it's tough because scientists are not inclined toward dropping emotional crumbs that sway opinion. 'M often shocked how shallow friends' thinking is, conforming to majority opinion without realizing they veered off the logical track.
@@EvolutionWendy Yes, to me the orthodox economics paradigm will not be anywhere in the solution path as it has become so removed from energetic reality in our ecological overshoot. My doomerism suggest that it will have to unravel completely to revolutionize.
@@SRCX.ClimateResearch I am probably misusing it a bit, but I use it in the overshoot conversation because the human enterprise is apparently causing an imbalance of the mass (energetic reality) of available energy. It comes from my lay-person understanding of lectures by William Rees.
@@SRCX.ClimateResearch Too many people using too much stuff. The theory of energetic reality suggests all mass is energy...as I understand it. SRCX, you are watching the same stuff I am obviously. I like to comment to help the creator get more traffic
Arguments about reversing Injustice to marginalized people are often used as a "carrot" to protect an ecosystem. However, lots of research shows that majority opinion IS NOT SWAYED by this motivation. This appeal to altruism simply isn't an attractive motivator (sad-but-true). I'm surprised that people in high places continue to motivate governments to protect environment by bringing up the marginalized-people plea. Majority opinion is stoopid this way: Majority opinion doesn't realize majority-ass-is-grass if we don't protect such ecosystems.
In a capitalist system - profit is god. People expect these non-human corporations driven by increasing profits (illegal for them to act against the shareholders interest) to suddenly forgo profits to merely delay inevitable global collapse. Our time to act was half a century ago, we had the scientific research (see ‘Limits to Growth’- 1972 MIT study, one of innumerable warnings but a key one in my opinion), unfortunately the oil companies spent a fortune obfuscating all of it. So when the host of this talk said “we’ve gotten ourselves into this mess” , it’s mainly the oil companies, corrupt governments and media for being bought by these companies. I mean sure we can put part of the blame on the masses for being so gullible, but I don’t think that’s very fair (as infuriating as I find their mindlessness to be lol). The irony of oil companies hosting this event is sickening. Lots of people find it funny, and as much as like ‘dark humour’ I see nothing amusing in the prospect of a bleak future destined for mass starvation, complete societal collapse and all of the atrocities associated with it. My only wish is that the ‘elites’ suffer the most when the time comes.
I'd say that without meaningful investment in that area, the answer to that specific question is going to be something along the lines of "we can't" - its a bitter pill to swallow and no one is going to listen to it from the people on this panel. It's something that will need to come from the top down, from laws and regulations. People may also need to consider if their journey is really necessary, not sure if holidays can come under that umbrella any more, or most/all business meetings. The systems thinking approach talked about here is an important point because without it we end up with the current crop of proposed solutions, like flying on recycled oil as in the Virgin Airlines SAF project (biofuels suffer from economic/ecological side-effects from ignoring the systems wide approach).
Underwhelming.. lot of words that have associated moral aproval , but nothing very confronting..sort of academic professional waffle.. give me william rees anyday.
Taxation was ivented to steer the economy in a certain direction. thus all we need to do is TAX all types of pollution! AND Tax the rich (who got wealthy via the publics natural resources) in order to help bring the cleaner alternatives to the masses.
Totally unrealistic, I'm afraid. There is no such thing as a worlwide tax. In individual countries, it's typically the rich who decide about it, either directly or through lobbyism or corruption; if anythings else fails, they'll just get their money into another country.
UA-cam sends me these videos because I’m interested Overshoot, as described by William Catton, William Rees, and several others. These people have no clue. It used to be infuriating. I’m over it. All human activity in all contexts is going to contract. Except for dyin’. This tendency will become increasingly egalitarian once economic buffers used by the privileged are disrupted and exhausted. There’ll be increasingly equitable opportunities for different genders, ethnicities, the economically disenfranchised to die as the processes we’ve initiated, progresses. Our core equality as living beings will be indisputably demonstrated….by dyin’ . This is being beta tested in Ukraine and occupied Palestine, with some variations in Haiti, Somalia, Sudan, Libya. Results appear to be really promising, although not evenly distributed, so far. Let’s stay positive! Don’t forget to vote!
Flying 30.000 air planes isnt going to be a factor feeding and not starving is the only thing poeple will be worried about once the systems collapse and that could happen vary soon i woould bet within the nest few years the heating is happening fast keep a eye on the oceans there heating is directly going to keep heating the planet 2024 will make 2023 look like paradise
Talks like these do nothing but to fuel the false hope for a green growth economy. This has been envisioned for decades with no evidence of it globally coming through whatsoever. Likewise, there's no evidence that this will change anytime soon. The global economy is based on ruthless resource exploitation and the panel offers no credible, plausible and realistic pathway out. In fact, one would do better to be honest and accept that there is no graceful way to transition away from the existing economy, since any country who tries to do so will suffer tremendous disadvantage compared to all countries which don't. The only way to transition away is by system collapse, which will happen sooner or later - be it by slow decline or by another world war.
I couldn't watch it all, but I am glad people have patience for such things.
it's tough because scientists are not inclined toward dropping emotional crumbs that sway opinion. 'M often shocked how shallow friends' thinking is, conforming to majority opinion without realizing they veered off the logical track.
@@EvolutionWendy Yes, to me the orthodox economics paradigm will not be anywhere in the solution path as it has become so removed from energetic reality in our ecological overshoot. My doomerism suggest that it will have to unravel completely to revolutionize.
@@SRCX.ClimateResearch I am probably misusing it a bit, but I use it in the overshoot conversation because the human enterprise is apparently causing an imbalance of the mass (energetic reality) of available energy. It comes from my lay-person understanding of lectures by William Rees.
@@SRCX.ClimateResearch Too many people using too much stuff. The theory of energetic reality suggests all mass is energy...as I understand it.
SRCX, you are watching the same stuff I am obviously. I like to comment to help the creator get more traffic
Economy met ecology. Economy won and now ecology is dying.
Arguments about reversing Injustice to marginalized people are often used as a "carrot" to protect an ecosystem. However, lots of research shows that majority opinion IS NOT SWAYED by this motivation. This appeal to altruism simply isn't an attractive motivator (sad-but-true). I'm surprised that people in high places continue to motivate governments to protect environment by bringing up the marginalized-people plea. Majority opinion is stoopid this way: Majority opinion doesn't realize majority-ass-is-grass if we don't protect such ecosystems.
In a capitalist system - profit is god. People expect these non-human corporations driven by increasing profits (illegal for them to act against the shareholders interest) to suddenly forgo profits to merely delay inevitable global collapse.
Our time to act was half a century ago, we had the scientific research (see ‘Limits to Growth’- 1972 MIT study, one of innumerable warnings but a key one in my opinion), unfortunately the oil companies spent a fortune obfuscating all of it. So when the host of this talk said “we’ve gotten ourselves into this mess” , it’s mainly the oil companies, corrupt governments and media for being bought by these companies. I mean sure we can put part of the blame on the masses for being so gullible, but I don’t think that’s very fair (as infuriating as I find their mindlessness to be lol).
The irony of oil companies hosting this event is sickening. Lots of people find it funny, and as much as like ‘dark humour’ I see nothing amusing in the prospect of a bleak future destined for mass starvation, complete societal collapse and all of the atrocities associated with it. My only wish is that the ‘elites’ suffer the most when the time comes.
Suggestion: is it possible to upload these very valable talks on podcast platforms? I think that would help reach more people aswell
Almost 5 people were interested. Shows very well the kinda investment we had. Rest of participants were out drinking cocktails and doing oil business
What a crock of blah blah. Why no ecologists, or biologists on the panel?
Just a bunch of meaningless words. Give me some specifics. Like how your going to fly 30,000 commercial airplanes without fossil fuel.
I'd say that without meaningful investment in that area, the answer to that specific question is going to be something along the lines of "we can't" - its a bitter pill to swallow and no one is going to listen to it from the people on this panel. It's something that will need to come from the top down, from laws and regulations. People may also need to consider if their journey is really necessary, not sure if holidays can come under that umbrella any more, or most/all business meetings.
The systems thinking approach talked about here is an important point because without it we end up with the current crop of proposed solutions, like flying on recycled oil as in the Virgin Airlines SAF project (biofuels suffer from economic/ecological side-effects from ignoring the systems wide approach).
Underwhelming.. lot of words that have associated moral aproval , but nothing very confronting..sort of academic professional waffle.. give me william rees anyday.
William Rees is the man.
Taxation was ivented to steer the economy in a certain direction. thus all we need to do is TAX all types of pollution! AND Tax the rich (who got wealthy via the publics natural resources) in order to help bring the cleaner alternatives to the masses.
Totally unrealistic, I'm afraid. There is no such thing as a worlwide tax. In individual countries, it's typically the rich who decide about it, either directly or through lobbyism or corruption; if anythings else fails, they'll just get their money into another country.
COrruPt28
Right
You mean the government and the economy needs to work for the people? Me thinks I agree. Sadly most peeps are numb.
UA-cam sends me these videos because I’m interested Overshoot, as described by William Catton, William Rees, and several others.
These people have no clue. It used to be infuriating. I’m over it.
All human activity in all contexts is going to contract. Except for dyin’. This tendency will become increasingly egalitarian once economic buffers used by the privileged are disrupted and exhausted. There’ll be increasingly equitable opportunities for different genders, ethnicities, the economically disenfranchised to die as the processes we’ve initiated, progresses. Our core equality as living beings will be indisputably demonstrated….by dyin’ . This is being beta tested in Ukraine and occupied Palestine, with some variations in Haiti, Somalia, Sudan, Libya. Results appear to be really promising, although not evenly distributed, so far. Let’s stay positive! Don’t forget to vote!
Flying 30.000 air planes isnt going to be a factor feeding and not starving is the only thing poeple will be worried about once the systems collapse and that could happen vary soon i woould bet within the nest few years the heating is happening fast keep a eye on the oceans there heating is directly going to keep heating the planet 2024 will make 2023 look like paradise
Talks like these do nothing but to fuel the false hope for a green growth economy. This has been envisioned for decades with no evidence of it globally coming through whatsoever. Likewise, there's no evidence that this will change anytime soon. The global economy is based on ruthless resource exploitation and the panel offers no credible, plausible and realistic pathway out. In fact, one would do better to be honest and accept that there is no graceful way to transition away from the existing economy, since any country who tries to do so will suffer tremendous disadvantage compared to all countries which don't. The only way to transition away is by system collapse, which will happen sooner or later - be it by slow decline or by another world war.