that she flip flops so much on environmental issues, because she has the fossil fuel industries lining her back pocket while claiming to the public that she's all for environmental progress, that her true interests at with those who line her pockets. She has said she has a public and private identity in the emails. She only really votes for those throwing big money at her. Anyone thinking otherwise is the fool.
    Exactly, Free! Hillary will do her best to convince the public she is pro-environment as long as it puts something in her own pocket or cap. We certainly don't need phony environmentalism this late in the game.
    rgambs said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    Living in rural Ohio, I will never be able to take an election lightly.
    2 miles from my house is a full sheet of plywood in someone's yard painted to say:

    Trump
    I'm A
    Deplorable

    Trump signs are more numerous than teeth around here and as Ohio goes, so goes the election.

    As far as the environment, I am mostly without hope. We need a polar shift in human ambition and I just don't see it happening. We can only mitigate unless there is some massive catastrophy that changes things.
    I'm not going to accept "there is no hope" from anyone because by my definition hope is doing what makes sense no matter what the outcome. If someone is not willing to keep doing their best to make a difference, then why would they even bother talking about it? That just gets in the way. If someone wants a better world, they would do well to keep trying to make it better and not bring everyone else down by saying "we're screwed". And believe me, if I were to be bluntly honest, I would say that may well be but I have several grand kids, nieces and nephews that are going to get stuck with the shit we are causing and I'm not going to leave them hanging out to die if I can at all help it. I can't do much but what I can do, I will. I hope you do too. We are the human ambition you speak of, Gambs. You and me. Is that all there is? Then we best get busy!
    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,537
    brianlux said:

    Free said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    You're right Brian. And those like rgambs who think that HRC is going to save the day will eventually just prove that she flip flops so much on environmental issues, because she has the fossil fuel industries lining her back pocket while claiming to the public that she's all for environmental progress, that her true interests at with those who line her pockets. She has said she has a public and private identity in the emails. She only really votes for those throwing big money at her. Anyone thinking otherwise is the fool.
    Exactly, Free! Hillary will do her best to convince the public she is pro-environment as long as it puts something in her own pocket or cap. We certainly don't need phony environmentalism this late in the game.
    rgambs said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    Living in rural Ohio, I will never be able to take an election lightly.
    2 miles from my house is a full sheet of plywood in someone's yard painted to say:

    Trump
    I'm A
    Deplorable

    Trump signs are more numerous than teeth around here and as Ohio goes, so goes the election.

    As far as the environment, I am mostly without hope. We need a polar shift in human ambition and I just don't see it happening. We can only mitigate unless there is some massive catastrophy that changes things.
    I'm not going to accept "there is no hope" from anyone because by my definition hope is doing what makes sense no matter what the outcome. If someone is not willing to keep doing their best to make a difference, then why would they even bother talking about it? That just gets in the way. If someone wants a better world, they would do well to keep trying to make it better and not bring everyone else down by saying "we're screwed". And believe me, if I were to be bluntly honest, I would say that may well be but I have several grand kids, nieces and nephews that are going to get stuck with the shit we are causing and I'm not going to leave them hanging out to die if I can at all help it. I can't do much but what I can do, I will. I hope you do too. We are the human ambition you speak of, Gambs. You and me. Is that all there is? Then we best get busy!
    Under that definition of hope, I would agree that hope abounds.
    I have hope, and it grows every year!
    :peace:
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,537
    Free said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    You're right Brian. And those like rgambs who think that HRC is going to save the day will eventually just prove that she flip flops so much on environmental issues, because she has the fossil fuel industries lining her back pocket while claiming to the public that she's all for environmental progress, that her true interests at with those who line her pockets. She has said she has a public and private identity in the emails. She only really votes for those throwing big money at her. Anyone thinking otherwise is the fool.
    Never said that, never thought it.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    rgambs said:

    brianlux said:

    Free said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    You're right Brian. And those like rgambs who think that HRC is going to save the day will eventually just prove that she flip flops so much on environmental issues, because she has the fossil fuel industries lining her back pocket while claiming to the public that she's all for environmental progress, that her true interests at with those who line her pockets. She has said she has a public and private identity in the emails. She only really votes for those throwing big money at her. Anyone thinking otherwise is the fool.
    Exactly, Free! Hillary will do her best to convince the public she is pro-environment as long as it puts something in her own pocket or cap. We certainly don't need phony environmentalism this late in the game.
    rgambs said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    Living in rural Ohio, I will never be able to take an election lightly.
    2 miles from my house is a full sheet of plywood in someone's yard painted to say:

    Trump
    I'm A
    Deplorable

    Trump signs are more numerous than teeth around here and as Ohio goes, so goes the election.

    As far as the environment, I am mostly without hope. We need a polar shift in human ambition and I just don't see it happening. We can only mitigate unless there is some massive catastrophy that changes things.
    I'm not going to accept "there is no hope" from anyone because by my definition hope is doing what makes sense no matter what the outcome. If someone is not willing to keep doing their best to make a difference, then why would they even bother talking about it? That just gets in the way. If someone wants a better world, they would do well to keep trying to make it better and not bring everyone else down by saying "we're screwed". And believe me, if I were to be bluntly honest, I would say that may well be but I have several grand kids, nieces and nephews that are going to get stuck with the shit we are causing and I'm not going to leave them hanging out to die if I can at all help it. I can't do much but what I can do, I will. I hope you do too. We are the human ambition you speak of, Gambs. You and me. Is that all there is? Then we best get busy!
    Under that definition of hope, I would agree that hope abounds.
    I have hope, and it grows every year!

    :peace:
    Excellent!

    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,537
    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    brianlux said:

    Free said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    You're right Brian. And those like rgambs who think that HRC is going to save the day will eventually just prove that she flip flops so much on environmental issues, because she has the fossil fuel industries lining her back pocket while claiming to the public that she's all for environmental progress, that her true interests at with those who line her pockets. She has said she has a public and private identity in the emails. She only really votes for those throwing big money at her. Anyone thinking otherwise is the fool.
    Exactly, Free! Hillary will do her best to convince the public she is pro-environment as long as it puts something in her own pocket or cap. We certainly don't need phony environmentalism this late in the game.
    rgambs said:

    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    Smokey the Bear has an equal chance of winning the Oval Office as Stein does.

    The real comparison that matters is Clinton vs Trump.

    Overall, we don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against climate change, humanity is
    On the loose, it's a truck
    All the rolling hills, it'll flatten 'em out, yeah
    It's herd behavior, uh huh

    Smokey the Bear, haha! Another false entity brought to you by the USFS.

    The thing is RG, I know you of all people don't have that cynical attitude of "we're all screwed anyway so eff it". No, we will not stop climate change at this point but we can slow it down and why not try! The thing is, we already know Clinton is going to win. Trump is making sure of that. So why not send a message to HRC saying, "Yeah, OK, you win but a lot of us know what your up to and we know you don't really care jack about the environment". That's the message I'm sending by voting for Stein.

    Gambs, you may be in a swing state so I can kind of see why you might be pushing for HRC but if you really care about the environment (and I think you do), please don't fool yourself or try to fool anyone else that Clinton is going to make any positive difference on environment. She's not. She is status quo and status quo ain't gonna cut it.
    Living in rural Ohio, I will never be able to take an election lightly.
    2 miles from my house is a full sheet of plywood in someone's yard painted to say:

    Trump
    I'm A
    Deplorable

    Trump signs are more numerous than teeth around here and as Ohio goes, so goes the election.

    As far as the environment, I am mostly without hope. We need a polar shift in human ambition and I just don't see it happening. We can only mitigate unless there is some massive catastrophy that changes things.
    I'm not going to accept "there is no hope" from anyone because by my definition hope is doing what makes sense no matter what the outcome. If someone is not willing to keep doing their best to make a difference, then why would they even bother talking about it? That just gets in the way. If someone wants a better world, they would do well to keep trying to make it better and not bring everyone else down by saying "we're screwed". And believe me, if I were to be bluntly honest, I would say that may well be but I have several grand kids, nieces and nephews that are going to get stuck with the shit we are causing and I'm not going to leave them hanging out to die if I can at all help it. I can't do much but what I can do, I will. I hope you do too. We are the human ambition you speak of, Gambs. You and me. Is that all there is? Then we best get busy!
    Under that definition of hope, I would agree that hope abounds.
    I have hope, and it grows every year!

    :peace:
    Excellent!

    I do what I can and try to shame my peers into doing more lol

    For instance, my brother-in-law is a big fan of apples according to himself. He only eats the worst apple known to man "Red Delicious" so I say he doesn't know shit about real apples!
    Anyways, Becca and I were headed to the local orchard 10 miles down the road to buy some cider, Fujis and Winesaps (which arent ready yet, they are the best though!) so I asked him if he wanted a half peck. "No, I just bought some at the (big box) grocery store" I look in his fridge, they are from fucking New Zealand and they are shit, even for red delicious. He's a friggin idiot about stuff like that, if I told him to buy local he would buy apples that had been shipped 3000 miles across the world just to spite hippies like me. So I am buying him 2 pecks and dropping the fuckers on his table so he won't have a choice.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,537
    They are also $5 a half peck at the orchard, and $1 an apple at the grocery store, which comes to about $11 or $12 a half peck at the store.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,920
    rgambs said:

    They are also $5 a half peck at the orchard, and $1 an apple at the grocery store, which comes to about $11 or $12 a half peck at the store.

    I can see where this is going- one of those confounding word math problems! :lol:
    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    Yellow delicious are great for making pies, don't knock the red, to each his own for eating choice, but I I do agree about buying local very much so.
  • JWPearlJWPearl Posts: 19,893
    ruin the earth we want more of this in the future (not)
    number 6...
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,537
    Free said:

    Yellow delicious are great for making pies, don't knock the red, to each his own for eating choice, but I I do agree about buying local very much so.

    Yellow delicious is okay if you like soft apples, I like a hard bite.
    Red Delicious is widely known as the worst. It was genetically selected for looks, and the thick, bitter skin and mealy, but beautifully white flesh is the result.

    Google something like "Red Delicious is the worst" and you find dozens of foody articles decrying the poor taste of the average American apple eater lol
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,342
    just watched years of living dangerously (letterman's doc) and before the flood (dicaprio's doc) and it's abundantly clear that it all starts and ends with americans ...

    and that means ultimately failure ... a country full of people who think they are living like kings and that everything is great ... a country which is controlled by corporations and people don't even realize it ... people who think that america is the greatest country in the world ...

    and yeah - i know ... i'm gonna get the same reaction ... either crickets or people who are gonna get all defensive and attack but the facts are there for everyone to see ... it only takes someone who thinks with their brain instead of with a flag or anthem ...

  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    polaris_x said:

    just watched years of living dangerously (letterman's doc) and before the flood (dicaprio's doc) and it's abundantly clear that it all starts and ends with americans ...

    and that means ultimately failure ... a country full of people who think they are living like kings and that everything is great ... a country which is controlled by corporations and people don't even realize it ... people who think that america is the greatest country in the world ...

    and yeah - i know ... i'm gonna get the same reaction ... either crickets or people who are gonna get all defensive and attack but the facts are there for everyone to see ... it only takes someone who thinks with their brain instead of with a flag or anthem ...

    polaris_x said:

    just watchhed years of living dangerously (letterman's doc) and before the flood (dicaprio's doc) and it's abundantly clear that it all starts and ends with americans ...

    and that means ultimately failure ... a country full of people who think they are living like kings and that everything is great ... a country which is controlled by corporations and people don't even realize it ... people who think that america is the greatest country in the world ...

    and yeah - i know ... i'm gonna get the same reaction ... either crickets or people who are gonna get all defensive and attack but the facts are there for everyone to see ... it only takes someone who thinks with their brain instead of with a flag or anthem ...

    This is one American that 100% agrees.
Sign In or Register to comment.