Here
and
Now

opinions

How did humans get to the brink of crashing climate? A long push for progress and energy to fuel it

19 Comments
By DANA BELTAJI

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.


19 Comments
Login to comment

“There are two kinds of boundaries to this economy,” said Fredrik Albritton Jonsson, a historian at the University of Chicago. “One is a sort of upper boundary of planetary limits” of what our natural world can withstand, “and then there’s a lower boundary, that would guarantee minimum social needs, entitlements, the right to education, the right to clean water, the right to a steady income.”

This is all encapsulated by the doughnut economic model of Kate Raworth, if anyone is interested. There are very few or no countries that manage this balance though Costa Rica seems to have some initiative to do so and is a world leader.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

People have been cautioning about this actively from the 1960s but were always denigrated and labeled as paranoid or too radical.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Climate change has been happening forever.

For billions of years and billions more to come.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Climate change has been happening forever.

Not due to the influence of a single species in such a short time span though.

Climate change deniers are really just people who don't understand time or chemistry in the way that infants can't.

For billions of years and billions more to come.

And there are those whose right wing doctrines prevent them from being allowed to understand it, because education is an 'elite' thing.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Climate change deniers are really just people who don't understand time or chemistry in the way that infants can't. 

Well, that is your opinion, I disagree.

And there are those whose right wing doctrines prevent them from being allowed to understand it, because education is an 'elite' thing.

Well, that is just a leftist talking point, the difference is, that many of us choose to believe another perspective to this debate, radical leftists say, you either believe the way we do or else, we will not be bullied, you can believe whatever and however you want and so will I and the left will not force me otherwise, it is not about religion or anything else, it is about the left doesn't get to tell me what to think or do. The media can censor, block me, delete my posts, and scream in my face, all acceptable, but how I or others that don't believe in this the way the left wants is my choice to believe in what I think is valid and what is not.

https://www.lootpress.com/10-reasons-to-prove-that-climate-change-is-a-hoax/

Now this is a perspective I can completely believe and relate to.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

What is undeniable is that as a result of the industrial revolution the planet has been polluted on an unprecedented scale.

Ironic that for all the conveniences and miracles of modernization it may lead to our downfall.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Is everything a left-right issue in your mind, Bass? Doesn't it get boring to see everything through one tiny lens? On the other hand, there does seem to be constellation of traits and opinions that align, making climate change denial an inevitability in some people.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Is everything a left-right issue in your mind, Bass?

No more than it is with the left.

Doesn't it get boring to see everything through one tiny lens?

My thoughts exactly.

On the other hand, there does seem to be constellation of traits and opinions that align, making climate change denial an inevitability in some people.

Because there are millions that take a different scientific view on the matter? What I don’t like about the out of control left is, there is no room for questioning or dissension, it’s either agree with us or we will silence you.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

@bass

Nice link! "It was cold in many places in 2014" sure convinced me that every scientific institution in the world is wrong.

Lootpress.com is owned by Occidental Oil. It operates from the same office as them.

You have been thoroughly mugged by the oil industry.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Lootpress stealing the truth. ROFL

1 ( +2 / -1 )

It’s so cold here in Kansai that I put my heater on!

I feel warm but dreadfully guilty…

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Anya Zilberstein, a historian of climate science at Concordia University in Montreal, highlighted Europeans colonizing the Americas in the 16th and 17th centuries as major factor of today's climate and environmental crises.

What does she think the alternative would have been? I get the impression she loathes Western culture but, like so many cocooned academics, is happy to wallow in her hypocrisy by enjoying the fruits of what Western culture has achieved for all its faults.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Nice link! "It was cold in many places in 2014" sure convinced me that every scientific institution in the world is wrong. 

Well, than you can believe that or anything you want when it pertains to Climate change, so shall I.

Lootpress.com is owned by Occidental Oil. It operates from the same office as them. 

Yes.

You have been thoroughly mugged by the oil industry.

I wholeheartedly support the oil industry, as we need it, without we are F*****!

Lootpress stealing the truth. ROFL

Bourbon? Lol

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

What does she think the alternative would have been?

Why would an alternative bee needed? describing how something that is happening originated in no way requires for an alternative, that would be much more valid for things that had an intrinsic negative value, specially if that was known even at the time.

Well, than you can believe that or anything you want when it pertains to Climate change, so shall I.

When the scientific consensus of the world can prove something that means that believing the opposite is simply wrong.

I wholeheartedly support the oil industry, as we need it,

But when you feel the need to believe things that can be demonstrated false to do it you make very clear that this support is unjustified.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

When the scientific consensus of the world can prove something that means that believing the opposite is simply wrong.

Well, that’s you, I could care less what the majority so called consensus think, it’s up to me if I want to accept another viewpoint and if I feel it makes rational and scientific reasoning that is logical to me, that is the viewpoint I will go with.

But when you feel the need to believe things that can be demonstrated false

Or proven corrected

to do it you make very clear that this support is unjustified.

I disagree, I’m always open to various viewpoints and not just what the left wants to force feed down my throat, and no, it has nothing to do with religion.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Well, that’s you, I could care less what the majority so called consensus think

As long as you make it clear you understand you are wrong but you don't want to accept it that is fine, the problem is when people pretend the science must be wrong and try to mislead others into making the same mistakes.

Pretending the scientific method is only right when you personally agree is of course another way to be irrational.

I disagree

That is of course of no importance, arguing to demonstrate your point is correct would be the only way to avoid that situation, giving up without even a single argument do mean you understand you can't do it, therefore accepting is wrong. The thing you are rejecting is not "religion" but logic, so you are explicitly recognizing being irrational.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

No more than it is with the left.

So, if your presumed opposition is narrow-minded, it's ok to not be better than them?

I feel it makes rational and scientific reasoning that is logical to me

Sounds like postmodern relativism to me. All views are as valid as any other as we spiral off into intellectual anarchy and ultimately might is right.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

So, if your presumed opposition is narrow-minded,

Says the people that want to band fossil fuels.

it's ok to not be better than them?

How about smarter?

Sounds like postmodern relativism to me.

I see

All views are as valid as any other as we spiral off into intellectual anarchy and ultimately might is right.

If you say so, doesn’t mean I have to take your viewpoint as fact or you mine

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites