Global Student Strike for Climate Change

[ilduce39]

2 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Considering how long the earth has been around, predictions of doom from the 1960s could be pretty accurate even if they don’t come true for another 100 years.  We’re talking billions and billions of years - being off by a century or two is hardly egregious.  

 

The point is: there’s enough measurable, tangible negative environment-related going on around us that any effort - even just a gesture like the climate strike - should be applauded.

 

I don’t understand what would motivate someone to crap on this.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, UnkNuk said:

Their future may be being screwed up by older folks who are the ones in position to do something about climate change and aren't doing it.

 

Who’s in position to do something? That’s what I'm getting at. People don’t have the slightest clue on what the solution is.  They think they know the problem (co2 levels rising) but what about the solution?

 

Quote

As far as them being unaware of what preventing climate change might entail in their personal lives - I don't know if that's true or not.  I just watched the demonstration, I didn't talk to any of the young people.  I wouldn't be surprised if some of them weren't sure what they were demanding.  But I wouldn't be surprised if many of them did have some idea and were ready to go along with it.   We should be careful about these sweeping generalizations.  

I doubt 1% of them do because even the majority of climate activities in North America don’t.

[BPA]

6 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

Who’s in position to do something? That’s what I'm getting at. People don’t have the slightest clue on what the solution is.  They think they know the problem (co2 levels rising) but what about the solution?

 

I doubt 1% of them do because even the majority of climate activities in North America don’t.

Well.  Got to start somewhere. 

 

Like I was telling a friend.  Growing up we never did any recycling.  Everything went into the trash.  Things take time to change.  Now it's expected to recycle.

 

I don't think anyone is asking to FULL-STOP everything.   But we all can make some little changes that can make large differences.

 

My kids walk to school (I walk them to school cuz I'm paranoid). I bike to work (not every day cuz my knees get sore). Take the skytrain to the mall sometimes.  Telecommuting is becoming a thing now.  Same with Video conferencing (no need to fly in for a meeting).

 

Reducing carbon footprint can be done so long as there is the will to do it.  It may be slower for our generation (typically the older you the more resistant to change you are) but the younger generation and ones to follow can thrust it to the forefront. 

 

Cars/Trucks will continue as there still needs to be a method of moving goods and people.  However, you can see more and more electric cars being developed.   It won't be mainstream yet until there is adequate changing stations.  And we really need to make more mass transit to main hubs around all of Greater Vancouver. 

[Kragar]

9 hours ago, BPA said:

Well.  Got to start somewhere. 

 

Like I was telling a friend.  Growing up we never did any recycling.  Everything went into the trash.  Things take time to change.  Now it's expected to recycle.

 

I don't think anyone is asking to FULL-STOP everything.   But we all can make some little changes that can make large differences.

 

My kids walk to school (I walk them to school cuz I'm paranoid). I bike to work (not every day cuz my knees get sore). Take the skytrain to the mall sometimes.  Telecommuting is becoming a thing now.  Same with Video conferencing (no need to fly in for a meeting).

 

Reducing carbon footprint can be done so long as there is the will to do it.  It may be slower for our generation (typically the older you the more resistant to change you are) but the younger generation and ones to follow can thrust it to the forefront. 

 

Cars/Trucks will continue as there still needs to be a method of moving goods and people.  However, you can see more and more electric cars being developed.   It won't be mainstream yet until there is adequate changing stations.  And we really need to make more mass transit to main hubs around all of Greater Vancouver. 

Is what you describe what these kids are demanding?  Or are they asking for something like the Green New Deal?  When they demand "widespread, systemic change" to stop climate change, that sounds more like the latter to me.

 

One student in an Alberta march was concerned about waiting too long to make the transition to green tech because if we wait until fossil fuels are running low, we will implement change too quickly, increasing the odds of making mistakes.  It'sa logical concern,  but do they not see the irony in their demands?  Every loud voice these kids listen to is demanding quick, drastic change, or we will die. 

 

They might be right, but those loud voices would need to coordinate globally, getting all the big polluters to change while still supporting other countries in the ability to modernize with controlled environmental impact.  I don't see that happening.  Paris Accords sure don't cut it.

 

Maybe if some of those loud voices would listen to you and teleconference in favor of private jet travel more often, and stop spending millions of dollars on property they claim will disappear under rising seas soon, others might take them as seriously as these kids do.

 

[BPA]

4 minutes ago, Kragar said:

Is what you describe what these kids are demanding?  Or are they asking for something like the Green New Deal?  When they demand "widespread, systemic change" to stop climate change, that sounds more like the latter to me.

 

One student in an Alberta march was concerned about waiting too long to make the transition to green tech because if we wait until fossil fuels are running low, we will implement change too quickly, increasing the odds of making mistakes.  It'sa logical concern,  but do they not see the irony in their demands?  Every loud voice these kids listen to is demanding quick, drastic change, or we will die. 

 

They might be right, but those loud voices would need to coordinate globally, getting all the big polluters to change while still supporting other countries in the ability to modernize with controlled environmental impact.  I don't see that happening.  Paris Accords sure don't cut it.

 

Maybe if some of those loud voices would listen to you and teleconference in favor of private jet travel more often, and stop spending millions of dollars on property they claim will disappear under rising seas soon, others might take them as seriously as these kids do.

 

They are kids.  What else do you expect from them.  They are not old enough to gain the wisdom of organizing events.  But old enough to know climate change is a real concern. 

 

We don't know when they earth will become "dangerous" but isn't it better to start doing something before we reach the point of no return?

[RUPERTKBD]

I can't speak for all demonstrators, but I think change has to happen in steps.

 

The first, (and most important, IMO) is for the people who have the power to dramatically effect change to see Climate Change as reality. Until people in power stop looking at it like a "Chinese hoax" or some such nonsense, we'll never get there.

[RUPERTKBD]

3 minutes ago, BPA said:

They are kids.  What else do you expect from them.  They are not old enough to gain the wisdom of organizing events.  But old enough to know climate change is a real concern. 

 

We don't know when they earth will become "dangerous" but isn't it better to start doing something before we reach the point of no return?

This is the problem. We may already be at that point, but it's almost impossible to accurately predict when we'll reach it.

 

This is why it's frustrating when people try and make timeline predictions. When they're shown to be inaccurate, the CC deniers use it as a basis for their denial, even though the fact remains that the vast majority of Climate scientists haven't made such specific claims, only that it we don't start reducing carbon emissions soon, we'll see things like flooding and other severe weather effects continue to get worse, until we truly do reach a point of no return.

[189lb enforcers?]

11 hours ago, UnkNuk said:

That's a good reminder, 189.

 

Even if a majority of the people who know what they're talking about (in this case, climate scientists) agree on an issue, they could still be wrong.  It happens.

 

And let's hope it is happening in this case because, otherwise, we could be in deep trouble.

I’m an outdoorsy kind of guy in Kamloops. I’m not some bearded lumberjack shirt wearing guy from Delta telling anyone about the environment which I care for. 

 

Its very difficult to separate the politics from the rest. There are less truths on the subject than there are lies. It’s become an industry.

 

This whole protest thing is political. How else did it get momentum? These kids are puppets.

 

Like every other hashtag of the day, consumers and NPC drones do their masters’ bidding without even knowing it. 

 

I live in Kamloops on the shores of what was once a glacial lake and in a valley which has seen several glacial periods, not one caused by man, which is the endgame-hysteria behind the claims of climate change. I am constantly reminded of climate change. 

 

Doesn’t anybody know we’ve just lived and prospered through one of the most stable climate phases in a very, very, very long time?

 

We are overdue for an ice bath, big time. It’s coming and happening no matter what any of us do. This is the political part I find entirely misleading about this “science”. Like a buffet, the facts are picked over and dished up to suit the needs and tastes of narratives out there.  

 

This Gretta kid, for instance, is a disgusting display of puppeteering. I want none of that, served up at face value, taken seriously by serious, critically thinking people. She works in manufacturing for those who profit on this misleading and misinformation, IMO. They’ve found their pawn to emotionally engage the disbanding youth before they get too far down the rabbit hole of alternate theories. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by 189lb enforcers?

[inane]

10 hours ago, ilduce39 said:

Considering how long the earth has been around, predictions of doom from the 1960s could be pretty accurate even if they don’t come true for another 100 years.  We’re talking billions and billions of years - being off by a century or two is hardly egregious.  

 

The point is: there’s enough measurable, tangible negative environment-related going on around us that any effort - even just a gesture like the climate strike - should be applauded.

 

I don’t understand what would motivate someone to crap on this.

Yeah it's pretty crazy that in the scale of what we're talking about the predictions are relatively very accurate but because they aren't perfect they are dismissed as irrelevant. 

 

 

[189lb enforcers?]

10 hours ago, ilduce39 said:

Considering how long the earth has been around, predictions of doom from the 1960s could be pretty accurate even if they don’t come true for another 100 years.  We’re talking billions and billions of years - being off by a century or two is hardly egregious.  

 

The point is: there’s enough measurable, tangible negative environment-related going on around us that any effort - even just a gesture like the climate strike - should be applauded.

 

I don’t understand what would motivate someone to crap on this.

It’s not the principle of doing something in regards to pollution, it’s the political game and practicality behind it all that is don’t support and find completely a waste of time. 

 

Don't conflate issues. A,so, these scientists don’t agree on this subject in the slightest. Like any other political pressures, people bend and people like Gretta get their day in the sun. We’ve seen it before, so did Galileo, etc. 

 

These Weatern kids aren’t going to stop buying their cloths, shoes, phones, backpacks, gadgets etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc from the offshore mega-polluters, so what are they actually accomplishing while marching in the streets of their relatively responsible countries where pollution is as disconnected from their realities as hunger is? 

 

The very people marching are the consumers. Was their solution to stop buying imported junk which is actually causing the measurable change you refer to? No. So, it’s just another yawn-fest; another look at me, I care moment.

 

Sipping their coffee from a deforested “fair trade” cup of coffee, holding an IPhone and wearing some Columbia or North Face clothing, they are platforming about pollution? How pathetic is that, especially to skip school for it all. Maybe they should take some more earth science classes instead. 

 

What i I don’t take seriously about global warming, turned climate change, is the idea that we will fare any better than the Myans or whoever else went through real, earth-made climate change, which is an earthquake away from starting off a bottled up series of events we definitely will have more trouble surviving than anything we can curse the surface of this crusty old ball of hate with.

 

Heck, a single meteor or asteroid could place us in a fossil record just above the dinosaurs, which is also a pending fate and a science worth the kids’ time. 

[ItTakesAnArmy]

19 minutes ago, inane said:

11 hours ago, ilduce39 said:

Considering how long the earth has been around, predictions of doom from the 1960s could be pretty accurate even if they don’t come true for another 100 years.  We’re talking billions and billions of years - being off by a century or two is hardly egregious.  

 

The point is: there’s enough measurable, tangible negative environment-related going on around us that any effort - even just a gesture like the climate strike - should be applauded.

 

I don’t understand what would motivate someone to crap on this.

Yeah it's pretty crazy that in the scale of what we're talking about the predictions are relatively very accurate but because they aren't perfect they are dismissed as irrelevant. 

What was the temperature of the planet during the period of the dinosaurs? Around 10 degrees hotter and that lasted for many millennia until the big ice age caused by the comet hitting the planet.

 

The mini ice age better known as the dark ages may have been caused by a massive methane release from the ocean depths, that was instantaneous and lasted close to 900 years

 

Krakatoa caused world temperatures to drop by more than 3 degrees and there was no summer and prolonged winter for close to a decade after.

 

The planet is like a living organism, heats up, causes cloud cover, changes currents, causes volcanism, cools the planet.

 

The non scientist that came up with iron fertilization of the ocean had an immediate and positive effect of neutralizing carbon build up, but it is now BIG business to ignore simple or effective solutions. Big gas companies suppressed better carburetors to sell more gas as well. BTW in the NW the resulting plankton blooms may have contributed to massive increases in some salmon runs in Oregon, Alaska and BC.

[189lb enforcers?]

40 minutes ago, inane said:

Yeah it's pretty crazy that in the scale of what we're talking about the predictions are relatively very accurate but because they aren't perfect they are dismissed as irrelevant. 

 

 

There are contingents that will dismiss things, sure. Others, myself included, see a trend and are more inclined to react with less haste than a flash mob looking to align under a feel-good banner of creed and whatever they think they accomplished. 

 

I don't conflate the plight of our oceans with what global warming used to be about. I separated the issues. Today, the new banner of climate change encompasses all practices, even fishing all the way to mining under one banner - the very banner these kids were claiming to hope to fix. 

 

But theres the problem. 

Its not solutions, it’s a mountain of emotion delivering a mountain of problems, not solutions. 

How productive. 

 

Forgive my snicker, my lack of support for and my posts concerning a global effort with no answers, but a whole eff of a lot of consumption! 

 

Starting somewhere is on the person.

 

Personal responsibility might be a thing of the past and now a job for government, but recognizing our own power as consumers is more powerful than any emotionally-charged doomsday speech by some stupid kid too ignorant to know their own place at the table they claim “I” set for them in the future. 

 

There is no denial of a changing climate. We may vary on the assessments, but we do know Kamloops will again be cleaned out by a massive ice sheet, no deniers of that type of climate change. How that change is coming is a minor detail in the story of our future survival, I don’t know why that’s seemingly never referenced in any of the “news” we get.

 

Whether or not I think that Nike is going to bring us to the brink before a volcano does isn’t a debate, anywhere, no money in that, I guess. Speaking of Nike, etc, what is on your guys’ feet today?

 

What is Ruperts’ closet looking like while he accuses others of “denial” of climate change? We can guess. Guitar strings - bad. Electricity - bad. Booze - bad. Profiting on these - real eff-ing bad, for the environment, but not as bad if you accuse others of it first. Hollow, virtuous, pretentious noise, these folks lecturing others on their beliefs and principles. 

 

Hypocrites. It’s easy to virtue signal, just look around this thread, harder to live the life of a light footprint. Those of you who are, respect. Those who aren’t, shhh. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by 189lb enforcers?

[inane]

17 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

There are contingents that will dismiss things, sure. Others, myself included, see a trend and are more inclined to react with less haste than a flash mob looking to align under a feel-good banner of creed and whatever they think they accomplished. 

 

I don't conflate the plight of our oceans with what global warming used to be about. I separated the issues. Today, the new banner of climate change encompasses all practices, even fishing all the way to mining under one banner - the very banner these kids were claiming to hope to fix. 

 

But theres the problem. 

Its not solutions, it’s a mountain of emotion delivering a mountain of problems, not solutions. 

How productive. 

 

Forgive my snicker, my lack of support for and my posts concerning a global effort with no answers, but a whole eff of a lot of consumption! 

 

Starting somewhere is on the person.

 

Personal responsibility might be a thing of the past and now a job for government, but recognizing our own power as consumers is more powerful than any emotionally-charged doomsday speech by some stupid kid too ignorant to know their own place at the table they claim “I” set for them in the future. 

 

There is no denial of a changing climate. We may vary on the assessments, but we do know Kamloops will again be cleaned out by a massive ice sheet, no deniers of that type of climate change. How that change is coming is a minor detail in the story of our future survival, I don’t know why that’s seemingly never referenced in any of the “news” we get.

 

Whether or not I think that Nike is going to bring us to the brink before a volcano does isn’t a debate, anywhere, no money in that, I guess. Speaking of Nike, etc, what is on your guys’ feet today?

 

What is Ruperts’ closet looking like while he accuses others of “denial” of climate change? We can guess. Guitar strings - bad. Electricity - bad. Booze - bad. Profiting on these - real eff-ing bad, for the environment, but not as bad if you accuse others of it first. Hollow, virtuous, pretentious noise, these folks lecturing others on their beliefs and principles. 

 

Hypocrites. It’s easy to virtue signal, just look around this thread, harder to live the life of a light footprint. Those of you who are, respect. Those who aren’t, shhh. 

Easy to just say 'hypocrites' if someone does anything other than live in a cave eating berries. You talk about being real but it's phony to dismiss those of us who want something better but still live in the world where things aren't great. I want cleaner air, am I a hypocrite for still breathing? Does my opinion become invalid because I have the gall to continue breathing despite wanting cleaner air?

 

 

[Duodenum]

28 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Whether or not I think that Nike is going to bring us to the brink before a volcano does isn’t a debate, anywhere, no money in that, I guess. Speaking of Nike, etc, what is on your guys’ feet today?

 

What is Ruperts’ closet looking like while he accuses others of “denial” of climate change? We can guess. Guitar strings - bad. Electricity - bad. Booze - bad. Profiting on these - real eff-ing bad, for the environment, but not as bad if you accuse others of it first. Hollow, virtuous, pretentious noise, these folks lecturing others on their beliefs and principles. 

 

Hypocrites. It’s easy to virtue signal, just look around this thread, harder to live the life of a light footprint. Those of you who are, respect. Those who aren’t, shhh. 

Most of this is just deflection. What effect does this have overall? So small it wouldn't register. 

 

There's nothing hypocritical of wearing Nikes and wanting to switch to renewable energy. Deforestation (~11%), Transportation (~14%) and Energy (~24%) are easier to hit and comprise of a much larger footprint than guitar strings and nikes lol. And with the right technologies, it won't have much, if any effect on our standard of living. 

 

Bringing up stupid things like nikes and guitar strings is intellectually lazy and doesn't progress the discussion at all. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by Duodenum

[Kragar]

1 hour ago, BPA said:

They are kids.  What else do you expect from them.  They are not old enough to gain the wisdom of organizing events.  But old enough to know climate change is a real concern. 

 

We don't know when they earth will become "dangerous" but isn't it better to start doing something before we reach the point of no return?

Isn't it better to know what we're doing, and why we're doing it, before we do something widespread and systemic?

 

I support pretty much everything you said in your first post I quoted, and I think a lot of others do too.  But that is not what these kids are demanding. They want something big, and soon, because they have been taught that the problems are imminent.

[BPA]

4 minutes ago, Kragar said:

Isn't it better to know what we're doing, and why we're doing it, before we do something widespread and systemic?

 

I support pretty much everything you said in your first post I quoted, and I think a lot of others do too.  But that is not what these kids are demanding. They want something big, and soon, because they have been taught that the problems are imminent.

Lol.  Kids demanding.  

 

While it may rub some people the wrong way, I view it as trying to raise awareness and prompt Government and big business to take some action...any action.  

 

Much like the gun debate in the US.  Now you are seeing major stores banning firearms sales in their stores.  It's a step in the right direction. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

11 hours ago, BPA said:

Well.  Got to start somewhere. 

 

Like I was telling a friend.  Growing up we never did any recycling.  Everything went into the trash.  Things take time to change.  Now it's expected to recycle.

 

I don't think anyone is asking to FULL-STOP everything.   But we all can make some little changes that can make large differences.

 

My kids walk to school (I walk them to school cuz I'm paranoid). I bike to work (not every day cuz my knees get sore). Take the skytrain to the mall sometimes.  Telecommuting is becoming a thing now.  Same with Video conferencing (no need to fly in for a meeting).

 

Reducing carbon footprint can be done so long as there is the will to do it.  It may be slower for our generation (typically the older you the more resistant to change you are) but the younger generation and ones to follow can thrust it to the forefront. 

 

Cars/Trucks will continue as there still needs to be a method of moving goods and people.  However, you can see more and more electric cars being developed.   It won't be mainstream yet until there is adequate changing stations.  And we really need to make more mass transit to main hubs around all of Greater Vancouver. 

See that’s the issue a lot of people have.  They are stuck and think the things you are advocating will save the world, but really most of that stuff is just greenwash.  CO2 emissions are a global issue and when you look at who the largest emitters are, you should quickly realize that the 1.6% Canada owns is a drop in the bucket to countries like China and India.  Even if Canada shut down every single source of emission, global emissions still grow at an accelerated rate and we are no closer as solving climate change. And that is talking about the extreme of stopping everything and having everyone go off grid.  That just not realistic, so people advocate transitioning to green, but I question if people who are advocating for this have even considered and done the research to see if that is a realistic option.  Most evidence suggest it’s not even remotely realistic. 

 

Take Michael Shellenberger for example, he is a Time Magazine "Hero of the Environment," Green Book Award winner, and the founder and president of Environmental Progress. has stated “you can't power a modern economy on solar and wind... All they do is make the electricity system chaotic and provide greenwash for fossil fuels”.  Bill gates has also made similar statements around renewable energy. “I am optimistic,” that the international community can solve climate change. But in the same breath he added, “Part of the problem is there’s not a broad awareness of how challenging it’s going to be to bring down greenhouse gas emissions.”  A lot of people think renewable energy,” he said. “Wind and solar has gotten a lot cheaper. Isn’t that it? When electricity is only a quarter of the problem. In fact, we’ve got to solve the entire 100 percent.” 

 

People are deceiving themselves into believing what and how to solve climate change. There is an obtainable solution and you never hear a peep about it.  In terms of finding a carbon neutral energy replacement the answer is easily Nuclear.  In terms to reducing CO2 emissions part of the answer is doing what you mentioned above but that’s really small scale, you should also include pushing for more carbon capture programs, supporting more GMO’s, and most of all supporting pipelines.  These are all methods of making the current emissions vastly more effective while supporting a demand that is not going away.

 

I’m not saying give up and not care about how you live your life, but I am saying we need shift the focus onto something that will actual make change.  People call on politicians to implement all these small scale changes that come at a great economic cost.. which, as I said before gets us no closer to solving the issue.  Anyways I’m also open for a healthy debate on this topic

[canuckster19]

6 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

See that’s the issue a lot of people have.  They are stuck and think the things you are advocating will save the world, but really most of that stuff is just greenwash.  CO2 emissions are a global issue and when you look at who the largest emitters are, you should quickly realize that the 1.6% Canada owns is a drop in the bucket to countries like China and India.  Even if Canada shut down every single source of emission, global emissions still grow at an accelerated rate and we are no closer as solving climate change. And that is talking about the extreme of stopping everything and having everyone go off grid.  That just not realistic, so people advocate transitioning to green, but I question if people who are advocating for this have even considered and done the research to see if that is a realistic option.  Most evidence suggest it’s not even remotely realistic. 

 

Take Michael Shellenberger for example, he is a Time Magazine "Hero of the Environment," Green Book Award winner, and the founder and president of Environmental Progress. has stated “you can't power a modern economy on solar and wind... All they do is make the electricity system chaotic and provide greenwash for fossil fuels”.  Bill gates has also made similar statements around renewable energy. “I am optimistic,” that the international community can solve climate change. But in the same breath he added, “Part of the problem is there’s not a broad awareness of how challenging it’s going to be to bring down greenhouse gas emissions.”  A lot of people think renewable energy,” he said. “Wind and solar has gotten a lot cheaper. Isn’t that it? When electricity is only a quarter of the problem. In fact, we’ve got to solve the entire 100 percent.” 

 

People are deceiving themselves into believing what and how to solve climate change. There is an obtainable solution and you never hear a peep about it.  In terms of finding a carbon neutral energy replacement the answer is easily Nuclear.  In terms to reducing CO2 emissions part of the answer is doing what you mentioned above but that’s really small scale, you should also include pushing for more carbon capture programs, supporting more GMO’s, and most of all supporting pipelines.  These are all methods of making the current emissions vastly more effective while supporting a demand that is not going away.

 

I’m not saying give up and not care about how you live your life, but I am saying we need shift the focus onto something that will actual make change.  People call on politicians to implement all these small scale changes that come at a great economic cost.. which, as I said before gets us no closer to solving the issue.  Anyways I’m also open for a healthy debate on this topic

Yep, if by some modern miracle Sweden managed to be emission free by 2050 or whatever the goal is, the amount of world growth in that timespan will have polluted 1000 times what Sweden did.

[Warhippy]

3 minutes ago, canuckster19 said:

Yep, if by some modern miracle Sweden managed to be emission free by 2050 or whatever the goal is, the amount of world growth in that timespan will have polluted 1000 times what Sweden did.

Love those arguments.

 

They're not changing so I don't have to.

 

Let's hypothetically claim that "they" are living in an open sewer" and you are choosing to also live in an open sewer because they refuse to change.

 

Love those arguments.  I don't have to change because they won't change is the equivalent of I'm waiting for them to jump off the bridge so I can to.  Why be a leader when you can be a follower

[189lb enforcers?]

1 hour ago, inane said:

Easy to just say 'hypocrites' if someone does anything other than live in a cave eating berries. You talk about being real but it's phony to dismiss those of us who want something better but still live in the world where things aren't great. I want cleaner air, am I a hypocrite for still breathing? Does my opinion become invalid because I have the gall to continue breathing despite wanting cleaner air?

 

 

Who is us, though? 

Aren't I also an us? 

 

Did you stomp around in the streets of Canada, or some other commonwealth type country, where we have stringent environmental law while, like some ultra ignorant, disconnected, consumer seemingly unaware that your outsourced consumption is partly the reason the environment is threatened? 

 

I’m going to say, no, no you’re not that base and recognize, not deny, that there are better ways to protect the environment than be a disconnected poser, who likes clean air, but is unwilling to become the ideal, which I’m not suggesting... you should see my premium gasoline bill for my toys... 

 

I want clean air. That’s partly why I don’t live in Vancouver with the consumers who want others to clean up their act, but that’s a separate complaint I have with the footprint of the cities tree hugger types predominantly reside in and contribute to. 

 

Your opinion becomes somewhat invalid, yes, if you’re just some disconnected kid-consumer who wants to save the world, but consumes the things that destroy it. As long as there are people to consume the products, manufactured goods will pollute. Easy enough to understand, so why can’t people act on that? Yes, if you’re not doing your part, you’re not part of the solution.

 

Going as far as holding a rally or ripping across the ocean to save the environment in a fibreglass super-boat is a joke in itself, Gretta, but she, and many others, are to disconnected too know why. That, is kind of scary, in that people can organize themselves under any false pretences/practices, in the name of good. 

 

Hey, it’s my opinion here, not anything more. Your opinion matters, but so do your behaviours, as did the footprint of the protest. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by 189lb enforcers?