its a nice quote. the world isnt big enough for everybody though. living sustainably, the world can support around 2-3 billion at the best estimate. thats a lower middle class lifestyle. 8 billion is too many.
We are 70 years old. My father born way back in early last century, used to bang on about how much human beings crap in their own nest. One of his favorite sayings was "Nothing shits in its nest as much as human beings." Another was "Plant trees to save the next lot of kids that come on the planet". Although we were a farming family and grew and raised our own food and shared it locally, in our lifetime we have seen the changes my father raved on about. One of the biggest changes has occurred at the beach. When we were kids, the beach was alive with activity; crabs, birds, shellfish, dolphins playing in the waves, and also small fish near the shores. And when we went swimming, larger fish coming in around us in the waves and nipping at our legs. And oysters and mussels on the rocks, so many of them, it was difficult to climb over the rocks. Now though, we go to a beach and it just seems dead. As a bushwalker, still going all these years, (loved it as a kid), we see the changes and how stark they are. Was remarking on it to our niece on a recent walk, and we walked through two dead beaches and then came across three beaches that are part of a marine national park as part of the walk. They were alive, just as they were when we were kids. Shellfish, birds, crabs, bugs, dolphins, geese, swans etc in the estuary and so on. My niece couldn't believe her eyes. We then walked over an isthmus and on the other side we were faced with dead beaches again. Much of the damage is not just climate change, but also farm run off. We need more comparisons like this; more documentaries showing the destruction, more interviews of people losing their homes etc if it is to take effect on the general population. The only way we are going to get change is to empty the feeding troughs of big business. We have to stop buying into their crap, and most importantly buying the shit that they dish up to us. We need to bring back bartering and a sharing culture. Not everyone needs cars, and a share economy would solve a lot of issues in that respect. We need to buy just what we need; no extras. Another one (which we are guilty of) is this 'travel broadens the horizons' crap. We need to reduce travel to a minimum and work within a few kilometers of our homes. And holidays, well, take them locally and support the local businesses etc. We are all part of the damage to the environment to some extent. Our voting also is extremely important. We must reject big business parties, and start working to the greener alternatives, becoming really aware of this greenwashing that is going on. Some protesters locally are placing stickers on shop shelves, windows etc., pointing out the greenwashing companies and products. Love that move. It seems weird to us that we grow beans in our backyard, yet the can of beans we were given recently turned out to be grown in China, cooked in Italy and then sent to Australia for packaging and distribution. Like, WTF? as the young folk say. Crazy crap that needs to be stopped and we can do that by not buying the product. It is only when we hit them in the hip pocket will they change their behavior at the top and corporate levels.
while aircraft and shipping play a part in global greenhouse emissions they both account for only around 6% of emissions, These are the hardest to decarbonise, other transport, industry and home heating and cooling are the ones that can be changed NOW and more quickly to make the difference we need!
Yea don't know what it is with stuff, thankfully I'm not big into stuff, I'm not O.C.D but i not into a house with no space in it due to stuff. And these days most of the stuff people buy is never used and is of crap quality.
@@markreed9853 I refer that most nowadays consumption rise is surpassing by far any changes that are being implemented to improve current situation. Insulation helps but impact is really insignificant, and even so I doubt it will be implemented in meaning ways due to reasons that the documentary says.
First ban lobbying. It's an established form of legal bribing. It's one of the root causes of a lot of getting laws passed. But of course nobody talked about that.
*RE: "First ban lobbying. It's an established form of legal bribing."* If your neck was about to be stretched on the gallows, I'll bet you would hire the kind of lobbyists we call lawyers. Simple minds, offer simple solutions. *_"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."_* - H. L. Mencken
@@SigFigNewton In democracy (rule by the people) the people decide by simple majority. If your neighbor hates your guts he can prosecute you by gaining a majority to put you on trial on whatever charges he likes. A simple majority can find you guilty and a simple majority can decide you need to be put to death - all "democratic" The first lobbyists were lawyers. In fact all lawyers are lobbyists, they lobby those who have power over you i.e. the courts and their juries. In fact democracies are so dangerous you will never find the word used in the Constitution of the USA. Another name for democracy is "mob rule." The founders were so suspicious of mob rule they only allowed the mob (in Greek the "demos") to vote for one federal office (their "representative' and importantly not their state elected US senators and not the president) The Senate was to be a check against the mob voting themselves the wealth of these who earned it. Sadly the racist "Democrat" Woodrow Wilson destroyed the senate by allowing fools like you to vote for them via the 17th Amendment. This is directly why we have saddled the coming generations with 35 trillion in debt. Thank God we still have the electoral college control the vote for President. It is the state legislatures that determine which electors elect presidents, not the the mob and you have absolutely no "right" to vote for the US president. If you doubt me, find it in the US constitution.
@@tradeprosper5002 Did I say it is? In case you were interpreting something into this oneliner which I never said, I spell it out for you: No, we should prevent, or at this point mitigate AWG and its consequences as much as humanly possible. But I think we as a collective are too stupid to act decisively on the matter. And in this context greed and apathy are nothing else but stupidity. edit: and so is tribalism.
@@scribblescrabble3185 Claiming stupidity is an easy out. I view it as a systemic problem. Most business owners short term incentives are to do less than needed to keep profits high. Greed of those in power is also key as you mentioned. We also can't figure out how to reasonably finance green tech in developing countries, so they will also use fossil fuels.
Parasites behave with greed, killing their host at the end. The difference is we humans are aware of it, which makes greedy people of lower intelligence than parasites. And they are our leaders (political leaders or economic). We are doomed.
When I went to college to study psychology 15 years ago, the lecturers told us that one of the best jobs we would find was working for large corporations as employees in the department of developing methods to steer the customers/consumers of these companies. Even then, this job market was sizable and lasted many years. BigCorp have a staff of top psychologists to manipulate public opinion. The average citizen who knows nothing about psychology has no chance in these battles. It's like going into an MMA duel with a professional without a single day of training.
PBS did a video awhile ago about how making it about individuals as opposed to the companies was actually done BY the companies to put the burden on consumers, not the company. It worked. We are busy attscking each other for driving instead of walking, forgetting to recycle 1 plastic bottle, protesting citizens as opposed to focusing on the businesses and government contracts that are 99.90% of the issue. So yes, we are to dumb because we let ourselves be distracted and turned on each other
The government can pass laws banning plastic bottles and containers. When I was young all drinks were in glass bottles that you took back to the drink company. Bottled water is a joke. I knew it was a joke when they first started selling it in the 1970's. Tap water is usually better. Bottled water is full of plastic residue. The label on the bottle does not have to tell you how much plastic there is in the water. And people think they are doing something good for themselves buying "pure" water. The plastic water pipes in your house bleed plastic and chemicals into the water. Get copper piping and pay $100 more for your house.
Will companies just change their behaviours though? They exist to make profit. I agree we need to focus on companies creating environmental damage but this starts with the public, the consumers, voting in governments to regulate companies.
Truly one of the 'normal persons misunderstanding is we assume companies are just people who also live on earth and therefore will have a vested interest in caring for earth. Companies are businesses that exist for profit and not at all the same as the people that work for them.
What companies do, the products and services they create, is dione for consumers, the individuals that buy those products and services, you and me. It is silly to point at those business and blaming them for being the problem while they only do what consumers ask them to do by buying their products and services. Provided you live in a democracy, the ordinary people are to blame, they are responsible for the demand, they are responsible for voting in politician that set the rules and are responsible for the enforcement of the rules. But it is of course a lot easier to deflect responsibility by pointing your finger at others and do whatever suits you.
What always throw me is the extreme ARROGANCE to stand right in from of a climate scientist in your Welsh village as an elderly lady knowing NOTHING of the research and tell a man who had spent his life studying the issue and telling him it'll all be fine while he tries to tell you it will not.
We don't know that he identified himself as a climate scientist to her. She perhaps only knew someone was asking about the 2054 thing. From her perspective, she has her habits and she is comfortable in them... and in any event... just doing the math... 2054 really is unlikely to be her problem. I would hope that some level of government would come up with a scheme to compensate people to help them move out (given market value is nil.) and turn the site into a nature preserve or something more organized than just letting the town flood. It seems heartless. They have 25 years to figure something out.
@@petersilva037 I am not much younger than her and I am not arrogant enough to have the habits of being entirely self serving or of assuming I know everything about a subject I didn't put time into at university. Rather, I read the reports of the 99% of climate scientists who are not being paid by the fossil fuel industry. It really isn't hard, and I will not accept that she should be given any excuses on this nor anyone like her. You see, maybe she won't be around in 2054, but it is also arrogant to ONLY CARE ABOUT YOUR PERSONAL SELF, and not about your children, your nieces and nephew, and about strangers. And its selfish in the extreme. The governments of the world can get little to nothing done while people like her fail to care unless they are forced to accept the reality of climate change or are personally hurt by it. I really will not give her any excuse for this.
@@charlotteinnocent8752 She never said anything like she doesn't believe in climate change, she just said she doesn't believe that her home would be flooded... We don't know anything about how she voted, or her opinion on climate change. All we know is she is in denial the likelihood of her personal home being lost to rising sea level. It could be an "I didn't think the leopards would eat MY FACE" thing... but it could easily be a fatalistic... " I will deal with it when it happens, and hope it doesn't." She could be hoping that they decide to build protection for the village even though the decision is against for now.
Many people are in denial. I started my work life after university working in government 🇨🇦in an environmental planning and research branch. It was an exercise in frustration. Economic growth was promoted. Environmental planning was seen as bad and unnecessary.
Pardon the pun: but the way we treat the planet is a barometer for how many people treat each other while taking no responsibility for their own behavior.
@@simulacra1394 Well yeah but we are not destroying the planet, we are destroying the way of life on it that life forms such as us need to survive. So yeah, it most certainly is about how we treat each other and in turn our selves. Its self mutilation and social weaponization. Why do so many hate themselves and wish to imprint that hate on others? Mental health, learned behavior from childhood through the present. We are flawed beings, its also our flaws that spur adaption and growth, our perspectives define our prisons and our sanctuarys. The best those with good mental health can do is show compasion to our enemies and fiercly defend our allies.
...because, big biz factories don't stop making poison food, plastic bottles, niknaks for Walmart, toxic cleaning products, etc..cuz the big guys don't careabout earth, y'all already Know this DW🙄
EXACTLY !! THATS THE REAL THING. THE PRODUCERS DECIDE WHICH TECHNOLOGIES WILL BE OFFERED FOR THE COSTUMERS. THEY ALWAYS CHOOSE THE MOST PROFITABLE ONES NO MATHER ENVIROMENTAL IMPACTS.
Governments have the power to regulate and ban things that are bad for the environment. Maybe not gasoline all at once, but almost everything else. We just have to vote for people who will do that. We've managed quite a lot in other countries.
First ad during this documentary - travel in a plane. And that's what I get with nearly every video. Travel offers, get on this plane, go to that country, sit on this tropical beach (without showing the other 3000 people crammed together there). Now, I'm concerned enough about the environment to completely ignore these types of ads. But considering the number of them all over the internet, the frequency, the alluring nature of them, it is absolutely no wonder that tourism is having a boom time. UA-cam doesn't make the moral choice to turn down advertising like this. It's a business. They want to make money, and if they were to choose greener business advertising only, they'd make next to nothing. When was the last time you saw an environmentally responsible ad? And then these ads for stupid gimmicky rubbish. Amazing space heaters that will heat your entire home for a fraction of the price (if you studied physics at school level, you'll know that's rubbish). And then special head shavers...what? And now, some stupid laser thing that women can walk about with to keep themselves wrinkle free...puh-leeze. There's no end to the junk being pushed onto a stupid public that thinks these things work. So, the problem is what people are being bombarded with all the time. Temptations posted online, on tv, in newspapers and magazines, billboards, in sports arenas. Ads are everywhere. No escape. And not many people are resistant enough to ignore them. Business loves that. The environment is tearing at the seams because of it. I think we have lost the planet. Not enough of us were interested enough, early enough to do enough. Presently, more people are worrying about mass migration and AI and global economic problems, but I think those are going to be very short term issues before the climate turmoil finally annihilates us. There may be pockets where humans hold out for a little while longer, but I read somewhere that in each of the 5 other great extinction events, animals weighing over 25kg each perished. Now, if the insects are already bailing out, creatures that weigh mere parts of a gram, what chance has an 80kg human?
For sure many people is victim of the ads, but if you want to change you've to adopt responsability and be disciplined to not consume and avoid ads. The tragic part is I know not enough people will do it, I prefer to still be, it gives me peace, maybe it'll help you doing it too.
It's not a question of stupidity, it's a question about egoism and profit for a few. As an example, if you own a oil company and you are 60 years old, what do you have to loose?
@@66wallace66 I think, you aren't wrong at all. These people have their own failures, also the Lobbyists that transport pseudoscience to betray the people.
Egoism? Freud is no longer on the course modules for A level psychology. Things have moved on from the imaginary pioneers of the 'mind map' world view. Ego is just the Greek word ((εγώ) for 'self'. Maybe 'selfish' would be a more modern term?
People sometimes forget that we are made to live the dream some sick capitalist had us educated for. Why else would we do what we do, we act like we need to work 16 hours 6 days a week to save the planet but actually it is just destroying familys and giving power to those who wage war and rob our planet for as long as our history exist
And how many of their products do you use? Not only directly, but also indirectly? People need to stop the finger pointing. One of the least constructive thing to do on a ship when it is sinking is engaging in blame game instead of trying to first correct the structural problems we face. You want "greed"? We put greed at the center of our economic pillar when we chose capitalism all across the globe. We thought the benefits in efficiency, innovation, market dynamics, etc will trump the pitfalls. Our entire world's economy is geared towards profit maximization. It is a paperclip optimizer situation. But here we are, instead of looking at underlying structural issues, we are busy finger pointing at the "biggest 100 conglomerates."
He is really great... I also recommend people like Nate Hagens, Daniel Schmachtenberger, Simon Michaux, Vaclav Smil, Art Berman etc. But I guess you know them already 😅
Governments also wants to be reelected. And so they do what the voters want: Lip service for climate protection but no real measures. Because the majority of people don't want to change their habits. So at least in western democracies responsible for our inaction are the electorate and not businesses and governments.
While actual climate problems don't get resolved. Big corporations try to sell the solution that do not contribute to anything other than themselves such as overpricing EVs, including less in phone packages, making things out of recycled bottles. To make as much greenwashing as possible. Meanwhile items get send all over the world during production just to save up a few cents. The real reason for climate change are the big corporations and the consumers. Being a vegan, who drives an ev and who only eats locally will do jack shit and makes you look like an idiot, while Coca-Cola keeps producing more plastic bottles at the same time.
Aside from you being told by politicians and the corporations who run them that humans are "changing the climate" how do you know this to be true other than by your massive corporate brain-washers?
The problem is two-fold: Our economic system, which is deeply undemocratic and favours profit of some already wealthy few over societal wellness. And our political system, where citizens relegate their power, every few years, to people they've never met, and in which those with the biggest campaign budgets tend to win elections. Thus, you end up with wealthy elites having most control over our world, while being shielded from the consequences of their actions. Democratizing the workplace, turning every corporation into a coop, would instantly solve most of the problems on Earth. Can't think of any other solution.
With the last twelve months exceeding +1.5°C, our failure to act in time has already occurred. 56 months behind on reducing emissions, and we have actually increased emissions. Well done... humans!
In the global north. The "third world" can suffer the rising temperatures a lot, but the world will keep watching football and reyecting migrants in their beautiful and developed countries.
@@nicolasvaron73making a huge fuss about climate refugees is actually when people will start to take notice. That’s when the people who have been duped into thinking that their selfishness is a virtue will “get it”
@@LegionarioCruel Its the responsibility of those individuals who know inner peace and have good mental health to teach it and defend it for others. Dont expect the self mutilating and externally harmful to teach themselves, they dont perceive life in such a positive way.
@@TimpanistMoth_AyKayEll yes but that worked back in a world where people would care about each other's lives and their own. We understand the things happening so well we allow this suffering to happen. Companies know who dies every minute based on their pollution but decided not to do anything
@@LegionarioCruel I'm confused. How are you saying that social and political progress/improvements happen? Ending legalized chattel slavery; expansion of the franchise; labor laws; desegregation; reproductive rights; queer rights; the Montreal Protocol for CFCs; the political independence of too many countries to count (including my own, Norway, twice - or thrice if you count WW2, but I'm mostly thinking of the first two as broadly peaceful, non-military dissolutions)... How did ANY of these things happen, if not through individuals working together? Of course this often (always?) happens "chaotically," with a myriad of different organizations all using slightly different tactics, sometimes at cross-purposes, but the majority of the groups contributing some kind of cultural/political/economic pressure. For that matter, technological progress ALSO depends on individuals working together. (And often requires political organization in addition, e.g. the smallpox vaccine needed to be not just invented but globally implemented.)
For years I said, "If you want to save the White Rhino, you have to commercialise it. It's almost impossible to imagine cows or sheep becoming extinct." People said I was nuts. But now they are all gone. Extinct. Most people don't even know, let alone care. But they would definitely care if they couldn't have their MacDonalds any more.
It wasn't until I took a Geosystems class in college that I finally understood climate change. It is a complex problem that is hard for the uninformed to understand. You can simplify it as "global warming" but that doesn't sound like much when you can only express that in a few degrees. People don't get the impact of a couple of degrees and how weather extremes point to global climate change. Climate change is just too damn complicated for the average person. The evidence is clear to well educated people but looks indistinguishable from hieroglyphic to the masses. So they ignore it and regard environmentalists as extremists. The environmentalist protesters don't help this perception at all as they indeed look extremist. Sure, it is an existential threat that should be extremely important, but having extremists that destroy property on your side never helps you have any impact with the skeptical and/or mislead people.
Yet, why is our survival instinct so strong? If it all has no value, then we should already be gone. If something keeps it from collapsing, then its the fault of that.
@@R_Alexander029 Nobody is saying switch off fossil fuels in a day. I'm simply saying let's Actually come up with a viable decommissioning strategy and work on it together. Problem is, we humans literally cannot do that to save ourselves.
@@keepitreal2902 I agree with you. This is an optimization problem. Not burning enough fossil fuels in the 19th and 20th century would have led continued poverty for billions. However, burning too much fossil fuels will lead to decreased standards of living of billions in the future.
After the rains in Rio Grande do Sul Brazil destroyed the entire state and left many deniers stranded, people began to understand the consequences of climate change. It is interesting to see the materiality of events happening and reality imposing itself in a violent way.
Ever thunk alot of this abnormal weather could be man made by programs like HARP. In the middle east they modified the clouds to carry more water so it wouldn't supise me..
Interesting???? I dont see anything interesting in this tragedy. It is an elite project to make poor people die anyhow, pretending to be a natural event like they did with covid-19. The things repeat year after year and most of us dont see it.... nothing interesting in this but chaos and deaths.
Most of us are not too stupid, but unfortunately most of us are not in any decisive position do to anything about it. Greed and money will always prevail. Unfortunately, I, like most of us, have much of neither. So I guess we are on the losing team.
Not necessarily. Stop buying the crap that these people offer up. Empty their feeding troughs. Buy second hand, share, keep stuff longer, fix stuff rather than buy new....
Finland used to be considered as safe from rising sea levels, because itself is rising as well. The land rising used to be faster than the rising of the water. Now, if nothing changes, by 2100 even Helsinki will struggle with flooding and maybe the faster-rising West coast, too. So predicting where would be high enough is a bit tricky. Also, the sea level rising is not the on issue. Temperatures will rise, weather events will be even more polarised, the air composition will change so much (not just with CO2) that it might be unbreathable... lots of issues await us if we don't start to act fast... some even if we do...
All social systems reach an exhaustion point in which they need to be replaced. We've reached this point with capitalism. Nevertheless, there's a strong and false ideology that capitalism is "natural" and can't be nor should be replaced, and most people prefer accepting the end of human life than replacing capitalism because "It's the best we have and we'll never have anything else".
Capitalism was being phased out in the 1920s. We have corporatism with planned obsolescence. Adam Smith wrote "read, write and account" multiple times in Wealth of Nations. When have economists been advocating mandatory accounting in the schools?
You are 100% correct. Maximizing profit is the reason businesses today must ignore the damages that they cause to the environment and it's also the reason they must fire as much of their work force as they can. Maximizing profit is the reason there is so much homelessness and it's also the reason that our planet is on fire. The good news is that we can correct our profit model, 'profit = income - expenses', which, as it turns out, is really our behavior model. I recommend this new profit model... Profit = protecting and enriching the environment, and sharing the sustenance that it provides for all of us. With this new profit model our only major expense is ignoring our obligation to care for and enrich the environment. This new profit model requires us to create millions of new jobs that come under the heading "Caretakers of the Environment". Caretakers will have many specialized categories: 1. Collecting pollution that is already in the environment 2. Collecting pollution before it gets into the environment 3. Dealing with all of the waste in such ways that are good for the environment, and or good for the production of products. 4. Economically incentivizing families with two or fewer children 5. Designing new ways of producing products so that those products last for a long time and don't have to be replaced every two years. There will be many more types of Caretaker jobs. Every company and government will have Caretaker jobs, and everybody will be schooled, from elementary school through university about how to be caretakers of the environment. It may already be too late to save our environment, but it is never too late to try. 👍
"PROFIT BEFORE PEOPLE" hits the nail right on the head. First, thank you! It's so refreshing to hear your opinion because most people are trying to correct technology instead of first correcting our behavior. Our present behavior model is 'profit equals income minus expenses'. This behavior model is the real cause of man-made climate change. First, it states that money is profit. In reality money is only a permission slip that allows us to purchase our actual gains. The Second part of this behavior model tells us to maximize this so-called profit by minimizing expenses; thus, we must ignore the damages we do to our environment, and we must keep labor expenses as low as possible. No wonder our planet is on fire and there is so much homelessness. The only way we can repair our environment is by first correcting our behavior model. I'm recommending this new profit model. "Profit equals protecting and enriching the environment, and sharing the sustenance that it provides for all of us. This new behavior model would work because our only major expense would be ignoring our responsibility to protect and enrich the environment. The new profit model requires us to create millions of new jobs that will come under the heading "Caretakers of the Environment". Caretakers will have many specialized categories: 1. Collecting pollution that is already in the environment 2. Collecting pollution before it gets into the environment 3. Dealing with all of the waste in such ways that are good for the environment, and or good for the production of products. 4. Economically incentivizing families with two or fewer children 5. Designing new ways of producing products so that those products last for a long time and don't have to be replaced every two years. There will be many more types of Caretaker jobs. Every company and government will have Caretaker jobs, and everybody will be schooled, from elementary school through university about how to be caretakers of the environment. So, we can correct our behavior! What do you think about this idea? How can we transition from our present reckless economy to this entirely new economy that requires us to behave rationally and responsibly. It may already be too late to save our environment, but it is never too late to try.
Aren't we like 20 years past due regarding Ted Dansens proclamations? Miami is doing fine I see, and Obama acquired some of the best beach property on the planet in the meantime.
Are we too stupid? Of course. And too greedy, violent and vain. Don't you remember WWII? It pretty much answered any questions there may have been about us.
I dont own a car and cycle to work daily. I even moved house so that I can cycle to work. Before i had to take the bus to work. I wish more people would make lifestyle changes so that they no longer have to drive. Im not perfect though. I still fly to go on holiday, but I do so less often than once per year. Still room for improvement.
@@puffinjuice good for you but it's nothing compared to government policy. And government policies won't change until rich and powerful governments accept their accountableitys from the past. Telling developing world don't destroy the world after doing much worse to get where you are doesn't mean nothing...
@@puffinjuice the best thing you can do is stay home, turn off your air conditioning , and your heating. Actually that still won't make a dent. Best thing to do is enjoy your life.
@@bakerkawesa Lina Khan did, bernie sanders did, many people have, yet there are many who wrongfully believe they can buy security for themselves or are too comfortable with their power in the status quo if only for the moment.
the global elite project is to induce the sixth mass extinction. They dont care because they have nuclearproof bunkers with plenty of food. As simple as that. So, what should be our (the people) next step? Just watch the flames from the livingroom sofa?
We have always been our own worst enemy. The Earth though, will only recover and be at equilibrium again when it doesn’t have our negative inputs anymore.❤️
Do remember all the beautiful ecosystems, filled with life species of so many kind. In a sense or other family members of the animal kingdom. Which if we don't act in any sensible way will feel an immense brand of the calamity that we made. Origin now 40% of insects species has probably been extended, there's almost no wild mammals in the Wilds anymore, similar for the sea with plastics and asification. In other words we are living in the 6th Extinction. Life will come again but it will be many many cycles from now. So we as a collective species named human will have been the originator of that extension. I think that's something worth trying to mitigate
we arent too stupid, its just that, we're too lazy and greedy. we know theres something wrong, we understand whats happening, why its happening. nobody is willing to change.
Environmental activists have a hard time to call out the stupid ones among themselves hurting their cause. It isn't just with nuclear energy. The same is also true with environmentalists being against any form of civic engineering like some figures within Dam Removal Europe cheering for the removal of hydropower dams, which are despite being bad for the local environment green for the climate. They're also against coastal protection like the Dutch Haringvliet Dam, part of the Delta Works. Or slightly related when Dutch government was banned from doing coastal maintenance for causing to much NOx emissions. Those kind of things are not ideal when half the country is below sea level. Or since whenthe wolf in the Netherlands, the Fauna Protection is fighting any form of management in court leading to wolves thinking it's okay to attack children (which eventually lead to people supporting the general extinction of the wolf here again). In that regard fundamentalists are just as destructive as the climate change ignorers and deniers, because they're excellent at destroying the general support for environment and climate protection.
Because nuclear energy is so clean, or what? It is expensive, we have absolutely no permanent solution for the waste and the potential to pollute the ground and water systems for thousands of years with radiation is massive.
@@janaburczyk4077 You fail to see the forest from the trees. It's not about being perfect, it is about being better. Nuclear is absolutely a better option compared to hydrocarbons.
Reason in Germany, thinking about my building cooperative: because we want to keep doing things the way we always did it. We want heat pumps, but not as part of an AC unit. That is considered devilish. I asked for the approval to have an efficient AC unit installed permanently that uses at least 75% less electricity than my mobile one (requiring am open window, leading to hot air from outside being sucked in). But that was declined, because it's a rental apartment.(I wanted to pay for everything myself, even yearly maintenance). Now I keep paying around 12 euros a day because my mobile AC consumes 30 kilowatt of electricity every day (for the last 4 weeks, as the building is so hot due to bad architecture). As a result, I cannot take people seriously anymore who tell me to act more sustainably. The "cannot do attitude" here in Germany does not allow for that.
Social/Liberal policy, and issues like climate are inherently disadvantaged. The opposition is way more coordinated and motivated compared to the diffuse lack of responsibility and ownership. An energy company knows very clearly what is at risk and the approach they want to take to protect their specific interests. We have numerous opinions about what might help and cant even agree on what we want. Its absurd to think the public can hold the responsibility when competing with industry. Its akin to asking the average grade 5 teacher how to fix our national budget deficit and expecting anything more than 'tax more, spend less.'
It is your choice to serve, give your opponent infinite power until the planet dies or fight till you die and maybe stop the maniacs to leave a legacy that your children think is worth living and caring for
In Metro Manila, the Philippines, I have seen temperatures spike to 37 to almost 39°C as the observed temperature (not heat index). Plus, I have seen one month of rain pouring down in three days (at 458 mm) surpassing previous Southwest Monsoon downpours observed back here. What would it take for us to be compelled to act, if I may ask?
No matter. Fertility rates in Africa are still high, and they want to move to the Americas and Europe to enjoy your lifestyle. All the people who feel guilt should move to Iceland, the first world country with the lowest carbon footprint.
@@rickdworsky6457 But the people talk more about the action and what the action costs then to talk about why the activists do what they do. It addresses often the wrong people. You need to convince the richest of the richest people and not the average Joe. And you need to show solutions.
This was an excellent production. It spoke directly to me as I remember as a kid seeing a Suzuki speech about climate change and feeling so worried and hopeless about it I went the other direction and left all my electronics on and spent additional time on them because I was unsure how to make a difference. This video provided a good visual of how our psychology effects us and our ability (or lack-there-of) to make responsible decisions. But how do we translate this understanding into action? I still feel just as hopeless and I even remain unconvinced that banning plastic straws will be part of the solution. Thank you again DW and staff for this video. I hope it will help start more conversations about the climate.
No. Not really close. The real problem is the vacuum of leaders to lead the global popular revolution to challenge the corrupt global elites. Thats it or our near extinction as a species.
Folks really underestimate their own species. We once survived an extinction event where only about a thousand of us were left alive. I am amazed we managed to repopulate the world again and also rise to this level. This climate change stuff is nothing in comparison to what we humans aim to do in the long term. Fight against climate change is just us taking the first few baby steps towards terraforming. Eventually, we will have reworked our economy, industry, society and politics to the point that we'll have moved past this entire "its too expensive to fight climate change debate." We just need to tweak our economics a bit, and shape our collective mindset, let the new one percolate down through the bulk of humanity. Once that happens, we will have outgrown this event. Ecdysis is never without its challenges. But we humans, we always rise above the challenges. Even if this event brings us to the brink of extinction while simultaneously throwing us back to the middle ages, we'll rebuild it all eventually. And we'll rebuild it all better this time.
It would be great if DW made the effort to invite experts who actually research the foundations of pro-sustainable behavior and have real experience in environmental psychology or neuroscience. Simply throwing the word 'brain' into the discussion feels sensational, given the substantial research already done in this field. This is the perfect opportunity to invite someone like Prof. Sabine Pahl! The field is decades old and well-established. While climate scientists are crucial, they aren’t psychologists. The neuroscientist featured here hasn’t conducted any research on sustainable behaviors and seems to be formulating arguments on the fly. It wouldn’t take much to invite the right experts and turn these documentaries into something truly outstanding.
The system is maintained by the structure of power. Open source and decentralization in the structure of global digital intelligence will help the human brain decentralize and flatten the structure of power.
@@rig4365 Yield decrease and crop failure. Temperature change. Warmer weather. Colder weather. Flooding. Desertification. Destabilization of weather patterns and the fact that despite our advanced technology, our very existence still depends on a six inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains.
@@christianzilla no. Modern technology is quite good. We get more food pet Sq inch today in spite of all the fear mongering and will continue to do so. The only risk is if governments impose restrictions on nitrogen based fertilizers. Or start buying out the smaller farmers . Both of which they are trying to do in the Netherlands
@@rig4365technology won't save you. I'm sorry but you are misinformed, you just haven't taken a look at all the info that is to be considered regarding the climate crisis. Total collapse is already baked, just slowly unraveling.
@@christianzillaonly if groups bring it about. Working hard to prove a point. All starvation is political. If we can place a man on the moon, then we can keep everyone fed. It is all political.
We would have needed clear and strict rules already in 1980! From 1990 they shouldn't have build any combustion engine cars, reduce cattle, pesticides, plastic waste, avoid any toxic and useless overproduction. We should be ready by now to have build up a sustainable, ecologically healthy and globally fair and just economy and societies. A better world is possible! Start with the man or woman in the mirror. Everybody! We needed rules and laws to stop any pollution and waste and burning. As it is 30 years to late we can only pray and bring forward renewable energy and biotechnology, precision Fermentation for milk and ecological farming. Give credits to the good workers!
One of the things people don't look at before buying a home is how far above sea level it is. I think that will eventually be an important number to consider before buying a home.
It’s not my brain that is stopping me, it’s money. I’ve spent a lot of money making my house produce less CO2 and the last change to install geothermal is too expensive. I make a good salary and I cannot go 100% green on my own. Imagine someone with less income. The other big factor is that landlords have zero reason to go green, since they don’t pay the utility bills in the US.
In simple terms, climate change is the cost we pay for convenience. Everyone is equally liable and climate change can’t be stopped unless each and every individual on this planet contributes to the efforts.
I was one of the protestors back in the 80´s over the Spotted Owl Movement and all I got to say is it was hard won but it worked!!! People just have to keep fighting and speaking with their dollars.
Yes climate activism isnt about getting everyone to c9me onboard. Its about getting policymakers to move pushed by a tipping point of activist & action
And no one wants to talk about that for some very strange reason. They are more concerned about the economy and having more workers to exploit for profits.
When do climate scientists talk about unnecessary manufacturing due to planned obsolescence which is going to produce more CO2? When do they talk about mandatory accounting in the schools so consumers are smarter? When do they point out economists ignoring the depreciation of durable consumer goods since Sputnik?
Climate activists have been doing it for years. And climate scientists just report on what the climate was/is/might be like, it's not their job to save mankind, they are just researchers.
My first vehicle was a 68 Ford F-100. It was painted leaf green with a toolbox the same color. In the center of the toolbox was a sticker that had an ashtray overflowing with put out cigarettes. It said “ Be kind to smokers because they do not have too much time left.” Later in life, after selling the truck, I seen the truck with smoke stacks behind the cab. I recon the “ Be kind to smokers because they do not have too much time left” sticker contributed to the decision to put smoke stacks on the truck. Everyday is an experiment in how much this O’World can withstand human manipulation of the natural environment.
Thank you again from the USofA. The last portion on dopamine is so important because that is the addiction neurochemical. This should be part of basic education -- learning the interactions in the brain. (Robert Sopolsky's Stanford lectures are available on UA-cam) Certainly the advertising industry uses all this information to influence the unaware. That is their job--to get you "hooked.". The issue is that dopamine is the "more" chemical, the addiction chemical, and not the satisfaction chemical. "Anything the eye can behold, the heart can desire." What will bring long-term satisfaction?
As long as we all choose to take internal combustion engine driven transportation or any other way which requires fuel burning we are all responsible. Use no fuel than Shell and Exxon will have a problem... Blocking highways only angers people
People "choose" to use ICE vehicles because their cities are not built for them to walk or cycle to work and school, and their employers and teachers won't let them work and study from home like they did during lockdown. Why fall into the trap of blaming individuals again when we know that these choices were made for us at the structural level? In cities that are designed for pedestrians and cyclists, people walk or bike, and only the disabled and delivery drivers use powered vehicles. That makes it a lot more practical to change powered vehicles from ICE to electric.
they've to work if they don't work how they survive if you're not a working person like that person you'll not understand I understand what your standpoint is but blaming a working person is illogical
@@SamudraGuptaChakma Illogical to suggest that someone who physically assaults non-violent protesters should be charged with assault? This, my fellow time traveler, is a felony - the reason for doing it is immaterial. Felony Assault is Felony Assault.
@@TheDiversifiedFarmer Could be? Why don't we stick to the facts. We are witnessing felony assault and you are concerned that something "could be"? and follow up with autos burning more fuel? The cars "could be" electric. Your argument has zero merit.
@@YANKEEYOGA Stopping vehicles leads to disruption of the global supply chains, which leads to more carbon emissions as pile ups and pending works increase and overall efficiency of the economy comes down. The driving force of capitalism remains a constant, despite the best efforts of the protestors to disrupt everyday life. The world is a massive machine that is running non-stop. We are faced with a dire situation where the machine will burn itself down, lest some parts of it (particularly the GHG producing ones) be exorcised. But those need to be replaced with cleaner alternatives, because otherwise, the machine will grind to a halt, which in turn will be more disastrous than climate change. So our task involves basically swapping the wheels of a moving car without letting it stop. Such a delicate task can not be accomplished by petulant protests. Nor will it be accomplished by climate change deniers that love to throw doubts at everyone but themselves. We all need to stop behaving like kids. If a problem seems insurmountable, work around it. Instead of banging your head on a rock like these protestors are doing, in the process causing more harm than good.
@@death_parade This brings nothing to the conversation. You are missing the part of FELONY ASSAULT. A few vehicles stopped by protesters does not influence supply and demand, if anything it would involve the law of diminishing returns
we are still using lots of fossile fuels because we subsidize its cost !!! via not paying for the damage it does. and this also relates to the 6th Great Extinction!
I’ve heard a lyric from a song recently, that may put it into some perspective. “ Hurry up, the world needs this, speak up now or we can pick up the pieces”.
Prošli smo točku, tkz. "tipping point", samo je ostao dobar marketing i zarada. Svi su se počeli baviti klimatskim promjenama tek kada su shvatili da mogu dobro zaraditi na njima. Novinari DW su ovoga puta ipak razočarali.
Activism receive funds from corporations. Goverments receive donations from corporations. The same corporations responsible for pollution. Activists are pawns, going to bother citizens that have no power over things. Activists should go after the responsible ones, the corporations.
@@Wind-oh-Wishp He is not entirely incorrect. Not all activists are like that, but many are. This is the era of hybrid warfare and nations like USA and UK wield activists and NGOs as weapons to sabotage other nations, like mine.
100 - 200 Bilions for footbal cup in UAE, so what is the reason not to have money for more substantial projects? Rich people and nations are trying to convince poor nations and people that it is their fault or that it cannot be done, whereas if 100 to 200 billion euros can be found for the World Cup in UAE, then money for such other projects should not be a problem.
I don’t understand the Indian scientist need to not get outraged, he’s acting like it’s an even playing field. When the oil companies are literally spending millions of dollars in propaganda each year.
“This world is big for everyone’s need,
But too small for some people’s greed”
-M.Gandhi
I have not read this Gandhi quote before, Thank you ❤
its a nice quote. the world isnt big enough for everybody though. living sustainably, the world can support around 2-3 billion at the best estimate. thats a lower middle class lifestyle. 8 billion is too many.
@@T.R.75 Source please. Because thermodynamically, the world can support more than 8 Billion. We just need to develop cleaner technologies.
Spot on, English water companies damp sewage in rivers so they can maximise profit.
Many food companies will feed us anything to do the same.
Gandhi was too selfish and racist for his own good. Don't blindly idolise him before you do your own research.
We are 70 years old. My father born way back in early last century, used to bang on about how much human beings crap in their own nest. One of his favorite sayings was "Nothing shits in its nest as much as human beings." Another was "Plant trees to save the next lot of kids that come on the planet". Although we were a farming family and grew and raised our own food and shared it locally, in our lifetime we have seen the changes my father raved on about. One of the biggest changes has occurred at the beach. When we were kids, the beach was alive with activity; crabs, birds, shellfish, dolphins playing in the waves, and also small fish near the shores. And when we went swimming, larger fish coming in around us in the waves and nipping at our legs. And oysters and mussels on the rocks, so many of them, it was difficult to climb over the rocks.
Now though, we go to a beach and it just seems dead. As a bushwalker, still going all these years, (loved it as a kid), we see the changes and how stark they are. Was remarking on it to our niece on a recent walk, and we walked through two dead beaches and then came across three beaches that are part of a marine national park as part of the walk. They were alive, just as they were when we were kids. Shellfish, birds, crabs, bugs, dolphins, geese, swans etc in the estuary and so on. My niece couldn't believe her eyes. We then walked over an isthmus and on the other side we were faced with dead beaches again. Much of the damage is not just climate change, but also farm run off. We need more comparisons like this; more documentaries showing the destruction, more interviews of people losing their homes etc if it is to take effect on the general population.
The only way we are going to get change is to empty the feeding troughs of big business. We have to stop buying into their crap, and most importantly buying the shit that they dish up to us. We need to bring back bartering and a sharing culture. Not everyone needs cars, and a share economy would solve a lot of issues in that respect. We need to buy just what we need; no extras. Another one (which we are guilty of) is this 'travel broadens the horizons' crap. We need to reduce travel to a minimum and work within a few kilometers of our homes. And holidays, well, take them locally and support the local businesses etc. We are all part of the damage to the environment to some extent.
Our voting also is extremely important. We must reject big business parties, and start working to the greener alternatives, becoming really aware of this greenwashing that is going on. Some protesters locally are placing stickers on shop shelves, windows etc., pointing out the greenwashing companies and products. Love that move. It seems weird to us that we grow beans in our backyard, yet the can of beans we were given recently turned out to be grown in China, cooked in Italy and then sent to Australia for packaging and distribution. Like, WTF? as the young folk say. Crazy crap that needs to be stopped and we can do that by not buying the product. It is only when we hit them in the hip pocket will they change their behavior at the top and corporate levels.
Thank you for sharing your personal observations and useful suggestions. It is sad to witness the decline of nature, mostly caused by our activities.
But no one hear this its like an empty message
change the motivation to sharing, love and care than money and greed.
I support what you said seems you are not heard maybe due to selective hearing like kids in neighborhood 😅
@@viktorasleopoldas7122 *Revolution!*
In a year with record number flights and planes, car sale records, ship freight up. Buying endless stuff online. What can you expect?
while aircraft and shipping play a part in global greenhouse emissions they both account for only around 6% of emissions, These are the hardest to decarbonise, other transport, industry and home heating and cooling are the ones that can be changed NOW and more quickly to make the difference we need!
Yea don't know what it is with stuff, thankfully I'm not big into stuff, I'm not O.C.D but i not into a house with no space in it due to stuff. And these days most of the stuff people buy is never used and is of crap quality.
@@markreed9853 I refer that most nowadays consumption rise is surpassing by far any changes that are being implemented to improve current situation. Insulation helps but impact is really insignificant, and even so I doubt it will be implemented in meaning ways due to reasons that the documentary says.
With year on year record breaking heat wave
@markreed9853 you can't change it now, cope lol
First ban lobbying. It's an established form of legal bribing. It's one of the root causes of a lot of getting laws passed.
But of course nobody talked about that.
*RE: "First ban lobbying. It's an established form of legal bribing."*
If your neck was about to be stretched on the gallows, I'll bet you would hire the kind of lobbyists we call lawyers.
Simple minds, offer simple solutions.
*_"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."_*
- H. L. Mencken
@@brucefrykman8295simple minds provide simple counter arguments such as yours.
Lobbyists undo democracy. Money gets its way, people do not.
@@brucefrykman8295happy to educate you about climate change if you have questions
@@SigFigNewton In democracy (rule by the people) the people decide by simple majority. If your neighbor hates your guts he can prosecute you by gaining a majority to put you on trial on whatever charges he likes. A simple majority can find you guilty and a simple majority can decide you need to be put to death - all "democratic" The first lobbyists were lawyers. In fact all lawyers are lobbyists, they lobby those who have power over you i.e. the courts and their juries.
In fact democracies are so dangerous you will never find the word used in the Constitution of the USA. Another name for democracy is "mob rule." The founders were so suspicious of mob rule they only allowed the mob (in Greek the "demos") to vote for one federal office (their "representative' and importantly not their state elected US senators and not the president) The Senate was to be a check against the mob voting themselves the wealth of these who earned it. Sadly the racist "Democrat" Woodrow Wilson destroyed the senate by allowing fools like you to vote for them via the 17th Amendment.
This is directly why we have saddled the coming generations with 35 trillion in debt. Thank God we still have the electoral college control the vote for President. It is the state legislatures that determine which electors elect presidents, not the the mob and you have absolutely no "right" to vote for the US president. If you doubt me, find it in the US constitution.
"Are we too stupid to save the climate?"
In short: yes
So hell on earth for our great grandkids is OK?
One can only speak for themselves and not others. Are you claiming you are too stupid?
@@georgelinker2408 I think I am pretty stupid, yes. Luckily I am good looking. No, seriously, I am not a smart guy.
@@tradeprosper5002 Did I say it is?
In case you were interpreting something into this oneliner which I never said, I spell it out for you: No, we should prevent, or at this point mitigate AWG and its consequences as much as humanly possible. But I think we as a collective are too stupid to act decisively on the matter. And in this context greed and apathy are nothing else but stupidity. edit: and so is tribalism.
@@scribblescrabble3185 Claiming stupidity is an easy out. I view it as a systemic problem. Most business owners short term incentives are to do less than needed to keep profits high. Greed of those in power is also key as you mentioned. We also can't figure out how to reasonably finance green tech in developing countries, so they will also use fossil fuels.
We aren't too stupid, we're too greedy
No. Some people are really stupid and don't get it
Bring greedy is pretty stupid. Greed is a glorified mental deficiency.
Parasites behave with greed, killing their host at the end. The difference is we humans are aware of it, which makes greedy people of lower intelligence than parasites. And they are our leaders (political leaders or economic). We are doomed.
@@MarionMM Thank you. Most don't get this - may be too stupid.... :)
tell the difference between stupidity and greed? greed is stupid. leads to stupid outcomes
When I went to college to study psychology 15 years ago, the lecturers told us that one of the best jobs we would find was working for large corporations as employees in the department of developing methods to steer the customers/consumers of these companies. Even then, this job market was sizable and lasted many years. BigCorp have a staff of top psychologists to manipulate public opinion. The average citizen who knows nothing about psychology has no chance in these battles. It's like going into an MMA duel with a professional without a single day of training.
Manipulation and Obsfucation and redirecting Anger.
@@MoreFootWork Yes but times are changing, there are heros fighting the good fight and at the moment they are winning.
@@robgronsky4466 😅
Thank you!
👏👏👏👏👏
PBS did a video awhile ago about how making it about individuals as opposed to the companies was actually done BY the companies to put the burden on consumers, not the company. It worked. We are busy attscking each other for driving instead of walking, forgetting to recycle 1 plastic bottle, protesting citizens as opposed to focusing on the businesses and government contracts that are 99.90% of the issue. So yes, we are to dumb because we let ourselves be distracted and turned on each other
The government can pass laws banning plastic bottles and containers. When I was young all drinks were in glass bottles that you took back to the drink company. Bottled water is a joke. I knew it was a joke when they first started selling it in the 1970's. Tap water is usually better. Bottled water is full of plastic residue. The label on the bottle does not have to tell you how much plastic there is in the water. And people think they are doing something good for themselves buying "pure" water. The plastic water pipes in your house bleed plastic and chemicals into the water. Get copper piping and pay $100 more for your house.
Will companies just change their behaviours though? They exist to make profit.
I agree we need to focus on companies creating environmental damage but this starts with the public, the consumers, voting in governments to regulate companies.
@@jeffbguarino what can be done and what will be done, sadly very different things
Truly one of the 'normal persons misunderstanding is we assume companies are just people who also live on earth and therefore will have a vested interest in caring for earth. Companies are businesses that exist for profit and not at all the same as the people that work for them.
What companies do, the products and services they create, is dione for consumers, the individuals that buy those products and services, you and me. It is silly to point at those business and blaming them for being the problem while they only do what consumers ask them to do by buying their products and services. Provided you live in a democracy, the ordinary people are to blame, they are responsible for the demand, they are responsible for voting in politician that set the rules and are responsible for the enforcement of the rules. But it is of course a lot easier to deflect responsibility by pointing your finger at others and do whatever suits you.
What always throw me is the extreme ARROGANCE to stand right in from of a climate scientist in your Welsh village as an elderly lady knowing NOTHING of the research and tell a man who had spent his life studying the issue and telling him it'll all be fine while he tries to tell you it will not.
Kane B has an interesting video on the philosophy of trusting experts. It’s called “Why Trust Experts?”
@@wmpx34 I think I will trust a CLIMATE SCIENTIST and not a block whose degree is in PHILOSOPHY, thank you very much.
We don't know that he identified himself as a climate scientist to her. She perhaps only knew someone was asking about the 2054 thing. From her perspective, she has her habits and she is comfortable in them... and in any event... just doing the math... 2054 really is unlikely to be her problem. I would hope that some level of government would come up with a scheme to compensate people to help them move out (given market value is nil.) and turn the site into a nature preserve or something more organized than just letting the town flood. It seems heartless. They have 25 years to figure something out.
@@petersilva037 I am not much younger than her and I am not arrogant enough to have the habits of being entirely self serving or of assuming I know everything about a subject I didn't put time into at university. Rather, I read the reports of the 99% of climate scientists who are not being paid by the fossil fuel industry. It really isn't hard, and I will not accept that she should be given any excuses on this nor anyone like her. You see, maybe she won't be around in 2054, but it is also arrogant to ONLY CARE ABOUT YOUR PERSONAL SELF, and not about your children, your nieces and nephew, and about strangers. And its selfish in the extreme. The governments of the world can get little to nothing done while people like her fail to care unless they are forced to accept the reality of climate change or are personally hurt by it. I really will not give her any excuse for this.
@@charlotteinnocent8752 She never said anything like she doesn't believe in climate change, she just said she doesn't believe that her home would be flooded... We don't know anything about how she voted, or her opinion on climate change. All we know is she is in denial the likelihood of her personal home being lost to rising sea level. It could be an "I didn't think the leopards would eat MY FACE" thing... but it could easily be a fatalistic... " I will deal with it when it happens, and hope it doesn't." She could be hoping that they decide to build protection for the village even though the decision is against for now.
Many people are in denial. I started my work life after university working in government 🇨🇦in an environmental planning and research branch. It was an exercise in frustration. Economic growth was promoted. Environmental planning was seen as bad and unnecessary.
Pardon the pun: but the way we treat the planet is a barometer for how many people treat each other while taking no responsibility for their own behavior.
@@simulacra1394 Well yeah but we are not destroying the planet, we are destroying the way of life on it that life forms such as us need to survive. So yeah, it most certainly is about how we treat each other and in turn our selves. Its self mutilation and social weaponization. Why do so many hate themselves and wish to imprint that hate on others? Mental health, learned behavior from childhood through the present. We are flawed beings, its also our flaws that spur adaption and growth, our perspectives define our prisons and our sanctuarys. The best those with good mental health can do is show compasion to our enemies and fiercly defend our allies.
bingo bango bongo. you win the internet today.
Spot on 💯
So -- where's the pun?
@@MegaJackpinesavagebarometer
Anything to avoid blaming large industry polluters
Are Industrie Vote for facists.
why not both.
Without us consumers no big companies/polluters.
We are all part of this.
@@oneshothunter9877
If you are a financial institute, you can make an even bigger impact. Disproportionate, compared to a single consumer.
@@oneshothunter9877 people do not want to give up their lifestyles even if it hurts us and the planet. Capitalism is at the core of this problem.
...because, big biz factories don't stop making poison food, plastic bottles, niknaks for Walmart, toxic cleaning products, etc..cuz the big guys don't careabout earth, y'all already Know this DW🙄
The majority of ordinary people also don't care about Earth.
It's unfortunate, but it matches with my experience that every day people don't give A Fk
EXACTLY !! THATS THE REAL THING. THE PRODUCERS DECIDE WHICH TECHNOLOGIES WILL BE OFFERED FOR THE COSTUMERS. THEY ALWAYS CHOOSE THE MOST PROFITABLE ONES NO MATHER ENVIROMENTAL IMPACTS.
Governments have the power to regulate and ban things that are bad for the environment. Maybe not gasoline all at once, but almost everything else. We just have to vote for people who will do that. We've managed quite a lot in other countries.
First ad during this documentary - travel in a plane.
And that's what I get with nearly every video. Travel offers, get on this plane, go to that country, sit on this tropical beach (without showing the other 3000 people crammed together there).
Now, I'm concerned enough about the environment to completely ignore these types of ads. But considering the number of them all over the internet, the frequency, the alluring nature of them, it is absolutely no wonder that tourism is having a boom time.
UA-cam doesn't make the moral choice to turn down advertising like this. It's a business. They want to make money, and if they were to choose greener business advertising only, they'd make next to nothing.
When was the last time you saw an environmentally responsible ad?
And then these ads for stupid gimmicky rubbish. Amazing space heaters that will heat your entire home for a fraction of the price (if you studied physics at school level, you'll know that's rubbish).
And then special head shavers...what?
And now, some stupid laser thing that women can walk about with to keep themselves wrinkle free...puh-leeze.
There's no end to the junk being pushed onto a stupid public that thinks these things work.
So, the problem is what people are being bombarded with all the time.
Temptations posted online, on tv, in newspapers and magazines, billboards, in sports arenas. Ads are everywhere. No escape.
And not many people are resistant enough to ignore them.
Business loves that. The environment is tearing at the seams because of it.
I think we have lost the planet.
Not enough of us were interested enough, early enough to do enough.
Presently, more people are worrying about mass migration and AI and global economic problems, but I think those are going to be very short term issues before the climate turmoil finally annihilates us.
There may be pockets where humans hold out for a little while longer, but I read somewhere that in each of the 5 other great extinction events, animals weighing over 25kg each perished.
Now, if the insects are already bailing out, creatures that weigh mere parts of a gram, what chance has an 80kg human?
My first ad was something about Formula 1 in one of the gulf states, the other one for some sneaker no one needs. Well done, useless ads
For sure many people is victim of the ads, but if you want to change you've to adopt responsability and be disciplined to not consume and avoid ads. The tragic part is I know not enough people will do it, I prefer to still be, it gives me peace, maybe it'll help you doing it too.
It's not a question of stupidity, it's a question about egoism and profit for a few. As an example, if you own a oil company and you are 60 years old, what do you have to loose?
Your ethics, if you have any left.
@@66wallace66 You own a oil company and know the consequences since 1970. Which ethics?
@@nosarcasm1 You are right in that case, I was focusing on CEOs, owners are not mostly do come and go.
@@66wallace66 I think, you aren't wrong at all. These people have their own failures, also the Lobbyists that transport pseudoscience to betray the people.
Egoism? Freud is no longer on the course modules for A level psychology. Things have moved on from the imaginary pioneers of the 'mind map' world view. Ego is just the Greek word ((εγώ) for 'self'. Maybe 'selfish' would be a more modern term?
No. Just too greedy. 100 companies produce more than 80%-90% c02 emissions.
It is very easy to blame others while you live the luxury lifestyle
@@ecomandurban7183 ye like any1 commenting here is living a luxury lifestyle as the ones killing the world do
People sometimes forget that we are made to live the dream some sick capitalist had us educated for. Why else would we do what we do, we act like we need to work 16 hours 6 days a week to save the planet but actually it is just destroying familys and giving power to those who wage war and rob our planet for as long as our history exist
And most people use their products.
And how many of their products do you use? Not only directly, but also indirectly? People need to stop the finger pointing. One of the least constructive thing to do on a ship when it is sinking is engaging in blame game instead of trying to first correct the structural problems we face.
You want "greed"? We put greed at the center of our economic pillar when we chose capitalism all across the globe. We thought the benefits in efficiency, innovation, market dynamics, etc will trump the pitfalls. Our entire world's economy is geared towards profit maximization. It is a paperclip optimizer situation. But here we are, instead of looking at underlying structural issues, we are busy finger pointing at the "biggest 100 conglomerates."
The ecologist Bill Rees sums up humanity aptly - “Too clever by half, but not nearly smart enough”.
He is really great... I also recommend people like Nate Hagens, Daniel Schmachtenberger, Simon Michaux, Vaclav Smil, Art Berman etc. But I guess you know them already 😅
Yes, big business and governments want profit before efficiency and actually saving the planet...
Governments also wants to be reelected. And so they do what the voters want: Lip service for climate protection but no real measures. Because the majority of people don't want to change their habits. So at least in western democracies responsible for our inaction are the electorate and not businesses and governments.
And what is our next step bro ? Just watch our extinction on the sofa?
While actual climate problems don't get resolved. Big corporations try to sell the solution that do not contribute to anything other than themselves such as overpricing EVs, including less in phone packages, making things out of recycled bottles. To make as much greenwashing as possible. Meanwhile items get send all over the world during production just to save up a few cents. The real reason for climate change are the big corporations and the consumers. Being a vegan, who drives an ev and who only eats locally will do jack shit and makes you look like an idiot, while Coca-Cola keeps producing more plastic bottles at the same time.
I am in that loop, but trust me there a way out and u need to keep practicing..
Aside from you being told by politicians and the corporations who run them that humans are "changing the climate" how do you know this to be true other than by your massive corporate brain-washers?
The problem is two-fold:
Our economic system, which is deeply undemocratic and favours profit of some already wealthy few over societal wellness.
And our political system, where citizens relegate their power, every few years, to people they've never met, and in which those with the biggest campaign budgets tend to win elections.
Thus, you end up with wealthy elites having most control over our world, while being shielded from the consequences of their actions.
Democratizing the workplace, turning every corporation into a coop, would instantly solve most of the problems on Earth. Can't think of any other solution.
With the last twelve months exceeding +1.5°C, our failure to act in time has already occurred. 56 months behind on reducing emissions, and we have actually increased emissions.
Well done... humans!
Its not 'humanity' destroying the world, its the 'capitalist cultists', and their religion of capitalism.
We did it everyone! Give yourselves a pat on the back and a mighty cough cause we’re doing a great job making the air unbreathable.
Tell that to China, they've never cared about the climate.
There is nothing bad in carbon emissions: more carbon means more substrate for the plants and ultimately greener planet.
@@___-dj2dw Short answer: No.
When the temperature hits 60ºC and still rising, people might "get it".
thats the temp your lungs start to melt
@@billmago7991 Birds falll out of the sky.
In the global north. The "third world" can suffer the rising temperatures a lot, but the world will keep watching football and reyecting migrants in their beautiful and developed countries.
@@nicolasvaron73making a huge fuss about climate refugees is actually when people will start to take notice. That’s when the people who have been duped into thinking that their selfishness is a virtue will “get it”
Structural, systemic problems have no individual solutions. It's not "the world" who needs to act, it's those responsible for the system we live in.
@@LegionarioCruel Its the responsibility of those individuals who know inner peace and have good mental health to teach it and defend it for others. Dont expect the self mutilating and externally harmful to teach themselves, they dont perceive life in such a positive way.
The only way structural, systemic problems have ever been changed is by individuals - that is, by _individuals working together_.
@@TimpanistMoth_AyKayEll yes but that worked back in a world where people would care about each other's lives and their own. We understand the things happening so well we allow this suffering to happen. Companies know who dies every minute based on their pollution but decided not to do anything
@@TimpanistMoth_AyKayEll That's unfortunately not true. Check history.
@@LegionarioCruel I'm confused. How are you saying that social and political progress/improvements happen?
Ending legalized chattel slavery; expansion of the franchise; labor laws; desegregation; reproductive rights; queer rights; the Montreal Protocol for CFCs; the political independence of too many countries to count (including my own, Norway, twice - or thrice if you count WW2, but I'm mostly thinking of the first two as broadly peaceful, non-military dissolutions)...
How did ANY of these things happen, if not through individuals working together?
Of course this often (always?) happens "chaotically," with a myriad of different organizations all using slightly different tactics, sometimes at cross-purposes, but the majority of the groups contributing some kind of cultural/political/economic pressure.
For that matter, technological progress ALSO depends on individuals working together. (And often requires political organization in addition, e.g. the smallpox vaccine needed to be not just invented but globally implemented.)
For years I said, "If you want to save the White Rhino, you have to commercialise it. It's almost impossible to imagine cows or sheep becoming extinct."
People said I was nuts. But now they are all gone. Extinct. Most people don't even know, let alone care. But they would definitely care if they couldn't have their MacDonalds any more.
It wasn't until I took a Geosystems class in college that I finally understood climate change. It is a complex problem that is hard for the uninformed to understand. You can simplify it as "global warming" but that doesn't sound like much when you can only express that in a few degrees. People don't get the impact of a couple of degrees and how weather extremes point to global climate change.
Climate change is just too damn complicated for the average person. The evidence is clear to well educated people but looks indistinguishable from hieroglyphic to the masses.
So they ignore it and regard environmentalists as extremists. The environmentalist protesters don't help this perception at all as they indeed look extremist. Sure, it is an existential threat that should be extremely important, but having extremists that destroy property on your side never helps you have any impact with the skeptical and/or mislead people.
Humanity isn't worth saving if it can't be bothered to save itself.
Yet, why is our survival instinct so strong? If it all has no value, then we should already be gone. If something keeps it from collapsing, then its the fault of that.
Because we are animals. Merely surviving is not a glorious act in itself. Living a good and beneficial life ( to yourself and others) should be.
But if we stop fossil fuels tomorrow, billions will starve in 6 months. Have you ever tried growing food by hand?
@@R_Alexander029 Nobody is saying switch off fossil fuels in a day. I'm simply saying let's Actually come up with a viable decommissioning strategy and work on it together. Problem is, we humans literally cannot do that to save ourselves.
@@keepitreal2902 I agree with you. This is an optimization problem. Not burning enough fossil fuels in the 19th and 20th century would have led continued poverty for billions. However, burning too much fossil fuels will lead to decreased standards of living of billions in the future.
After the rains in Rio Grande do Sul Brazil destroyed the entire state and left many deniers stranded, people began to understand the consequences of climate change. It is interesting to see the materiality of events happening and reality imposing itself in a violent way.
The Oil companies blamed the victims.
Ever thunk alot of this abnormal weather could be man made by programs like HARP. In the middle east they modified the clouds to carry more water so it wouldn't supise me..
Well, kinda too late
Interesting???? I dont see anything interesting in this tragedy. It is an elite project to make poor people die anyhow, pretending to be a natural event like they did with covid-19. The things repeat year after year and most of us dont see it.... nothing interesting in this but chaos and deaths.
Most of us are not too stupid, but unfortunately most of us are not in any decisive position do to anything about it. Greed and money will always prevail. Unfortunately, I, like most of us, have much of neither. So I guess we are on the losing team.
Not necessarily. Stop buying the crap that these people offer up. Empty their feeding troughs. Buy second hand, share, keep stuff longer, fix stuff rather than buy new....
Moral of the story - best to buy home away from the sea and at high ground, your grandchildren will be grateful
Finland used to be considered as safe from rising sea levels, because itself is rising as well. The land rising used to be faster than the rising of the water. Now, if nothing changes, by 2100 even Helsinki will struggle with flooding and maybe the faster-rising West coast, too.
So predicting where would be high enough is a bit tricky.
Also, the sea level rising is not the on issue. Temperatures will rise, weather events will be even more polarised, the air composition will change so much (not just with CO2) that it might be unbreathable... lots of issues await us if we don't start to act fast... some even if we do...
and you should keep in mind that mountains can collapse from drought, instability and short time heavy rain
Also CO2 is a neurotoxin. So figure how to make your house safe from that.
The issue is self centredness, nothing else. The self centredness drives the greed. It is 100% going to be why we die off as a species in my opinion.
So now we are wasting time inventing euphemisms like "human brain" instead of the term for the cause of the problem: capitalism.
Capitalist media is trying to gaslight us
All social systems reach an exhaustion point in which they need to be replaced. We've reached this point with capitalism. Nevertheless, there's a strong and false ideology that capitalism is "natural" and can't be nor should be replaced, and most people prefer accepting the end of human life than replacing capitalism because "It's the best we have and we'll never have anything else".
And our Inbuilt and massive unrecognized selfishness
Ps the end is nigh
Capitalism was being phased out in the 1920s. We have corporatism with planned obsolescence.
Adam Smith wrote "read, write and account" multiple times in Wealth of Nations. When have economists been advocating mandatory accounting in the schools?
PROFIT BEFORE PEOPLE IS WHY
Because without profit you would never have been able to write this comment!
@@pinktfatrabbit won't someone think of the profit
You are 100% correct. Maximizing profit is the reason businesses today must ignore the damages that they cause to the environment and it's also the reason they must
fire as much of their work force as they can. Maximizing profit is the reason there is so much homelessness and it's also the reason that our planet is on fire. The good news is that
we can correct our profit model, 'profit = income - expenses', which, as it turns out, is really our behavior model. I recommend this new profit model...
Profit = protecting and enriching the environment, and sharing the sustenance that it provides for all of us.
With this new profit model our only major expense is ignoring our obligation to care for and enrich the environment.
This new profit model requires us to create millions of new jobs that come under the heading "Caretakers of the Environment".
Caretakers will have many specialized categories:
1. Collecting pollution that is already in the environment
2. Collecting pollution before it gets into the environment
3. Dealing with all of the waste in such ways that are good for the environment, and or good for the production of products.
4. Economically incentivizing families with two or fewer children
5. Designing new ways of producing products so that those products last for a long time and don't have to be replaced every two years.
There will be many more types of Caretaker jobs.
Every company and government will have Caretaker jobs, and everybody will be schooled, from elementary school through university about how to be caretakers of the environment.
It may already be too late to save our environment, but it is never too late to try. 👍
"PROFIT BEFORE PEOPLE" hits the nail right on the head. First, thank you! It's so refreshing to hear your opinion because most people are trying to correct technology instead of first correcting our behavior. Our present behavior model is 'profit equals income minus expenses'. This behavior model is the real cause of man-made climate change. First, it states
that money is profit. In reality money is only a permission slip that allows us to purchase our actual gains. The Second part of this behavior model tells us to maximize this
so-called profit by minimizing expenses; thus, we must ignore the damages we do to our environment, and we must keep labor expenses as low as possible. No wonder our planet is
on fire and there is so much homelessness. The only way we can repair our environment is by first correcting our behavior model. I'm recommending this new profit model.
"Profit equals protecting and enriching the environment, and sharing the sustenance that it provides for all of us.
This new behavior model would work because our only major expense would be ignoring our responsibility to protect and enrich the environment.
The new profit model requires us to create millions of new jobs that will come under the heading "Caretakers of the Environment".
Caretakers will have many specialized categories:
1. Collecting pollution that is already in the environment
2. Collecting pollution before it gets into the environment
3. Dealing with all of the waste in such ways that are good for the environment, and or good for the production of products.
4. Economically incentivizing families with two or fewer children
5. Designing new ways of producing products so that those products last for a long time and don't have to be replaced every two years.
There will be many more types of Caretaker jobs.
Every company and government will have Caretaker jobs, and everybody will be schooled, from elementary school through university about how to be caretakers of the environment.
So, we can correct our behavior!
What do you think about this idea? How can we transition from our present reckless economy to this entirely new economy that requires us to behave rationally and responsibly.
It may already be too late to save our environment, but it is never too late to try.
Climate scientist: "The sea is rising!" Householder: "Will it affect the value of my property?" DW: "Let's make another documentary".
They are banning Fungicide in EU and cheaply offloading it into rural South East USA.
DW: 🤷♂️
Aren't we like 20 years past due regarding Ted Dansens proclamations? Miami is doing fine I see, and Obama acquired some of the best beach property on the planet in the meantime.
@@flinch622 Never heard of that scientist
@@flinch622 ohhh, found him, an actor ... so the answer to the question if we are too stupid is solved in you. Yes.
You forgot Isildur's captain: "The sea is always right!"
We're DOOMED. Heaven help the people and other animals who come after us.
Man will go on long after science. They will chuck out science with the dishwater.
Effective collaboration is much more difficult than simply expressing opinions. Most people just do what is easier, with little risk to themselves.
Next do How Corporations Wont Let Us Save The World
Yeah. They sort of did, though, they talked about Exxon and lobbies, but they lost focus with the SUVs and "people always want more".
Are we too stupid? Of course. And too greedy, violent and vain. Don't you remember WWII? It pretty much answered any questions there may have been about us.
Greed is very powerful. We all deep down know what the right thing to do is. But nobody wants to make sacrifices to see it through.
I dont own a car and cycle to work daily. I even moved house so that I can cycle to work. Before i had to take the bus to work. I wish more people would make lifestyle changes so that they no longer have to drive. Im not perfect though. I still fly to go on holiday, but I do so less often than once per year. Still room for improvement.
@@puffinjuice good for you but it's nothing compared to government policy. And government policies won't change until rich and powerful governments accept their accountableitys from the past. Telling developing world don't destroy the world after doing much worse to get where you are doesn't mean nothing...
@@puffinjuice the best thing you can do is stay home, turn off your air conditioning , and your heating. Actually that still won't make a dent. Best thing to do is enjoy your life.
@@bakerkawesa Lina Khan did, bernie sanders did, many people have, yet there are many who wrongfully believe they can buy security for themselves or are too comfortable with their power in the status quo if only for the moment.
@@puffinjuiceyou work? Get on my level and do gta real life if u wanna expect change
Corporate greed knows no bounds
the global elite project is to induce the sixth mass extinction. They dont care because they have nuclearproof bunkers with plenty of food. As simple as that. So, what should be our (the people) next step? Just watch the flames from the livingroom sofa?
We have always been our own worst enemy. The Earth though, will only recover and be at equilibrium again when it doesn’t have our negative inputs anymore.❤️
Do remember all the beautiful ecosystems, filled with life species of so many kind. In a sense or other family members of the animal kingdom. Which if we don't act in any sensible way will feel an immense brand of the calamity that we made. Origin now 40% of insects species has probably been extended, there's almost no wild mammals in the Wilds anymore, similar for the sea with plastics and asification. In other words we are living in the 6th Extinction. Life will come again but it will be many many cycles from now. So we as a collective species named human will have been the originator of that extension. I think that's something worth trying to mitigate
we arent too stupid, its just that, we're too lazy and greedy. we know theres something wrong, we understand whats happening, why its happening. nobody is willing to change.
Well, when you shut your nuclear power plants down just to reopen coal-fired ones, that surely looks silly
Environmental activists have a hard time to call out the stupid ones among themselves hurting their cause. It isn't just with nuclear energy. The same is also true with environmentalists being against any form of civic engineering like some figures within Dam Removal Europe cheering for the removal of hydropower dams, which are despite being bad for the local environment green for the climate. They're also against coastal protection like the Dutch Haringvliet Dam, part of the Delta Works.
Or slightly related when Dutch government was banned from doing coastal maintenance for causing to much NOx emissions. Those kind of things are not ideal when half the country is below sea level. Or since whenthe wolf in the Netherlands, the Fauna Protection is fighting any form of management in court leading to wolves thinking it's okay to attack children (which eventually lead to people supporting the general extinction of the wolf here again).
In that regard fundamentalists are just as destructive as the climate change ignorers and deniers, because they're excellent at destroying the general support for environment and climate protection.
Germany moment
Well, what can I say. Yes
Because nuclear energy is so clean, or what? It is expensive, we have absolutely no permanent solution for the waste and the potential to pollute the ground and water systems for thousands of years with radiation is massive.
@@janaburczyk4077 You fail to see the forest from the trees. It's not about being perfect, it is about being better. Nuclear is absolutely a better option compared to hydrocarbons.
This is really a feat of deep authentic journalism at it’s finest. Quite gripping and so cutting edge. Thank you so much. Very helpful.
In the end, people will know. The question is just how bad the situation will become until then.
Reason in Germany, thinking about my building cooperative: because we want to keep doing things the way we always did it. We want heat pumps, but not as part of an AC unit. That is considered devilish.
I asked for the approval to have an efficient AC unit installed permanently that uses at least 75% less electricity than my mobile one (requiring am open window, leading to hot air from outside being sucked in). But that was declined, because it's a rental apartment.(I wanted to pay for everything myself, even yearly maintenance). Now I keep paying around 12 euros a day because my mobile AC consumes 30 kilowatt of electricity every day (for the last 4 weeks, as the building is so hot due to bad architecture). As a result, I cannot take people seriously anymore who tell me to act more sustainably. The "cannot do attitude" here in Germany does not allow for that.
Too busy making money destroying it to stop destroying it. We never tried.
To busy on something that only collectively exists. Unlike the planet
Social/Liberal policy, and issues like climate are inherently disadvantaged. The opposition is way more coordinated and motivated compared to the diffuse lack of responsibility and ownership. An energy company knows very clearly what is at risk and the approach they want to take to protect their specific interests. We have numerous opinions about what might help and cant even agree on what we want. Its absurd to think the public can hold the responsibility when competing with industry. Its akin to asking the average grade 5 teacher how to fix our national budget deficit and expecting anything more than 'tax more, spend less.'
Smoking is a personal choice, what companies and government do to us is not.
It is your choice to serve, give your opponent infinite power until the planet dies or fight till you die and maybe stop the maniacs to leave a legacy that your children think is worth living and caring for
But Ofc it is always the fault of the powerful that people give them power
@j4ckpot1994 I didn't do anything, and If I did it would be wasted. Nice try. Legacy is what got us here.
@@j4ckpot1994 Of course it is. I didn't do anything. Didn't choose any of it, told everyone.
@@j4ckpot1994 Without knowing anything about me or asking any questions, what is it that I should take responsibility for 🤔
As long as the leaders of this planet will be financists and economists andd lawyers,we have no chance !
I said this before and people just shrugged it off...
Needs to be reframed, it should be a call to save the people.
Hell, yeh. Right on...
No need to watch a 42 minutes documentary to know the answer, it's yes.
In Metro Manila, the Philippines, I have seen temperatures spike to 37 to almost 39°C as the observed temperature (not heat index). Plus, I have seen one month of rain pouring down in three days (at 458 mm) surpassing previous Southwest Monsoon downpours observed back here. What would it take for us to be compelled to act, if I may ask?
The economic system must change in order to make the changes necessary to save us from ourselves..in my opinion !
Not having kids and not living a materialistic Life only saves humanity from the climate change disaster.
Asking people to become saints and sacrifice for the greater good isn’t gonna work. Or did it so far?
@@Sunabe77 are you of that opinion if corona strikes again and I refuse to take the jab?
No matter. Fertility rates in Africa are still high, and they want to move to the Americas and Europe to enjoy your lifestyle. All the people who feel guilt should move to Iceland, the first world country with the lowest carbon footprint.
@@SkiDooSummit670their labor creates those nice and highly destructive lifestyles
Because we only live 100 years. If everyone had eternal life, this would be more important.
What about that love that parents say they have for their kids, I guess it's a fake love.
One of the best pro-religion comments I've seen in the Web recently
Yeah, considering people didn't care enough to take action Against CLIMATE CHANGE. @@begonaRR
Throwing stuff on paintings or blocking traffic will have an opposite effect
It brings attention to the problem that some people want to ignore.
@@rickdworsky6457 But the people talk more about the action and what the action costs then to talk about why the activists do what they do. It addresses often the wrong people. You need to convince the richest of the richest people and not the average Joe. And you need to show solutions.
Yea that's of very little effect, they want to try more effective non lethal ways of making their point.
but freedom convoy fascists get support violating other peoples rights...makes no sense
whats your solution then?
As to the question in the title...yes we are too stupid to save the climate.
In japan there's a saying: "rivers and mountains can move, but human nature never does".
This was an excellent production. It spoke directly to me as I remember as a kid seeing a Suzuki speech about climate change and feeling so worried and hopeless about it I went the other direction and left all my electronics on and spent additional time on them because I was unsure how to make a difference.
This video provided a good visual of how our psychology effects us and our ability (or lack-there-of) to make responsible decisions.
But how do we translate this understanding into action? I still feel just as hopeless and I even remain unconvinced that banning plastic straws will be part of the solution.
Thank you again DW and staff for this video. I hope it will help start more conversations about the climate.
It's not our stupidity, it's large industries and capitalism
Humans have not been granted an exemption from extinction. Know thy enemy: greed.
No. Not really close. The real problem is the vacuum of leaders to lead the global popular revolution to challenge the corrupt global elites. Thats it or our near extinction as a species.
Well, we had a good run. The final season of Earth is going to be wild!
The Earth started out as a molten ball.
Folks really underestimate their own species. We once survived an extinction event where only about a thousand of us were left alive. I am amazed we managed to repopulate the world again and also rise to this level. This climate change stuff is nothing in comparison to what we humans aim to do in the long term. Fight against climate change is just us taking the first few baby steps towards terraforming. Eventually, we will have reworked our economy, industry, society and politics to the point that we'll have moved past this entire "its too expensive to fight climate change debate." We just need to tweak our economics a bit, and shape our collective mindset, let the new one percolate down through the bulk of humanity. Once that happens, we will have outgrown this event.
Ecdysis is never without its challenges. But we humans, we always rise above the challenges. Even if this event brings us to the brink of extinction while simultaneously throwing us back to the middle ages, we'll rebuild it all eventually. And we'll rebuild it all better this time.
@@death_parade our species will be fine, but civilisation and society might take a deep dip in a systems collapse.
@@JeffBilkins Will it? Read my 6th, 7th and 8th sentence in the comment above.
@@death_parade if ur talking about the toba eruption human bottleneck theory. that has been proven wrong
It would be great if DW made the effort to invite experts who actually research the foundations of pro-sustainable behavior and have real experience in environmental psychology or neuroscience. Simply throwing the word 'brain' into the discussion feels sensational, given the substantial research already done in this field. This is the perfect opportunity to invite someone like Prof. Sabine Pahl! The field is decades old and well-established. While climate scientists are crucial, they aren’t psychologists. The neuroscientist featured here hasn’t conducted any research on sustainable behaviors and seems to be formulating arguments on the fly. It wouldn’t take much to invite the right experts and turn these documentaries into something truly outstanding.
This has been a problem for over 50 years, but many people still remain indifferent. I think we will soon lose our ability to survive.
Inefective. You dont make friends striking in roads.
Do the people driving make the system? No.
Change the system.
Irreversible catastrophic climate change. Extinction. Human Extinction.
The system is maintained by the structure of power. Open source and decentralization in the structure of global digital intelligence will help the human brain decentralize and flatten the structure of power.
For these people, it'd be easier to change the roads 😂
The first global famine will make people sit up and start doing something. It may be closer than you think.
@@christianzilla no. Why would there be a famine?
@@rig4365 Yield decrease and crop failure. Temperature change. Warmer weather. Colder weather. Flooding. Desertification. Destabilization of weather patterns and the fact that despite our advanced technology, our very existence still depends on a six inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains.
@@christianzilla no. Modern technology is quite good. We get more food pet Sq inch today in spite of all the fear mongering and will continue to do so. The only risk is if governments impose restrictions on nitrogen based fertilizers. Or start buying out the smaller farmers . Both of which they are trying to do in the Netherlands
@@rig4365technology won't save you. I'm sorry but you are misinformed, you just haven't taken a look at all the info that is to be considered regarding the climate crisis. Total collapse is already baked, just slowly unraveling.
@@christianzillaonly if groups bring it about.
Working hard to prove a point.
All starvation is political.
If we can place a man on the moon, then we can keep everyone fed.
It is all political.
We would have needed clear and strict rules already in 1980! From 1990 they shouldn't have build any combustion engine cars, reduce cattle, pesticides, plastic waste, avoid any toxic and useless overproduction. We should be ready by now to have build up a sustainable, ecologically healthy and globally fair and just economy and societies. A better world is possible! Start with the man or woman in the mirror. Everybody! We needed rules and laws to stop any pollution and waste and burning. As it is 30 years to late we can only pray and bring forward renewable energy and biotechnology, precision Fermentation for milk and ecological farming. Give credits to the good workers!
Most of the things you said have nothing to do with carbon emissions. No pesticides and plastic? Maybe ban pharmaceuticals? Are you nuts?
Does people that committed violent actions against activists been prosecuted according the law? Or there is no law in Germany. ???
I watch a lot of DW's documentaries.... I think this is the best one I've seen so far. Good Work guys.
Thanks a lot for watching and for your positive feedback. We appreciate you taking the time to comment and
are glad you like our content!
The bulk of the collective is insane. Suffering is the only way we will awaken.
We have been suffering. It hasn't helped a bit.
@@troygoss6400 no . Get out there and enjoy your life. You deserve a good one. But you're responsible for doing do
The global standard of living keeps rising.
You will be too old and dying before you can awake. So it becomes the next generation's problem.
Local majors are doing nothing, Most of the people are ignorant to the theme, big politics only take the theme as a nice flag. Shame on humanity 😔
No, we aren't too stupid. The system is stupid.
Maybe we're too stupid to change it?
Maybe the system's mamma is the stupid one - or the real stupidity are the friends we made along the way; wait, that can't be right...
I agree with what agent K said in the movie MEN IN BLACK:" a person is smart(in essence), people are dumb". Don't follow the herd
One of the things people don't look at before buying a home is how far above sea level it is. I think that will eventually be an important number to consider before buying a home.
Unless you're Al Gore, I suppose
It’s not my brain that is stopping me, it’s money. I’ve spent a lot of money making my house produce less CO2 and the last change to install geothermal is too expensive. I make a good salary and I cannot go 100% green on my own. Imagine someone with less income.
The other big factor is that landlords have zero reason to go green, since they don’t pay the utility bills in the US.
We are not too stupid, rather, we are too greedy and power hungry at the cost of humanity.
In simple terms, climate change is the cost we pay for convenience. Everyone is equally liable and climate change can’t be stopped unless each and every individual on this planet contributes to the efforts.
No - the cost we pay for convenience are microplastics; everything else is a bonus.
Yes we are...
Most people think the solution is for others to change, but they're unwilling to change themselves.
I was one of the protestors back in the 80´s over the Spotted Owl Movement and all I got to say is it was hard won but it worked!!! People just have to keep fighting and speaking with their dollars.
That's the spirit!
Yes climate activism isnt about getting everyone to c9me onboard. Its about getting policymakers to move pushed by a tipping point of activist & action
Should have kept population below 3 billion
And no one wants to talk about that for some very strange reason. They are more concerned about the economy and having more workers to exploit for profits.
Exactly and so you know whoever propagates for more kids have interest to keep the current consumerism culture to maximum.
OK, Thanos
Yes. You're welcome.
Time has run out!
When do climate scientists talk about unnecessary manufacturing due to planned obsolescence which is going to produce more CO2?
When do they talk about mandatory accounting in the schools so consumers are smarter?
When do they point out economists ignoring the depreciation of durable consumer goods since Sputnik?
they are?
Climate activists have been doing it for years. And climate scientists just report on what the climate was/is/might be like, it's not their job to save mankind, they are just researchers.
The situation is bigger than recycling or effeciency 'solutions'.
We need mandatory minimum repairability laws. I've actually created a list of them for automobiles.
@@gregorymalchuk272
What is in the list?
I'm 40, never owned a car even if I could afford it. Everyone thinks I'm an idiot.
well, you can be that, and not own a car, owning a car does not mean you are an idiot, and not owning a car does not mean you are smart.
Great video
Its quite easy to get co2 emissions down; do as Jim Hansen suggest; co2 tax, rising every year. And all this money given to every citizen
My first vehicle was a 68 Ford F-100. It was painted leaf green with a toolbox the same color. In the center of the toolbox was a sticker that had an ashtray overflowing with put out cigarettes. It said “ Be kind to smokers because they do not have too much time left.”
Later in life, after selling the truck, I seen the truck with smoke stacks behind the cab. I recon the “ Be kind to smokers because they do not have too much time left” sticker contributed to the decision to put smoke stacks on the truck.
Everyday is an experiment in how much this O’World can withstand human manipulation of the natural environment.
Thank you again from the USofA. The last portion on dopamine is so important because that is the addiction neurochemical. This should be part of basic education -- learning the interactions in the brain. (Robert Sopolsky's Stanford lectures are available on UA-cam) Certainly the advertising industry uses all this information to influence the unaware. That is their job--to get you "hooked.". The issue is that dopamine is the "more" chemical, the addiction chemical, and not the satisfaction chemical. "Anything the eye can behold, the heart can desire." What will bring long-term satisfaction?
As long as we all choose to take internal combustion engine driven transportation or any other way which requires fuel burning we are all responsible. Use no fuel than Shell and Exxon will have a problem... Blocking highways only angers people
People "choose" to use ICE vehicles because their cities are not built for them to walk or cycle to work and school, and their employers and teachers won't let them work and study from home like they did during lockdown. Why fall into the trap of blaming individuals again when we know that these choices were made for us at the structural level?
In cities that are designed for pedestrians and cyclists, people walk or bike, and only the disabled and delivery drivers use powered vehicles. That makes it a lot more practical to change powered vehicles from ICE to electric.
The people attempting to remove the protesters should all be charged with assault - especially that truck driver with anger mgmt issues. Bizarre.
they've to work if they don't work how they survive if you're not a working person like that person you'll not understand I understand what your standpoint is but blaming a working person is illogical
@@SamudraGuptaChakma Illogical to suggest that someone who physically assaults non-violent protesters should be charged with assault? This, my fellow time traveler, is a felony - the reason for doing it is immaterial. Felony Assault is Felony Assault.
@@TheDiversifiedFarmer Could be? Why don't we stick to the facts. We are witnessing felony assault and you are concerned that something "could be"? and follow up with autos burning more fuel? The cars "could be" electric. Your argument has zero merit.
@@YANKEEYOGA Stopping vehicles leads to disruption of the global supply chains, which leads to more carbon emissions as pile ups and pending works increase and overall efficiency of the economy comes down. The driving force of capitalism remains a constant, despite the best efforts of the protestors to disrupt everyday life.
The world is a massive machine that is running non-stop. We are faced with a dire situation where the machine will burn itself down, lest some parts of it (particularly the GHG producing ones) be exorcised. But those need to be replaced with cleaner alternatives, because otherwise, the machine will grind to a halt, which in turn will be more disastrous than climate change. So our task involves basically swapping the wheels of a moving car without letting it stop. Such a delicate task can not be accomplished by petulant protests. Nor will it be accomplished by climate change deniers that love to throw doubts at everyone but themselves.
We all need to stop behaving like kids. If a problem seems insurmountable, work around it. Instead of banging your head on a rock like these protestors are doing, in the process causing more harm than good.
@@death_parade This brings nothing to the conversation. You are missing the part of FELONY ASSAULT. A few vehicles stopped by protesters does not influence supply and demand, if anything it would involve the law of diminishing returns
we are still using lots of fossile fuels because we subsidize its cost !!! via not paying for the damage it does. and this also relates to the 6th Great Extinction!
Does anyone know where to find the original documentary in German?? I tried, but I suck at searching on my phone
I’ve heard a lyric from a song recently, that may put it into some perspective. “ Hurry up, the world needs this, speak up now or we can pick up the pieces”.
DW , Kindly include official English subtitles.
Prošli smo točku, tkz. "tipping point", samo je ostao dobar marketing i zarada. Svi su se počeli baviti klimatskim promjenama tek kada su shvatili da mogu dobro zaraditi na njima. Novinari DW su ovoga puta ipak razočarali.
Activism receive funds from corporations. Goverments receive donations from corporations. The same corporations responsible for pollution. Activists are pawns, going to bother citizens that have no power over things. Activists should go after the responsible ones, the corporations.
Misinformation
@@Wind-oh-Wishp He is not entirely incorrect. Not all activists are like that, but many are. This is the era of hybrid warfare and nations like USA and UK wield activists and NGOs as weapons to sabotage other nations, like mine.
100 - 200 Bilions for footbal cup in UAE, so what is the reason not to have money for more substantial projects? Rich people and nations are trying to convince poor nations and people that it is their fault or that it cannot be done, whereas if 100 to 200 billion euros can be found for the World Cup in UAE, then money for such other projects should not be a problem.
I don’t understand the Indian scientist need to not get outraged, he’s acting like it’s an even playing field. When the oil companies are literally spending millions of dollars in propaganda each year.
Yes we're the evil apes.