Morningstar is payed by people like you and me. No one else.
Itâs hard to wade through because the whole set up is designed to make it so. Morningstarâs work takes all the pieces apart so you can see all the nefarious actions put in place to deceive. That said, iâm into the subject and she doesnât write in an easy to understand way, even for those that follow the subject.
Sadly i think the truth has to be faced. Any measures that would have to be taken to make a serious difference, and reverse climate change will never be taken by any government, because these measures would be so draconian that the people would never stand for it. Thatâs the truth. People will never stop flying, people will never give up their gas guzzling cars, people in India, China, Pakistan, who less than fifty years ago didnât even have fridges, never mind cars and motorbikes, when we in the west had taken all these for granted for years wonât give them up now they have joined the rest of us. And who can blame them. Lip service will be paid to the climate change arguments, but nothing will be done. Because no politician, in any country will ever stand on a platform of telling people the truth, and a manifesto telling their people they will take these things away from them, for their own good. We know it wonât happen, letâs stop pretending otherwise. I realised this many years ago when Madonna, after flying in on a private jet, stood on the stage at Wembley and implored her adoring fans to only use one sheet of toilet paper to wipe their arse. To save the planet! Greta and all the rest of them are being played, wasting their time, but i have no doubt some big bucks are being made by some people on the back of it. Nothing meaningful will be done, because the overwhelming majority of the populace will never stand for it. Live for today and fuck the next generation coming through. And the next generation after that will be just the same, ad infinitum.
6 Likes
Reluctantly agree. 
1 Like
On the face of it, that broadly sums up how I view the situation. However, the timescale is the critical thing here. I fully expect that 20 years from now practically every vehicle on the road will be electric, with the power supplied by carbon free means, be that natural or nuclear. Taking transport emissions out of the equation will make a huge impact, whether thatâs going to be enough remains to be seen. In combination with other measures which are actually being implemented, like solar panels and very high insulation standards imposed on new builds, it just might look different in a couple of decades. Of course, we may have already passed the point of no return by then, but I donât personally think itâs quite as final (yet) as the picture being painted.
1 Like
Itâs going to take a dramatic change to turn all of the worldâs power production carbon free in 20 years. I donât think that will happen. CO2 emmissions from transport are only about a third of the global output, energy is the other two thirds. If we donât switch our energy production methods then weâre fucked. Unfortunately for the reasons many have outlined above I think we already are. The system has too many vested interests and will not change until its too late.
Yeah, there are so many reasons the lie about electric will never work. It currently supplies about 18% of world energy consumption. The resources needed to even consider the rest is mind boggling and there arenât enough resources left(weâve already raped the planet).
If only we could use the western worlds greatest resource.
So, why are the powers that be wasting time and effort on pretending to take any steps at all? If that were wholly true, they have nothing whatsoever to gain and a great deal, both politically and economically, to lose by implementing the sort of measures that they are, regarding electrification of transport, etc. The population would be far more content if they were told that either the problem was nonexistent or that it was inevitable anyway, so not to worry about altering their behaviour. If it genuinely is too late to avert it, why are they bothering at all? Why not just do a Trump, and sweep it aside in a flood of rhetorical bullshit?
Content they might be(and thatâs your problem when it comes to politics), but neither of the above are true. Itâs very real and only our capitalist system has made it inevitable(at least in the accelerated way itâs happened/happening).
Why are they bothering? Look at the rise in awareness. They do a few sums and work out how it effects vote share. Then do something thatâs no help at all, but fools people and does so whilst making big profits.
Thatâs modern politics. People think somethingâs been done, so are happy to vote for you and big business have their profit, so donât turn their dogs(msm) on you to destroy the public perception.
The answers are simple, but until you change the mindset of vapid greed/consumption everything everywhere is fucked. If you compare our energy use to the average Bangladeshi(carbon footprint=population) this little island would have a population of around 5 billion people. We are that greedy.
Try explaining to a middle class, middle aged, white westerner, that it is indeed them that are responsible and need to cut everything they do.
They donât take it very well in my experience.
Why do you think weâve got trump?
So, your opinion is basically that itâs Game Over for the human race?
Just so long as my Ch. Ausone 16 has time to mature, I donât give a fuck
Not my opinion, sciences opinion*.
We do of course have options, but that means facing some hard truths, as if we were mature adults that could see past personal greed and pointless vanity.
As is our parasitic way, we will keep devouring more than we need, for that shallow thrill of buying pointless shit because weâre told too. Looked at rationally, weâre only going to get what we knows coming and in truth, what we richly deserve. Itâs not as if we havenât been warned for as long as iâve been alive.
Sad part, weâll take everything else with us, including all future generations hopes(obvs).
*\Professor Stephen Schneider(deceased) explains a bit here and things havenât got better since this was made.
Thereâs a video from Architectâs & Engineers for truth about WT7(bear with me) that at the end explains why people struggle to believe the truths of certain major trauma events even when the science is irrefutable(remember the politics?). Iâd recommend it for anyone that wonders why we so often follow without question, quite obvious lies.
If youâre interested here it is. That particular bit starts at 46:40 but if you ever for a single second believed the official bullshit, watch it all.
Theyâre all top professionals in the relevant fields with a combined experience of 25,000 years.
The science doesnât lie(plus you get a bit of Lynn Margulis).
Putting aside the rather sweeping assertions of greed and overconsumption, this little issue might be contributing itâs fair shareâŚ
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
As to your earlier perfectly valid point about Bangladeshis, etc, having a vastly more sustainable carbon footprint than those in the west, well, what do you think their populations aspire to? Retaining their environmental status quo as their technologies and industries make similar advances to our own, in the name of ecological virtue? Donât kid yourself, theyâll want iphones and BMWs the moment they can afford them.
Population is of course a major issue.
Wanting certain technology isnât the issue. Weâve already produced enough phones for the world(go live in India and see how they constantly reuse everything. Itâs a world away from the west). The issue is the drip feed of the latest tech and the psychological warfare that is called marketing thatâs the problem. We havenât got such a huge carbon footprint because we make stuff last and itâll be us that leads them into the never ending shit cycle, not their own natural development.
Itâs our problem and no amount of âwhat ifsâ will change that(but is a very easy form of denial).
I still donât see what you are actually proposing. I drive a 15 year old car, and Iâve had the same pc and phone for the last 5 years, Iâm too old to change to a vegetarian diet and I donât buy any more energy than I need to. As far as I can tell from the scenarios being put forward, we basically need to return to pre-industrial levels of population and/or living standards in order to preserve the environment in a way which suits us. Youâve already said that really major governmental initiatives like electrification of transport and home insulation/solar panels are merely political lip service and wonât make a jot of difference, so what are you actually suggesting ought to be done?
A Thanos type cull might be a good start 
2 Likes
That the way we live will kill everything on the planet and much much sooner than people are led to believe.
People need to grasp the reality of that before we even begin trying to deal with it in any meaningful way.
In the present western world itâs hard to do much more(you donât fly?), but even everyone doing as you are would slow the process down a bit(maybe even enough time for people to face the truth, before the worse scenarios become reality).
The thing is how many people live like that. Look at people nowadays. Mortgaged up to the eyeballs, but must have the new BMW/Audi/Merc because the neighbors have one. Go back just 30 years and compare, thatâd be considered madness for most, but not today(why does everyone want to be the same?).
In some senses yes we need to go back, but not in all. Technology does have its uses and used correctly could ease the pain of change. Even things like solar are great, just not in the way itâs done now.
Work and food supply need to be local for a start. Simple things like that relate to a big drop in energy use.
Nothing about the environment should be thought of " in a way which suits us". Thatâs what got us here.
Sorry if thatâs how it appears. 'Twas not my intention. There are many things that can help, but the bullshit being spouted that things will go on as normal needs to be stopped. Governments and business deliberately lie about how they will help to keep the population from change, but i suppose thatâs what happens when youâve already told the lie that a debt fuelled economy has any chance of avoiding collapse.
Acceptance of what is happening and itâs causes. No more, as when that happens people wonât need to be told anything else.
Survival is a very powerful instinct.
Posted these before, but good summing up of us and our self inflicted problems.
So if we nuke China and India - 2bn less people = zero global warming
Enviro shit is a piece of piss
A few problems there.
1 whoâs going to make stuff?
2 ever heard of wind? It has a nasty habit of blowing and spreading stuff(not the kind of stuff in point 1).
3 youâve just made a large percentage of very important resources(if you want to keep living as you presently do) unobtainable.
4 hypersonic. The Chinese are very good at it. Weâre not. Guess who disappears in a mushroom cloud first?
Now if you reverse the roles you might be onto a winner 
Mere details
2 Likes
We only have about 10 nukes to their 100+, think weâll not come out of it well.