You didn't watch the presidential debate last night

Oh, yeah, because that was definitely supposed to be taken that way.

 

nono I get it, when Ragic advocates for murdering millions is fine but when I say we should Probably just somehow arange for China, Russia and the US to nuke the Bane Shift out of eachother it's not.

 

Says who? I think that's hilarious too.

 

My conscience and my cat.

my cat does not outright state it he just disaproves of most of what I do unless it involves him getting scraps of fish.

 

what do you think *are* the realistic endgame priorities, then?

 

Humans: the real threat to life on Earth

Stephen Emmott

Saturday 29 June 2013 19.05 EDT

If population levels continue to rise at the current rate, our grandchildren will see the Earth plunged into an unprecedented environmental crisis, argues computational scientist Stephen Emmott in this extract from his book Ten Billion.

The only solution left to us is to change our behaviour, radically and globally, on every level. In short, we urgently need to consume less. A lot less. Radically less. And we need to conserve more. A lot more. To accomplish such a radical change in behaviour would also need radical government action. But as far as this kind of change is concerned, politicians are currently part of the problem, not part of the solution, because the decisions that need to be taken to implement significant behaviour change inevitably make politicians very unpopular – as they are all too aware.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jun/30/stephen-emmott-ten-billion

Bluntly honest experts believe the above needs to happen, or that MANY billions of humans need to die MUCH sooner than later... for the greater good.

President Obama had the House and Senate for 2 years, but he prioritized health insurance for people in America above saving the entire planet. Whoops!

The same folks stating carbon footprint of each person needs to "radically" decrease are for importing tens of millions of humans out of 3rd world and into 1st world. Please explain how this plan is anything other than 180 degrees in the wrong direction. Seems to be myopic, pathological altruism or nefarious. Thoughts?

 

wait first it isn't real then we need to kill billions? why are YOU flipflopping on this DJ?

grossly misrepresenting the problem and giving black and white extremist worldviews is not helpfull.

 

Curious that you think the above summary of other peoples' opinions is my opinion. Grossly misrepresenting the problem? You disagree with the experts?

I read the article in English, and then shared it here. It was NOT written by me Geressen. Please provide links to experts you believe are most accurate.

 

You represent these pieces as if they are your own opinion, you parse lines but never write your own. what are you hiding?

 

Quoting so that I have objective proof of silliness.

If I type a lot, peeps complain about length. If I opt for brevity, some falsely complain that I "never write" my opinions. If I say "be well", some see hatred. Curious.

 

Quoted as objective proof of continued condescending remarks.

 

I see strong disagreements as strong disagreements. Apparently you are focused on feelings. Your call. Be well. Off to work I go.

 

I am an animal in touch with what I am, not one pretending to be a robot, I hope that computes.

 

Beep boop

 

no matter what you do or say, it can be taken in a way you did not intend or, perhaps, conceive of. especially when not in person, or even virtually in person. that doesn't mean that you (or anyone else) should stop trying, but every so often it's understandable that you may want to re-assess and re-explain yourself when dealing with people that are prone to seeing strawmen instead of real people.


this applies to literally everyone in these threads.

 

*insert witty remark taking this post seriously and/or as a strawman*

sorry im half asleep, this is all I got

 

And sometimes people just don't like what you're saying and get prissy about it. Or pretend to be confused or misconstrue when the burn was quite clear. I guess they think it saves face to play dumb.



How's that for 'snooty'?

 

its not slander if its true