Forums > Social Discussion > Vegetarianism for climate change?

A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.

How would we know how much Co2 to sequester? and what if we act like it's gone and it dissolves and comes back? that would be like a time bomb. Dry Ice is soluble so that part of the sea would surley die as carbonic acid was formed. so the cure to Global warming would be to poison the sea? seems a pretty bad idea to me

A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.

the best smiles are the ones you lead to

If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Originally Posted By: Stone I think you could be mistaken about the climbing - Heat-affected climber rescued, and the snow - Australian ski fields on slippery slope.


NOOOoooooooooo!!!!!!!!!

but on a serious note that climbing article was a load of rubbish, that is not the way it happened. The guy in question was way hungover, and the climb he was on (he wasnt mountain climbing like the article suggests, it is only 80 metres high) is directly in the sun all day. He didnt bring enough water and was not wearing any suncream. The temperatures were not at 40 on that day, otherwise I would have needed rescuing too as I was climbing just around the corner. (though I was in the shade)

Holy Crap, further investigations confirm; I was on the same climb as this person on that day! (just earlier in the morning).

I dont recall ANY heicopters and he was rescued by the Arapiles rescue squad, not the police. The Arapiles rescue squad is just the fancy name given to local climbers who have been given beepers.

That article is misrepresenting user error as climate change.
The skiing one is not true too, I work at Bulla and I can say that the snow condition is much worse in Australia than that

sticks and stones my break my bones, but ski patrol will save me.

sticks and stones my break my bones, but ski patrol will save me.

the best smiles are the ones you lead to

Originally Posted By: WoodlandApplesThat article is misrepresenting user error as climate change.
The skiing one is not true too, I work at Bulla and I can say that the snow condition is much worse in Australia than that

Fair enough.

If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.

the best smiles are the ones you lead to

A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.

ouch.. I really wouldn't go as far.

For me it would already be enough NOT to support oppressive regimes which enslave, exploit and torture their own people in 3rd world countries and emerging markets... that in itself would already diminish poverty and suffering.

and it should not be forgotten that "aid" going to those countries quite often comes in form of money - which they then got to spend on goods and services originating in the donating countries.

its quite easy to say: let them die... maybe we should start a full scale war as to speed up the process and shorten the suffering... ?

the best smiles are the ones you lead to

Well done Tom now you've got it right!

we are animals, animals are territorial, Survival of the fittest. nuke them and turn it into a nature reserve.

Ok so what I said seems a little extreme. but the point is the earth has finite resources and can only support a certain level of life.
Animals (including humans) need those resources to live.
Whilst alive those animals will reproduce and will increase their populations unless acted upon by external pressures (predators, disease, misfortune. lack of food)
This increase in populations will need more resources BUT the sources are finite.
Evolution kicks in and those most suited to survival will get those resources (In the animal kingdom it's those most suited physically) however Humans as animals are also taking those resources.

We want to save all the animals and all the people, who honestly thinks that's possible? Animals will end up extinct it happened before and it will happen again we have to accept that some will go - no one cares about the 100's of species of insects that go extinct but may have a more serious effect upon our lives than a panda (Bee's, ants etc who keep flora etc ticking over, the planets gardeners.) what we care about are those we enjoy looking at or who have a good press agency and get on TV. I don't want to see tigers or pandas only in pictures but I would rather that than every insect on the planet died - put your wants and hopes aside and look at the facts can it be done yes or no? Look at chernobyl and tell me the Nuke wouldn't be better for the planet than the people. Trying unsuccessfully to live in an area that cannot suuport them, birth rates through the roof, due to infant death, and the need for workers. If they were animals we would have captured them and put them in a zoo or park for their own safety. but because they are human we ship in huge amounts of aid, money, clothes, equipment which at the same time adds to climate change - which is contributing to their suffering due to desertification - which I know everyone believes is caused by global warming. etc etc.seems to me to be making things worse not better.

think of Humans as animals with the same rights and tell me what you would do to humans if they were an animal?

A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.

If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

okaaay... yesterday I was feeling a little belligerent sorry

And I'm saying yes the dry equatorial and southern area will probably desertify because it's expanding the edges of what is already there, but if everything gets warmer then colder areas become more temperate, ice melts and plants can grow. the planet won't immediately turn into a desert of sand.
I think we have different perspectives based upon our home climate. you are seeing drier more desert like effects but it's just plain getting wetter here. Yes it's warmer but we are having so much more rain and snow than we have had for the passed 15 years. Talk of hose-pipe bans have disappeared and we now have regular floods.

What I'm saying is I can't see us slowing global warming especially by political means. it's too big a lifestyle choice for everyone. the governments can't agree because they don't want to disadvantage their own countries after financial disaster to growing 3rd world economies which supply most of our produce and take a lot of our money. Giving them extra to become "green" will essentially bring them up to our level of technology whilst they maintain huge resources the west covets is going to be a massive stumbling block, no matter what we say we aren't a global community yet, we are a globe full of communities and some of those don't get on.
We're all still using our computers our TV's, refridgerators and millions of Xmas lights. It's not just about the energy we use it's about the amount of people using it. the easiest way to cut carbon footprint in half is to half the population. Green energy is good but it is also very expensive to start up especially in private homes. The requirements for politicians is to make tough choices that their electorate will NOT like and I don't see them doing that - It risks their own Job and that of their party.

I'm not talking about 20 years time. I know we're screwed now. WORLD POPULATION NOW - 6.8 Billion
WORLD POPULATION 30 YEARS - Estimates say 9 billion.

So even if we halve emissions today in 1 day and keep peoples emissions constant in 30 years they will be way back up again as the 3rd world develops and more people are born. population is increasing exponentially birth rates are coming down but not quick enough. it's not enough to talk about emissions it's the people making them that is the problem. and all those people will need places to live, food to eat which will mean more farms more trees cut down more animals for meat, more fish being caught. less space for other life which will be restricted to the places we don't want to live.

I know it all seems negative but even if we do drop emissions is there any proof that CO2 uptake will counter what has already occurred? If not then addressing emissions is bailng out the sea with a thimble even though it still needs to be done. I'm not someone who doesn't believe I'm someone who thinks we are not focusing at all the issues, only the surface and that many people don't realise and it is our ability to stay alive that could be our greatest problem.

A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.

is this thread anywhere still about "vegetarianism for climate change" or just plain

the best smiles are the ones you lead to

If you notice in my last post I did mention more meat needed for more people, if population increases so do food requirements we can cut emissions but if birth rates continue at approximately 2 for the western world and higher for developing countries more meat will be needed to feed them all so some emissions will increase regardless of green energy. it has wandered a little I admit

I maintain that the lifestyle changes required to combat climate change be it emissions or dietary choices are too severe for many to accept. Laws will be required and i don't see governments cutting their own throats and risking their jobs to enforce what will be required even if it is to save the planet. People may want to think globally but it will take soomeone special to stand up and make the required changes even though they know it will be the end of their job. After so long with a Labour Government I can't see the conservatives risking letting them back in by enforcing laws that will inconvenience the entire population. Brown could do it now but he won't, even knowing he'll probably lose next year. And I doubt he could get the laws passed his own peers who will want to keep their jobs.

A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.