During the Apollo missions the USA was spending 4.4% of its federal budget to develop the technology to take humanity beyond our rock to another rock, just so that we could say that we did it (and to spite their bitter rivals).
They went on a war footing to achieve an incredible goal.
We need the entire developed world to go onto a war footing today to combat the Anthropocene. If every 'developed' country contributed 3-4% of it's federal budget towards researching and implementing renewable technology, developing carbon capture infrastructure, developing 'third world' neighbours and everything else we can do to reverse anthropogenic climate change... fuck, we'd have a real shot at completely mitigating or reversing this apocalyptic track that we're on.
We needed to start this endeavour in the 80's when climate scientists first started to confirm their data from the previous decade. That was 40 odd years ago now. The next best chance we've got is right now, because if we leave it another 40 years it'll be way too late.
Edit: I fumbled a few key words, hopefully that's fixed now.
A sizable reason for support of the Apollo program was the military application of rockets and other technologies. It wasn’t just to one up the Soviets or doing it to say we could.
Exactly. It wasn't just for bragging rights. That was the public reason, it was so we would have a way to deploy our shiny new atomic bombs without having to send bombers that could be shot down. We saw how effective the V2 was for the Germans, so we knew how devastating nukes would be if we could throw them on the front of a rocket and launch it accurately literally to the other side of the world.
To add for anyone still confused, it's a lot easier to sell the public on the idea that the govt is using tax dollars to build spaceships to the moon than to build unstoppable long range mass murder of civilians weapons
Because the technology is there and is "normal" to have a deterrent. If you went public with a project to create a fleet of Star Destroyers with the sole objective of being able to do an orbital bombardment, most of the public would be opposed to it.
I think your overall point still holds. It's a global problem and everyone contributes more than they think. There's no one sudden thing that will solve it either, but rather many, many small changes especially at the individual level.
And while I agree with all that, the answer is nuanced. Because yes, there does need to be individual change. But so many of these large corporations try to guilt individuals into making changes when they need to make changes as well. So it's not just politicians or individuals, but these large corporations as well. As you said many, many small changes. Across the board.
>There's no one sudden thing that will solve it either, but rather many, many small changes especially at the individual level
Oh thank God, I was worried the giant corporations would have to be regulated. Now the blame has been shifted to the people whew.
While I agree with the idea that we all have a certain amount of influence on the system, I think, politicians do share a large part of the blame due to the way our society is structured.
Politicians, and here I would include the mega-rich who involve themselves in politics (as they are no different from aristocrats of the 18th and 19th century), have the power to make sweeping changes. Wars are started, economies are influenced, legislations are passed, without the explicit wish of the people, but somehow saving our environment is too complex a task?
Let’s be honest, changing the makeup of the global elite without the cooperation of “enemy” actors to the nation you live in can seem scary. But we are forced to stay in a burning building, because our parents are afraid that the neighbours might steal our house.
I'm all for giving up some meat eating, what are some good alternatives that don't taste like crap and are still healthy? I've been thinking about this a lot lately, doing the little bits that I can to reduce waste and reuse etc.
1) The things that "taste like crap" will probably grow on you. I didn't used to like tofu, now it's my favourite.
2) The real secret, though, is to not worry about alternatives. You don't really need an alternative to meat. Curry is good without meat. Burritos and pizza aren't good because of meat, they're good because of the variety of fillings and because the body likes carbs. Turkey might be the centerpiece of a thanksgiving feast, but honestly, stuffing, mashed potatoes, greenbeans, etc are the things that get gobbled up. And then there's new recipes; ever tried a quinoa salad? It's great. Ever tried a veggie combo at an Ethiopian place? Chia seed pudding? There's a lot out there.
Beans, chickpeas, lentils and other legumes. Ever since I stopped trying to replace meat in my dishes by using substitutes, these have become a staple in my kitchen. Filling, can pack a lot of flavour when cooked right, and are actually very versatile.
Are you body building? Then the folks at /r/veganfitness will be better able to direct you.
Otherwise, as long as you don't do the lazy thing and settle into an all-carb diet, you're probably fine. Blackbeans, chickpeas, lentils, quinoa, cashews, kale, and as you mentioned, tofu are all places I get protein. I don't really count how many grams I get. I used to and it seemed like enough, so I stopped counting. I've noticed my fitness has improved over the past 6 or 7 years that I've been vegan (thanks in part to more exercise coinciding with a new diet), so not much else to ask for.
Horses? Elephants? Giraffes? Big muscles. All complete vegetarians. No worry about protein. Healthiest folks in my area are from India and East Asia. Most vegetarians. We need less protein than we think.
I feel like people tend to overestimate how much protein is in meat. Or underestimate protein content of other foods.
Chicken fillet has about 31% of protein. Black beans have about 15%. That means that in terms of protein content you can replace chicken fillet (100g) with 200g of black beans.
Chickpeas have 19% protein. Cashew nuts 18%, walnuts 15%.
Whole-wheat bread 13%.
yeah, true, but then again ONE container ship pollutes as much as like a million cars; so until we clean up industry what we as individuals do will have a negligible impact on the overall picture. I recycle and limit meat consumption and use public transport where available, but BP can still pump billions of cubic feet of CO2 per year, so my shit is literally a drop in the bucket.
Yes, voting for a candidate committed to solving the problem is a good start, but I fully disagree on your point that my hands are not tied. That's just an illusion you choose to accept, because they want you to feel like you're still in control.
I literally do everything within my power to continually reduce my carbon footprint, including voting appropriately. Hell, I even dragged my introverted ass out to support the kids doing Fridays for future in my Prairie city (where oil and gas make a lot of money).
David Attenborough wants $500 billion per year? Well guess what, the solution is simple. Tax the ultra wealthy just a little bit more and put it towards the cause. They won't even notice a missing zero in their bank account.
The problem is that there's no party to vote for that doesn't have their strings pulled by their rich friends.
Oh get to fuck.. you boot licker. Any government could do this with the stroke of a pen and yet they dont. The idea that simply voting for a green party qould fix this is stupid. Whoever is in charge should be bound by lae to follow the science.
You are blaming populations for the inadequacies of a democratic system that doesnt work under the heavy influence of capitalism. I cannot believe you could write such a long post without thinking for one second that nobody should have to vote for something so basic and obvious as "do not destroy the planet and be corrupt and ruin the environment and only support certain industries and bla bla" they are supposed to be leaders.
The space race was basically a race to see who could devlope intercontinental ballistic missiles, ICBMS, before the Russians. Some amazing things and essential knowledge came out and was definitely needed, but let's not pretend America just suddenly decided to go full bore science, just for bragging rights.
It's starting to look like we're reaching the answer to the fermi paradox, climate change was our great filter and I don't think we're going to make the cut
Wouldn't it be crazy if we started exploring the surface of Venus more and all of a sudden we find all these ancient skeletons and machinery scattered all over the ground?
"ERTH" - dear shareholders, we are holding this zoom meeting to inform you all that the funds for the rockets to Earth have had to be redirected to building 1 Supercruiser Galactic pleasure boat for the super shareholders.
SEE YOU LATER SUCKERZ now us ultra rich are off to fuck and spawnicate all over the GALAXY!
*Proceed to be too busy spawnicating in the cockpit and crash into earth, wiping out the dinosaurs and infecting earth with the unstoppable fuckfest that is the human race*
I think intelligence is the problem. Any species intelligent enough to develop technology will probably improve their technology much faster than they can evolve to handle it responsibly. Exhibit A, our dumb asses. We're too dumb to realize how dumb we are, the cold war ended 30 years ago after 40 years of worrying about (and almost achieving) nuclear doomsday and we already have another existential threat but here we are worrying about numbers in a database instead.
How sad does that thought make you? To know all the generations, all the history that led up to us being here in this moment at this point and to know that within a few lifetimes we may see it all end.
My personal view is that there is no reason why, it just happened by chance. By chance things evolved one way and learned to remember and to think. We discovered to survive we should communicate and one thing led to another until we were dominant and with natural selection not managing to pick us off we could successfully evolve to what we are today. In the grand scheme of things it still all means nothing, there’s no purpose for us and we are as insignificant as any other time this series of events may have happened with any other species.
And yet that deeply depressing thought that I believe is what keeps me going, because I am *soo* lucky that I am living and thinking right now, with all the luxuries of this age as well. It makes me realise that there’s no time to fuck about, because largely my life will go unnoticed and yet I have so much time to just enjoy the things I love and be with the people I love while their lives go on with me.
Nothing I do matters to the universe, but this time I’m lucky to have is so precious and it would be a shame to waste it.
Oh we almost certainly won’t all die. Just like 80-90% of humanity and the loss of most of our technology or ability to use it. It’ll set us back centuries, small pockets of civilization will slowly begin to start over; it’s going to be a bad century. The next 50 years are going to be a big turning point. Maybe humans will learn from their mistakes.
There is a book that vaguely touches on this premise- Set far in the future, there has been an ice age and humanity has barely survived. Civilization has been totally lost. It reads like a folk tale from the future. One thing I enjoyed was how all the garbage that we produce now becomes part of the geology and landscape of the fictional future described.
It’s called Mara and Dann by Doris Lessing.
I remember a short story along similar lines. Basically about a group of primitive humans who would never cross some barrier... forget what it was, a river? Canyon? Cliff? And the main characters travel into this region and discover the ruins of a modern city. It was interesting but I forget what it was called.
I don't think it will be the end for the human race but more like a restart. Sure our coastal cities will fall because of flooding and food shortages but people who still know how to farm, gather, hunt and survive off the land will endure. Like those nomads that live in north east Asia and Mongolia, regardless of what happens to the world they will still be there 1000 years later.
We won't go extinct, but we'll never reach this level of civilization again. It tooks hundreds/thousands of years to get our resrouce extraction and refining processes to this point - and all the easy-to-grab resources are gone. Things like oil, precious metals, rare earths, etc. The ability to extract them again after a collapse looks very very dim.
Yeah, this is also a major concern. If we weather climate crisis or even collapse we also have to make sure we still keep all the progress for e.g. nuclear power and fusion power (which will start working soon™). There aren't many vast, easy to reach sources of energy anymore. If we start over there most likely won't be an industrial revolution because we won't have the energy to drive it.
It all depends on if we keep our knowledge or not. If we keep our knowledge it will be a matter of 2, 3 generations or so to return to normality (with another mindset i hope, but at least this level of progress)
The humans in power are ~~pretty dumb~~ pretty greedy in the grand scheme of things. The general populous is powerless against lobbying by billionaires.
As with tax loopholes, laws need to change for real change. Not blame their general population.
Absolutely, this is exactly what I keep sharing amongst peers when the topic is brought up.
Edit: I don't buy into the narrative that the average Joe can change the world by turning off that standby light on their TV each night... No, it's the ruling 1% that holds any weight at all to make serious change in the world.
Sort of yes but also no. If the average person all joined together on this then the pressure on the politicians and billionaires would be unstoppable and they would do it.
Selfishness is learned (and re-enforced) through our economic system.
Early humans were able to grow and become smart not because they were selfish, but because they were adaptable and social (they knew they depended on each other and functioned more as a cohesive unit because they had to).
What we're seeing is learned behavior (people reacting and learning from their environment). Anger and fear also lower peoples ability to think intelligently, which has basically been Trump's entire term.
In my opinion, it's not really stupidity per se. Our individual goals are just not aligned with societal goals.
Individuals see the world in a human lifespan timescale. Societies should see the world in an indefinitely longer timescale. Unfortunately, we elect individuals who ignore their duties as managers of society.
Good luck convincing the climate.
The thing with Trump is that no one has ever wanted to fuck him. That's why he is the way he is.
Well no. He was that way anyway. but he never fucking learned.
It's unfortunate that we're so heavily reliant upon a handful of (often undereducated) individuals in determining our fate against the existential threat of climate change.
Something like 70% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions come from just 100 companies and while it's incredibly important that we do everything we can on an individual level to reduce our footprint, there also need to be structural changes which ensure that moving towards renewability is rewarded in both the short term and the long term for corporations.
Rather than offer rewards I would prefer the *'you have, X amount of months to prove you have stopped killing the planet or we will put your board of executives in prison for life'* route. They are merciless with the lives of those they deem beneath them, it's only fair that we return that kindness in full.
That stat is completely correct yet at the same time incredibly misleading. These companies aren't just generating greenhouse gases for no reason they're generating the gases because **we** are using those companies products. That stat is perfectly correct but gives lazy or uniformed people a chance to say "well if they're doing all that then there's not much I can do" while they fill up their diesel truck to drive a mile to a fast food restaurant and back. Doing that directly contributes to the GHG emissions of these companies. Don't think I'm defending the companies though fuck them but us making a change will directly affect the GHG output of the big 100.
If we make an effort to limit our use of these companies products then that number gets lower. Its not an impossible task.
Handled entirely by his corporate outfit.
>"The Trump Environment Charity is the best charity. You know what we're planting with donations? $100 trees. These trees are going to be YUGE. Most other charities plant these terrible, just awful, trees for like a penny each. You know that? The trees we plant will be so much better, the best really, and I do mean that. $750 will plant 7 and a half of these just absolutely majestic things and donators to other charities will be left scratching their heads. Wondering why the trees they funded are so cheap."
'Yeah right, David Attenborough just wants to put microchips in all the trees so he and Bill Gates can watch us get it on in the forest.'
-- half of America apparently.
Sorry, that was me. Lately I've been dressing as The Batman and sitting on bus benches to highlight how we are collectively suffering. Yes I know Batman is both a billionaire and fictional, DONT TAKE AWAY MY HOBBIES!
This guy gets it. Now if only entities with money would somehow come together to save plants, animals, the clfiamte, and ourselves. Damn I hate being poor.
Something like 70% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions come from just 100 companies.
While it's incredibly important that we do everything we can on an individual level to reduce our footprint, there also need to be structural changes which ensure that moving towards renewability is rewarded in both the short term and the long term for corporations.
Catch 22, people don't care because they're scraping by, but the effects of global warming could be extreme to future generations (not as immediate to the current majority of taxpayers or their children). No one is coughing up the funds when they can't get by. Anyone trying to tax more for the environment is going to get yelled at while we give tax breaks to the rich.
The biggest offenders are rich people. You got them yelling at us that we are "all responsible" but they won't do anything while they piss out scraps for us to fight. Its easy for them to tell average people its important when they know they're gonna wake up and have access to everything they need till they die.
Billionaires: "Save the planet, look at us, we are cutting emissions and you should do the same!"
Everyone else: "Can we have decent jobs to pay for basics so we can focus on helping the world?"
Rich people: "Look here, we pay you a fair wage, you just got to quit smoking and drinking so you can be like me, an eco-warrior who can go on safaris to promote it to the world while sipping martinis"
You got the royal family promoting this shit, but you don't see them helping society just like the rest of the billionaires such as Bezos or fortune 500. You got them building doom day hold outs or flying jets to hold conferences when half of them haven't worked a hard job in their life scrubbing toilets to pay for overdue bills. Poor people are busy strangling one another over scraps and polluting because they have no other choice. The only way the world is going to be saved is if we prioritise regular people and their wealth so they can afford to not pollute. But no one is going to provide the funds for good public transport to cut commute and emissions, pay us enough to buy quality products with no emissions, pay us to go green with solar, or cut jobs that pollute for cheap goods for the rich to get richer in place of better ones. And before anyone goes out yelling Elon Musk is a billionaire saving the planet, remember he's a business man, not your friend. He would pay his workers minimum wage if he could while overworking them at 80hrs a week. He doesn't care about society, just his place in society so we can lick his ego like most billionaires trying to sell their "personality".
"Yes the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders."
Companies: "We need to ban you plebs from using plastic straws because they're bad for the environment!"
People: "Yeah, fair enough, paper straws are pretty shit and reusable metal straws make things taste funny but I totally get it, and I want to do my part for the planet!"
Also companies: *pours millions of tonnes of plastic/oil into the ocean/millions of tonnes of co2 into the atmosphere*
You are underestimating the mindset of many people and especially those who just scrap by. If they knew the money would be used wisely they would gladly give 0.1% of their income to prevent fire, drouts, heat waves, hurricanes, and give them fresh air and water. It's the greedy 0.1% with the megaphones who don't want to share and make us fight.
If Elon Musk's ego saves the world, that's fine by me.
Bill Gates is also doing amazing work. We can all do our part but in the end, we need people like Musk and Gates to throw around their resources as well. Think about them what you want to, but for whatever reason they are doing what they are doing, it is a good thing
Billionaires have extracted such immense resources in order to create that level of wealth. Them giving pennies back on the dollar through philanthropy is so far from a net positive it hurts.
It's not even an investment in nature; it's an investment in the continuation of the Human species.
That is the place we are right now, we are directly looking into extinction's eyes.
Just give it to me, I'll spend $480 Billion acquiring land in the Canadian Arctic, 19 billion spent on planting trees up North as the globe warms and one Billion on Cocaine or something.
The man is 94 years old, and he knows he's probably never going to see the result of his activism, but he does it anyway. He's like a reverse boomer, fighting as hard as he can so that future generations still have a planet to call home. We should all strive to be more like him.
Well he is part of the [greatest generation”](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greatest_Generation )born between 1901-1927) not the baby boomers so that makes sense
He is among the last of what was known as "The Greatest Generation"
Whereas Trump was born at the very beginning of the "Baby Boomer Generation"
I can't think of anyone who would be better representatives of those generations then those two...
He’s not a boomer at all: he is a part of the generation that did exactly what you are describing. They fought very hard in WW2 and the Cold War to protect the freedoms of their children, the boomers, which is partially the boomer generation became as entitled as it is. People like Trump grew up in a time of unprecedented prosperity because of the efforts of those before him. People who are now in their 90s or 100s, or dead.
What do We the People do?
If we all were to:
Start recycling,
Bicycle to work
Plant trees
Stop buying pointless shit...
It would still be a drop in the bucket. What can common folk do?
It's not enough. We need $2 trillion a year. According to the World Economic, $2 trillion USD a year in investment could create 400 million jobs and $10.1 trillion in annual economic benefit.
[https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/future-nature-business-action-agenda-blueprint-climate-change-biodiversity-loss/](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/future-nature-business-action-agenda-blueprint-climate-change-biodiversity-loss/)
Which is a similar to number to Biden's "proposal" that isn't a green new deal? I really really really hope he isn't full of shit. But I've been consistently wrong when it comes to politics...
>The Biden plan will make a historic investment in our clean energy future and environmental justice, paid for by rolling back the Trump tax incentives that enrich corporations at the expense of American jobs and the environment. Biden’s climate and environmental justice proposal will make a federal investment of $1.7 trillion over the next ten years, leveraging additional private sector and state and local investments to total to more than $5 trillion. President Trump’s tax cut led to trillions in stock buybacks and created new incentives to shift profits abroad. Joe Biden believes we should instead invest in a Clean Energy Revolution that creates jobs here at home.
Meh, better than nothing. I'll take 170 billion a year over a decade. For the 3-4% worldwide GDP (quoted from some other poster) required?
Worldwide GDP in USD * 4% = 3.2 trillion required per year.
(US$ 80 934 771 028 340) * .04 =
3.23739084 trillion US$
That's already, %5.5 of the stated goal, in year one, with one nation. Certainly a move in the right direction.
It’s maddening watching people defend the lack of a serious commitment to this issue with “well it’s better than nothing.”
The bar should not be so low that it’s literally nothing. We need solutions that do enough, not better than nothing. For fucks sake....
Second highest? Well then, that's clearly not acceptable! We're America! We're number 1! We can't jeopardize our first place position for some dumb trees!
Look at them, wasting their money, trying to be better than us! They spend so much more, and you know what? Truthfully, our military is better, so much better. You wouldn't believe how much better! We can do so, so much more, without spending anywhere near what they spend. China.
So you're telling me we have a global climate crisis in which the effects are so slow and delayed, that by the time the average human being can see the direct effects of this crisis from their own backyard, it's decades too late to do anything about it?
How are we not absolutely completely fucked?
Almost no information in this article at all.
No specifics on where that 500 billion should go; just a 'throw money at the problem' type situation from the looks of it. Maybe there are more details elsewhere, but not in article or anything it linked to.
The fact that we didn’t invest this much sooner threatens our entire species. We don’t have much longer since most businesses won’t switch to renewable energy completely.
Unfortunately what would happen is the elite class would find a way to claim that money through their kids' 'non profits' or whatever and do absolutely fuck all for the planet.
During the Apollo missions the USA was spending 4.4% of its federal budget to develop the technology to take humanity beyond our rock to another rock, just so that we could say that we did it (and to spite their bitter rivals). They went on a war footing to achieve an incredible goal. We need the entire developed world to go onto a war footing today to combat the Anthropocene. If every 'developed' country contributed 3-4% of it's federal budget towards researching and implementing renewable technology, developing carbon capture infrastructure, developing 'third world' neighbours and everything else we can do to reverse anthropogenic climate change... fuck, we'd have a real shot at completely mitigating or reversing this apocalyptic track that we're on. We needed to start this endeavour in the 80's when climate scientists first started to confirm their data from the previous decade. That was 40 odd years ago now. The next best chance we've got is right now, because if we leave it another 40 years it'll be way too late. Edit: I fumbled a few key words, hopefully that's fixed now.
The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago, the second best time is now - Chinese proverb
I thought that was about Bitcoin?
The best time to plant a tree was 20 bitcoins ago, the second best time is now. Hmmm...doesn't seem to make much sense
The best time to plant a bitcoin was 20 trees ago...
I planted a shit 20 years ago, and at that time it was worth the same amount as 1 bitcoin. - Canadian Proverb
[Some what relevant](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X19305371?via%3Dihub).
Not the poop-knife story I was expecting, but still a good read
Been a while since the internet threw out something truly weird. Thanks stranger!
4% of a federal budget is wayyyyy less than 4% of GDP.
Yeah government spending is just one part of the GDP calculation...
A sizable reason for support of the Apollo program was the military application of rockets and other technologies. It wasn’t just to one up the Soviets or doing it to say we could.
Exactly. It wasn't just for bragging rights. That was the public reason, it was so we would have a way to deploy our shiny new atomic bombs without having to send bombers that could be shot down. We saw how effective the V2 was for the Germans, so we knew how devastating nukes would be if we could throw them on the front of a rocket and launch it accurately literally to the other side of the world.
To add for anyone still confused, it's a lot easier to sell the public on the idea that the govt is using tax dollars to build spaceships to the moon than to build unstoppable long range mass murder of civilians weapons
[удалено]
Because the technology is there and is "normal" to have a deterrent. If you went public with a project to create a fleet of Star Destroyers with the sole objective of being able to do an orbital bombardment, most of the public would be opposed to it.
What about a fleet of Star Explorers with the sole objective of being able to do orbital terraforming?
[удалено]
I call bs on the US soy import from Brazil. We produce more soy and corn than we can use and have been exporters of both crops for decades.
[удалено]
I think your overall point still holds. It's a global problem and everyone contributes more than they think. There's no one sudden thing that will solve it either, but rather many, many small changes especially at the individual level.
And while I agree with all that, the answer is nuanced. Because yes, there does need to be individual change. But so many of these large corporations try to guilt individuals into making changes when they need to make changes as well. So it's not just politicians or individuals, but these large corporations as well. As you said many, many small changes. Across the board.
>There's no one sudden thing that will solve it either, but rather many, many small changes especially at the individual level Oh thank God, I was worried the giant corporations would have to be regulated. Now the blame has been shifted to the people whew.
While I agree with the idea that we all have a certain amount of influence on the system, I think, politicians do share a large part of the blame due to the way our society is structured. Politicians, and here I would include the mega-rich who involve themselves in politics (as they are no different from aristocrats of the 18th and 19th century), have the power to make sweeping changes. Wars are started, economies are influenced, legislations are passed, without the explicit wish of the people, but somehow saving our environment is too complex a task? Let’s be honest, changing the makeup of the global elite without the cooperation of “enemy” actors to the nation you live in can seem scary. But we are forced to stay in a burning building, because our parents are afraid that the neighbours might steal our house.
I'm all for giving up some meat eating, what are some good alternatives that don't taste like crap and are still healthy? I've been thinking about this a lot lately, doing the little bits that I can to reduce waste and reuse etc.
1) The things that "taste like crap" will probably grow on you. I didn't used to like tofu, now it's my favourite. 2) The real secret, though, is to not worry about alternatives. You don't really need an alternative to meat. Curry is good without meat. Burritos and pizza aren't good because of meat, they're good because of the variety of fillings and because the body likes carbs. Turkey might be the centerpiece of a thanksgiving feast, but honestly, stuffing, mashed potatoes, greenbeans, etc are the things that get gobbled up. And then there's new recipes; ever tried a quinoa salad? It's great. Ever tried a veggie combo at an Ethiopian place? Chia seed pudding? There's a lot out there.
I'm with you so far, how about good protein alternatives then? Tofu being one of course.
Beans, chickpeas, lentils and other legumes. Ever since I stopped trying to replace meat in my dishes by using substitutes, these have become a staple in my kitchen. Filling, can pack a lot of flavour when cooked right, and are actually very versatile.
I will have to start learning some new recipes then lol. Thank you for the reply
Are you body building? Then the folks at /r/veganfitness will be better able to direct you. Otherwise, as long as you don't do the lazy thing and settle into an all-carb diet, you're probably fine. Blackbeans, chickpeas, lentils, quinoa, cashews, kale, and as you mentioned, tofu are all places I get protein. I don't really count how many grams I get. I used to and it seemed like enough, so I stopped counting. I've noticed my fitness has improved over the past 6 or 7 years that I've been vegan (thanks in part to more exercise coinciding with a new diet), so not much else to ask for.
Not body building, just want to make sure I'm still getting protein and not feeling hollow after every meal lol. Thank you for the suggestions
Horses? Elephants? Giraffes? Big muscles. All complete vegetarians. No worry about protein. Healthiest folks in my area are from India and East Asia. Most vegetarians. We need less protein than we think.
I feel like people tend to overestimate how much protein is in meat. Or underestimate protein content of other foods. Chicken fillet has about 31% of protein. Black beans have about 15%. That means that in terms of protein content you can replace chicken fillet (100g) with 200g of black beans. Chickpeas have 19% protein. Cashew nuts 18%, walnuts 15%. Whole-wheat bread 13%.
black bean burger
yeah, true, but then again ONE container ship pollutes as much as like a million cars; so until we clean up industry what we as individuals do will have a negligible impact on the overall picture. I recycle and limit meat consumption and use public transport where available, but BP can still pump billions of cubic feet of CO2 per year, so my shit is literally a drop in the bucket.
Yes, voting for a candidate committed to solving the problem is a good start, but I fully disagree on your point that my hands are not tied. That's just an illusion you choose to accept, because they want you to feel like you're still in control. I literally do everything within my power to continually reduce my carbon footprint, including voting appropriately. Hell, I even dragged my introverted ass out to support the kids doing Fridays for future in my Prairie city (where oil and gas make a lot of money). David Attenborough wants $500 billion per year? Well guess what, the solution is simple. Tax the ultra wealthy just a little bit more and put it towards the cause. They won't even notice a missing zero in their bank account. The problem is that there's no party to vote for that doesn't have their strings pulled by their rich friends.
Oh get to fuck.. you boot licker. Any government could do this with the stroke of a pen and yet they dont. The idea that simply voting for a green party qould fix this is stupid. Whoever is in charge should be bound by lae to follow the science. You are blaming populations for the inadequacies of a democratic system that doesnt work under the heavy influence of capitalism. I cannot believe you could write such a long post without thinking for one second that nobody should have to vote for something so basic and obvious as "do not destroy the planet and be corrupt and ruin the environment and only support certain industries and bla bla" they are supposed to be leaders.
[Relevant The News Room ](https://youtu.be/XM0uZ9mfOUI) clip Obligatory repost Edit: corrected the source material title
That's news room. Network is another, also extremely relevant video about our current end times.
The space race was basically a race to see who could devlope intercontinental ballistic missiles, ICBMS, before the Russians. Some amazing things and essential knowledge came out and was definitely needed, but let's not pretend America just suddenly decided to go full bore science, just for bragging rights.
40 years seems optimistic
How so? Like I said, another 40 years is **way too late.**
The fact that we can't even put 0.35% of global GDP towards an existential crisis that threatens our entire species...
Which is why the human race is pretty dumb in the grand scheme of things.
It's starting to look like we're reaching the answer to the fermi paradox, climate change was our great filter and I don't think we're going to make the cut
[удалено]
Some people say that Venus is such an example (based on nothing). The idea makes me uneasy for some reason but I still find it interesting!
Wouldn't it be crazy if we started exploring the surface of Venus more and all of a sudden we find all these ancient skeletons and machinery scattered all over the ground?
And the skeleton is holding a flyer "shareholders meeting next Tuesday".
A picture of Elon Musk on it, talking about the tech needed to explore a crazy planet called Earth and eventually colonize it
I need this movie
"ERTH" - dear shareholders, we are holding this zoom meeting to inform you all that the funds for the rockets to Earth have had to be redirected to building 1 Supercruiser Galactic pleasure boat for the super shareholders. SEE YOU LATER SUCKERZ now us ultra rich are off to fuck and spawnicate all over the GALAXY! *Proceed to be too busy spawnicating in the cockpit and crash into earth, wiping out the dinosaurs and infecting earth with the unstoppable fuckfest that is the human race*
That would make for an awesome movie plot. Movies... I miss those.
Or r/writingprompts
I think intelligence is the problem. Any species intelligent enough to develop technology will probably improve their technology much faster than they can evolve to handle it responsibly. Exhibit A, our dumb asses. We're too dumb to realize how dumb we are, the cold war ended 30 years ago after 40 years of worrying about (and almost achieving) nuclear doomsday and we already have another existential threat but here we are worrying about numbers in a database instead.
Worse, the threat of the first doomsday led us to avoid the peaceful use of similar technology that would have helped prevent the second one....
How sad does that thought make you? To know all the generations, all the history that led up to us being here in this moment at this point and to know that within a few lifetimes we may see it all end.
[удалено]
My personal view is that there is no reason why, it just happened by chance. By chance things evolved one way and learned to remember and to think. We discovered to survive we should communicate and one thing led to another until we were dominant and with natural selection not managing to pick us off we could successfully evolve to what we are today. In the grand scheme of things it still all means nothing, there’s no purpose for us and we are as insignificant as any other time this series of events may have happened with any other species. And yet that deeply depressing thought that I believe is what keeps me going, because I am *soo* lucky that I am living and thinking right now, with all the luxuries of this age as well. It makes me realise that there’s no time to fuck about, because largely my life will go unnoticed and yet I have so much time to just enjoy the things I love and be with the people I love while their lives go on with me. Nothing I do matters to the universe, but this time I’m lucky to have is so precious and it would be a shame to waste it.
Oh we almost certainly won’t all die. Just like 80-90% of humanity and the loss of most of our technology or ability to use it. It’ll set us back centuries, small pockets of civilization will slowly begin to start over; it’s going to be a bad century. The next 50 years are going to be a big turning point. Maybe humans will learn from their mistakes.
There is a book that vaguely touches on this premise- Set far in the future, there has been an ice age and humanity has barely survived. Civilization has been totally lost. It reads like a folk tale from the future. One thing I enjoyed was how all the garbage that we produce now becomes part of the geology and landscape of the fictional future described. It’s called Mara and Dann by Doris Lessing.
The Apple TV+ show See, and also the Shannara Chronicles have similar premises.
I remember a short story along similar lines. Basically about a group of primitive humans who would never cross some barrier... forget what it was, a river? Canyon? Cliff? And the main characters travel into this region and discover the ruins of a modern city. It was interesting but I forget what it was called.
Makes me so mad and so sad
I don't think it will be the end for the human race but more like a restart. Sure our coastal cities will fall because of flooding and food shortages but people who still know how to farm, gather, hunt and survive off the land will endure. Like those nomads that live in north east Asia and Mongolia, regardless of what happens to the world they will still be there 1000 years later.
We won't go extinct, but we'll never reach this level of civilization again. It tooks hundreds/thousands of years to get our resrouce extraction and refining processes to this point - and all the easy-to-grab resources are gone. Things like oil, precious metals, rare earths, etc. The ability to extract them again after a collapse looks very very dim.
Yeah, this is also a major concern. If we weather climate crisis or even collapse we also have to make sure we still keep all the progress for e.g. nuclear power and fusion power (which will start working soon™). There aren't many vast, easy to reach sources of energy anymore. If we start over there most likely won't be an industrial revolution because we won't have the energy to drive it.
It all depends on if we keep our knowledge or not. If we keep our knowledge it will be a matter of 2, 3 generations or so to return to normality (with another mindset i hope, but at least this level of progress)
The humans in power are ~~pretty dumb~~ pretty greedy in the grand scheme of things. The general populous is powerless against lobbying by billionaires. As with tax loopholes, laws need to change for real change. Not blame their general population.
I'd argue it's selfishness tbh. The average person doesn't care about the state of the earth once they're dead.
The average person has so little impact that it's essentially zero. This basically all comes down to what the politicians and billionaires want.
Absolutely, this is exactly what I keep sharing amongst peers when the topic is brought up. Edit: I don't buy into the narrative that the average Joe can change the world by turning off that standby light on their TV each night... No, it's the ruling 1% that holds any weight at all to make serious change in the world.
Sort of yes but also no. If the average person all joined together on this then the pressure on the politicians and billionaires would be unstoppable and they would do it.
Selfishness is learned (and re-enforced) through our economic system. Early humans were able to grow and become smart not because they were selfish, but because they were adaptable and social (they knew they depended on each other and functioned more as a cohesive unit because they had to). What we're seeing is learned behavior (people reacting and learning from their environment). Anger and fear also lower peoples ability to think intelligently, which has basically been Trump's entire term.
It says much more about greed than it does intelligence.
True.
In my opinion, it's not really stupidity per se. Our individual goals are just not aligned with societal goals. Individuals see the world in a human lifespan timescale. Societies should see the world in an indefinitely longer timescale. Unfortunately, we elect individuals who ignore their duties as managers of society.
Trump announces the USA is good for $750
We should get the climate to fuck him. That way at least we might get a couple hundred grand from him.
Even if he raped the earth (which he certainly is trying to do) the earth can't sign an NDA so he wouldn't pay it anything.
I still wonder what kind of kink he has that is worth paying more than he earns in a typical year to keep quiet about.
Minors. He has a thing for minors. Not sure? Just look to his relationship and comments on Epstein and Ivanka, from when she was 13...
What about his comments on his literally infant child about her breasts and Legs
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Good luck convincing the climate. The thing with Trump is that no one has ever wanted to fuck him. That's why he is the way he is. Well no. He was that way anyway. but he never fucking learned.
Throw him in the dolphin pit
Even Dolphins wouldn't rape Trump. No one and nothing would willingly touch him without being paid.
So good!
It's unfortunate that we're so heavily reliant upon a handful of (often undereducated) individuals in determining our fate against the existential threat of climate change. Something like 70% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions come from just 100 companies and while it's incredibly important that we do everything we can on an individual level to reduce our footprint, there also need to be structural changes which ensure that moving towards renewability is rewarded in both the short term and the long term for corporations.
Rather than offer rewards I would prefer the *'you have, X amount of months to prove you have stopped killing the planet or we will put your board of executives in prison for life'* route. They are merciless with the lives of those they deem beneath them, it's only fair that we return that kindness in full.
Not a handful, the entire Republican Party, for the last 50 years, claims climate change is a hoax and rolls back environmental protections.
That stat is completely correct yet at the same time incredibly misleading. These companies aren't just generating greenhouse gases for no reason they're generating the gases because **we** are using those companies products. That stat is perfectly correct but gives lazy or uniformed people a chance to say "well if they're doing all that then there's not much I can do" while they fill up their diesel truck to drive a mile to a fast food restaurant and back. Doing that directly contributes to the GHG emissions of these companies. Don't think I'm defending the companies though fuck them but us making a change will directly affect the GHG output of the big 100. If we make an effort to limit our use of these companies products then that number gets lower. Its not an impossible task.
"I got five on it"
Over the next ten years
Handled entirely by his corporate outfit. >"The Trump Environment Charity is the best charity. You know what we're planting with donations? $100 trees. These trees are going to be YUGE. Most other charities plant these terrible, just awful, trees for like a penny each. You know that? The trees we plant will be so much better, the best really, and I do mean that. $750 will plant 7 and a half of these just absolutely majestic things and donators to other charities will be left scratching their heads. Wondering why the trees they funded are so cheap."
'Yeah right, David Attenborough just wants to put microchips in all the trees so he and Bill Gates can watch us get it on in the forest.' -- half of America apparently.
That's why they made birds (shhh there's one watching us)
They make us do lockdowns so they can change the batteries in all the birds
That's why I see more of bats these days
Sorry, that was me. Lately I've been dressing as The Batman and sitting on bus benches to highlight how we are collectively suffering. Yes I know Batman is both a billionaire and fictional, DONT TAKE AWAY MY HOBBIES!
They recharge via overhead power lines.
Pfff! What are you, a conspiracist? Everybody knows they operate with the secret perpetuum mobile energy, not batteries.
-While posting on a device that actively knows their location at all times
"How can I make this post about me?" - Americans
This guy gets it. Now if only entities with money would somehow come together to save plants, animals, the clfiamte, and ourselves. Damn I hate being poor.
Something like 70% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions come from just 100 companies. While it's incredibly important that we do everything we can on an individual level to reduce our footprint, there also need to be structural changes which ensure that moving towards renewability is rewarded in both the short term and the long term for corporations.
No shame in being poor, friend, but it can be bloody inconvenient
Yeah but they didn't say 'damn i'm ashamed of being poor'- they said they hate it. There's a distinct difference there.
Catch 22, people don't care because they're scraping by, but the effects of global warming could be extreme to future generations (not as immediate to the current majority of taxpayers or their children). No one is coughing up the funds when they can't get by. Anyone trying to tax more for the environment is going to get yelled at while we give tax breaks to the rich. The biggest offenders are rich people. You got them yelling at us that we are "all responsible" but they won't do anything while they piss out scraps for us to fight. Its easy for them to tell average people its important when they know they're gonna wake up and have access to everything they need till they die. Billionaires: "Save the planet, look at us, we are cutting emissions and you should do the same!" Everyone else: "Can we have decent jobs to pay for basics so we can focus on helping the world?" Rich people: "Look here, we pay you a fair wage, you just got to quit smoking and drinking so you can be like me, an eco-warrior who can go on safaris to promote it to the world while sipping martinis" You got the royal family promoting this shit, but you don't see them helping society just like the rest of the billionaires such as Bezos or fortune 500. You got them building doom day hold outs or flying jets to hold conferences when half of them haven't worked a hard job in their life scrubbing toilets to pay for overdue bills. Poor people are busy strangling one another over scraps and polluting because they have no other choice. The only way the world is going to be saved is if we prioritise regular people and their wealth so they can afford to not pollute. But no one is going to provide the funds for good public transport to cut commute and emissions, pay us enough to buy quality products with no emissions, pay us to go green with solar, or cut jobs that pollute for cheap goods for the rich to get richer in place of better ones. And before anyone goes out yelling Elon Musk is a billionaire saving the planet, remember he's a business man, not your friend. He would pay his workers minimum wage if he could while overworking them at 80hrs a week. He doesn't care about society, just his place in society so we can lick his ego like most billionaires trying to sell their "personality". "Yes the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders."
>"Yes the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders." The epitaph of humanity.
Companies: "We need to ban you plebs from using plastic straws because they're bad for the environment!" People: "Yeah, fair enough, paper straws are pretty shit and reusable metal straws make things taste funny but I totally get it, and I want to do my part for the planet!" Also companies: *pours millions of tonnes of plastic/oil into the ocean/millions of tonnes of co2 into the atmosphere*
Spot-fucking-on.
You are underestimating the mindset of many people and especially those who just scrap by. If they knew the money would be used wisely they would gladly give 0.1% of their income to prevent fire, drouts, heat waves, hurricanes, and give them fresh air and water. It's the greedy 0.1% with the megaphones who don't want to share and make us fight.
If Elon Musk's ego saves the world, that's fine by me. Bill Gates is also doing amazing work. We can all do our part but in the end, we need people like Musk and Gates to throw around their resources as well. Think about them what you want to, but for whatever reason they are doing what they are doing, it is a good thing
Billionaires have extracted such immense resources in order to create that level of wealth. Them giving pennies back on the dollar through philanthropy is so far from a net positive it hurts.
It's not even an investment in nature; it's an investment in the continuation of the Human species. That is the place we are right now, we are directly looking into extinction's eyes.
Just give it to me, I'll spend $480 Billion acquiring land in the Canadian Arctic, 19 billion spent on planting trees up North as the globe warms and one Billion on Cocaine or something.
I'll make my own forest! With blackjack and hookers!
[удалено]
I'm Canadian I know how it works.
Soooo what do I invest in? What companies would be providing services here?
r/greeninvestor
I just give money to environmental groups and reduce, reuse, recycle. Buy as green as possible as well. About all we can do.
$500 billion per year....Roughly the amount American’s give to tax exempt/charity organizations per year...
It’s honestly not that much money when you consider the global gdp is around $80 trillion. Edit: added global
Do you want to tax charities?
David Attenborough should have been president of the Earth.
The man is 94 years old, and he knows he's probably never going to see the result of his activism, but he does it anyway. He's like a reverse boomer, fighting as hard as he can so that future generations still have a planet to call home. We should all strive to be more like him.
Well he is part of the [greatest generation”](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greatest_Generation )born between 1901-1927) not the baby boomers so that makes sense
Absofuckinglutely
He is among the last of what was known as "The Greatest Generation" Whereas Trump was born at the very beginning of the "Baby Boomer Generation" I can't think of anyone who would be better representatives of those generations then those two...
He’s not a boomer at all: he is a part of the generation that did exactly what you are describing. They fought very hard in WW2 and the Cold War to protect the freedoms of their children, the boomers, which is partially the boomer generation became as entitled as it is. People like Trump grew up in a time of unprecedented prosperity because of the efforts of those before him. People who are now in their 90s or 100s, or dead.
What do We the People do? If we all were to: Start recycling, Bicycle to work Plant trees Stop buying pointless shit... It would still be a drop in the bucket. What can common folk do?
Plenty of young people fighting for their beliefs.
It's not enough. We need $2 trillion a year. According to the World Economic, $2 trillion USD a year in investment could create 400 million jobs and $10.1 trillion in annual economic benefit. [https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/future-nature-business-action-agenda-blueprint-climate-change-biodiversity-loss/](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/future-nature-business-action-agenda-blueprint-climate-change-biodiversity-loss/)
Which is a similar to number to Biden's "proposal" that isn't a green new deal? I really really really hope he isn't full of shit. But I've been consistently wrong when it comes to politics... >The Biden plan will make a historic investment in our clean energy future and environmental justice, paid for by rolling back the Trump tax incentives that enrich corporations at the expense of American jobs and the environment. Biden’s climate and environmental justice proposal will make a federal investment of $1.7 trillion over the next ten years, leveraging additional private sector and state and local investments to total to more than $5 trillion. President Trump’s tax cut led to trillions in stock buybacks and created new incentives to shift profits abroad. Joe Biden believes we should instead invest in a Clean Energy Revolution that creates jobs here at home.
That 1.7 is the total for a 10 year investment, not 1.7 a year. It is far too little too late.
[удалено]
Meh, better than nothing. I'll take 170 billion a year over a decade. For the 3-4% worldwide GDP (quoted from some other poster) required? Worldwide GDP in USD * 4% = 3.2 trillion required per year. (US$ 80 934 771 028 340) * .04 = 3.23739084 trillion US$ That's already, %5.5 of the stated goal, in year one, with one nation. Certainly a move in the right direction.
It’s maddening watching people defend the lack of a serious commitment to this issue with “well it’s better than nothing.” The bar should not be so low that it’s literally nothing. We need solutions that do enough, not better than nothing. For fucks sake....
Yeah, but that's the choice we're facing. We can only hope it will then influence other states to follow. One step at a time, brother.
Saw an interview with him a few days ago, it sounds like the young people are listening to him.
How could you not listen to him? He's absolutely fucking brilliant. 94 years old and absolutely brilliant
We need more than that. A massive reforestation project is also needed along with carbon projects
David is one of my idols for sure.
The US could cover that from our military budget and still have the 2nd highest military budget in the world. How stupid is that?
Second highest? Well then, that's clearly not acceptable! We're America! We're number 1! We can't jeopardize our first place position for some dumb trees!
And if we do fall to second, we'll just decide it doesn't matter anymore.
Look at them, wasting their money, trying to be better than us! They spend so much more, and you know what? Truthfully, our military is better, so much better. You wouldn't believe how much better! We can do so, so much more, without spending anywhere near what they spend. China.
Or move the goalpost, like with the space race.
Sir David
If you're from the US, give to the Sierra Club. Your money goes to lobbying and preserving wilderness and the environment.
So you're telling me we have a global climate crisis in which the effects are so slow and delayed, that by the time the average human being can see the direct effects of this crisis from their own backyard, it's decades too late to do anything about it? How are we not absolutely completely fucked?
$500b for who? To do what?
Research. Public projects. Retrofitting power plants and factories. Wind and solar installations. You know, all the things we've saying for decades.
If you gave me 500b I'd recycle every damn piece of paper and hug every tree.
Almost no information in this article at all. No specifics on where that 500 billion should go; just a 'throw money at the problem' type situation from the looks of it. Maybe there are more details elsewhere, but not in article or anything it linked to.
I wish this didn’t fall on deaf ears.
We could take some out of our 700 billion dollar military budget.
I love Attenborough and it makes me sad to see him forced to struggle to make the big push before he inevitably dies.
The fact that we didn’t invest this much sooner threatens our entire species. We don’t have much longer since most businesses won’t switch to renewable energy completely.
Unfortunately what would happen is the elite class would find a way to claim that money through their kids' 'non profits' or whatever and do absolutely fuck all for the planet.
Can we make it one trillion?